Town of Buxton Planning Board
Minutes of April 27, 2009
Recorded by Hilda Lynch
Board Members Present: David Savage, Sr.; Jeremiah Ross, III; Keith Emery; Harry Kavouksorian; James Logan; Caroline Segalla; and David Anderson
Others Present: Jean Harmon, Becky Turek, Stephanie Keene, Ethan Owens, Patsy Leavitt, Walter Stinson, Don Narras, Mark & Cheryl Pombriant, Neal Morrison, Louise Morrison, Barbara Peck-Deister, and other not legible
Chairman Harry Kavouksorian called the April 27, 2009, meeting of the Buxton Planning Board together at 7 p.m.
Pledge of Allegiance
Public Hearing: Narragansett Business Park, LLC for an industrial business park off Route 202 (across from Waterman Road); Tax Map 8, Lot 20A.
- Keith motioned, seconded by David A, to open the public hearing. All voted in favor.
Harry clarified that what was under review this evening was an application for a 3-lot subdivision in the business/commercial zone. The discussion will be limited to that this evening. Walter Stinson, Civil Engineer from Sebago Technics, spoke about the application for the business park. Patsy Leavitt, a member of the Narragansett Business Park group, was in the audience. They’re present for a public hearing. They’ve been before the Board on several occasions beginning in March. They’ve worked towards meeting all of the application requirements. They’ve refined the pre-application sketch in order to bring it to the public hearing. The Board has held a site walk earlier this month.
Late last year, Narragansett Business Park, LLC, purchased 25.5 acres known as the Berry land almost across from the Waterman Rd. The land is bi-sected by a zoning boundary. The part nearest Rt. 202 is zoned business/commercial—500 ft. back. The back of the property is zoned rural. The part under discussion this evening would be the part proposed for the business/commercial zone. A road would be built of about 850 ft., a turnaround and three lots. Each lot will have a minimum of 8,000 sq. ft. They’ve shown where these lots will go on the map. They’ve done a boundary survey, a topographic survey, and wetland investigation, which they had a chance to look at in some detail during the site walk. They have a highway opening permit,
and the location has been staked out during the site walk so the Board members could see where the road will go. There will be wetland impact as the road crosses the wetland area, and they’ve shown the total impact in the plans of each one of those wetland crossings. They require a Tier One Wetland Alteration Permit from the Maine DEP, and they have that ready to go. They’ll require a storm water permit from the DEP. He believes this is all they’ll require other than subdivision approval.
Caroline asked about the storm water plan. She was curious if the calculations were done before or after the trees had been removed from the site. The pre- numbers were done when the trees were on the site, and the post-numbers were done when proposing the road being constructed. An issue she has with the calculations is that it must be designed to limit peak discharge rates for the pre-development level for the 2, 10 and 25-year frequency. No. 1 looks like it exceeds the criteria. Will the pond have to be enlarged? There are some storm water ponds that will be constructed with the road, Walter stated; those could be enlarged. He went through the report. There are two drainage outlets, which he shows on the plan. They
eventually come together; and since they’re such a small area, those two storm water flows can assume to be additive. If you add the pres and posts together, he thinks they’ll find that they’re at the pre-development level in total. The study will be submitted to the DEP; and if they find that these ponds need to be enlarged, then this wouldn’t be a problem.
Caroline mentioned that the ordinance says, “shall not exceed” and wonders if they could have a positive finding as a result of this. Walter would like the Board to look at the totality of the report. Jim believes the DEP will have engineers review it according to comply with the Maine Storm Water Law, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that they’ll look at it according to Buxton ordinances so he believes she’s asking if they need a review of the storm water design. If the calculations were clear up front, Jim and Caroline don’t feel that it would be a problem. Walter stated that he could put this information in a letter to clarify this. Jim stated that they might need some backing to suggest that his methodology is appropriate. Maybe a signoff
from the DEP to add to the Board’s findings would be adequate, Caroline stated. Caroline felt that if there were ever any issue in the future regarding storm water runoff, they’d go back to that and why they didn’t ask to correct this. Jim asked if they’d had a pre-application meeting, and Walter said they hadn’t. Jim suggested that he sound the DEP out regarding the methodology they’re using. Walter stated that this is a fairly small project. Jim expressed some concerns at the neighborhood level for this project.
