TOWN OF BUXTON PLANNING BOARD MEETING
December 10, 2007
Recorded by Krystal Dyer
Board Members Present: Harry Kavouksorian, Jeremiah Ross, III, Jim Logan, Caroline Segalla, David Anderson, Keith Emery and Barbara Elwell.
Board Members Absent: none
Others Present: Kellie Short, Robert & Joan Weeman, Stephen Bradish, Ruel Sawyer, Francouis Paradise, Harry Schnus, Harry Weymouth, Jeff Larimer, Brian Keezer, Frank Crabtree, Don Gnecco, Gloria Leveillee, Benjamin Collings, Brenton Hill, Carol A. Weeks, Beth Sturtevant, Peter Spano and Voeun Spano, Allen & Lisa Cox, ACO Jessica Hillock, Code Officer Fred Farnham and others.
Chairman Jeremiah Ross, III, called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.
Public Hearing for Kellie Short of 165 Rankin Road, submitted an application for a conditional use permit for a kennel; Tax Map 6, Lot 62A.
· Motioned by Keith, seconded by Harry to open the public hearing for Kellie Short. The motion passed with a 6 – 0 vote.
Kellie gave a quick overview of her application stating that she has more than six dogs and to be in compliance with the ordinance she has to get a conditional use permit from the Planning Board. She does not intend to run a kennel as they are all her pets and live in the house. Jere stated that a site walk was held on November 25th.
The Board is in agreement that there were no issues and everything was satisfactory.
Having no abutter or public comment or comments from the Code Enforcement Officer, Jere asked Animal Control Officer Jessica Hillock to answer Board questions. Jere asked how barking dogs are handled now. Jessica stated that she asks the owner to keep their dogs at a manageable amount of barking or to stop them from barking. Caroline said the State requires five (5) dogs for a kennel license, should the Town Ordinance (requires six (6) dogs) conform to the State. Personally she feels it should be five, but there are other requirements such as breeding, field training, hunting that could require them to attain a permit. It is easier for keeping track. Jere asked Ms. Hillock if there were any conditions she would like to see the Planning Board imposed on the permit? She would like to be
able to inspect once a year and follow the same rules of any other kennel. This means checking the safety and well being of the dogs (and other animals if applicable), which include food, water, housing, bedding and adequate outside play area. Ms. Hillock will schedule an appointment with the owner so she and a police officer (if requested) can inspect. Jere asked what happens if they do not allow an inspection? They will not receive a license; she has to sign the document. The list is posted at the Town Hall and Police Departments. She will include a copy when the license is issued.
· Motioned by Keith, seconded by Jim to close the public hearing at 7:08 pm. Having no discussion, the vote was unanimous.
Conditions of approval:
1. All elements and features of the plan and all representations made by the applicant concerning the development and use of the property which appear in the record of the planning Board proceedings, are condition of approval. No changes from the condition of approval is permitted unless an amended plan is first submitted to and approved by the Planning Board.
2. That the applicant be in compliance with all applicable provisions of Article 8.2.B and 10.
3. That the applicant be in compliance with all applicable provisions of Section 11.
4. All outstanding bills paid before building permit is issued.
· Motioned by Keith, seconded by Harry to find the application in compliance with Articles 8.2.B, 10 and Section 11. The motion passed with a 7 – 0 vote.
· Motioned by Keith, seconded by Caroline to approve the application with conditions stated tonight and at prior meetings. The motion passed with a 7 – 0 vote.
Public Hearing for Ruel Sawyer who is proposing an amendment to Adams Acres by relocation of lot lines. Located on Erma Lane; Tax Map 10, Lot 141-9 and 142B-1.
· Motioned by Keith, seconded by Harry to open the public hearing. The motion passed with a 7 – 0 vote.
Ruel Sawyer stated that he has a landlocked parcel lot #142B-1 and he is proposing to rework the lot lines with lot number 141-9 to create 200 feet of road frontage to conform with the current zoning. Jere said a site walk was held on Sunday, November 25th. David was concerned with the distance from the running brook. Mr. Sawyer said the building area is on the new plan (submitted tonight) indicated by a 75-foot setback from the brook. Barbara asked whether the lots would have single-family houses. Mr. Sawyer said there will be single-family dwellings, but the building on 141-9 has a house with an in-law apartment.
