Standish Planning Board Meeting Minutes
Standish Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
May 01, 2023
The meeting of the Standish Planning Board was called to order by Chairman Charles Brown at 6:00pm. Present were Derek Wright, Deb Boxer, Frank Nappi, Jolene Whittemore, Andrew Walton, Chris Struebing, Scott Hastings, Town Planner and Jackie Dyer, Admin. Asst. to Town Planner and Planning Board.
Open Meeting
a. Call to order by Chairman Brown
b. Opening Statement from Planning Board Chairman Brown
c. Declaration of a Quorum (7)
Approval of Meeting Minutes from April 03, 2023
Mr. Nappi made a motion seconded by Mr. Struebing to approve the meeting minutes as written. All in favor.
Old Business:
- Standish Fish & Game Club, 48 Middle Road, Map 9, Lots 8,9-Site Plan Application to build a gun range and club house.
Beth Brown Malia, President of Standish Fish & Game was present to represent the Club. She read a letter that stated the Fish and Game Club are withdrawing their application. Beth will email the letter to Mrs. Dyer so it can be on record.
- Leavitt Earthworks, Inc.,191 Ossipee Trl W, Map 10, Lot11A- Site Plan Application for Ossipee Trail Self Storage
Griffin Wood from Teradyne Consultants was present to represent the applicant. Brian Leavitt from Leavitt Earthworks was present as well. He showed the project site and what they are proposing to do. He said this lot is approximately 7.5 acres and an existing building. He said they have a wastewater management system for the office and there are stormwater management plans in place as well. There will be a new paved driveway off from Kayli Drive as access. The water main will connect to all the buildings for the sprinkler systems and a hydrant. The wooded buffers will remain, and some clearing will be minimal. He said a site walk was done on April 11,2023 and a meeting for all interested people was held with DEP on April 13, 2023.
Mr. Hastings said his main question was about the access from Ossipee Trail to the abutting property. He asked how this access would work for the abutter as well? Mr. Griffin said they would use Kayli Drive as it’s considered safer, but the abutter would like to use their own access and are asking DEP to agree to it. He said the abutter would like to have their own entrance. He said if they do, then they can tighten the grading.
Brian Leavitt from Leavitt Earthworks said he had met with DOT and the owners of the abutting property. He said they did not have any permits for the existing driveway and DOT told them to put in permits for their own driveway. Mr. Hastings said he was concerned about their easement over the existing driveway and Mr. Leavitt said they would never cut that easement off nor could they. Mr. Hastings said that is a major concern with the grading and Mr. Leavitt said provided they get permission from DOT for their own driveway, they can tighten the grading. He said that the abutter has deeded easements from Kayli Drive and Rt. 25 but are choosing to have their own. Mr. Hastings said this project right now encroaches on their easement. Mr. Leavitt said the easement stands and has not been changed but the abutters are hoping to have their own driveway, if permitted by DOT.
Mrs. Boxer said that the Board would have to wait for the site plan review before the final approval. Mr. Leavitt said that they are hoping for approval with conditions and Mrs. Boxer said the Board can’t do that until they have all of what is needed and those are the rules. Mr. Leavitt said that everything DEP needs they have but it could take up to six months. There was no public comment, and the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Brown said the Board should go thru the site plan criteria:
§181-73 Site Plan Criteria
- Vehicular and pedestrian safety: The proposal will not impose a significant burden on public facilities. Kaylie Drive was designed with this connection in mind. Self-storage is a low traffic volume use and any minimal traffic impacts from this use will be vastly overshadowed compared to the larger impacts of the Highlands Subdivision.
- Impact of building and use: The proposal will not impose a significant burden on public facilities.
- Landscaping and screening: Screening requirements of §181-7.1 E)(4)(h) appear to be met. (Large landscaping plan has been provided to Board)
- Soil and drainage: This is a large project with a significant new impervious surface. The Board felt at the April meeting that the extensive MDEP review that this project would undergo was sufficient oversite to make sure the project would not result in any undue stormwater or drainage impacts.
- Exterior lighting: Specifications for exterior lighting have been submitted and show them to be full cut off as required by §181-7.1 E) (4)(h)[2]. (Per Mr. Leavitt there will be some exterior site lights 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, with key card entry. The lights will not be directed outward or toward any houses.)
