Standish Planning Board Meeting Minutes 06/05/2017

Meeting date: 
Monday, June 5, 2017

      Standish Planning Board

Meeting Minutes

June 05, 2017


The Standish Planning Board meeting was called to order by Chairman Brian Libby at 7:02 pm. Present were Mike Willette, Betty Thompson, Carol Billington, Jolene Whittemore, Adam Higgins, Cindy Beckwith, Bud Benson-Town Planner and Jackie Dyer, Secretary to the Planning Board.

Approval of Meeting Minutes from May 01, 2017

Mrs. Billington made a motion to approve the minutes as written seconded by Mr. Higgins. All in favor.

Approval of Finding of Fact

Town of Standish, Standish Memorial Park, 670 Ossipee Trail West, Map 5, Lot 23- Site Plan Application


Nicholas Thompson, 19 Ossipee Tr.West, Map 36, Lot 7- Site Plan Application- The Learning Post School


LTD Industries, Inc. (Little Tykes Daycare), 48 Pequawket Trail Ext., Map 5, Lot 45 D-Site Plan Application for existing daycare expansion


Mr. Higgins made a motion seconded by Mrs. Beckwith to approve all three of the Finding of Facts as written. All in favor.

Old Business:

Shaw Earthworks, Inc., 333 Pequawket Trail, Map 5 Lot 70 –Site Plan application for gravel pit expansion

Brian Shaw was present to represent himself and his brother. Mr. Libby said they have had a site walk and two workshops. He asked the Board if they have any major concerns at this point. Mrs. Billington said they are missing information with the ground water study. Mr. Benson said they submitted the portion of the ground water study done by DEP, but the plan was not stamped by anyone. He said the new one has a seal on it and that was what he needed to see. He said the original one had no signature of the geologist that did it and Mr. Shaw had gone back to them to have it signed and sealed.

Mrs. Thompson asked about 1999 approval and the amendment done in 2000. Would these conditions still be applicable to this application now? Mr. Shaw said they have monitoring wells now and these mirror what was done in 1999 and 2000, and nothing has changed. He said they are all on the plan like they needed to be.

Mr. Libby said they need to go through the gravel pit standards 181-16 and also the Standard of Approval. He said this is a type three gravel pit. Mr. Libby went through the standards from fences, buffers, and signage and asked for concerns, also he went through hours of operation from the previous approval. Mr. Shaw said they are asking for an hour more on each day and crushing ending at 5pm. They would be operating from 7am-6pm. He said this would be more of a convenience thing for them. They are also looking to crush materials from off site. Mrs. Billington said she has been thinking a lot about this application as they already have a standard ordinance that allows them to work certain hours and this is truly a land use ordinance use.

Mrs. Billington said that with the abutters in mind and all, she couldn’t find any reason not to give them the hours they are asking for with all of the concessions they (Shaw Earthworks) have made. Mr. Libby asked for more comments from the Board and there were none.

Type 3 Standards (Plan review from Ordinance)

          Type 3 operations: standards for new excavation operations, expansions over five acres and existing excavated areas or areas approved for excavation where the excavated area is five acres or larger.

 (2)       Permit application requirements. The following information shall be submitted to the Code Enforcement Officer, who shall verify that the application is complete. Planning Board approval of the permit is required before operations may be expanded. The following information shall be submitted to the Planning Board when applying for a permit. All plans shall be drawn to a scale of one inch equals 100 feet. Map, lot and zone designation shall be on the plan. 

(d)        A site plan, drawn to scale, showing the location and boundaries of the existing parcel. The site plan shall include the following information: 

 [6]       Location and proximity of all great ponds, rivers, streams and wetlands within 250 feet of the proposed activity.   

(e)        The location of existing wells, streams, contours of the land within and extending beyond the boundaries of the parcel for 200 feet. Contours shall be at five-foot intervals, at intervals acceptable for a DEP permit application or at intervals determined by the Planning Board in excavation operations under five acres. 

