Standish Planning Board Meeting Minutes 04-04-2016
Standish Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
April 04, 2016
The meeting was called to order by Acting Chairman Brian Libby. Present were Mike Willette, Amanda Martin, Alta Harding, Adam Higgins, Cindy Beckwith, Bud Benson-Town Planner and Jackie Dyer, Secretary to the Planning Board. Absent was Carol Billington.
Approval of Meeting Minutes from March 07, 2016
The first item on the agenda was the approval of the meeting minutes from March 07, 2016.Mrs. Martin made a motion to approve the minutes, seconded by Mrs. Beckwith. All in favor.
Approval of Finding of Fact
Karen Webber, 4 Diamond Lane, Map 71 Lot 26-Amendment to Shadow Lawn Subdivision
Mrs. Beckwith made a motion seconded by Mrs. Martin to approve the Finding of Fact. All in favor.
Old Business :
Acres of Wildlife, Pequawket Trail, Map 11, Lots 1-4 Site Plan Review
The applicant has requested this be tabled to the May 02, 2016 Board meeting. Mr. Libby said the Board has received a letter and the applicant has hired a lawyer to possibly make this into a contract zone. He said there still needs to be more clarification about this application and what they intend to do, before the Board can render any approval.
Mrs. Harding made a motion seconded by Mrs. Beckwith to table this application to the May 02, 2106 meeting. All in favor.
New Business:
Mark L. Woodbrey, 175 Stuart Shores Road, Map 59, Lot 19A-Shoreland Zoning Application
Albert Frick was present to represent the applicant and Mark Woodbrey was also there. Albert said that the property is an existing single family dwelling with an existing garage. It is on the Sebago Lake basin with a private septic and well. He said there is some vegetation with grass and trees. He said they would like to do the expansion and move back from the water. He said Bud pointed out where the high water mark is when he reviewed the application. He said on the plan, they are back 10 more feet than originally thought and he has made the adjustment on the plan showing that. He said they have looked at all of the elevations and feel they are where they need to be. He said they are proposing a newer house and turning it so they can look at the water from the front.
He said the house is proposed to be raised with a new foundation, as the old ones has some issues with cracks and different things. He said the proposed height would be 24 feet, 11 inches from the basement to the peak of the house. He said the expansion would be back from the water. He said the proposed expansion is less than the 30% that is allowed. They are trying to get as far back as possible from the water, but the leech bed and septic would have to be moved.
Mr. Frick said at the north corner of the lot there is a retaining wall and not a practical place to place the septic. Mr. Libby asked for public comments, there were none. Mrs. Harding said she is confused by the architectural drawing of the existing building and what exactly they want to accomplish. Mr. Frick explained that the brown part she is questioning is the existing deck. That deck will remain and be built the length of the front of the home.
Mr. Benson said the existing and proposed deck are the same with a 75 foot set back. Mr. Woodbrey said they want to keep the deck. Mr. Frick said the design needs to conform to the new ordinance. He said they will probably have to push the house back approximately 10 feet further than what it is not because of the high water elevation. Mr. Benson said the normal high water mark will be something the CEO will look at and something he will need in order to determine the height restrictions of the proposed building. He said there are different height restrictions depending on how far away from the water the proposed building would be.
Mrs. Martin asked if they were increasing any area in front of the 100 foot set back. Mr. Frick said no. There were no comments from the public and no more from the Board. A site walk was scheduled for Saturday, April 09, 2016 at 9:00am.
Michael Lyons, dba Tower Publishing, 650 Cape Road, Map 3, Lot 20- Site Plan Application
Michael Lyons was present to represent himself. He said that he had bought the property at 650 Cape Road and wanted to use it for personal and business purposes. He said that Tower Publishing would be there and also his other company, Rogue Wallet Co. He said the structure is beautiful but in need of repair and it would provide the additional workspace they are in need of. His business is currently at 588 Saco Road and he said they have very limited space and have out grown it.
He said they are not considering any expansion. This property has 14 acres. There is a main house and also a workshop. He said there is a lot of room down the road so if they have to expand, they have the room. They are looking for 3 uses of this property: business, a home and also light manufacturing. For light manufacturing he is talking about some stitching machines to do the wallets. There will be no chemicals or anything like that. He said they could do prototyping there and small production. He said they also have their design studio in Portland and they are going back and forth a lot from one place to the other.
