Standish Planning Board Meeting Minutes
Standish Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
September 11, 2023
The meeting of the Standish Planning Board was called to order by Chairman Charles Brown at 6:01pm. Present were Derek Wright, Deb Boxer, Frank Nappi, Patrick Gere, Andrew Walton, Carolyn Biegel, Town Planner Scott Hastings and Jackie Dyer, Admin. to Town Planner and Planning Board.
Mr. Brown said that the Yates Builders’ application was requesting to be tabled and the application for Martin Secord on Boundary Road, which was heard at a prior meeting, had been withdrawn.
Open Meeting
a. Call to order by Chairman Charles Brown
b. Opening Statement from Planning Board Chairman Brown
c. Declaration of a Quorum (7)
Approval of Meeting Minutes from July 10, 2023/August 07, 2023
The amended minutes and additional comments that Mrs. Biegel wanted entered into record were okayed by the Board. Mr. Walton said he was okay with it and Mr. Wright said he had no comment. Mr. Gere asked Mrs. Biegel if what she had written was what she wanted with clarification and what she was referring to and she said yes. Mr. Brown asked for a motion to accept the amended minutes and Mr. Wright made the motion, seconded by Mrs. Biegel. All in favor.
Mr. Brown asked for a motion to approve the August 07, 2023, minutes, which he said were very brief. Mr. Nappi made the motion to accept the minutes, and this was seconded by Mrs. Biegel. Six members for and one abstaining (Mrs. Boxer) as she said she was not at the meeting.
Old Business:
- Yates Builders, Cram Road, Map 6, Lots 32-1A, Lot 40- Subdivision -Phase One for 12 Single family homes & Phase Two for 8 single family homes
Mr. Brown said that the applicant has asked for this to be tabled. Mr. Hastings said the applicant was hoping to have more information to the Board but was not able to at this time. Mrs. Boxer made a motion seconded by Mr. Nappi to table the application. Mrs. Biegel said when she looked at this, there was some basic information missing and why is this on the agenda to begin with? She said the Board still doesn’t know if the applicant has a legal right to improve Cram Road and if that information is not there, then all the time spent reviewing this is for nothing. Mrs. Biegel said she would like to see that some of these things are in place, where they are fundamental to the project. Mr. Brown asked Mr. Hastings if this is timing with the application once an application is submitted. Mr. Hastings said that the applicant thought they had what was needed and the legal right to the road is exactly why they are not spending time on this tonight. Mr. Hastings said the Board does not have that information in their hands and they are not going to spend any time on it. Mrs. Biegel asked if there are DEP permits and will they change? Mr. Hastings said the DEP permitting is standard but can take up to a six-month minimum. He said during the review, if the plans change, the applicant must come back to the Board. Mr. Brown said this is not an active review.
Mr. Rikers said he lives on Cram Road and has a lot of misinformation from the developer. He said that the developer is missing several pieces, including signatures giving them permission from the residents that live on Cram Road, to build the road. He asked if the Town required a 22-foot road with ditches on both sides going all the way in. He said the first mile of the road going in is only 18 feet wide and is the developer required to bring that to the Town standard? He said he has spoken with the Fire Chief about this. He said he had a pretty big fire a few years ago and luckily a neighbor had moved snow, so the Fire Department trucks were able to get in. He said they are going from about 12 cars today to potentially 80 cars a day and will the developer have to upgrade the road for his development? Mr. Brown told him that we really don’t have any other information to share, but to watch for the Planning Board meeting agendas to be advertised and to please come and express his concerns.
Mr. Gere said he has a question about the plan and is it a requirement for the plan to be prepared and sealed by a land surveyor. Mr. Brown said the Board has a boundary survey and a lot of Towns require a land survey and the seal from the surveyor. Mr. Hastings said a boundary survey is required but not necessarily a seal. Mr. Brown said the engineers cannot put survey pins in. Mr. Brown said this can be asked of the Town Attorney as he doesn’t think it’s in the ordinance. Mr. Hastings said there are jurisdictions within the realms of the surveyor, or the engineers of the plan and the Town has no jurisdiction over the plans or the survey.
All in favor of the motion made by Mrs. Boxer and seconded by Mr. Nappi to table this application.
New Business:
- Nicholas Thorne 11 Angelwood Road Ext, Map 2, Lot 2-48-1C-Site Plan Application to build a duplex.