- Financial capabilities: Adequate financial capacity information has been submitted.
- Fire safety: The Fire Inspector has reviewed the plan and a condition related to the sprinkling of the existing building is requested and included below.
- Sewage disposal: An HHE 200 for the existing septic system has been submitted. (Bathroom in office only)
- Character of the district: The proposal is in keeping with the character of the district as laid out in the FBCVD standards.
- Water Supply: The property is proposed to be served by public water. (Water line has been run and will hook up to this.)
- Applicant’s standing on previous approvals: The applicant is not in default on any previous approvals for other sites. Previous approvals on this site have included the need to sprinkle the existing building which has not been done. Staff has proposed a condition below that this be remedied prior to the issuance of any building permits on the site to ensure it is corrected in a timely fashion.
- Architectural design (FBCVD): The Board will need to find the building form standards have been met with modifications.
- FBCVD additional Standards:
- Compliance with FBCVD standards: The proposal complies with the FBCVD Standish Corner Town Gateway street frontage type as reviewed above.
- Contribution to physical definition of the public right-of-way: The site will be landscaped and screened as required.
- Appropriate accommodation of automobiles: The proposal adequately accommodates vehicular traffic and does not impede or preclude pedestrian travel.
- New lot layout standards: Not applicable, no lot divisions proposed.
- Provision for phased development: Not applicable. the proposal is for infill development surrounded by developed lots. The Highlands Subdivision meeting this point is in part what set this project up to be built.
- Underground utilities: Proposed utilities are underground.
Mr. Hastings said the Board should review the building form standards and enforce those as they are given the ability to do so. This is not village center. The elements that needed to be modified are windows and doors facing the street and the façade of the building keeping a rural character. There will be one door going into the office, Mr. Hastings said, and there is a tree planting buffer they saw during the site walk. Mr. Brown said the front building will shield all the others from being seen. The public hearing was reopened for comment, there was none. Public hearing closed.
Mrs. Whittemore asked if the Board was all set on the property line and existing easement. Mr. Hastings said the Board will have to figure out some wording for a condition of approval and the applicant must get it down on a plan before final approval. He said if the abutter is going to use the easement, the landscaping would have to be pared down and changed a little if they continue with that use. Mr. Brown said all the landscaping would have to move further away from where it is situated on the plan now. Mrs. Boxer said she thought the easement should be settled and not be a condition of approval. She feels they need to get their DEP approval and Mr. Hastings said the Board could do preliminary approval subject to DEP approval and the resolution of the easement. There also might be some minor changes to the plan that need to be looked at.
Mr. Brown read the building form standards, as written in Mr. Hastings memo(181-7.1.B.7). Mr. Brown asked for a motion to find the application complete, Mr. Wright made that motion. Mrs. Boxer said this wasn’t clear and Mr. Hastings said all the information they needed for the review had been sent. The motion was seconded by Mr. Struebing. All in favor of finding the application complete as presented.
“Move that the Board grant approval preliminary approval, subject to approval, under the provisions of the Standish Land Use Code for the site plan application submitted by Terradyn Consultants on behalf of Leavitt Earthworks for the property at 191 Ossipee Trail West in Standish (Map 10 Lot 11A), having found it to meet the site plan review criteria of §181-73, the performance standards of §181-7.1, and all other relevant standards of the zoning ordinance to the greatest extent practical with the following conditions:
- The existing building on site must have a functional automatic sprinkler system installed, tested, and approved by the State Fire Marshal’s office prior to the issuance of any building permits for this project.
- All required permits from MDEP are required and must be received and submitted to the Town prior to final approval of the site plan.
- The access easement needs to be resolved and the location of the existing entrance must be resolved as well.
Mrs. Boxer made a motion to grant preliminary approval, seconded by Mr. Wright with Conditions of Preliminary Approval as read.
New Business:
- Nancy Mancini, 23 Wards Cove Rd., Map 50, Lot 23-Shoreland Zoning Application to remove existing cottage and build new home.
