Standish Planning Board Meeting Minutes
Charles Brown 0:03
Welcome to the August 2, meeting of the Town of Standish planning board meeting.This is a public proceeding unless the board specifically votes to go into Executive Session, you have the right to hear everything that's being said. And to look at all exhibits that are offered. please notify me if you're unable to hear or to see the materials. The board works from a prepared agenda. This evening, we have some items to attend to. We have two finding of facts, one item under new business, and we have a public hearing after that, relative to a zoning update. The applicants have the burden to prove to the board that their application is complete and the application meets all applicable town's standards. Any person wishing to address the board may do so.
We'will open the public hearing. The applicant will present their project . If there are any questions or comments from the public, the Board will hear those. Board members will then be asked to address their questions to the applicant and hear responses.
Following the decision on the application either towards the end of the meeting or at next public meeting, the board will prepare and adopt the written decision that will be mailed to the applicant. The board may receive any oral or documentary evidence but such evidence is restricted to subject matter of the agenda item. The board shall exclude irrelevant, immaterial or unduly repetitious evidence. citizens will refrain from interrupting other speakers this meeting is being taped recorded and it's very difficult to hear what is being said when multiple people speak at the same time. Citizen shall avoid personal current attacks conduct themselves in civil and courteous manner. Speakers should address questions through the chair speakers shall not attempt to engage in debate with other meeting participants.
That's the opening statement. So good evening, we have a full board. And we have one new member Andrew Walton. Welcome. Andrew has been to a workshop. I think it was a sitewalk.
We have the minutes to approve for the July 12 2021 meeting. Members of the Board had a chance to review these and look them over.
I found nothing that jumped out at me. Is there a motion to approve the minutes as presented? Mr Struebing made a motion to approve the minutes,seconded by Mrs. Whittemore. All in favor.
We have two Finding of Fact. First one is for JR Partnership LLC doing business as Richardson's Boatyard and Marina on the Whites Bridge Road M- site plan application to build a 30 by 209 foot boat storage rack. I did not see anything on that one either. Anybody else from the board? Seeing none is there a motion to approve the finding of facts motion. Mr. Wright made a motion to approve the Finding of Fact,seconded by Mr. Nappi. All in favor.
Second is the Finding of Fact for Giles and Brook Westie at 159 Hearthside Road Shoreland Zoning application to add to an existing foundation and construct a year round home. Pretty straightforward on that one. I saw nothing. Anybody else anything? Is there a motion to approve? A motion to approve the FInding of Fact was made by Mr.Struebing and seconded by Mr. Wright. All in favor.
New Business
William Day,Jr.and Craig Woodbrey ,Saco Road - Subdivision Application for six lot subdivision Whitetail Ridge Estates. One of you gentlemen like to make any type of presentation
Brent Day 6:35
Do you want to go down through the application piece by piece? How do you usually approach these?
Charles Brown 6:42
If you could just give us an oversight of the project? What has changed since the workshop?
Brent Day 6:53
As you can see in the packet, we only had the one test kit on the first site. We now have two test holes per site. We have put the building envelopes on the plan. And I guess we need to talk about that before the meetings over. Basically, it's that we have tried to keep the impact minimal. Due to many factors with the internal streams and the configuration of the law, and that really didn't lend itself to a any major subdivision, I guess. So we tried to keep it low impact and small was something that made sense to fit the area , as we know, we got quite a few acres and behind it, and a few acres on the other side of the road for the wildlife. You know, it's it's a pretty neat little place there. Six lots. I don't know any questions or any concerns that the Board may have. How do you direct these? We have mad a few modifications to the application that we spoke of. I spoke to the gentleman at the fire department, did he get an email to you Scott? Last time I talked to him was two weeks ago and in the applications that says that he was willing to sprinkle the homes one through six, I spoke to the lieutenant or whoever he is in the town. What we agreed to is he's got all the the means and the function for dry hydrant at the brook and I guess it's all been approved . He said they just have not had had the funds to put that into the brook. So,that is what we have discussed and he was supposed to get an email off to Mr. Hastings that day. We'll put the dry hydrant in for the time being as long as he will provide the materials, we'll provide the machine and the manpower.We will put the dry hydrant in for lots one thru five andlot six will have to be a sprinkler system. That was what we discussed and he was going to get an email off to the board. Yeah, so that
That's what we discussed, you know, we're gonna put the dry hydrant in. And I told him, it's whenever the town's ready. I've contacted two folks that would install the hydrant, Sturgeon and another excavator. And they're both ready. So whenever we get the green light from the town, it's a go. As soon as the fire chief or whoever's in charge of that, I guess, the permitting process has already been taken care of and all the components are there, everything's there, they just need the machine. And the only other comment on that is if we can get a location, we'llhave everything put in. And I don't know where , I'm assuming on Josie Brook, that 's at his discretion. So if he says, next week, we'll do it next week. H And it's totally at the fire chiefs discretion. I told him when he's ready, we pull the trigger.