Mr. Thorne is not here tonight. A motion was made to move this after the next application by Mr. Walton and seconded by Mr. Wright in case Mr. Thorne might just be late. Mrs. Biegel asked what would happen to this now and Mr. Brown told her that we are just moving the order of the applications around in case Mr. Thorne does come in. Mr. Gere said he will recuse himself from this application as he works for Sebago Technics and a colleague is working on this project. All in favor of moving the order of the agenda, with one abstaining. (Mr. Gere) Mr. Hastings said this is not an official subdivision and these lots never had specific deeds. Mr. Brown said we have a boundary survey, but no markers on it, also needed are bearings and distances. Mr. Hastings said we had delineation on the wetlands and Mrs. Biegel asked if a DEP permit is needed. Mr. Brown said no because it’s under 4300 square feet. Mr. Gere said if they attack any wetlands they would need an Army Corp of Engineers review. Mr. Hastings said they will need a road opening permit and a culvert permit. He said he will let them work that out with the Public Works Department. Mr. Brown asked who owns the dry hydrant and Mr. Hastings said that is the Town’s. Mr. Hastings said if the building placement is the same as on the plan, they are fine with the dry hydrant. A motion made by Mr. Walton and seconded by Mr. Wright to table this to the October 02, 2023, meeting was unanimous,
- PATCO Construction, 25 Ossipee Trl E, Map 36, Lot 34-Site Plan Application to build a 7500 square foot building for NAPA Auto Parts
Kaleb Bourassa from Gorrill Palmer was present and Greg Patterson owner of PATCO. He said that they are here tonight and looking at the existing lot of the old Town Hall on Rt.25. He said they have a site plan and an aerial view which shows the Town center and the intersection where this lot sits. He said they have gone through the form-based code and the ordinances. He said they can go through the site pieces on this 1.2-acre lot, which also has a candy and ice cream shop. Kaleb said they want to do a lot split and maintain the existing lot on the left and they will maintain the two existing buildings that are on the other lot now. He said the applicant is proposing to build a NAPA Auto Parts retail store that is 50’x100’ with the primary entrance on Route 25. Kaleb said that they would maintain the primary driveway so that both existing lots have access. He said the driveway is blocked with barricades now as they have two different businesses going. Grading across the site would be on the average of 5-10% and they would be raising it up and matching the grade that is there now. He said they would be grading along the foundation of the building as well and there is also some stormwater management to be done. For their permit with DEP, they are using a clean or metal roof, so no filter protection will be used for runoff.
Mr. Bourassa said that they will have a rain garden or bio protection area and what goes through the filter protection will then go through the other drainage system they will have in place. He said they are trying to be good neighbors with good, implemented standards. They will tap into CMP poles for underground service. He said they have the septic and have had test pits done already for that so they can determine the size needed. He said they do not have the final HHE200 submitted but they would be more than happy to submit it as a condition of approval. Kaleb said they have tried to hit on the form-based code as much as possible. He said for parking, they have supplied extra parking spaces on the plan. He said they have a letter of intent, and they feel very comfortable adding the extra spaces and maintaining the parking lot at the back of the building. He said most of the items are building related and there are things they can talk about later. He said they have supplied a lot of fenestration work with the siding, dormers, the roof, and doors. He said he will be glad to answer any questions that members of the Board may have.
Mr. Hastings said he spoke with the Fire Inspector and Public Works Director, and they have no issues with the application or building. He said the additional six parking spaces are not within the code and 50 feet of the façade of the building along with the metal siding plus the pitch of the roof, is not within the code either and it doesn’t provide any space above. Mr. Nappi asked what the siding would look like as he would like to get an idea. Kaleb said they had some pictures at the last workshop showing what it will look like, and Mr. Nappi asked if it’s a shingled type building, but said it looks like horizontal siding. Kaleb said this siding is vinyl. Mr. Patterson said that the building looks like the one in the picture he brought that was done in the Town of Waterboro with vinyl siding and vinyl that looks like stone. Mrs. Boxer asked about the colors and did they want to use metal siding. Mr. Patterson said some of the siding is metal and some is vinyl. He said the vinyl is vinyl composite and a siding called Azac. Mr. Walton asked about the dormers and Mr. Patterson said he didn’t like the looks of the dormers and maintaining them on a metal roof. Mr. Patterson said he is trying to work with what the Town wants, and he thinks this building and its looks are sharp. Mr. Patterson said the pitch of the roof he has is much better and not so steep. He said OSHA likes the 3-12 pitch better and he said the 6-12 pitch is very hard. He said with that pitch it would be very difficult and the snow would come screaming off the roof. Mr. Gere said he has seen some metal roofs with the 6-12 pitch and Mr. Patterson said he is more concerned about safety with a steeper roof. He said that the difficulty with a fifty-foot-long building is trying to get a colonial design with a broken-up roof line, a second floor and trying to make a big building look small. Mr. Patterson said he has been building since probably 40 years ago and has won many awards for his buildings.