Caroline thought that a letter from the Fire Chief and Road Commissioner would be needed. She wants to be sure that the turning radius for fire apparatus is satisfactory and that the Road Commissioner is satisfied with the cross sections and profiles for the proposed road.
Caroline asked if they had any response from the Maine Historical Society or the Dept. of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. Walter said they’ve been contacted, but he can’t give the Board any information yet.
On sheet No. 3, the ordinance requires a property pin or monument on the left-hand side closest to the Trailer Sales. One needs to be set on both sidelines at a distance of 150-200 ft. from the sidelines. There is one on the right-hand side. Caroline would ask that it be shown on the Plan. Fred stated that it is usual for a residential subdivision to make sure a house is not built within 200 ft. of the road. Would it be appropriate due to the small building lot and road going in at the front? Jim asked if they’d have a problem putting a marker on that side. Walter said he was agreeable to that. 13.4.J. is the section Caroline is referring to.
Caroline asked if there was any way of placing the power underground. Harry stated that they’ve talked about this, and it is not possible. It looks like the overhead power stops between Lots 2 and 3 on Sheet 4. Walter said it stops about midway between Lots 2 and 3, and he says they’d have to coordinate that with CMP. That would be within the Town right of way. She asked if the Road Commissioner could look at something like this. Keith says the Road Commissioner needs to be on the site when they change different materials so he’s aware of the change. Caroline asked if Fred had any issues with it—the light poles. Keith said the Town would have to be asked for permission to set a pole if the road is accepted.
Caroline asked if any vernal pools were found, and Walter said there weren’t. She wanted to know if they had any idea about sign location yet, and they don’t.
Caroline wanted to know about Note 17 on Sheet 4 that discusses the limits of clearing, but she doesn’t see where this is on the Plan. She thought in February that the applicant said there would be a 50 ft. perimeter strip. Walter says the plan doesn’t specifically address the clearing limits on each lot. They could show that. He asked if it was just the part abutting residential property. Caroline would envision some on the sides, specifically the right-hand side, and on the front. The note is kind of vague. Walter thinks that 50 ft. is more than they intended. They wouldn’t have a problem maintaining it on the front because there’s a 40 ft. setback. They’d be willing to maintain 20 ft. on the sides. Caroline would like the
buffer and limits of clearing to be clarified on the Plan. Jim concurred. Jim would ask for some kind of landscape plan if they aren’t willing to leave 50 ft. because of the abutters who have concerns. Walter thinks that any landscape treatment should be a function of the use of the lot. Jim is looking to maintain some level of culpability to the abutters who are concerned and with an eye on what our ordinance says regarding commercial subdivisions. There is nothing specific on the table so he is concerned about that and asked why the 50 ft. shouldn’t be kept. This is the difficulty for the Board. Walter shares the difficulty and is willing to stipulate a 20 ft. undisturbed buffer. He believes that anyone who comes in should do the buffering. Caroline says that it is usually up to the developer and not the buyers to do the landscaping. Walter believes it makes sense to have a site-specific landscape plan. Jim wants
pretty solid language for the 20 ft. undisturbed buffer at a minimum. Jim and Jere had some discussion about the amount of land for the buffer and questioned Fred about it. Fred stated that it would be 20 ft. all the way around. Caroline wants something specific spelled out on the plan. She asked about limits of clearing along the road. Walter said the wetland areas were left undisturbed as far as clearing and thought the Board members could see that on the site walk. They’re not going to disturb any more than they need to for the building of the road. She wants to make sure that this is clear on the Plan. Harry asked if she were comfortable with the 20 ft. She believes they can request more if they want to because of the residential property; but she thinks if the Board is comfortable with the 20 ft., she would go along. Harry mentioned that the original plan said 50 ft. Jim stated that the application said 50 ft.
so that’s why they’re wrangling about it. Keith says that 20 ft is enough for him; and whoever comes in to build on the lot, they could address the landscaping then. He believes that’s all they’re required to do. Jim believes the application should be amended or amends the Plan to match the application. He wants the 20 ft. to be retained the same forever as a buffer. Note 17 should be changed significantly, Jim stated. Patsy asked for clarification. They agreed 20 ft. all around and 40 ft. in the front because it’s a wetland. Jim asked for them to adjust their application.
