Standish Planning Board Meeting Minutes
Standish Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
March 07, 2022
The meeting of the Standish Planning Board was called to order at 6:00pm by Chairman Charles Brown. Present were Chris Struebing, Andrew Walton, Jolene Whittemore, Deb Boxer, Derek Wright, Town Planner Scott Hastings and Jackie Dyer, Admin.to Town Planner and Planning Board. Absent was Frank Nappi.
Open Meeting
a. Call to order (Chairman Brown)
b. Opening Statement from Planning Board Chairman Brown
c. Declaration of a Quorum-6 members present
Approval of Meeting Minutes from February 23, 2022
Mrs. Boxer made a motion seconded by Mr. Struebing to approve the minutes as written. All in favor.
Approval of Finding of Facts:
- Orchard Road Solar-Rose Lane, Map 10/Lot 69F & Lot 61-Site Plan Application for a solar farm
Mrs. Whittemore made a motion seconded by Mrs. Boxer to approve the Finding of Fact. All in favor.
- Katrina’s Properties, LLC, 71 Phinney Road, Map 21, Lot 32-Shoreland Zoning
Mrs. Whittemore made a motion seconded by Mr. Struebing to approve the Finding of Fact. All in favor with added conditions six and seven as approved.
New Business:
- Mary Lisa & Lawrence Fluke, 720 Oak Hill Road, Map 9, Lot 29-Site Plan Application for a Social Events Center
Mary Lisa and Lawrence Fluke were both present to present their application. They told the Board that this was something they have always wanted to do. They want people to come and hold their events on their property, anniversaries, weddings, parties, etc. They want to comply with the Town and make sure any guest on the property does as well. They do not want to have huge events, just maybe 120-125 people. Mr. Brown asked them to explain their plan. Mary Lisa showed the survey with a plot plan on it showing the parking area and the proposed area for tents, etc. She talked about building a plywood floor for chairs to sit on under the tent. She said they held an event last summer for a friend. She said the driveway is by the house.
Mr. Hastings said that the social events center is in the upward of 125 people and this is just to begin site plan review. He said they are waiting for a written statement from the Fire Chief. He said the Board has received some extensive comments from the public and there is also a legal review going on.
Mr. Brown asked the Board for comments and Mrs. Whittemore said their numbers don’t add up about the number of people nor their budget. Mrs. Fluke said they have been working close to two years getting to this point and this is their first time doing something like this. She said the latest documents are the most recent ones. She said some of the things mentioned are just visions. She said they are not planning on building structures or putting things in like lighting. They are just trying to make the property available for people to use. She said the house is only used for people to get ready in.
Mr. Wright asked about the previous wedding and is there anything from the neighbors about their concerns. Mrs. Fluke said that they put a survey out to neighbors and did get some back as the music was too loud, etc. Mrs. Boxer asked about people renting the property and Mrs. Fluke said that the people would have to realize what the limitations are and need to comply with Town regulations. She said if they don’t, they wouldn’t book their event. She said she knows what the sound level is. Mrs. Boxer said many of Mrs. Fluke’s neighbors are close by and Mrs. Fluke said they would follow Town guidelines. Mrs. Boxer asked if there would be live bands, as this is in a residential area and the noise level is 55 decibels during the day at all property lines, which is the same as people having a conversation. After 7:00pm the decibel is 45, which is less than people talking. Mrs. Boxer said she is concerned that those levels can’t be met. She said there is a wedding venue approximately 2500 feet away from her home and she can hear them as clear as day when they have a live band.
Mrs. Whittemore asked about the wedding and were there temporary potties, lights, a DJ, etc. Mrs. Fluke said the potties were in a trailer. Mr. Brown asked about the tent pad and the three-foot drop. Mr. Fluke said the entry access is a bit steep and the planned dance floor, which they are planning on grading. Mr. Brown said they need to get some things on the site plan like the grading and drainage of the soils.
Mr. Fluke said it drains and there is sandy clay soil. Mr. Brown asked about the entrance and was it wide enough for two cars at the same time? Mr. Brown said this is a field entrance and does it need a design for gradation? He said this will need to be review for emergency vehicles as well. The Flukes said they own land out behind their property as well. Mr. Brown said there are other things to discuss as well. Mr. Walton asked about a site walk. Mrs. Whittemore said until the non-conforming lot issue is resolved, a site walk would be a waste of time. Mr. Brown said that the Town Attorney needs to give them an opinion on the non-conforming lot.