Mrs. Biegel said that she keeps hearing about the builders’ needs and his buildings can’t meet the codes. She said she is trying to keep calm but is getting more and more upset with the absolute disregard for the codes. She said she sees this is very well put together and the well-done plan by Gorrill Palmer. She said Gorrill Palmer sits on a Board in another Town and holds the applicants’ feet to the fire in meeting the codes. Mrs. Biegel said she wonders why we can’t do the same thing to protect our community. She said when we talked about the six extra parking spots, it’s because that’s what NAPA wants. She said in developing the code, putting in extra parking was detrimental to the site. She said the code says that specific rationale is supposed to be shown, not because NAPA wants it but from a particular standard that says rather or not that parking should be required. Mr. Brown asked if the parking was a minimum and Mr. Hastings said it is both. Mrs. Biegel said it is supposed to be a walkable area and the more spaces you have, the more cars there will be. She said there is a rationale behind it and the plan shows measurements that are different, she said there is a little bit of a discrepancy. Mrs. Biegel showed Mr. Bourassa the plan and the discrepancy. He said this is an error.
Mr. Patterson said when he first came, parking was a concern. He said that he went back and changed what the Board had asked to be changed and all those buildings had about a third of the parking that he had submitted. He said a big building has added parking. Mrs. Biegel said she would like to continue, and she said we keep referring to the other buildings like the old Town Hall, which is the Albion Howe School. She said there is historical content there and Albion Howe was in the Civil War and his family gave that building to the Town. Mrs. Biegel said that the whole corner was once a historical district and if you looked at a street view, the Albion Howe School has a dormer and windows on the second floor. She said if this is for use or nonuse, they recommend that there are two floors. She said this whole metal building is out of character and there are other buildings around, this one has 2/3 that is storage. She said a building like this is supposed to have a nice entrance and this one has it way around the corner, not where it’s supposed to be and there are more fake doors. Mrs. Biegel said she feels there is a total disregard for the code. She said that she knows the person that put this together would not waive these things that are being asked for. Mrs. Biegel said it doesn’t help the Town to waive things. She said, for example, when McDonalds went into Freeport, they did not waive all their requirements and told them if you are going to come in here, you will conform to what we have. She said that the Harraseeket Inn did not lose any value of their property or Thomas Mosher and that allowed Freeport to retain its value. She said to accept less than over and over, we are selling our community short. Mrs. Biegel said that you cannot just waive willy-nilly and allowing it not to meet the intent of the code. She said it must be a valid reason to keep the code intact and this does not. She said we could say we would love NAPA to come but to a spot like Brian Leavitt’s building and she said she would make a motion to get a peer review from an architect and see if this is consistent with the other architecture around.
Mr. Wright said he remembers talking about having an architect review this but is not sure where it ended up. Mrs. Boxer said she agrees with Mrs. Biegel, and she would never approve of this with the metal siding, this is a metal warehouse with many things that are not functional. Mr. Patterson said he apologizes and guesses that maybe he didn’t listen or change the things they wanted. Mrs. Boxer said maybe he should hire an architect and go over this and come up with a building that is acceptable. Mr. Patterson said that he is only asking for three items, and he guesses he lost out. He said that he told the Board in the first meeting that if they didn’t want him, they could tell him to leave. Mr. Nappi said if we continue to take this view, there will be no business in Standish. He said that this is just his opinion and Mrs. Biegel said she doesn’t agree. She said when the time is right someone will build there and there are other problems with this site, and she has a whole page of them. She said we are charged to follow the code and if we have waivers, we are supposed to keep the intent intact and enforce the code.
Mr. Brown said there was a motion and Mrs. Biegel said it is to do a peer review of the architecture and see if this is compatible with our code. She said that is what they underlined. Mr. Patterson said he will need to make a decision at that time as he will be into this for a lot of money already and to be turned down because of someone’s personal beliefs, he can’t change that. He said for him to continue might not happen and if they want to send him packing now, please say so. He said that other businesses trying to come in will feel the same way. Mrs. Biegel said that the Board had already said this building was not okay and he came back with the same building and a few plastic dormers on it. Mr. Gere said that Mrs. Biegel brought up McDonalds in Freeport. Mr. Gere said that McDonalds bought a historic house and converted it to McDonalds. Mr. Gere said them asking him to buy a house to convert and keep the character of the village is asking too much and he wouldn’t even know where to start. Mr. Gere said that maintaining the code is important. He said they want NAPA, but he needs to make changes to meet the code. Mr. Patterson said if he meets the architectural standards, would the Board approve it then? Mr. Gere said that is not in the purview to say if he does this, they will approve it. He said that he would need to make the changes and let the Board see them.