Caroline asked about the drainage—is any going onto the adjoining property. There will be some surface run off, Walter says. He shows the ditch that runs along the boundary on the left where the water is going now. Jim asked if the ditch line were on their property or the abutters. Jim thinks there should be some language about the ditch and the protection for future lot owners as well as the location shown on the plan. Walter said he could do that. Jim doesn’t want the drainage to be impeded in any way. Walter said they would add an easement.
Jim’s concerns were limited to the notes on Page 4, No. 7 – clarifying that the Construction General Permit has been obtained. Walter said it would be submitted with the DEP application. Jim thought Note No. 8 conflicts with itself. Walter says that any work that has been done there has been done according to Town standards and proper permits. Jim says he thinks there was more than an acre of disturbed area. Jim is referring to the re-grading of Lot 2, which is fairly significant. There’s a potential conflict with this note. Further down, there’s a note about erosion and sediment control being in place. Whoever did the work, the stump grindings around the site have been blown out, Jim says. It would be in the interest of the applicant to
fix some of this. He asked about Note No. 12, 33.60.A, Walter thinks it is the “Dig Safe” law. Jim says he would appreciate it being stated. Walter says it is a standard note. No. 9 is the erosion and sediment control note. Walter stated that it’s on a separate plan, and Jim would like it referred to on page 4. He’d like Note 9 to reference Sheet No. 6. Note number 18 is talking about cuts and fills and that the contractor shall stabilize disturbed areas. This is what he was having a problem with. Note No. 26 says that “before the final acceptance of the project,” Jim asks what that refers to. Walter says this is a standard note; but in this particular case, it refers to the road. Jim asked for the note to be enhanced. Caroline asked about 10.1.B.2, bottom of page 10-1, being added to the Plan. Walter could copy this version to put on the Plan, she stated. Jim stated that the Plan should include
Jim asked about the storm water plan, which has some under drains. The Town will accept the road and wants to know whether the under drains will be the responsibility of the people owning these lots or the Town. They need better guidance in these notes. It would be a good subject of discussion with the Road Commissioner. Walter says they will discuss this with him.
Keith is glad to see that the wetlands have been fixed. Jim agrees.
Jere asked if they’ve provided an estimate or bond for the cost of the construction of the road. Caroline asked for a performance guarantee for the road, landscaping, drainage, erosion control, etc. Jere would like a performance guarantee and to see an estimate. His biggest problem—they go into the field and it is virgin land whereas this one hasn’t been the case, which has made it difficult for them. Jim doesn’t believe that they’ve done anything out of whack with tree clearing or anything like that. Jere thinks that the clearing has complicated the issue of landscaping and buffering. He agrees that a buffer that might be changed isn’t right. Harry mentioned the original application stating a 50 ft. buffer. Jim thinks it germaine to
talk about what they would like to see against the next zone over.
David S goes along with Jim on the buffering. They don’t know what the buildings are going to be and what is going to go onto this property. He mentioned that Note No. 10 addresses “Dig Safe.” Walter had said that 33.60 was also “Dig Safe.” Walter thinks it is “overkill” on “Dig Safe.” Jim says Note 27 also deals with “Dig Safe.” Walter could take one off if the Board would prefer that.
Jere’s other concern is with the utilities. He would not want to see the road dug up to bring utility lines across. Maybe the utility work needs to be done prior to the road being completed. Keith says they’ll often jump across the road with a utility pole.