Having no abutter or public comment Jere moved on to code enforcement comments. Fred Farnham received a call with concern about the road. The concern was with it being a family subdivision with three (3) houses going in. Mr. Sawyer would be required to post a bond to cover the cost of paving the road, but with a family subdivision he is requesting not to pave the road at this time. In his research Fred found the original five (5)-lot subdivision was approved in 1998 and was amended to add five (5) family member lots on the remaining land in the rear. Jere said that from a previous discussion Mr. Sawyer did not have to pave the road until one of the houses was sold outside of the family. In the past, other developers have been required to pave the roads, such as Common Way,
Memory Lane and Timber Creek. Fred said to look at how the lots were created; Mr. Adams gifted the lots to his kids making it a family subdivision and then a family member sold the lots to Mr. Sawyer. If the Board approved for the road not be paved, how would the code office monitor a sale transaction, which would make it lose its “family subdivision provision” to the property, which would require it to be paved? Fred said that a deed would come from York County Registry of Deeds. Keith does not believe this is a family subdivision, when a non-family member purchased the land from the family member. It kicks it out of a family subdivision and into Section 10.1 where three (3) lots or more require the road to be paved. David is starting to look at this as one owner with separate lots that originally started as family lots. Mr. Sawyer now owns those lots and is renting for profit, which he believes would put Mr. Sawyer on the same basis as
Mr. Pompeo and Mr. Chase; whom the Board required to pave their roads. Jim said the substance of the law was set up so when you do a family division and deed off properties you’re doing so over a longer time period than a developer. There have always been issues as to what happens when it gets sold. The law does not prohibit the family members from selling the lot once they have held it the appropriate amount of time (a five year period). Jim tends to agree with Fred and the ordinance is fairly clear that the intention was to give family subdivisions a break from costly subdivision requirements. The ordinance lacks a good definition for family subdivision. Caroline said this is a revision to an approved plan and you have to look at from scratch again. If the lot is going to be sold then she believes the road should be brought up to town standards.
Harry said that if the land was gifted to him or if he intends to gift the land to a member of his family, than he would consider it a family subdivision, but if not the road clearly has to be paved. The Boards consensus is 6 – 1 (Jim disagrees) that the applicant is required to pave the road. A bond is required. Provide 2 estimates for the total cost to bring the road up to town standards and a bond to cover those costs. Section 13.5 of the ordinance gives four options. Mr. Sawyer asked if this could be submitted before the building permit is issued (about two years) or does it have to be presented at the public hearing on January 14th.
· Motioned by Keith, seconded by Harry to close the public hearing at 7:42 p.m. Having no discussion the motion passed with a 7 – 0 vote.
The following is needed for the next meeting: mylar, performance bond guarantee, and an estimate for the improvements for the road.
Discussion with the Board: Section 13.5a lists the four options to be submitted with final plan approval. The Board will check with Town Council to interpret the ordinance and to see if the Board is allowed to impose such a condition.
· Motioned by Harry, seconded by Barbara to re-open the public hearing for Adams Acres. Having no discussion the motion passed with a 7 – 0 vote.
· Motioned by Keith, seconded by Harry to continue the public hearing. Having no discussion the motion passed with a 7 – 0 vote.
Discussion of site walk for Navan Leng is continuing the application for the conditional use permit for the Wat Samaki Cambodian Buddhist Temple to be located at 128 Back Nippen Road; Tax Map 4, Lot 43.
Jere said the Board attended a site walk on December 3rd with all members present except Keith. Keith clarified that the Town cleaned out a section of the drainage ditch. If there is an easement to the ditch it should be recorded at the York County Registry of Deeds. If it is not recorded then it does not exist. David was concerned with the ditch going down the middle of the property. How are the vehicles going to cross over the ditch with only a walking path bridge? The bridge will be brought up to structural capacity. Caroline is asking for the setbacks to be listed on the plan. The plan looks like it can get the number of cars required, but would suggest more buffering for the neighbor on the right side (Mr. Miller). The Board has been waiting for a
submission from the Fire Marshals Office that determines the occupancy limit, which will verify the number of parking spaces required.