Don Nichols, Don Nichols Building, was present to represent the applicant. He has been hired to demolish and rebuild a new structure. He said the memo that Mr. Hastings wrote was great. He said that a site walk has not been done and he has some pictures to show of the property. The pictures showed the patio, the existing building, the property line, concrete ramp going into the water and the layout of the property. He said there is a lot of concrete for the patio and the retaining wall. The retaining wall will remain, but the concrete patio will be removed. Mr. Nichols said the property lines are close and he said the existing building is approximately 7’8” from the property lines. Mr. Nichols said the set back from the road is about 9’6”, he showed the grade of the property.
Mr. Nichols said that there is the existing property survey in the application and is done by a professional surveyor. The septic is across from the property with 3 lots combined into this one system, that they already have a permit for. Mrs. Boxer asked about the septic and who permitted it. Mr. Hastings said the septic is a different project and Mrs. Whittemore said this is a very good thing for the lake. This septic is designed for 11 bedrooms with 92 algin chambers. Mrs. Boxer said they need insurance for this system and other items for the life of the system. Mr. Nichols said the Mancini’s will take care of what they need to.
Mr. Nichols said the project will be 1100 square feet with the expansion. He said the new expansion will go towards the north and the front is staying at the same setback as well as the roadside. Mrs. Whittemore asked if there are steps coming down from the building and Mr. Nichols said there are two steps coming down. He said they are pretty much walking out to grade. He said the new building will be increased to its 30% expansion. He said by removing the patio, this will reduce the area by over 200 square feet. Mr. Hastings said the concrete is part of the structure and impervious area. Mrs. Boxer asked if that includes things along the water line and Mr. Hastings said there are no changes to anything near the water line. Mr. Nichols said they will have some plantings and shade trees when the concrete patio is removed. He said he did not have a vegetation plan ready yet but will.
Mr. Nichols said the drawings are schematic only and will adhere to impervious surface and reduce it. He said plantings and vegetation will take place where it’s all concrete. Mrs. Boxer said she didn’t think they could plant stuff right by the water and she would go to the DEP and go over stuff with them. Mr. Brown asked about the canopy and Mr. Hastings said it has to be included in the building calculations. Mr. Nichols said he believes as long as the height is not increased, they could have this perpendicular structure.
Mr. Hastings said this site is about the most non-conforming as you can get, and the code can just about handle it. He said there can be about 59% structure on the property. He said there is strict language about a structure being a structure. Mr. Hastings said the building cannot be moved back any further. The building will take about 30% of the property. Mr. Nichols said with the new code and volume, the old code would not consider that as volume, but square footage. He said if they had the ability to go higher, it would be better, but they cannot go across the lot as it is small.
Mr. Hastings said there is a question about the height of the building and the Board will have to address that. Mr. Nichols said they can take away the canopied sitting area from the plan. Mr. Hastings said the applicant has been trying hard to meet every standard and what is allowed. He said the Board might want a final plan for planting to be done and erosion and control plan. Mr. Nichols said he only hires DEP certified contractors, and they will place erosion control where needed. Mr. Brown said some of the calculations on the plan do not add up. Mr. Nichols told him how he had calculated some of the numbers and explained how he reached his final calculations. Mr. Nichols said the plan could very well achieve a decrease of more than 200 feet, and it could be a reduction of 400 feet. Mr. Wright said its total footprint against structural footprint.
Mr. Hastings said the overall reduction is 222 feet. Mr. Nichols said the original structure is 837 feet. Mr. Brown said that he sees it now. Mrs. Whittemore asked about the sliding door window seat shelf. Mr. Nichols said this is a continuous sliding door and it’s a 16-foot door that just slides. He said it’s a multiple track door that goes back into the closet. He said it creates more open space. Mrs. Boxer said she looked at the proposed structure and it doesn’t blend in with the existing neighborhood. Mr. Hastings said there are not any architectural standards for shoreland zoning. A site walk was scheduled for Wednesday, May 16, 2023, at 5:00pm. Mr. Brown said the Board would like to see an erosion and sedimentation control plan. Mr. Brown asked for a sealed copy of the survey and Mr. Nichols said he could provide one. Mr. Nichols said they are drilling a well and will not have any basement but can be used year-round. Mrs. Boxer asked about an Air B&B and Mr. Nichols said no. Mr. Nichols said Portland Water District is a good resource for what to plant. This application was tabled until the June 05, 2023, meeting.