David S asked about the size of the electrical not going under the road. It depends on whether it will be three phase or not. Walter says that he agrees with Keith that there would be a pole placed on the other side. Jere says that the CMP engineer will come out and tell them where the pole is going to go. He believes that this can be looked at down the road. Caroline asked if the performance guarantee would be for the entire infrastructure. She wants to know if the guarantee will be held until the infrastructure is all done. If the utilities are part of this plan, Jim and Caroline state that the applicant would need to show this on the Plan. Jim asked for a little more detail about getting power into Lot 2.
Harry asked Fred if he had any questions, and he didn’t. Harry asked for any questions from abutters.
Neal Morrison spoke about some questions his wife prepared. Harry asked if he was a direct abutter. He is across 202 so not a direct abutter. He stepped aside until his turn.
Ethan Owens of 63 Justin Merrill Rd. thanked the Board for the work they’re doing. He thinks there are a lot of permits that haven’t been done yet. He asked about the driveway – does the State say this is okay with site lines. Board members said that this is okay. The bond, he thinks, is a big thing. He worries about the Town getting stuck with things that aren’t quite right. He’s glad the maintenance of the culverts under the road was mentioned. The wetlands are a major concern, and he’s glad the Board is really on that. The future of the land is of concern. As a horse farm, he walks horses around towards the back of the property. He can see right through to Rt. 202 now. As far as the buffer is concerned, he hopes that
they will enforce this buffer around the whole thing. Will there be a public comment again when everything is all done, he asked. Harry said there will be conditions of approval. Jere asked Jim if there is public input to DEP Tier One approval. Jim says they may send the information in; and if it gets no comment, there may be no meeting. Jim stated that there is not an official process, but people can always contact DEP with concerns. He mentioned looking online to see if there’s an official appeal process.
Caroline wants to clarify that direct abutters can be those right across the road. Caroline mentioned conditioning things. They don’t have to do that; they could wait until things come in.
Jere thinks that whatever uses come into these lots, they would come before the Board. Owen said that as far as the buffers go, it is a large thing for them and the neighborhood concerning light and noise pollution. The buffer might rebuild the relationship with neighbors. Seeing that things aren’t quite right on the permitting creates some of the angst among the neighbors.
Neal Morrison had some questions. He thinks the subdivision is inappropriate without a marketing study. They have concerns about the drainage, tree preservation, parking and storm water. They’re concerned about a lot of fill being needed, which could impact natural flow of water. They’re concerned about pollution to wells and the Stroudwater River. A marketing plan or type of business is not known—parking requirements, access, screening water and drainage, power access as well as traffic flow. They believe the Board should go no further without a concrete business plan for this area. They think it should be tabled until the owners come forward with specific businesses and a plan so they won’t be surprised in the end. The back of his
lot flows through this area to the Stroudwater most of the year.
Jere stated that the Town has no jurisdiction on Rt. 202. As long as they have a valid permit for an entrance from DOT, they are covered. All of the storm water has to be retained on these lots and not discharge what was there pre-development. Keith stated that there would be two reviews for each lot. The buffers have been talked about. He says there are a lot of trees along Rt. 202 but they’re too tall to buffer anything. He’d like to see something different there.
Keith feels this entrance is much safer than Waterman. The Town will maintain it until it gets to the private landowner. Harry said that as far as uses of the land, the ordinance spells out the uses possible. It has been difficult for all that they don’t know the uses, he said. Any others will need to come back before the Board.
Neal says that there are businesses that make noise throughout the night, and he’d like to see this avoided.
Jim says that there was no discussion about fire protection. They have a tank. Jim points out 13.4.K.1.V. – need to prepare a recordable easement for the Town to use that fire suppression water supply in perpetuity. Keith says the tank should be located where the Fire Chief wants it. Jim discussed the showing of all wells and septic systems. He doesn’t see that. Walter says that hasn’t been completed yet.