 (f)       The depth to seasonal high-water table at the site of the proposed excavation as determined by test borings or test holes to substantiate that the groundwater will not be disturbed

Mr. Shaw said they are operating one foot above on pit one and five feet on pit two. Mrs. Billington said the pit that is one foot above the water table should be really looked at and monitored. She said this could jeopardize the wells and the water quality. Mr. Shaw said they can haul materials in from off site with no crushing. This would be in the back pit only and not in pit one that is close to the water table. Mr. Libby said it makes more sense to crush it and haul it away than bring it in and leave it.

 Mr. Higgins said this should be in the approval that it can be hauled in and then hauled out and nothing stockpiled in the front pit of offsite materials. Mr. Shaw said once they have Pit 2 and 3 opened, they will crush and haul from there. He said this will create a better buffer too. Mr. Shaw said this is the first time they have seen what they have to open as far as areas before they can do any reclamation. In condition 24 from the memo it will say” no crushing of offsite materials in Pit 1 except for areas that are over five feet from the water table.(This would eliminate Pit 1 from any stockpiling or crushing of any materials) Also, no stockpiling within 500 feet from any property line.

Mr. Shaw said they could crush higher and stay above the water table at least five feet and then move the materials out. Mrs. Billington said it should be at least five feet above the water table and Mr. Shaw agreed. Mr. Benson said that he has that in the memo as part of Condition 24. Mr. Higgins said he assumes this pertains to all materials there that are going to be moved off site. He said it should be five feet or above from the water table anywhere within the pits. Mr. Shaw said he has talked with DEP and they feel it shouldn’t be an issue. He said the geologist has stamped and signed the plan and they feel comfortable with it now the way it is.

Mr. Benson said that one of the main purposes in the Ordinance in place is the protection of the water, aquifers and wells. He said the geologists have this all in their ground water study. He said there could be a place where it says no stockpiling within the five hundred foot buffer and Mr. Shaw said this would be the majority of Pit 1 and this is the line they can’t crush near but have to stay away from. Mr. Benson said there is a 500 foot separation and Mr. Shaw said they are at least 500 feet from the nearest well. Mr. Benson said the flow of the water seems to run away from the lake, the streams and other aquifers.

Condition #24 will now say that “There will be no crushing of any offsite materials in Pit #1, except for areas that retain a minimum of a five foot separation from the water table. No stockpiling of any offsite materials with 500 feet from any property line.”

Mr. Benson said there are a number of houses on the opposite side of the road. Mr. Shaw said they are at least 500 feet from any wells. Mr. Libby and Mrs. Billington said they are comfortable with this.


 (i)        Provisions for shielding the excavation from surrounding properties with adequate screening or buffering. 

(j)         A final rehabilitation plan, including seeding, planting, final grading, shaping and surface stabilization plans, showing contours (at, five-foot intervals) as proposed following completion of the operation, with such plans to be approved by the Cumberland County Soil Conservation Service, a registered professional forester or registered professional civil engineer. The plan shall provide for drainage, erosion and sedimentation control and cost estimate. The proposed use of the property at completion of the project shall be described. A time schedule and cost estimate for rehabilitation shall be included. The time schedule may include reference points rather than specific dates; for example, 30 days from a specific event. Any project which is proposed to operate for a period of time in excess of five years shall be designed to operate in phases, when deemed appropriate by the Planning Board.


Mrs. Billington said with the way the memo is written and the Ordinance that are in place, the gravel pit standards have pretty much been met with all of the prior approvals and conditions.

Mr. Libby asked for public comment. Judith Harris spoke and said she has lived near there for 31 years. She said when they first moved there, there was no pit, only woods that they used to walk and ski on. She is a past president of the Watchic Lake Association and thinks she is a good steward of the lake. She said they have family that are careful stewards also. She said that she has been unable to come to the meetings and it bothers her that some of the rules and regulations on the pit may change, that includes bringing in materials from off site. She said she is concerned they will get to near the brook and then it will run off into and pollute the lake.