- Pine Tree Estates, 580 Ossipee Trail W, Map 6, Lot 15, Map 5, Lots 32,33- Site Plan Application to expand mobile home park by additional 133 manufactured homes.
Jason Vafiades from Atlantic Resource Consulting was present to represent the applicant, Pine Tree Estates. Also present were Bill Anderson w/Atwell (Land Development Consultants for RHP Properties), Joel Brown Owner of RHP Properties and Rebecca Pulsifer, Park Manager of Pine Tree Estates. Mr. Anderson said that RHP bought the property in 2019 and has made many improvements within the park. He said they are here to talk about the proposed expansion. He said they have 224 existing home sites on 224 acres. Mr. Anderson said they have a private wastewater system as well as their own wells, which they would be expanding on both. He showed the existing acreage and proposed expansion of 166 acres. Mr. Anderson said in 2019 they have a meeting with DIFWL, MDOT, the Town and a formal presentation to the Planning Board before going to the Board of Appeals, which was extensive meetings over an eighteen-month period. He said they also did a traffic study as they need to make some changes to their entries.
Mr. Anderson said there are no negative impacts expected to the residents or abutters, environment. He said they are proposing a 125-foot vegetative buffer towards where Josie’s Brook is located. He said they are proposing 133 new home sites with fifty percent being age 55 and older. Mr. Anderson said there are about 75 acres of open space that a lot of the new homes will back up to. He said there is an update to the traffic study, and he said they have done many studies that are about 90% finished.
Mr. Hastings said that they have put a lot of work into this project. The Town did have a third-party review done, which RHP has answered and addressed any concerns reasonably. He said there is one undersized lot which is 98 feet under the minimum and will have to be adjusted. He said that they only have their road frontage at 60 feet and the ordinance is 90, but that will be addressed. Mr. Hastings said what they are proposing makes sense. He said that for fire protection, all the sites need to be within 2000 feet from the protection and hydrant. He said there are still some outstanding items, but he is not ready to worry about them yet.
Jason Vafiades spoke. He said the cistern for fire protection is something they are working on with the Fire Chief and will be in the next submission. He said the performance bond is being worked on and this project is well designed with a lot of hard work. He said they do need a DEP site location permit. He said they are trying to expedite that process. Mr. Brown asked if there was any feedback from the DEP near the setback of the vernal pool with lots 100-103. Mr. Vafiades said the Board of Appeals strongly suggested they go to DEP with their layout of the lots. He said DEP sent them an email that this layout is acceptable to them. Mrs. Boxer asked if the emails were there, and Mr. Vafiades said the Board of Appeals has it with all the findings. Mr. Brown said Dow Road is discontinued and that was in the final survey. Mrs. Boxer asked about Sebago Technics identifying wetlands and vernal pools in 2019 and Mr. Vafiades said those were finished.
Lucien Langlois said that those studies were done in 2019 and he worked with DEP and DIFWL on those studies. He said once vernal pools are surveyed, that is written in stone. He said a Blanding turtle survey was done and none were found. He said they are found in vernal pools; all the land was gone over and there were not any Blanding turtles that were found. Mrs. Boxer said the report has many different species in it and Mr. Langlois said some of those species were found in a common habitat all over the property. He said there is nothing that is considered endangered or rare.
Mr. Brown asked about the abutters on the end of Dow Road and how many residences are there. Mr. Vafiades said there is one private parcel, and the owner has an easement over the road for access to his property. Jason said that Dow Road will have fire protection access and the abutter hopefully has no objections to the road being upgraded. Jason said the improvements are adding some gravel (3 inches) to the top, they are not expanding the road. There will be a gate at the end, and they may have to add a second gate as well. This access will be plowed and maintained. Mr. Nappi asked if all the internal roads are private, and Mr. Vafiades said they are. He said there is no HOA, and this is a subdivision as they are adding more than three residences. He said RHP owns the entire parcel but leases the land to mobile home owners. He said they do some rentals but prefer to sell. Mrs. Whittemore asked if there was a plan to use the open land behind the units for a Phase 3 and Mr. Vafiades said they are not looking to do another expansion after this.