Mr. Brown asked for public comment. Don Jordan from 377 Oak Hill Road spoke and said he was curious about the traffic this will cause? Will it be daily or weekly? Ben Flann, Attorney for Brenda and James Glasgow directly across the street from the proposed social events center. He said the Glasgow’s are opposed to the project. He said he sent the Board a letter as to why the Board cannot approve this application. He said that it is prohibited as it's a non-conforming lot as determined by the Towns code and ordinance. He said a conforming lot meets the town’s code as far as area, width, and road frontage. He said the Fluke’s home does not meet the ordinance as its too close to the road and not a conforming lot. Mr. Flann said that the Flukes cannot satisfy the Town’s criteria or site plan approval and gave several reasons: surrounding character of project, residential neighborhood, not for commercial use, traffic generated, noise with intense impacts on surrounding homes from amplified music and going late into the night.
Mr. Flann said the Board has seen his materials and the Glasgow’s have also retained a site plan engineer. He said that this ties into the Boards site plan criteria and this application has the potential to cause huge noise disturbances in this neighborhood and traffic noise as well. He said the Town would have to spend a lot if this gets approved to take care of all the issues this would cause. He introduced Mark St. Germaine, PE to speak about the plan.
Mark St. Germaine introduced himself and said he is from St. Germain Civil Engineering in Westbrook. He said he works closely with PE Peter Dalphonso. He said he has many concerns about the proposed site of this venue. His analysis is that this application is very vague and has very little information. He spoke about traffic safety and about the soils, the neighbors and any State regulations that are needed. He said the traffic report the applicants submitted is very vague and has assumptions. He said stacking of cars can occur and cause problems because of speed. He spoke about the tent area and the noise that will be generated. He said the parking is all field parking and has quite a few wet areas. He said that spotted salamanders have been spotted and maybe a vernal pool exists.
Mr. St. Germaine said that the access needs to be widened, along with some reconstruction, and graded and made sure there is enough sight distance. He said its only 65 feet to the Glasgow’s driveway. He said there is a culvert located there and that it is not shown on the plan. He said there should be a traffic study with speed measurements done. A survey is not a site plan and shows very little about the property. He said there is no information about the tent pad, nor any mention about a barn for the venue. He said grass will not support much traffic and turn muddy instantly. He said the impervious area is estimated by him at one to one and a half acres. He said they need a lot of site improvements.
Mr. St. Germaine said there is storm water coming from the site and would need many graded areas. He said that some type of stormwater treatment would be needed to slow it down. He said some silk fencing might be ended and Little Watchic Pond is not far away from the property. He said it is his opinion that a wetland permit from DEP would be needed. He said this is a very steep site with much work and permits needed. He felt that a new access point would be required for traffic safety purposes. Also, emergency vehicles on the fields would not be very successful as the grass and soil cannot support their weight.
He said there is nothing wrong with a wedding venue if it can support the activity.
He said the application does not demonstrate that it can be successful. He said that this might be a great place but in the wrong location.
Mr. Brown asked if any members of the public would like to speak.
Chandler Case-715 Oak Hill Road
Said he lives across from the property and he feels he would be very affected. He said he went to the wedding last summer and left in the latter part of the evening. He said that he could hear the music and crowd loud and clear at his house across the street. He said he has children and if this happens every weekend, he wonders how to get them to sleep at night with all of the commotion. He said once in a while is okay, but not every weekend. He said weddings are not quiet and sometimes are ramping up the longer they go into the evenings. He said there is very little for buffering between his property and the Fluke’s. He said the traffic on the road is like Maine’s version of the Kancamagus Highway. His biggest concern is the noise and having not just weddings but other events as well. He feels that this is going to cause a lot of concern and disruption to the neighborhood.
John Avery-abutter of the Flukes
He said his house is very close to the road and he worries about the traffic and someone coming through the side of his house. He said the added traffic coupled with noise and excess speed is not a good thing. He feels the sound will carry in the summertime as they can hear everything, the roosters and the chickens. He asked about who will enforce the venue if things get out of hand. He feels that this neighborhood is not the place for this, and a business should not be allowed there.
Cindy Dolloff Hopkins-315 Dolloff Road
Cindy said lives across the road, and she is not happy about being in opposition against this. She is concerned about the noise and the traffic as well as being able to get in and out of her road. She feels that in this rural neighborhood this is not a good idea. She said when the wedding was held last summer, she could hear everything from her back yard like she was right there. She said she feels it will affect her way of life and everyone else’s in the neighborhood.
Neal Rush-corner of Oak Hill and Dolloff Road
He said that in the event last summer it was extremely loud. He said it takes away from the community and feeling of a great neighborhood.