Mrs. Harris said she enjoys the area and thinks in a perfect world, there would be no pit there. She said she thinks the owners of the pit don’t care, they are business people and will not be good stewards of the lake as she feels they have no interest in the Town or the lake. She said they only care about their bottom line and they have created their own hard ships. She said any changes need to be taken seriously and not for the benefit of any one company.

Peter McNulty spoke. He said he feels the way Mrs. Harris does. He thanked the Town officials for working hard. He said there are permits and regulations in place and why would they want to change them. He said for the people that live around the lake, the extra hour is a hardship as that’s when people are enjoying the outside and also having dinner. Why do the things need to change at all?  Why can’t the rules and regulations stay the same as they are? He said he feels that if any changes are made, what is the compelling reason and also he feels it would depreciate property values.

Bob Joslyn spoke and said the other two residents spoke about many concerns. He asked about the starting time of the pit and Mr. Shaw said its still 7:00am. He said they get to his Gorham facility around 5:30. Mr. Joslyn said the 500 feet from any well could be a problem. He said if someone needed to drill a new well, being 500 feet from the line might be a problem. He asked about reclamation and also about more digging out of the pit. He said at one time they were talking about a mobile home park when the pit was fully reclaimed. He brought aerial photos of the proximity of the lake to the pit. He said they have real concerns about noise levels and also traffic on Route 113. He said they pay horrendous taxes for their waterfront and are a driving force of the Town. He said that he asks the Board to consider all sides of the issue before they render their final decision.

Eileen Burnell from Watchic Road 19 spoke. She said her family has been there for many years. She said they also belong to the Association and have done the volunteer water testing for many years. She said she is concerned about the water quality of the lake and teaching others what is important. She thinks the watershed is very important and the preservation of the lake. She said her son is concerned and he works at an environmental agency called Arcadis. She is concerned about pollution and he is also. They are concerned about a contaminated load of something being brought into the pit and ruining the area wells, the brook, the streams and also contaminating and ruining the lake.

Donal Drew spoke and he said he agrees with what has been said prior. He asked about the five hundred foot from any wells and was that from the boundary line or a well nearby? Mr. Benson said it pertains to offsite wells. He said they need to put it to the property line. Mr. Drew said his daughter has a shallow well across the street from the pit and that is a concern. He said he also has a house lot directly across from the pit, but there is currently no well there. Mr. Drew said he has had soil tests done and there could be a well if needed. Mr. Shaw said they can change the 500 feet and have it from the property line instead of 500 feet from any wells. Mr. Drew said this would make it much better and Mr. Shaw agreed.

Judith Harris asked about the materials being brought in from offsite such as asphalt. She said she assumes that when you crush you create dust and poorer air qualities. She said she questions this about materials from offsite and the danger they can impose. Mr. Shaw said that they want to be good stewards of the lake and good neighbors. He said they bought the pit because of its location to the city. He said the entire pit is internally drained and goes underground, not over the top. He said they have the best sand and gravel and those are the best filters. He said they have done their best to abide by the rules and reach a compromise that everyone will be happy with.

There were no other public comments. Mr. Libby said they don’t have to go down through the gravel pit standards, so they will go through the standards of approval and the conditions from the memo. The Shaw’s said they are good with all of the conditions of approval from the memo.

[14]Conformance with site plan review standards.  181-73

 A.     The provisions for vehicular loading, unloading and parking and for vehicular and pedestrian circulation on the site and onto adjacent public streets and ways will not create hazards to safety nor will impose a significant burden upon public facilities. The hours of operation will be from 7:00 am until 6:00pm Monday thru Thursday with no crushing after 5:00pm, Friday it will operate from 7:00am-5:00pm, with no crushing after 5:00pm. There will be no crushing on the weekends .There will be no Sunday hours.

Mrs. Billington made a motion seconded by Mrs. Beckwith that Standard A has been met with all of the 22 conditions of approval. All in favor.

B.     The bulk location and height of proposed buildings and structures and the proposed uses thereof will not be detrimental or will impose undue burdens on the public facilities.

Mrs. Billington made a motion seconded by Mrs. Higgins that Standard B has been met with all of the 22 conditions of approval.