Mrs. Biegel said that on the building, there is one set of lights and then in another drawing there are lights like you see in a warehouse building and they are very different. She said the sidewalks do not connect to the parcels, the landscape plan looks to be done by a civil engineer and is the foundation going to show, the sidewalk ends and there is 3 feet drop to nowhere. Mr. Patterson said he needs to think about this. Mrs. Biegel said that is okay and he said he knows how she feels about this. Mr. Brown asked for a second on the motion and Mr. Walton said he doesn’t want to second the motion. He said he feels he knows what a review of this building will be, and the outcome and we know what it will come out to. He said the Board is not architects. Mr. Brown said that the Council has given them the authority to grant waivers and determine if the criteria is met. Mr. Walton said he feels the Council is doing this because nothing is happening, and Mr. Brown said he is probably right. Mrs. Biegel said that the application needs to meet the intent of the code. Mr. Brown said that her interpretation of intent may be different from hers and Mrs. Biegel said this is not her interpretation of the intent, you can read what it is, and it’s spelled out in 181.7-1. Mrs. Biegel read the following:
“The intent of the Form Based Code Village Districts is to strengthen and/or establish mixed-use, interconnected, village-scaled neighborhoods based on a development pattern that is fiscally responsible and environmentally sustainable. New neighborhoods and redevelopment opportunities shall be characterized by vital civic spaces with quality FBCVD streetscapes framed by pedestrian-scaled buildings. The standards for the Form Based Code Village Districts allow for a wide range of residential, economic development and recreational opportunities, while promoting improved vehicular and pedestrian connectivity throughout the area.”
She said its connectivity throughout the area, and it gives all different definitions. She said she feels everyone could really use some training. Mrs. Biegel said form-based code works by taking an area and how you want it to function. She said all these different definitions are to see how each area is supposed to function. She said there is so much language about architecture, consistency, and function and this is all to protect the economic vitality of a community. She said if you were to take a McDonalds, it would not have protected all the property around it, its important to see what is next to what. Mrs. Biegel doesn’t feel that the Board or staff has really had the projects come before them to think about it. Mr. Patterson said that no they haven’t and think about that. Mrs. Biegel said that we haven’t had property for sale that long and Mr. Patterson said that he didn’t just come out of nowhere as eight years ago he looked at the same property. He said the schoolhouse is starting to deteriorate and he is left to decide if someone wants to come in there or buy it. He said he is asking for three things, and he said the right way to do the building is up to him to figure out. He said he is really trying to make this building what they have asked for and look at what has happened. He told Mrs. Biegel she has her own opinions and she said they told him what they wanted. Mrs. Biegel said that if the Board wants to move ahead with the architectural review, they would get a sense of what is needed, and he would as well. She said it would be a valid use of resources and Mr. Patterson said that these are his resources.
Mr. Brown asked Mr. Patterson if the entire building could be vinyl siding and he said yes. He asked if the two windows on the front could be removed and replaced with doors and Mr. Patterson said yes. Mrs. Biegel said the entrance is on the end and said that this is again a complete disrespect for the code. Mr. Patterson asked Mrs. Biegel if the entrance should be where someone has to walk around the whole building to the front. He said maybe the ordinance doesn’t make sense and she said the roof line needs to be broken down. Mr. Patterson said that no one is perfect on any submittal, and he has built buildings in many towns. Mrs. Biegel said the whole point of new structures in the village was to get a second story for density purposes. She said Norway Savings has a full second floor with windows and this is not a common thing to ask for. She said the pitch of the roof is one change needed and are we supposed to meet the applicants’ needs and not ours. She asked why are we continually waiving things when they are requirements. Mr. Brown said he was just asking Mr. Patterson about doing things and making changes. Mr. Patterson asked Mrs. Biegel why she feels he didn’t listen to the Board, and she said that this is pretty much the same building as before. Mr. Walton asked if anyone knew when the George E. Jack school was built and how long the roof is. Mrs. Biegel said it was a school built before we had any ordinances and will be replaced soon. Mr. Walton said it’s there and he is thinking of all the things we have currently, and we do not have much with road frontage and space. He said that Mrs. Biegel is talking about so many buildings that are in disrepair and not looking great anymore. He said looking at the NAPA building, that this is the best-looking NAPA he has ever seen. He said he feels Mr. Patterson can make it a lot better given the chance and he feels the review wouldn’t help. Mrs. Biegel said that every design that we have okayed in the past has been given waivers and are an eyesore, the Dollar Store that no one likes, Aroma Joes is an eyesore and doesn’t function well. She said compare that to Aroma Joes on outer Congress Street. She said it has open space and is a much better-looking building than some here. Mrs. Biegel said she feels that waivers are granted because we are afraid that businesses will not come here. She asked if we are going to continue to do strip development and people do not want this. She said a building that doesn’t meet code is not acceptable and riles her more than anything. She said this is like shaming us into doing something that shouldn’t be done and saying we have no choice and will lose out.