Charles Brown 12:12
They'd have a plan that shows there are some site constraints on one location.
Brent Day 13:05
We did get all we get all the six driveway permits from DOT and you have them in the packet. We did ask for two waivers, the internal road and the stormwater I mean, it was really due to the the impact. I mean, it's 88 kids in the houses potentially. Anyways from 1216 acre lot so the impact was pretty, pretty small to the subsurface, I guess if you will. One other piece like I said is in the email, I was a little confused what you were referring to when we're not crossing the books we're not crossing the street.
Charles Brown 13:19
So we just need Wayne to add meets and bounds descriptions to the plan. So for that easement,we just need a quick drainage easement that goes away from the highway, It didn't have access in terms of the stream and probably the stream connected . But there's a way to have standard drainage.
Brent Day 16:52
Do you want to see all of the changes at the same time or do you want to see another plan with the changes on that plan? Scott, anything you want to add, wavered from our drainage plans? Given that we are not building any structure, normally what that plan would cover is great . So that's a reasonable request to waive the interior road requirements. You can also see the shading of the contour lines here. You've got ups and downs that are involved in the shot. So as I said in the middle to all, I think that it makes a lot of sense in terms of the sense of environmental impacts here that would be very hard to play around. When we first looked at this stuff at the workshop, there were some creative ways to make some revisions. But with the further information on the vernal pools in particular, I don't know you could access some of the different parts of the site This just seems like the best way to deal with that issue to just not have to try and build a huge impervious road across the site.
Charles Brown 19:36
The only other issues we already had covered were conditions were drainage easements, still need to have property markers put in the corners of the property and there's a provision in the ordinance for that covers what those look like. Then the other ones are that those are definitely what we need to put on the plan. We would need to know exactlywhere they're crossing the wetlands for the driveway on block five that would trigger the Army Corps regulations as well. Lot six has a pretty small building envelope, I think somebody would want to go over that.
Brent Day 22:26
Yeah, I mean, you pop across that little wet area with distilled water, and you've got all kinds of when you didn't get it tested from there. So you know, some of them that
I think in general, the general consensus of the whole project was not the buildings and stuff right in the back corner, it is the lots and their sizes. Lot six I'd say,once you get past the hump of the land,it's a really nice lot.
Charles Brown 23:07
So the other two conditions that are just the standard, everything has to be done to conditions. Similiar to the permitting, any law that has floodplain on it has to show that their lowest floor couldn't be a lot has to be a minimum set of one foot above the 100 year flood elevation. And this is a standard that's taken directly from our floodplain ordinance. I don't see any major issues at this point. The requirements do not have any outstanding questions, and we're gonna have those conversations with the fire chief. I apologize. I did that last time I left it with a guy he probably talked to back.
Well, we have two waivers on this project. I think we should address those two first perspective. And then we can move forward with going down through the various items for completeness. And staff comments would
Deb Boxer 24:57
I would like to ask a question before we get there. Look at the memorandum on page three from the bottom. When it says for each lot in the subdivision is limited to a maximum of two dwelling units. I'm just not sure what that means, two separate houses.? So I guess there is one question that I would bring forward, if you were considering the waiver request for internal road. One of the ways to do that is to say that when houses are placed on the lot, would accessory apartments, or duplexes be allowed ? And then a potential question would be a condition whether or not the lots be restricted to residential, agricultural and forestry for those users that would be accessory to a residence or in the home occupations, anything that we would expect people to do. So I don't quite understand how you can build more than the six houses ?