Lisa Knight-675 Oak Hill Road
Lisa said she lives across the street, and she feels like the other neighbors do. She feels that there would be a lot of traffic congestion and noise going into the night and every weekend. She said she feels that she should be able to enjoy her weekends and they would be taken away.
Curtis Thurston-Oak Hill Road
He said he feels that traffic will be increased as more and more people are taking that road. He said no one is doing the speed limit. He said he doesn’t have many weekends off and doesn’t want to listen to this. He is afraid of the potential of fire in the dry grass in the Fluke’s field. He said they will lose their privacy and his wife has always lived on that road.
Sandra Thurston-Oak Hill Road
She read a letter from Lea Sutton that the Board has expressing opposition to this project.
She said that she is not in favor of this at all. She said she could hear the music at her house with the doors and windows closed. She said they hear the gravel pit and shooting at the pit on Middle Road. She is concerned about the increased traffic and noise. She said they are becoming a very popular road with more traffic than ever. She feels this would impact everyone’s peace and quiet and health. She said they enjoy all the wildlife and the quietness of the neighborhood. She said an event every now and then is fine but not every weekend for months.
Brenda Glasgow-685 Oak Hill Road
She thanks all the neighbors for being at the meeting and for their support. She said she loves her home, and they want to continue living there. Her husband is in bed by 7:30 and she is still working and up very early. She said that she looks forward to retiring and being able to work in her gardens and being on their back porch in the evening. She said this will be disrupted every weekend by an event and she finds this unacceptable. She said her husband worked for DEP for years and really wanted to be here tonight. She worked for the Corridor Commission and also worked on the Comprehensive Plan. She said the plan identified open space and rural character for the Town.
Mrs. Glasgow shared a letter with the Board that she had sent the Fluke’s back in April 2021, speaking about their disapproval of this project and how their lives and the lives of many others within their neighborhood would be disrupted. She spoke about the value of houses going down because of this proposed project, the disruptive noise and disruption of everyday life as they have known it. She said that the noise is the biggest concern and the added traffic, not just for the event, but on many other days as well. She said that the caterers, potty trailers being hauled in, the tent being set up and taken down, and other things would be detrimental to their health and wellbeing. Mrs. Glasgow said this would not be just operating on weekends, but during the week as well. She said they feel like they would be hostages in their own home.
Mrs. Glasgow said neighborhoods like theirs are popular places to build in. She said they have privacy, peace and quiet and wildlife. She said that speed on the road is becoming a concern and have been fortunate to not have many accidents on the road. She said that stacking of cars will happen and disrupt their ability to get out of the driveway. She said the traffic study the Fluke’s had done was not a reliable one. She said the noise will be very stressful and disruptive, plus detrimental to their health. Brenda said there is nothing to buffer them from the Flukes and an event. She said the application is not complete and doesn’t provide anything that is compliant or credible. She said the location will destroy their neighborhood.
Mrs. Glasgow said her weekends would be gone with what disruption this will cause. She said she looks forward to the weekends along with peace and quiet. She said the neighbors all try and be respectful of each other, but this endeavor is not working out well. She said the concerns are loud and clear that the neighbors would not want this. She said she and all of the neighbors all have rights to live in peace. She said this application is inappropriate. She said they have a close neighborhood where everyone gets along, and they choose to stay that way and a venue like this needs to be elsewhere. She said the plan has nothing that has any confidence in it and there is nothing that says they will have any control over. She said she doesn’t want to have to work around or cope with the events taking place so that she can enjoy her yard along with peace and quiet. She said there is no proof they can handle this and its up to the Flukes to prove the Ordinances and they do not do that with this application.
Mrs. Glasgow said that it’s easier to say something than it is to do it. She said the Flukes say they don’t want to encroach on their neighbor’s peace but haven’t done anything to prove it. She wonders when they would get to enjoy their home with all going on in a venue. She said this is very over whelming and very daunting with many serious issues, putting the neighbors in a very hard position. She said this application will have a very destructive impact on their neighborhood and relationships. She said that she feels its very inappropriate for a neighborhood to have to turn inside out and be disrupted when they do not want the noise and disruption. Are they going to have to leave or move away? She said this is ill suited and incompatible to the neighborhood and the location. She said the burden of proof is up to the applicant and they have not done that and feels they have demonstrated they are unlikely to do so. Mrs. Glasgow asked the Planning Board to deny this application.