Mr. Wright said we are not professional architects and if there is value to the review, it would be to get professional opinions about doing strip developments. Mrs. Biegel said all she is looking for in the architectural review is for the code to be understood better and for the applicant to understand the code and how this fits the requirements. She said the code says that whatever is put in there needs to be consistent and this is not. She said the only thing this will help with, is the applicant will see what is allowed and what isn’t. She said it is up to the applicant to decide if it’s worth it to them. She said she thinks we owe it to the Town and to do the right thing by following the code.
She said this is 1/3 retail and 2/3 storage and they are looking for 4 waivers. Mr. Wright said any deviation from a plan has pros and cons. He said that the opinion might say there is no reason why this building can’t fit the character of the town, would that be enough to grant the four waivers. Mrs. Biegel said they would have to wait and see what is said by them. She said she would be surprised if they approved of it and they need professional feedback and go with it. Mrs. Boxer said if it had dormers, same siding and going the same way, remove some things and a few minor changes are needed. Mr. Brown said Mr. Patterson has changed the building since the last meeting with a frame strip over the doors. She asked if it was a big deal to change the roof’s pitch and Mr. Patterson said it wasn’t. Mrs. Biegel said it’s not just the dormers and the roof pitch, its breaking the roof up. She said there is nothing around here like this except for the school.
Mrs. Biegel said we must hold firm and the code is a legal document adopted by the Town Council. Mrs. Boxer asked how difficult it would be to raise the middle section of the roof. Mr. Patterson said if he went to a 6-foot pitch, it would only be lifted by 4 feet. Mrs. Boxer asked about a larger dormer and Mr. Patterson said he can do it, but he doesn’t like the way it looks. He said he has built many like this. Mr. Patterson said he is at a loss for words and that doesn’t usually happen. He said maybe an architect’s opinions would be a good thing, but is he going to make these changes and then get a quorum for approval?
Mr. Brown said the motion for the architectural review had to be voted on unless Mr. Walton rescinded his second to the motion, he said he will not rescind. Mr. Walton said the review is to be paid for by the applicant and Mrs. Boxer said there should be a consensus on this as is this doable at all? Mr. Walton asked if he submits this for review does he come back so they can see this? Mr. Hastings said the stormwater reviews done by engineers are back and forth, with comments directed to the Board and an architectural review is new to the Board. Mr. Hastings said they do get new sets of plans with other reviews. Mr. Patterson asked if he changes the pitch and some other things, would they approve it if it meets the code and grant the waivers being asked for. Mr. Patterson said he has worked with many architects. He said he feels they are telling him that if he makes these changes, they will approve it and he feels this is not what they want. Mrs. Biegel said they really need the architectural review and if Mr. Patterson is paying for it, he can decide what plan he wants to submit to be reviewed. Mr. Patterson said he might come back with something better looking but doesn’t meet the ordinance. Mrs. Biegel said if it meets the intent of the ordinance, then they could grant a waiver. She said she would suggest Mr. Patterson work with the architect and their professional advice.
Mr. Gere said he would be more inclined to grant waivers with the approval of an architect and have other options to go forward. Mrs. Boxer said everything needs to be horizontal as far as the siding. Mr. Brown said they had done this with another project. Mr. Patterson said he has no problem working with an architect. Mrs. Biegel said she would like an architect that works with this type of project and provides feedback. Mr. Nappi said if we go down the path to hire an architect, he thinks that there needs to be more open-mindedness on the Board and not sending the applicant packing after the review. He said that borderline he feels the applicant is not being treated right by the Board. He said he feels we are wasting time and we have no right to dick around with the applicant like this. He said he will go along with it. With a vote of 6-1, the Board approved the architectural review.