Scott Hastings-Planner 27:12
So this would be the restriction that those lots are considered a lot. In general, when we see the ordinance , we look at a lot you may be able to build a duplex or an in law on that doesn't necessarily require it to be one lot but mightbe able to have two residential units on a it The process right now is allowing building owners to build on a lot and so a future owner could potentially come back and say I want to build a duplex which means that you're gonna have two families living on that lot. That is allowed as far as I understand, certainly a house with a accessory apartment or something like that. And that's true for a lot and found if it's not part of the cluster, which does happen, and that's the consideration here is that's the board 's responsibility to limit future use of these lots.
It is common practice for lots to have restricted uses or just the ability to choose if anything, that is a permissive way of doing it, just to acknowledge that a second dwelling could be put within the same lot. So that was my intention with the language as were written, there could be two dwelling units was not to inadvertently prevent someone from using their property.
Charles Brown 29:19
This is rural residential right. So family apartment is allowed. I think if I read item number nine it's restricted to single family dwellings.Single Family is allowed to per the site plan review so they would have to come back to the court anyway.
Scott Hastings-Planner 29:52
Accessory apartments may not be something that is needed as condition. Just consider their concern about future development even more there are limited uses to basically natural areas that are residential might be more to the concerns that I would expect to hear. She says rural residential are a whole lot of things allowed their ideas, but the more commercially, some small business professional offices or bed and breakfasts are allowed, for example, so I'm going to be some commercial uses. Maybe you've already given me constraints here that we're trying to give him. Those are allowed in subdivisions, duplexes, and because this is a subdivision,subdivision does not inherently restrict us. So, yes, those would be allowed in subdivision lessons, the clusters, cluster subdivision, there are restrictions. But if this is a traditional subdivision, it just is now creating blocks in the future people would be able to propose to us as is allowed.
Deb Boxer 31:31
Can I ask what the characteristics of this that classifies as a subdivision? Rather than somebody having 10 lots that are mostly buildable and selling them once every five years along the road? Can we just waive the interior road requirement? Which standards? Internal road access? Yes, the board is giving explicit ability to waive standards and the standards access management standards, we can just waive them if you choose. I have a hard time understanding what makes this sa subdivision rather than somebody builds along the road?
Scott Hastings-Planner 32:32
Well, six lots are being created from one large lot within a short amount of time. They are split off one lot .
Deb Boxer 32:45
That's what we've always had to do in the past. So I'm just going to try to figure out what's changed. If we can do that anyone can come in and do the same thing.
Scott Hastings-Planner 32:54
For some if they want to create more than that,they're held to the standards unless the board feels through the requirements of this ordinance that a need for waivers. Support. One of the main board decisions here tonight is whether this site warrants a waiver.
Deb Boxer 33:22
How many acres are actually buildable? I couldn't find that 79 total. But how many are actually able to be used if you wanted to make an actual subdivision without an interior road? What would that even be possible? I mean, I don't think it would be possible with it. A couple of single lots maybe.
Scott Hastings-Planner 33:58
If you are especially concerned about the vernal pools on line four, they are not significant and therefore you don't have to worry about the buffer which is yet to be seen. And you can easily put a dent in the road. The Highlands have bought 300 acres and I wouldn't be surprised to get up to 10 one acre house lots up there. They are tightly packed together.
The Army Corps of Engineers has a 25 to 28% maximum clearing within that buffer. This buffer is the Army Corps last year before we drop this and all requirements, but still maintains that, I think, it's 25% maximum and we don't have the classification from them that the verticals have been determined to be potentially significant, they have caught on with fish and wildlife determination, they are not very certain what time of year they have to come back next but the proposed six lot subdivision we're looking at we're not impacting 25%. I think it's all dependent on on them if you didn't do a site walk on here, we have not had a site walk for you to know what has been cut up there already, have gotten all the setbacks required, all the stuff that the required setbacks is for from the streams, everything else I'm assuming was being cleared outside of that.