· Benjamin Collins met with the new Fire Chief, who determined by means of egress that parking space totals should be 63 regular and four (4) handicapped for a total of 67. The Board would like a letter from the Fire Chief with his determination of the maximum occupancy allowed. Beth Sturtevant of CCB Construction Company said the State Fire Marshals probably would not give them a letter stating the number of occupants. The life safety code is very clear on how you determine the maximum occupancy based on the use of the facility. Take the gross square footage area, minus the non-occupied and divide by the square footage per person by use. The
maximum is 219 people. The majority of the Board is not satisfied with the determination of occupancy and would like a letter from the local Fire Chief determining the maximum number of occupants. After meeting with the Fire Chief, Benjamin Collins said the determination that Beth had used was adequate under the standards of the State Fire Marshals. The Fire Marshal also determines the right egress, the right fire extinguisher, and the right smoke detectors. The Board agreed a letter from the local Fire Chief would be sufficient. Jere said the more evidence they could provide the Board the better. Jim did not feel it is unreasonable for the Board to ask the applicant to provide a letter from the Fire Chief for the public record. They would also like letters from the neighbors who have agreed to allow parking in their yards and a copy of the legal deed easement. Keith would like the applicant to check to see if there is an
existing drainage easement for the ditch at York County Registry of Deeds.
· Motioned by Dave, seconded by Caroline to schedule a public hearing for January 14th, 2008. Having no discussion the motion passed with a 7 – 0 vote.
Francoise Paradis is proposing a Co-housing Community plan located off Marshall Lane. Tax Map 10, Lot 147.
Jim Logan, who has completed professional work for Ms. Paradis and Barbara Elwell, owns abutting property will remove themselves from the Board for this application. Steve Bradstreet from Oak Engineers represented Ms. Paradis and presented the plan to the Board. The property is a twenty-nine (29) acre lot with road access on Marshall Lane. Twenty (20) acres will be left to its natural condition. Jim Logan has performed the net residential calculations to determine what could potentially be done on the property. Minus the wetlands, right-of-ways and easements, they determined that approximately 17 traditional lots could be created. There would be different types of units, two units clustered together with 1, 2 and 3 bedrooms with common back yards, with active solar units in
most community buildings. The development will also include a trail system, a pond for skating in winter and a community garden area. Individual septic fields and wells for the cluster units. A fire safety pond will be built and the road would be built up to the town standards. This is a leadership in energy and environmental design project with a community atmosphere with a Green Design.
Questions from the Board – Harry confirmed that the application falls under cluster and subdivision in our ordinance and questioned whether a fire pond would be allowed. The Fire Chief would determine type, size and location of the fire safety apparatus. David asked if the road has to be paved past the development to the next house or just to the development entrance? The ordinance says to the most terminus way. The Board may have to check with the town council. Caroline commended Ms. Paradis on the project, allowing more open space, and asked whether the open space would be accessible to the public or just the residents who reside there. She would very much like to have it available to the public and has determined an area for parking. David asked if the gray shaded
area becomes a public road, how would the Highway Dept plow around the circle with the parking spaces. The standard would be met for the whole road. Keith asked where the snow would go. Once all the units are sold an association owns all of it and runs it. The association would plow the driveways and parking areas. David asked if the wooded area would remain. The wide-open area is the wetland area. The wetland delineation was complete before it snowed.
· Motioned by Dave, seconded by Caroline to schedule a site walk for December 16th, at 9 am. Having no discussion the motion passed with a 4 – 1 vote, Keith voted against the site walk due to the snow on the ground. Barbara and Jim abstained.
The buildings will be determined by the orientation of the sun. Jere would like a copy of the septic test pit logs and to depict the entire setback requirements of the building envelope on the plan. The Board discussed that a cluster subdivision does not need to have separate lots. Keith said if this is considered a condominium (the building is sold, but not the land) then it cannot be a town accepted or public access road. He felt that there are more problems to discuss.
School Administrative District #6, the new Buxton Elementary School. Located off Long Plains Road on Tax Map 3, Lot 88-2.
Brian Keezer of Harriman Associates, representing SAD 6. Stated that a site walk was completed on Sunday, November 25th. They have included in the packets the following information: three new plans, copies of the wetland delineation report, wetland functional assessment, geo technical report and the high intensity soil survey. Also included are a site grading and erosion control plan, landscaping plan and the site plan with parking. The plan is to submit a final package for the January 14th meeting, which will include a septic design, stormwater info to submit to DEP. Mr. Keezer explained the parking design.