Caroline says that in regards to what the abutters have been saying, she would like a note added to the Plan stating that future lighting will be full cut off fixtures. She wonders if they should have a buffer at the line where the business/commercial ends. Jim says that it is treating the rural portion of her property the same as the adjacent owners. He’s not thinking about the back of the rural zone. Jim doesn’t believe the rural part is part of the package they’re considering. Caroline asked if they were not considering the whole parcel. Jere suggests the remaining lot will be Lot No. 4, even though it won’t be a part of the business/commercial part of the subdivision. It is technically a lot.
Caroline is concerned about the buffers for the whole parcel. A note will be added to retain a 50 ft. buffer at the back of the rural portion. Where does the 50 ft. come from? Patsy asked. The setback for the lot line in a rural zone is 50 ft., Jim clarified. Walter says that it something they will consider. Patsy mentioned a field is on the other side of her lot line in the back. As far as the plan they’re discussing tonight, would they be willing to put a 50 ft. setback in the rural section. Keith says that a note can be added regarding the remaining land that is in the rural zone—50 ft. must be retained. If there aren’t trees there now, they’d need to be put in. Walter says he can see showing it as Lot 4, but he isn’t asking
for any approval on this lot this evening. To further condition this land, there’s a whole different set of uses that can be on this part. Keith says it is technically part of this project. Walter says they’re asking for approval for a three–lot subdivision. Jim is in agreement with the applicant. He doesn’t feel as strongly about a 50 ft. buffer along the back as he does about the buffer in the back of the business/commercial zone. Harry reiterated that there is a 50 ft. setback in the rural zone but not a buffer. Jere says the review now is on the three lots. David A mentioned the road going into the 4th lot. Keith and Jere agreed that they have a right to do this. Jim asked if they wanted to take a straw poll. Caroline was just trying to be cognizant of what the abutters have said. Harry doesn’t think they can condition this back lot.
Jere states for the record that he lives on Justin Merrill Rd., and he can see right through from his back step to Rt. 202. He wishes it hadn’t been done, but he knows there’s nothing he can do about it. 10.10. and 10.7.F. – Caroline asks that Walter look at these for setbacks and screening and address them in the Plan.
Harry mentioned letters he received after the deadline. He’s going to suggest that the public hearing be continued so the applicant has a chance to see them. Walter says he received those letters this afternoon. Jere asked if he had three letters now. The Board agrees that the reason to keep the hearing open is that there are a number of other things that need to come in. Jim mentioned that it is no different for an abutter to get things in as it is for the applicant.
Caroline asked it they could have an itemized list sent to the owners from tonight’s meeting.
Patsy Thompson Leavitt, the owner of the property, wanted to know if there would be a deadline as to how long the hearing would be kept open. The Board agreed that it should be closed at the next meeting. Any information would need to be in by Monday, May 4, 2009, at Noon. Keith mentioned having three public hearings for next meeting. Caroline asked if it had to be carried over, and it was agreed that it should be.
Walter asked if they were looking for plans to be revised. Jim thinks there are things they’ve discussed that would be imperative enough to see some changes. Much of it is note changes. There are letters, performance estimates, etc. needed. Could the calculations regarding the peak discharge be obtained, Caroline asked? Jim wanted them to sit down with DEP for a pre-application meeting. They could condition this.
The applicant would like to keep things rolling. He hopes there will be some flexibility in terms of some of the information. Harry stated that some things could be made conditions of approval. Caroline mentioned that if there were any significant changes, it would come back before the Planning Board.
Harry asked if there were any additional questions from the general public.
Stephanie Keene wanted to know if the Plan itself would show what the buffers would be against the rural part. A well and septic survey is one of the issues. Jim didn’t think they were talking about adding trees—just protecting what is there. The natural pines are 100 ft. tall so there is no real buffer, Stephanie stated. Caroline mentioned asking for shrubbery at a maximum height of 6 ft. Jere asked if they wanted to ask for this when the individual lots are developed. Walter clarified the abutters of the three commercial lots. Harry stated that the buffer along the sideline would be undisturbed until a new owner comes in. Hegarty Plumbing would be a fourth lot abutting this project. There would need to be an estimate for the road,
a monument or pin somewhere down the left lot line, under drain easements, a performance guarantee, a ditch line between Trailer Sales and Lot 1. He asked if the performance guarantee could be a part of the final review. Caroline said that it could be.