Mr. Brown said he had a question about the site plan and the grade. He said he is counting 6 contours. Mr. Bourassa said they accounted for this and have been able to level it out. He said they are maintaining a 2–3-foot drop on the back edge, but they will put some plantings in those areas. He said there is a lot of space there where some landscaping can be done and a winding sidewalk. Mr. Bourassa said they can basically hide the foundation with plantings right up to the building. Mr. Brown said his thoughts were on the building height and it looked like they were getting close to the building height restriction. Mr. Walton asked about the sidewalk that dead ends and how would it connect. He said the sidewalk should go all the way to the edge. Mr. Bourassa said that the plan has a culvert that might have to go underneath the sidewalk and have a drainage channel. He said the sidewalk would run parallel along the road and he feels an esplanade might fit into the area. Mr. Walton said this is a future connectivity piece that may be used later. Mr. Bourassa said the extension might be another 20 feet and winding it in by the trees makes it a bit interesting. Mr. Bourassa said that they are not doing a large expansive development here and this gives the opportunity to know what can be done in this area. Mrs. Boxer asked about the lot split and how will this work with the trucks turning? Mr. Bourassa said the truck turning would all be off hours and not interfere during working hours. He said the intent of the code is to extend the pavement to the rear of the lot and make it a usable space. Mrs. Boxer asked if it would still be a shareable driveway and Mr. Bourassa said yes. He said there are easements shown on the land division plan.
Mr. Patterson said that if he hires an architect, they don’t know how things will work. He said he would like to hire his own architect and let him critique what he has. He has an architect that he thinks is retired and he has worked with him on many projects. He said it would be a team approach. Mr. Walton said what they are looking for is that the ordinances are met. Mr. Patterson said it would be in his own best interest. He is trying to keep costs down and if the Board says no, it’s their prerogative. Mrs. Biegel said she looks at the plantings on the plan and where the exposed end of the building is 6 feet, some of those would only grow to four feet high. She said she thinks some of the trees are diseased and are they worth preserving. She said her husband took one down that was diseased. Mr. Bourassa said they would like to preserve the trees if possible. Mrs. Biegel asked if it’s healthy to preserve them and then have them die. Mr. Wright said an architect should be able to weigh in on most things. Mrs. Biegel said she would like to see a landscape plan done by a landscape architect and to see the sidewalks, go to at least the ditch. Mr. Brown said that its not certain that the sidewalks will connect to anything. Mr. Bourassa said there is some vegetation that they do not want to touch in the construction process.
Mr. Bourassa said there are some trails and trees around the property, and they usually stay away from them. Mr. Brown said the trees that are on the edge of the property are within the range way. Mr. Hastings said that the Town maintains their right to the full 8 rods, and he doesn’t know about the trees and if they are the Town’s or not. Mr. Gere asked if the maintenance would fall within the Town for the sidewalk. Mr. Hastings said there are no comments on the sidewalks so far. He said the piecemeal part of many towns is building sidewalks and who do they fall to for the maintenance. He said the Town has not had a lot of sidewalks in the past and it’s becoming more of an issue. Mr. Gere asked if this is the case for sidewalks and the project is approved, will it be left to the applicant to maintain the sidewalks. Mr. Hastings said it would be the applicant’s responsibility. Mr. Bourassa said they usually put money into escrow for things like this if needed.
Mr. Brown opened the hearing up for public comment:
Chris Lapointe- Fort Hill Road
Chris said that the trees have had a fair amount of discussion and has an arborist looked at them. He said there might be some nasty surprises with them being diseased and it might be wise to have a professional look at them.
Izzy Higgins-Bonny Eagle Road
Izzy said that when the Village Master Design Plan was formed, this was how we got form-based code. She said the Town wanted to offer smaller setbacks and more parking. She said what that morphed into was the form-based code. She said the only thing that has been built with this is the Dollar Store, which doesn’t conform with any of it. Izzy said that she thinks we need to look at what the people in the Town want. She said we have a new demographic from what we had when the Comprehensive Plan was done. She said there is not a lot of walkability and she said she doesn’t necessarily agree that we need to have living space or a second floor in these buildings. She asked Mr. Hastings if he had gone through the code in the last year or so and he said he had. She said a lot of it was redundant and it needs to be looked at what the people want. She said we do not want to be Windham, but we will never be Cornish as we have a major intersection which is awful. Izzy said you are never going to stop the traffic, there is an access plan from the Scarborough area that will dump more traffic and get worse. She said she thinks that development must be tempered, not with the cut and dried let’s make everything look colonial. Izzy said back in the day, Route 25 was a four-lane highway. She said there were two inner lanes for faster wagons and horses and two outer lanes for oxen and slower animals. She said the Board does not have an easy job, but she agrees with Mr. Nappi that we need to stop beating this dead horse before it goes away.