Brent Day 36:50
Yeah, there's a buffer from Josie's Brook, as far as forestry,this was the only buffer and the only setback that on the forestry standpoint that was that was concerned 25% can't be Josie Brooke and the other internal buffers. The one thing that fell under the forest service got dragged up to the street. No more than 1400 square foot canopy was opened near Josie's Brook and I think we went with the two options. The basil area option on the on the interior of the timber harvesting has different standards that they maintained.
Deb Boxer 37:44
I was reading all the requirements for canopy coverage around wetlands and streams, vernal pools and all that kind of stuff. Your forester did all that cutting for you?
Brent Day 38:09
We did it. We did the cutting ourselves. Resource protection is just this little bit here on the plan, from here to here. And then screen protection is 75 feet around the rest of those Josie's Brook. And then this stream coming up along lots four or five, protection solid areas attached. The tributaries flow into it I believe or into protection that serves as a block stream buffer versus our local stream protection zone. Again, there's so much going on with Rob we're having trouble showing you some of the emails that I have gone back and forth between trying to get all these different things on the plan. It's hard to see but the mainstream body coming up here to lots four, five and six.
Charles Brown 40:54
For completeness, the applicant has submitted the subdivision plan, the application, the two test pits on each lot, wetland report, DOT driveway entrance permits, location map, and soils report. So the first item is the stormwater drainage plan for which they are requesting a waiver. We have discussed the fact that putting in individual driveways for 6 is probably pretty minor. Any future approvals that will be required will be when buildings are proposed for each lot. TThe applicant believes that this is a reasonable and appropriate request. Is there anybody wishing to make a motion and staff has recommended two proposals. One would be a motion to waive the submission requirements of the drainage plan and the other one is to move to find the application for Whitetail Ridge Subdivision complete as presented. So those would be two items we'd have to consider.
Mr.Struebing 43:08
I'll make the first motion to waive the submission requirements of the plan. This motion was seconded by Mrs. Boxer
Charles Brown 43:16
Any discussion from the board? Seeing none All those in favor? Unanimous. That being said, is there a motion to find the application for Whitetail Ridge Estates Subdivision complete as presented. That's with the waiver we just granted. Mr. Struebing made the motion and this was seconded by Mr. Wright . Find the application complete. All those in favor. Unanimous. Now we need to move forward with a second waiver, which is the interior road requirement. The applicant is requesting a waiver, which requires no internal roads.
Deb Boxer 45:01
This comes from the Code Book, Streets and Sidewalks(Section 3-Internal Road access).... When a proposed development involves the division of land into three or more lots within any five year period,whether accomplished by sale, lease,development, buildings or otherwise, as defined by the Subdivision Law,Title 30-A,MRSA 4401-4407 and where such projects abuts or contains an existing or proposed arterial, the following provisions shall apply: A. Direct arterial access prohibited. Direct access to any individual lot or to a single place of business shall be prohibited.
Scott Hastings-Planner 46:17
The workshoon we held on this this application is based on on how this was handled in the last application for the Middle Jam Road subdivision. The access management standards are subservient to the zoning code. Generally I cannot quote ordinances off the top my head but what you want is generally considered to be higher in the hierarchy of the ordinances and where conflicts exist between it and other ordinances. And that element is the ability for the board to waive the requirement for the internal road. Now, I don't know if need a legal opinion on that. But we get one that goes to the board and vote to table this discussion from tonight's meeting and get the legal opinion.
I think getting a legal opinion is wise concerning the road before we go any further. Mrs. Whittemore said she felt a legal opinion was needed and then if this ever came up again, they would be covered. The rest of the Board agreed.
My feeling tis that this is something that is meant to give us more information on how to enact the practicalities of zoning. The ability to waive some subdivision elements are sometimes necessary. When a decision is made without guidance, or some sort of recommendation, if we did approve this, and someone were to challenge that approval it would nullify the actions of this board. I am okay with granting the waiver, but if the Board feels a legal opinion is necessary to go forward, I am okay with seeking that.
Mr.Struebing 53:08
I think we should have a legal opinion so that we're not addressing this every time this comes up.
Charles Brown 53:22
That is right. Sometimes it takes a while to get a legal opinion. That's gonna change the whole approach. There's no sense of going through the rest of the review. The rest of it's pretty straightforward. Things are pretty straightforward.