They would like to utilize what is there on the property with nothing added. Mrs. Martin said this is in a rural zoned area and also a low growth area. Mrs. Harding asked how far this property is from the 4 way stop on Saco/Cape Road and Mr. Lyons said it was around a third of a mile. Mrs. Harding said she realizes that Cape Road is very heavily used in the mornings during the weekdays. She asked if they notice the amount of traffic that goes by where they are now and he realizes the traffic is heavy before school starts and after. Mr. Lyons said they have had their eyes on the property for a long time. Mr. Libby asked if there would be any increase in the number of employees and Mr. Lyons said there would be none. He said this is just a shift and relocation. If business increases, they might increase employees. They are looking for additional square footage and more room to bring the light manufacturing into.
Kathy Libby came to speak and said her property is adjacent to this one. She said the only time traffic is really heavy is before and after school. She said other than that, there is a normal amount of traffic. She said they are really on a great stretch of road and beyond the curve. Mr. Libby asked the Board if they want a site walk. Mrs. Harding asked Mr. Benson if he has any major concerns and he said the issue that needs to be resolved is the fire pond or some type of fire suppression. He said this used to be a bed and breakfast and a semi commercial use. He said Mr. Lyons will have to work with the fire chief and figure something out that will work.
Mr. Lyons asked if the Town had a plan to put in a hydrant in that area. Mr. Benson told him that he would have to work with the fire department on that. Mrs. Beckwith asked what the school uses for fire suppression. Mr. Benson said they have their own big holding tanks and also there is a hydrant not far from the school. He said this is on the Buxton/Standish Town line. Mr. Lyons said they would meet with the Fire Chief and decide rather to sprinkle, use a tank or a fire pond.
Mr. Benson said before this application can be approved, the applicant has to go to the Appeals Board for a special exception. This meeting is on April 25, 2016. Mrs. Martin asked if the special exception is for the manufacturing and Mr. Benson told her yes. She said she was concerned about this, so she went to look at the comprehensive plan and found this is a residential area and light manufacturing is not allowed. She said this property falls into low growth under the comprehensive plan. He said this a visionary document and not law. He said the Board has to go by the ordinances in front of them. Mr. Benson said that he doesn’t feel that light manufacturing would change anything about this application.
Mr. Libby said the comp plan is just a guide and not what is actually in the code now. Mrs. Martin said if they were going by that, this would fall under light manufacturing that isn’t allowed. Mrs. Martin said she feels that this change of use would change the character of the neighborhood. Mr. Lyons said they have no desire to alter the character of the neighborhood or the house and would like to keep it the way it is. He said that the character would be preserved and this is what drew them to this location in the first place. Mr. Benson said Mrs. Martin was making a good point, but this is not changing the rural character of anything. He said they should go and see this historic building and how it’s being preserved. He said he feels that Mr. Lyons hasn’t changed the character of the neighborhoods in either place he is in. Mrs. Martin said she wasn’t just thinking about the character of the building but approving a new use. Mrs. Harding said the Board is cautious about setting precedent. Mr. Libby said if something completely different came into the building then it would have to come back before the Board again. Mr. Lyons said the house was built in 1880.
Mr. Benson said if there is a needed condition that made sure this light manufacturing wouldn’t change the area, it can be crafted and guarantee it would not change the area and the character of the building. Mr. Lyons said the shipping would be mostly with UPS, but sometimes they get deliveries and they come in a larger truck. They also will have a place to turn on the property and not have to back into the driveway. Mr. Lyons said they have 12 parking spaces now and are adding two more at the garage.
Mrs. Beckwith made a motion to find the application complete. Mr. Benson said that this would be subject to the appeals board approval. Mrs. Martin and Mrs. Harding said they would like to wait before they do anything to see what happens with the Appeals Board. The Board would also like to see what happens with the fire suppression issue and Mr. Lyons will meet with the Fire Chief. Also the extra parking spaces need to be put on the plan. This application was tabled to the May 02, 2016 meeting.
Walter Butler, 234 NE Road, Suite 3, Map 10, Lot 48- Site Plan Amendment
Walter Butler was present to represent himself. Mr. Butler said they have talked about this road before and having it come all the way around the building, to give the fire department and others access. They will maintain a buffer in the front and also to the side. The fire department would like to be able to access the pump house from the front of the building without having to drive all the way around to the back of the building.
Mr. Libby said he feels it makes sense to do this and Mr. Benson said he had been out to see it. He said Mr. Butler seems to be preserving the buffer and there will be some additions of trees. Mr. Butler said they have proposed adding three more red maples to keep it in line with what is there now. He said they are trying to preserve about a 200 foot buffer zone.