There was discussion on changing the location of the main entrance off Long Plains Road. Keith felt the lights would shine into the houses across the street. Jere said peer review letters were sent out in November, they would be addressed at the January 14th meeting. Keith mentioned that at a previous meeting the plan indicated there was a vernal pool out front however there is no vernal pool on this new plan. Mr. Keezer said the report by S.W. Cole indicates there are no vernal pools. A vernal pool has to have certain soils and the report does not show this. Krystal will check the previous record and make copies for the next meeting. Caroline asked whether the tree limbs on the church property, in the site line would be trimmed by the applicant, with proper notification to the
church. Mr. Keezer said if it is in the States right-or-way they would trim during the project. Brent Hill of the Buxton/Hollis Historical Society clarified the letter from the State Historic Preservation, who stated the project would affect any historic buildings. He spoke with the staff people of the Maine Historic Preservation and the letter in 2006 was based on the old site plan. Abutter Harry Weymouth submitted a new site plan and they have since written a letter (dated November 29, 2007 from Mr. Shuttleworth) requesting more information so they can make another determination. Jere said it was his understanding that the owner of the house has a specified amount of time to move the building off the site. He asked what would the Historic Society like to see happen with the building. Mr. Hill said the 1830 building contributes to the historical record of the Town and would like to see it moved to a compatible site. Jere
requested that Carol Weeks, Assistant Superintendent, come to the podium. He asked what the intention of the school district is if the house is not moved in the time allotted. Carol said that this has not been discussed, but does feel there are some legal issues if the house is not moved. What are the alternatives if the house is not moved by the time the construction is scheduled to start or what are the options you are willing to explore with preserving this house. Ms. Weeks would like to start by looking at what was agreed to in the contract and said that from day one of the plan the intention was to move it. Jere asked Ms. Weeks to provide a brief overview on the condition and what the district intentions are for the building.
Jeff Larimer, an architect from Harriman, would like feedback from the Board on the location of the driveway. Keith mentioned moving the proposed location further toward the center. Harry said there are concerns with the lights and also with the site lines for turning traffic. Information received from the Police Dept. was to move the driveway up further which would improve the site lines based on southbound traffic. Screenage was mentioned at the site walk. Barbara agreed that the entrance should be moved because it is hard to see coming out. Keith said he is concerned with the traffic going north up the hill. The speed is posted at 35 mph. Mr. Larimer said flashing school lights would be installed and used during school hours. Jim said the Police Chief concerns would
be met first and does not have a problem with the entrance the way it is shown on the plan. Caroline referenced the ordinance, feeling the building should be preserved somehow and understands the abutters concerns, but with the safety issues would have to concur with moving the entrance. David compared this with a past application that had a similar entrance, but overall public safety should be first and agreed with the proposal. The Board agreed with the grading vs. the retaining wall with Harry saying it would be an attractive nuisance for the kids to want to climb. The peer reviewer will readdress most issues. Abutter Harry Weymouth is very surprised that the proposed location is a better location and will follow up with the Police Chief and the Fire Chief on the matter. He does not feel it is a better location. He also feels the building should not be moved. The school already has taken out one historic structure for the
existing driveway and now they want to take out another historic structure.
Allen & Lisa Cox of 7 Warren Road submitted an application for a conditional use permit for a kennel permit; Tax Map 1, Lot 197-2.
Allen Cox stated that there are no changes and the dogs are their pets and treated as their children. He owns six Springer spaniels, three have been fixed, and two females are in the process of their last litter due to the new State rules to pay for each puppy before selling. These last two females will be fixed after the litters. There is a deck area with a gate to confine them if needed, they have roaming system and have not had any problems with them leaving the property. The dog waste is not stored near abutting property. All dogs are licensed with the Town and AKC registered.
· Motioned by Keith, seconded by Jim to schedule a site walk for December 16th, at 10:15 am. Having no discussion the motion passed with a 7 – 0 vote.
CEO Report – none
Approval of Minutes:
November 26, 2007
· Caroline motioned to approve the minutes of November 26, 2007, seconded by Jere, the motion passed with 7 – 0 vote.
Approval of Bills: Motioned by Keith, seconded by Jere to purchase seven copies of the “2008 Planning & Land Use Laws” books for each Board member, at a cost of $121.27. The vote was unanimous.
Email to ACO and Chief Thomas and memo to attend meeting
Updating the Selectmen on the Shoreland Zoning issue.
Budget update – 12/7/07
MDOT scoping meeting for SAD 6 on 12/18/07 @ 1 pm
Keith has been informed that something needs to be done about the parking at Hannaford.
· Keith moved, Jim seconded to move close the meeting at 10:00 p.m. and the vote was unanimous.
Approval Date: __________________
Jeremiah Ross, III, Chairman Signature Date