C.     The provisions of on-site landscaping and screening do provide adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the development.

Mrs. Billington made a motion seconded by Mrs. Beckwith that Standard C has been met with all of the 22 conditions of approval. All in favor.

D.     The site plan adequately provides for the soil and drainage problems that the development will create.

Mrs. Billington made a motion seconded by Mrs. Beckwith that Standard D has been met with all 22 conditions of approval. All in favor.

E.     The provisions for exterior lighting will not create undue hazards to motorists traveling on adjacent public streets nor are inadequate for the safety of occupants or users of the site nor will such lighting damage the value and diminish the usability of adjacent properties.

Mrs. Billington made a motion seconded by Mrs. Beckwith that Standard E has been met with all 22 conditions of approval. All in favor.

F.     The applicant has provided reasonable evidence of his financial capabilities to complete the development as planned and approved.

Mrs. Billington made a motion seconded by Mrs. Beckwith that Standard F has been met with all 22 conditions of approval. All in favor.

G.     The proposed development will not create undue fire safety hazards by not providing adequate access to the site or the buildings on the site for emergency vehicles or by failure to meet other fire safety ordinances or laws. The Fire Department shall file a written report with the Planning Board prior to the hearing.

Mrs. Billington made a motion seconded by Mrs. Beckwith that Standard G has been met, even though it does not apply as there are no structures on the property, with all 22 conditions of approval. All in favor.

H.     The proposed development has made adequate provision for sewage disposal.

Mrs. Billington made a motion seconded by Mrs. Beckwith that Standard H has been met with all 22 conditions of approval. All in favor.

I.     The proposed site plan will not alter the existing character of the surrounding zoning district or division to the extent that it will become a detriment or potential nuisance to said zoning division or district.

Mrs. Billington made a motion seconded by Mrs. Beckwith that Standard I has been met, with all 22 conditions of approval. Six Planning Board members in favor with Mr. Higgins opposed.

J.     The proposed development has made adequate provision for water supply, including an adequate supply of water for fire-protection purposes.

Mrs. Billington made a motion seconded by Mrs. Beckwith that Standard J has been met will all 22 conditions of approval. All in favor.

K.     No plan shall be approved by the Planning Board as long as the applicant is in default on a previously approved plan.

Mrs. Billington made a motion seconded by Mrs. Beckwith that Standard K has been met with all 22 conditions of approval. All in favor.

L.      Architectural drawings

Standard L is not applicable.

The following are the Conditions of Approval:

 All easements for reduces setbacks must be recorded in the Cumberland county registry of deeds within 85 days of this approval or the approval becomes void. Proof of recording at the registry of deeds shall be presented to the Town Planner within 90 days.

 Standish Zoning map must be amended removing any shoreland zoning from this lot. It must be both redrawn and approved by Town Council.

 This approval is for mineral extraction only as shown on the Reclamation Plans of Route 113 Gravel Pit made for record owner Shaw Earthworks Inc. Revision B dated 3/20/2017 sheets 1 through 8. In the former Boyington  closest to Rte. 113, shown as pit #1, the limit of extraction is as shown on the reclamation plan for existing (pit #1) on sheet 4 of 8, but in no case shall it be less than a minimum of one foot above the seasonal high water table. In pits #2 and #3 the approval is as shown on sheet 5 of 8 and sheet 6 of 8 respectively but in no case shall the excavation be less than five feet above seasonal high water table. Once seasonal high water is determined, the reclamation plan will be modified and pit floor elevations must remain a minimum of five feet above the seasonal high water table.

 Excavation shall not extend closer to the seasonal high-water table than allowed by DEP regulations. If standing water already exists in an existing excavated area at a depth of 6” or more and remains there for more than a week then no further excavation which will increase the amount of standing water shall occur. The applicant shall inform the CEO and Planner who will determine if the site is substantially in compliance or is in default and must return to the Planning Board who may request additional information to ensure compliance with this provision.