Mrs. Martin said the fire report says that they would find this road beneficial if they have to use it. Mr. Butler said there is a pump station already there for the department to access and he has maintained it all winter. Mrs. Harding made a motion seconded by Mrs. Beckwith to approve the application. All in favor.
Alan & Jane Bell, 23 Burke Rd. Ext., Map 20, Lot 5C- Shoreland Zoning Application
Carol Morrissette, architect, from Residential Design Studio was present to represent the applicants. The Bells were also present. She said they have a slide presentation for this project. She said she wanted to show the slides as it shows the building heights better than she can explain them in relation to the project. She also had some new information and calculations that she handed out to each Board member.
She said the Board has everything current in front of them and what she feels they need. She showed the design as it looks out towards the water. She showed the existing garage and the far corner being behind the 100 foot set back. She said the Bells recently purchased this home and are hoping to make it their full time residence. She showed a survey done by Owen Haskell. She said that they have taken a very conservative approach on this project as far as setbacks and high water marks. She said this survey shows they are behind what they need to be as far as the high water mark. She said they are behind the 75 foot set back and the 100 foot set back puts the garage out of the high water mark.
She said this is a non-conforming lot and has been since the 1950’s. In the 1970’s the land was transferred and a garage was built on someone else’s property and then this was sold to the people that owned the lot. She said there is an easement on the property and it was listed in the deed from the 1950’s, so this is not a new easement. She said there was questions about the approx. distance to the water and she has added a dimension that shows the closest point from the water to the house.
She went on to say that there are differences in height. She said they have projected up 20-25 feet. She said the building top does not go through the height limitations. She said they want to expand and then build the garage at the end of the house. They want to keep the basic footprint of the existing garage. Impervious surface will be decreasing. She said she misunderstood some of the criteria of measurements as far as eves and edges went. She said she has amended those on the plan.
She said they want to remove a lot of the pavement there as there is too much. They would like to keep the parking pad as it is now. They are doing an expansion of use and take one of the bedrooms that’s in the house and relocate it to over the garage. She said this will remain a single family home and will remain that way. She said they want to be right up front with what they are planning on doing.
Mr. Libby asked for public comments, there were none. Mrs. Harding said she didn’t quite understand the addition with the height restrictions on it and asked for a 3 dimensional slide. She said it looks like the roof line coming off the garage is a small 10 foot piece and Carol told her it is. Mr. Libby said the new plan shows what she is looking for. She said the foot print on the slide looks different from the one on the paper. She asked how wide the addition is at the narrowest piece. Carol said it around 13 feet, 10 ¾ inches. Mrs. Harding asked if there is an existing deck and Carol told her yes and they have no plans to touch it.
Carol said the first floor plan shows how narrow the addition is. She showed the second floor roof and said it is all the same plan that she gave the Board tonight. Bud asked that they do the changes on the elevations and they have done that. It shows the 75 foot set back and the buffers. He said it also impacts the height restrictions and Dan has had a hard time with that. He said that the garage looks like it is slightly turned. Carol said she had squared it off. The garage is being torn down and rebuilt. Mr. Benson said it’s the charge of the Board to make sure things are moved back to the maximum practical extent and behind the 100 foot setback. He said the lines show that this lot, on the northeasterly side, has the most outside of the setback.
Mr. Libby asked if there were any more comments. Carol said the only concern she has is where the current septic is located. It is just to the side of the garage and is shown on Plan L-2 that she handed out tonight. She said this would be on revision #3. She said it just shows the tank and not the leach bed. Mr. Benson said the tank is considered removable and also can be replaced. Carol said the financial cost of replacing the tank would be okay. She said it is still behind the 100 foot set back. They are looking for a 30% expansion and she said she feels they are right on that now.
Mrs. Martin said she thought behind the 100 foot setback meant to remove everything back behind the 100 feet. Mrs. Harding said the original could have been moved back and right now she would not vote to approve this as no attempt has been made to move anything back at all. She said right now she would not vote to approve this. Mr. Libby said that’s why a site walk is needed. She said she would rather see it back from the water. Mr. Libby said they have an existing foundation with a structure that isn’t going to change. They are making some minor changes like an egress window and door, but nothing else. Mr. Benson said the garage itself is just in a small portion of the 100 foot set back. Mr. Benson said there may be room enough to build that garage outside of the setback. Carol said if they moved back to far, would they be able to still get onto the property? Mr. Libby said they need to look at everything and not make a determination tonight. The Board asked the applicant to have everything marked out.
A site walk was scheduled for Saturday, April 09, 2016 at 10:00am.
Meeting adjourned at 8:20pm.