Jim Pillsbury-644 Oak Hill Road
Jim said they have lived here for over 50 years. He said they have enjoyed their home and the quietness of the neighborhood. He said they are hoping the Board is looking out for the citizens and make the right decision. He said the cars speed on their road and there is more and more traffic all the time.
Mr. Brown asked what the Boards thoughts are? He said he felt they needed to get a legal opinion from the Town Attorney on the non-conforming lot. Mrs. Whittemore made a motion to table this application until the opinion is made by the Town Attorney, seconded by Mrs. Boxer to do so. All in favor.
- Drilling & Blasting Rock Specialists, Inc. for Leavitt Development, LLC (Highlands Subdivision), Map 10, Lot 11 A- Application for blasting
Brian Leavitt from Leavitt Development was present to represent himself and Rick Meek from Terradyn. They are here seeking an extension on the blasting permit for the Highlands Subdivision.
Mr. Hastings said the Board needs to see the sites where they will be blasting as they have not really identified those on the map. He said there are places where they have already blasted and that might need further blasting. He said the plan they submitted didn’t have the locations where they want to continue to blast. He said until the Board gets a better idea where they want to blast, they are not going to get very far.
Mr. Brown asked where the blasting stood at the present. Mr. Meek said they have blasted from the Oak Hill side and over the hill in the subdivision. He said the remainder of the blasting down the road is mainly for trench blasting to put the underground utilities in. Mr. Brown asked if this was strictly for the roads and the house lots would be separate.
Mr. Hastings asked if there was any blasting needed for the village housing at the end and Mr. Meek said they were not sure. Mr. Hastings said the Board needs an idea where they will be blasting. He said the application does not indicate any particular area where they will be blasting. Brian Leavitt said that he takes full responsibility for not having an exact description of where they would be blasting. He said there are some areas they have no idea on and some high spots. He said the majority of the blasting will be trench ledge blasting from Oak Hill Road in. He said there is ledge on Macie Drive and around the pond, plus William Drive. He said he thought there were either 6 or 7 house lots to be blasted.
Mrs. Boxer asked about blasting more than 2000 feet by a residence? Brian said the blasting company is required to do a pre blasting survey which is a required 500 feet. He said its hard to get a blasting schedule and would like this to be done as soon as possible. He apologized to the neighbors saying the blasting was disruptive.
Mr. Brown asked about a map showing the blasting area and Mr. Leavitt said they should have circled the entire property, but they are not sure where exactly blasting will have to happen. Mr. Leavitt said there is nothing visible on the ground towards Route 25. He said they try to communicate with the neighbors by emails or phone calls telling them they are blasting but can’t give them a solid time. He said the blasting company is required to notify the abutters as a subcontractor. He said that his company notifies people
that have requested to be.
Mr. Meek said they are here to get an extension for the permit that was already approved, and they are trying to complete what they have already started. He said he totally understands the need for identifying other blasting sites and will get them to the Board if required. He said they are about 70% done with blasting.
Jennifer Dunham-120 Oak Hill Road
She said she is right by the entrance on Oak Hill Road. If the blasting company comes at what point do they need to let abutters know they are there. Mr. Hastings said they are supposed to notify abutters that have requested to be called, they are supposed to give them 24 hours’ notice and the same to the Town.
Deanna Loring-166 Oak Hill Road
Said the blasting rocks their house and its disturbing and rocks their house as they sit on top of the ledge. She said they spend the day wondering when the blast will come. She wonders how much more of the ledge face needs to be blasted. She said they are asking for another 6 months and what happens when this expires. Mr. Brown said they would need to reapply and get approved again. Mr. Hastings said the application approval usually lasts for one year. She said she sees where they are blasting. Mr. Leavitt said they are done blasting on the ledge but need to do some trench blasting and that might be needed down at the entrance. He thanked Mrs. Loring for bringing up the fact that the permit had expired as he didn’t realize it and the Town didn’t either. Brian said there are either 3 or 4 house lots that will need some blasting. He feels they are at least 60% done with blasting.
Mr. Brown said he felt the Board could approve the extension for the already approved application. He said there are two permits for blasting, one through the State for the blasting company and one through the Town. Mr. Hastings said if the applicant is comfortable approved could be extended to June 30, 2022. Mr. Brown made a motion to find the application complete and extend the previously approved blasting application to June 30, 2022, this was seconded by Mrs. Whittemore. All in favor. Any other blasting permits will need to be submitted to the Board with a new blasting plan. A motion to extend the renewal of the blasting permit was made by Mrs. Whittemore and seconded by Mr.Wright. A new condition is that renewal of the previously approved blasting application would be extended to June 30, 2022.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:45pm