 A minimum of three steel cased monitoring well with lockable cap will be installed within the pit floor of each pit, with one additional well per 5 acres of open pit. A minimum of three of these wells must reach into the water table to determine a plane surface. Well depth will reach a minimum of 17 feet below the pit floor in that area or 5 ft. into the ground water table whichever is less. These new monitoring wells shall be installed around the proposed toe of slope as shown on the reclamation grading plan.

 Seasonal high water within all monitoring wells should be observed and reported by a registered professional engineer, geologist or by the applicant. Annual records of the seasonal high water table elevation shall be kept by the applicant and submitted to the town prior to annual CEO permit renewal. This monitoring well report must be certified each spring for the seasonal high water table elevations for the existing monitoring wells and all new wells.

 The applicant shall monitor groundwater levels biweekly during April, May, and June and once a month in September, December, and March for all water-level monitoring wells on the project site.  If the groundwater monitoring results indicate that the groundwater levels do not vary significantly, the applicant may request a reduction in the monitoring frequency.  All groundwater level data shall be submitted to the Town and the MDEP by April 30th of each year.

 Because the applicant has not submitted adequate data to confirm the elevation of the seasonal high water table during the initial approval thus if the annual monitoring well logs, as described in the previous condition of approval, from a minimum of three monitoring wells per pit, are not submitted annually prior to the payment for annual inspection then an additional fee of $500 shall be assessed over and above the normal inspection fee to cover cost of hiring a hydrologist to obtain groundwater information.

 The applicant shall install a new well to replace monitoring well MW-3 in the same general vicinity of the previously existing well.  The applicant shall add casing and locking caps to all four monitoring wells on the property.  The integrity of the monitoring wells shall be maintained during excavation activity.  Any well damaged or removed shall be replaced within 30 days of such damage or removal.  The location of the replacement well shall be in the same general vicinity as the damaged or removed well.

 The applicant must provide the town a copy of the Maine Department of Environmental Protection’s inspection report prior to annual July 1st pit renewal, if one has been received in the previous year.

 In no case shall the total area needing reclamation exceed 29 acres. This includes the working pit and associated on site non-vegetated storage areas roads and stockpiles.

 A performance bond in the amount of $92,200 for reclamation is required to be maintained. This amount assumes a cost of $3,180 / acre for total of 29 acres. Adequate loam material shall be retained on site to reclaim pit to grades shown on reclamation plan. Topsoil shall not be removed from the site but shall be retained on site for reclamation. Adequate loam to cover all reclamation needs shall be retained on site for the purpose of reclamation.

 Crushing is not to exceed 75 decibels at the property boundaries.

  No crushing on weekends. No parking of trucks along Pequawket Trail (Rt.113) while waiting for the gate to open.

  No blasting for mineral extraction within the pit without a town approved blasting permit.

  Blaze property lines shall be created along property lines within 200 ft. of all pits

  The approval is contingent upon establishment of a reclamation bond in the amount of $92,200. Adequate loam piles must be established and maintained on site for reclamation of all pits and disturbed areas

  Loaming and seeding must be established for a minimum of 18 months.

  In addition to any specific erosion control measures described in the plans, the applicant shall take all necessary actions to ensure that their activities or those of their agents do not result in noticeable erosion of soils or fugitive dust emissions on the site during the construction and operation of the project covered by this approval.

  This approval is for mineral extraction only as shown on the reclamation Plan made for Shaw Earthworks as revised 3-20-2017 The limit of extraction is the same as the reclamation plan, however, the approval is for excavation within only one foot above seasonal high water in pit #1 and only five feet above seasonal high water table in pits #2 and #3. Once seasonal high water is determined, the reclamation plan will be modified and pit floor elevations must remain five feet above the high water table.

  21.   There will be no crushing in Pit #1 except for areas that retain a minimum of a five           foot separation from the water table. There will be no stockpiling of offsite materials within 500 feet from any property line.