Pam Thomas-Thomas Road
Pam said that in reply to we have what we have, she commends the Board for going forth with the architectural review. She said she is sad and embarrassed to say she lives in Standish, and she has been here all her life. She said when she drives through, she sees a lot of the old homes and historical fields gone. She says it is becoming a Windham. She said that the trees we think are strong can be diseased and it does happen.
Ryan Carson-Cram Road
He said this is his first Planning Board meeting and he gets the view in trying to preserve Standish. He said he sees an applicant here with spirit and this would be the first white colored NAPA that would exist anywhere. He said the applicant came with the intent of satisfying the Town and he sees a lot of effort put into this. He said he doesn’t see a lot of praise for this developer, but he feels this has been more of an attack. Mr. Carson said the building is ugly. He said he feels like Mr. Patterson hasn’t been given credit enough for the plan he came forth with. He said the sidewalk issue is nit picking and it’s a road to nowhere. Mr. Carson said the Town really is making no effort on building sidewalks or maintaining them. He said the trees are nature and can’t be controlled and he doesn’t see how this affects the project.
Sandra Thurston- Oak Hill Road
She said she has been going to a lot of estate sales and no where do you see clapboards running vertical on any building and the metal roofing should be a different color and not a silver one. She said Mr. Patterson said the corners would be metal and they should be vinyl. She said if he can make the changes and make it look more like a colonial building, he should be able to do it. She said she feels that Mr. Patterson has done a good job in trying to meet the ordinances. Sandra said she disagrees with Carolyn about the added parking spaces because as the Town grows, we will have more people and more development, so more parking will be needed. She said she feels Mr. Patterson has tried to put a good design together. She said if he makes the changes, he can make it look more like a colonial building.
Cara Childs and Tom Childs
Cara said that she is speaking for her husband Tom and said he wanted to remind the Planning Board that this must meet the form-based code. She said that Tom said that an astute architect would make a recommendation. She said now she speaks for herself: she said she is concerned about the historical buildings next door and then she sees this next to it and we have let a lot of buildings go down. She said this Town has an enormous amount of history and she asked how we not lose the feeling that people talk about. She said we need to hold people to the standards, and she agrees we need to have an open mind. She said it’s hard to make a decision and we need to make sure we meet the code. She said she doesn’t give a darn about waivers, and she doesn’t like them, if we keep giving waivers why have a code and let people do what they want to do. She said the Board did the right thing in having an architectural review. She said peer review will be beneficial.
Tony Folsom-Dolloff Road
Tony said that ever since PATCO came in he has been very upfront and honest. He said he agrees with Carolyn about protecting the Town and this building could be built anywhere in Standish. He said he doesn’t feel this belongs in Standish Corner and this could be a good developer for the Town, just not this location. Tony said some of this is Mr. Patterson’s choice where he wants to put the building.
Craig Herrick
Craig said his biggest concern is, if this doesn’t take place, and someone else buys the property, they could take the Albion School down and then what will happen to the rest of the property. He asked what would stop that building being taken down and he doesn’t think there is any ordinance that says it can’t be torn down.
Mrs. Biegel asked if she could respond, and she said this was gifted to the Town and then sold. She said there might be an issue with the deed that needs to be resolved but were there any provisions made in the deed that the building can’t be torn down. Mr. Herrick asked if we could assume that the building can be sold. Mrs. Biegel said she doesn’t know the answer. Mr. Herrick said the Historical Society has tried to buy that building. If PATCO buys it, they might sell it and it be taken down, said Mr. Herrick. Mrs. Higgins said there was a deed specific to the Marean House but not the Albion School. She said if the Historical Society could assume ownership of this building and do the maintenance, that would be great.
Mr. Patterson said he really needs to step back and see what this relationship is going to be going forward. He said he is anxious to see what the architect says. He said maybe he can come up with a completely new and better design and have the architect come and explain why this or that was done. He said hopefully it will come together, but he isn’t sure. Mr. Brown closed the public hearing with a motion by Mr. Nappi and seconded by Mr. Walton. All in favor.
Mr. Hastings said he wants to make sure the Board has covered everything and are they okay with the stormwater drainage system? He said he just wants to make sure it doesn’t come up in another meeting and have to do another review. Mr. Bourassa said the drainpipe might be coming out to a nearby abutter and it’s just a small 6-inch pipe. He said they might direct it a bit further into the range way. Mr. Gere said he doesn’t have a problem with that. Mr. Walton asked about doing a site walk and Mr. Hastings said better sooner than later. Mr. Gere said he would like to see an HHE200 for both parcels for the wastewater flow. Mr. Bourassa said they have already done everything for the septic except fill the paperwork out. They have the sizing and have already done the test holes. Mr. Gere said he would like to see how this fits the minimum lot size for 300 gallons per day. Mr. Gere asked if they had approached DOT for the driveway. Mr. Hastings said this is in the compact for DOT. Mr. Gere asked if they had reached out to the Historical Preservation for their opinion on this project. Mr. Hastings asked about a site walk and it was scheduled for Monday, October 02, 2023, at 5:15pm. Mr. Bourassa said they will stake the four corners and the driveway. Mr. Brown said if the building site is staked, they can see where the drainage is and how the sidewalk will relate to the site.