Mr. Brown asked if the Board does a site walk, what would they see? Mr. Vafiades said that the best access would be from Dow Road and there is a trail they could walk easily on. He said it’s the end of Ashley Lane and is a good place to see the vernal pools and wooded areas. He said a little further down the trail the Board would be able to see a lot. He said they will have it marked so the Board can see where the expansion will be. He said some of the other sections are right off the road. The Board indicated they would like to do a site walk and this was scheduled for Wednesday, May 31, 2023, at 5:00pm. A site walk for the Cram Road subdivision application was scheduled for June 05, 2023, beginning at 4:30pm.
Mrs. Whittemore asked about the fifty-five and over section and how they would identify this. Mr. Vafiades said that this will be on the next plan, and they will be clumped together.
Mrs. Boxer asked about an aquifer under where they are going to blast, and Mr. Anderson said this will be in the packet next time. She asked about the shared septic and Mr. Vafiades said they have a few of them. He said this is reviewed by the State as this is a site location application and reviewed by the State geologist. He said the existing park has two shared septic systems which are constantly maintained. Mrs. Boxer asked about a forested wetland and were they building on it? Mr. Vafiades said that there will be some filling in of wetlands, but nothing substantial. He said the DIFWL asked them to maintain the wildlife paths and keep things in a natural state as best as they can.
Mr. Langlois showed the different landscapes they are using, the vernal pool locations and some of the roads. Mrs. Boxer said nothing can be built on a forested wetland and Mr. Hastings said this is residential acreage that is suitable for building. He said that doesn’t mean you can’t touch the wetlands, but they try to stay away. He said forested wetlands are different than just wetlands. Mrs. Boxer asked about the effect on the school system and said the schools are overcrowded now. Mr. Vafiades said they have talked with the school district’s Superintendent and how they add capacity for that. He said they might do more stops, depending on the number of children that will come in. Mr. Vafiades said he would be surprised if more than 12 to 15 kids will be added to the park.
Mr. Vafiades said they must go through a driveway modification with DEP and more of a traffic study as to the number of trips per day. He said there is no traffic engineer tonight. He said that residential projects are one of the most studied projects that they do. He said for every three houses, one person will make a trip. He said that not all people will leave at the same time, most leave at peak hours, which they calculate is under 100 trips per day.
Mr. Brown asked if the public had any comment.
Robin Mercier-Rosida Drive said she has questions about the plans and the changes that have been made. Are all the other reports changed as well, will Rosida Drive be gated, will the hydrogeo report contain the blasting and how will that affect their water? What about the septic failure and the water aquifer? What about 55 and older, what kind of a change?
Warren Ouellette-Deer Hill North- what about the water and the number of homes?
Mr. Vafiades said the 55 and older will be deed restricted and they are obligated to this.
Before a building permit is issued, the restricted deed will be sent to the Code Enforcement Officer. He said they have updated the plans and the studies do not update. He said people are always concerned about their water and issues that can arise. Jason said that they are using a bedrock well, not a drilled well. Jason said this is a wet area and they are not concerned. The well will also be connected to the well that the park has onsite now. All three wells will be tied together to eliminate water pressure and other issues. By tying this together, it will make it so that not just one aquifer is being drawn on and over worked. He said they are a public utility and must undergo water testing monthly. All septics are located on the outskirts of the plan layout. They have a water system manager, and he has a lot of tests that need to be done.
Mr. Vafiades said there are some issues with some water and flooding, and they have tried to address those issues. He said RHP has been trying to make improvements as they go along, channeling water away from driveways and he feels they have done a pretty good job of trying to resolve issues as they inherited what was there.
Carolyn Biegel- asked what the frontage of the lots on the existing section is. Mr. Vafiades said some are only 50 feet and the expansion in 2004 is 100 feet and pretty spread out.
Robin Mercier said the only time the road (Rosida Drive) gets maintained is before a meeting. Mr. Vafiades said that Rosida Drive will not be accessed from the park and will certainly be gated off. It will be left so pedestrians can get through but not vehicles, etc.
Mrs. Boxer asked about sidewalks and the State regulations do not require that, said Mr. Vafiades. He said there are speed bumps in different sections, and they do work in slowing things down. He said the speed limit is 15 mph. Public hearing closed.
Application tabled until after the site walk is done.
Meeting adjourned at 8:39pm