22.   This approval is dependent upon, and limited to, the proposals and plans contained in the application and supporting documents submitted and affirmed by the applicant (either orally or in writing) and that any variation from the plans, proposals, and supporting documents are subject to review and approval by the Planning Board, except for minor changes which the Code Enforcement Officer may approve


Application is approved.


New Business:


Leavitt Earthworks , Boundary Road, Map 12, 13, Lots 4,5,42B- 5 Year Gravel Pit Renewal( Gordon Brown Pit)


Peter Dalfonso, Civil Engineer was present to represent Brian Leavitt and Leavitt Earthworks. He said they are up for the five year renewal and they have been working with Mr. Benson on this. He said the pit is just over 22 acres and was taken over by Leavitt Earthworks in 2005 with a renewal in 2012. He said the pit was approved for a little over 22 acres with 10 acres to be open for an excavation area and three acres for storage of materials. He said that right now the first phase of almost 13 acres is pretty much completed with about 6 acres being mostly reclaimed with some vegetation. He said there is almost seven acres being used for storage of materials and they have just moved into phase two with just about 8 acres open.


Mr. Dalfonso said the way the sight is being used meets the requirements from the previous approval. Mr. Libby said they would probably do a site walk, especially where the pit is going to be expanded. Mr. Benson said that a site walk and then a workshop would be appropriate. It was scheduled for Monday, June 19, 2017 at 5:30pm.


Leavitt Tompson, LLC., Oak Hill Road/Route 25, Map 10, Lots 22A & 19-6 Sketch Plan Review


Steve Blais from Blais Civil Engineers was present to represent the applicants. He gave a brief over view of the project and said this was their second sketch plan review, with the first one in November 2016. He said that the layout is better than before with 16 lots on the lower side and 81 village housing lots. They have taken the commercial lots out of the picture and will come back with them at a later date. He said they have had a couple of meetings with Mr. Benson and the new plan they have, they feel good about. He said the storm water pond is in the same place, with another smaller one in a different location. He said that Portland Water District has about 1700 feet of water main to run up Oak Hill Road. He said they are working with the Fire Department about the upgrades of the water main. He said they will have adequate pressure and fire suppression with the upgrade.


Brian Leavitt said the water main starts around an area by the Red Church and would run up Oak Hill Road to the project with 12”main to their location. He said the storm water will run off into one pond or the other. Mr. Leavitt said that the watershed for this area is Sebago Lake and also the Saco River. This project would have two water shed divides, both of which are quite far away from the project.


Mr. Blais said there are some pockets of wetlands on the site and they are meeting with DEP about these and also the water sheds. He said that they will be submitting a subdivision application at some point and the village housing will have to have its own set of site plans. He said their plan is to put together one submission package, but two sets of plans. He said they will keep the Board informed as they go along. Mr. Blais said he has lived by storm water ponds and they need to be dredged out every few years. He said DEP has to have renewals of these storm water ponds every five years, which is similar to gravel pits.


Mr. Blais said the water levels drop and go up and down with the ground water. He said that the ponds they have designed will probably stay pretty much level all of the time because of the ways they have designed the drains through gravel, which is a good filtration system. He said DEP says they can mow the surrounding grasses every six months and the grass has a rustic look to it.


Jim Stevens from 130 Oak Hill Road spoke. He said he lives right beside where the project is proposed to go. He said he doesn’t have a problem with anything but the survey they have done is about 20 feet off going to the back of his lot. He said he bought an extra 20 feet all of the way back and it looks like they have come ahead too much. Mr. Libby told him that he and the applicant would have to work this out. He has a big pond on his property and he is concerned about that and would their project run into his pond. Mr. Libby said this will be discussed at later meetings.


Mrs. Billington asked why only one side has houses and Mr. Blais said the Village housing is based on density. He said they have checked the ordinances and they can’t combine the village housing and the residential housing. He said it pushed the houses too far away from the road and didn’t look good at all. He said the lay out they have now looks better and seems to work well. One side will be housing and the other side they look at will all be forested with trees and such.


A workshop was scheduled to be held on Monday, June 19th, 2107 at 7:00pm.

Meeting was adjourned at 9:00pm.