Mr. Bourassa asked if there would be a handful of architects he would be reaching out to and see if one of them could review this. He said he would let them know what the cost will be. Mr. Patterson said he hopes the case is that he can make the building better and meet the ordinance. Mr. Walton asked if the architect would come in and present the report and Mr. Hastings said it’s usually in the form of a written report. He said they will give the Board commentary and then it’s up to the Board to decide. Mr. Hastings said he would be working with Mr. Patterson on what to submit for the review and how it meets the ordinance. Mr. Nappi asked if the architect would make suggestions as to what will/will not meet the ordinance. He said there will be commentary and by doing this or that, it will meet the ordinance. Mr. Patterson said he needs one more shot at this and not give up. He said he is willing to risk one more meeting. Mrs. Biegel said it would be ideal for him to meet the code and not have any wiggle room. Mr. Patterson said he will have a better chance at having the Board agree to his project with the review by an architect. He said in the direction he is going now; he has already lost two months. Mr. Wright thanked Mr. Patterson for his tenacity.
Mr. Hastings asked the Board if they were good with letting Mr. Patterson submit another plan. Mrs. Biegel said her concern is that this design came back almost the same twice and she doesn’t know why the building can’t be different. She said she doesn’t want to feel pigeon-holed if he comes back with almost the same design again after working with an architect. She said she doesn’t want to have an architect come in with the same design, as she would be very disappointed. Mr. Brown said her motion stands and is not going away. Mr. Brown asked if all plants had to be native and was told they do. Mr. Wright said there are plenty of options for plantings, not just arborvitae. Mr. Hastings said he feels the Board has covered everything. Mrs. Biegel said that the added parking is in question and it’s in the ordinance as to what the requirements are. She said if they can submit something that says what the rationale is behind the added parking, then okay. Mr. Patterson said maybe they would put it on the abutting lot. Mr. Hastings said they can use added parking studies and other data. Mrs. Biegel said that may be for you, but not for me because that is what NAPA wants. Mr. Gere said that every parking space costs the developer money, and they aren’t going to put it in if it’s not needed. Mr. Nappi said that this project should not be killed over an added 6 parking spaces. Mr. Wright said that as far as meeting the code or the plan, he went to a parade recently and there was absolutely no parking in the downtown area. He said if there is more parking in the downtown area, it’s better. Mrs. Biegel said just bring in the documentation why you need the waiver because that doesn’t address the issue because they want it and should be able to get it. A motion to table this was made by Mrs. Boxer and seconded by Mr. Walton. All in favor.
Public Hearing:
TITLE: AMENDMENTS TO STANDISH TOWN CODE, CHAPTER 181, LAND USE, MULTIPLE SECTIONS, REGARDING INDOOR SHOOTING RANGES
Mr. Hastings said this refers to indoor shooting ranges and the Town separated indoor from outdoor. He said they wanted to put rules on the books, and this would be permitted in some different zoned areas. He said there are rules about being run safely and not bother the neighbors. Mr. Hastings said this is allowed with site plan review in Rural, Village Center (Steep Falls), Town Gateway, Business Commercial and the Industrial Zone. This is a special exemption use and would require Board of Appeals and Site Plan Review.
A design showing that all lead, etc. would be needed for self-containment, safe disposal of all waste, air quality systems, operation, type of firearms, retail component, safety plan, rules for range, notice to abutters within 500 feet of the range. Minimum of property line and 100 feet from any abutting property structure. There is no limit of hours and operations and must meet the noise requirements. They must have a safety officer, limited liability insurance and meet the noise ordinance. The facility must be built to certain standards and be registered with the Town and an inspection by the Town on an annual basis.
Mrs. Boxer asked if there was anything in the ordinance that says that a convicted felon cannot own or operate this facility. Mr. hastings said these were written 6 months ago and he believes this is a state law and they must meet all State laws and standards. Mr. Gere said there is a state law that no convicted felon can own a firearm and anyone buying one must submit to a background check.
Meeting adjourned at 9:10pm. These meeting minutes were amended on 10/02/2023