Brent Day 54:21
I guess that was my question. Just to sum it up just for clarity. Your concern is the last as the board is the access to an arterial street ?
We got all the permits from DOT, we told him that we were subdividing. And then we thought that would be another piece,it's all laid out in the DOT permits that were already permitted.
Charles Brown 55:43
But again, is this is an issue locally? Mostly the DOT. If we are going to seek a legal opinion we need a motion to do so. Mr. Struebing made a motion to table the application to August 16 and this was seconded by Mr. Wright. All in favor. I think we could do that within two weeks.
Scott Hastings-Planner 57:28
Probably depends on the schedule. But it seems like it should be a yes or no answer. We can do a special meeting in two weeks.
Charles Brown 58:02
We've done it in the past. We can get an answer within two weeks. The only item on the agenda, right? Meeting is scheduled for August 16th
Brent Day 58:39
I guess let me know what else I can get for this other stuff. I'll try to get all my ducks in a row. So when we come in two weeks, we have a full plan with everything that you folks are looking for.
Charles Brown 58:57
Basically, it is easy once we have our answer. So far, nothing new comes up. So we're just gonna update the plan. You're gonna add the drainage easements? Brent Day asnwered yes.
Scott Hastings-Planner 1:02:31
I mean, we may not have we'll definitely have the language for that. Deed restrictions will be required. They're not currently drawn out. Probably we'll have to find the language of that. But we can get some drafts. And hopefully the buyers are all on board with that.
Brent Day 1:03:03
They said all the pieces and components they have(dry hydrant), they just don't have the funds. And we can throw money into an account if they can't do it. I'm assuming with all the rain, the high water , they probably want to hold off a little bit. So I made this part of approval, you want some money thrown into account till that's completed. I'm happy to provide that as well. Whatever it takes.
Good to go. Thank you guys.
Charles Brown 1:03:45
The last item on our agenda is this public hearing relative to amendments to the form based village zoning district amendments, it looks like it's mostly on sidewalks.
Scott Hastings-Planner 1:04:21
So the town's running into some issues with the sidewalks The review process is to have new applicants build sidewalks in front of the property .So, what exactly are the changes to that? And what happened in the end is the effectively two things. One, the Esplanade grass strip, between its road requirement, has been removed to give a little more freedom of space. And then it has also removed the requirements that new projects have to build sidewalks throughout the different street frontage types. So they're starting in the former center and Main Street frontage types, gateway, residential ,Sebago Lake District, they are being retained in the core fringe districts and used in the residential areas. Future subdivisions in some of these areas, some of the street prototype, subdivisions of residential areas, but whenever required, standards apply if they are to be built.
Charles Brown 1:07:14
So this public hearing, which no one is here from the public, so obviously it doesn't affect too many people. It now goes back to the council. And they will enact the process by hearings, readings, etc.
Scott Hastings-Planner 1:07:47
Alot of this came from subdivisions, as we did have Apple Lane, Middle Jam Road and Highlands. We're having trouble with some of these standards as we are expecting more density. And there's been some issues with how to apply the requirements. We'll be seeing some more tweaks to the fForm based code language. S
Not to diminish the importance of it because it is an important element chance for people providing feedback on this process. The reason that is this board's holding public hearings instead of the council is a bureaucratic state law. In most towns, the zoning ordinance has changes made to it. And all the work done on it is in the hands of the planning board and state laws written, with that expectation and requires a public hearing be held for potential changes without the planning board. The Planning Board can make recommendations to the governing body to enact the policy. In this instance the ordinance committee is making the recommendation to the Council in hopes they will developthese ordinance changes and play an important part in the process of changes .
Charles Brown 1:10:12
It just goes back to the council now that we have had the public hearing .
The last item on the agenda is the election of a Planning Board Chairman and Vice Chairman. Do I have any nominations for Chairman? Mr. Struebing nominated Mr. Brown for Chairman and this was seconded by Mr. Wright. All in favor with Mr. Brown abstaining. Mrs. Whittemore nominated Mr. Struebing for VIce Chair and this was seconded by Mrs. Boxer. All in Favor with Mr. Struebing abstaining.
Motion to adjourn made by Mrs. Whittemore and seconded by ? All those in favor.
Transcribed by https://otter.ai