- Keith motioned, Caroline seconded, to continue the public hearing for the above to May 11, 2009. All voted in favor.
Pleasant Ridge Subdivision, owned by Normand Berube Builders, Inc., is proposing an 8-lot cluster subdivision, Tax Map 8, Lot 40A. (Due to a clerical error, the public hearing will not take place until May 11, 2009.
- Motioned by Jere, seconded by Jim, to move the public hearing for Normand Berube Builders to May 11, 2009. Six in favor; Keith abstained. It was clarified that the subdivision will be 7 lots rather than 8.
Discussion of site walk for Rebecca Turek of 56 Kairos Way who is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for an in home day care; Tax Map 5, Lot 5-3.
Rebecca talked with Krystal about the Buxton Fire Chief coming out. She mentioned that the State Fire Marshall had been out in December. She brought the State approval for the day care, which she would leave copies of for Krystal. Harry believes she is all set with the fire marshal.
David A. believed there were no issues with the ordinances. Caroline thought there was enough space for parking. She asked about a sign. Rebecca wasn’t sure, but it would be small according to the ordinances. Harry clarified. David S. said he agreed the parking was sufficient. He asked about fencing in the back yard or the play area, and the Board felt it was more of a DHHS issue. Keith clarified the need for a letter so that the Fire Chief would be aware that there is a daycare if there is a fire. It is in the applicant’s best interests. Keith would like to see an acknowledgement that the Fire Chief knows that it is there. Fred usually sends the information to the Fire Chief. Harry asked if they had enough information to
set a public hearing.
- Jere motioned, seconded by David S, to set a public hearing for the above on May 26, 2009. All voted in favor.
Rebecca asked about the order on the agenda for the public hearing. Board members said she would be first unless there are other hearings continued.
Mark Pombriant has submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit to allow auto sales at 30 Tory Hill Drive; Tax Map 10, Lot 16A-4.
Mark Pombriant presented his application for an auto sales permit at Tory Hill Business Park. Caroline asked if this was incidental to what is there now. She asked if he has a towing service. He stated that he did. She asked if he had set hours. He said 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Caroline asked about the parking on the right-hand side now. She asked if he is proposing to put some in front. He says they will be where they are now. The grassy area on the left is for Mr. Hanson, the tow truck and employees, Mark stated. If nothing will be placed in front, they should be all set. Caroline mentioned the note about the additional parking needed if stated by the CEO in the application. Keith asked how many cars he thought he would have. Mark said that he would have 25 cars. Caroline thought they could look at additional parking when they took a site walk. She mentioned landscaping in the front if there would be a need for additional parking in front. Jim clarified buffering if there was a need to have an
additional parking area.
Jim asked how many employees they had. Mark said that between his family and himself, there would be five. Jim asked how many employees were at Hanson Electric. It was stated that it was just Mr. Hanson, and he isn’t often there. Jim is looking at the wastewater design flow. They’d be well within the design for 15 employees. Keith thought that awhile back they did away with some of the buffering on the front of these lots since they would be blocking what they are trying to sell. Keith believes they took out this restriction. Under 10.7.F., Caroline believes that buffering is needed. Perhaps it could be decided by the project. The Board and Fred talked about a number of places where this has been done. If it is
something that could be waived, it would require a vote by the Board, Caroline stated. Caroline referred to some car dealerships where they’ve made it look nicer with some landscaping. Board members agreed that they would hold comments until the site walk.
David S asked how many bays Mark has now. He mentioned needing five parking spaces for the one bay he now has. Mark would want 20 more for the repos, towing, used cars, etc. Jere said he would be limited to that. David S asked if he would have enough parking for his employees, too. Mrs. Pombriant says they drive the tow truck to work.
- Motioned by Keith, seconded by Caroline, to set a site walk on Monday, May 4, 2009, at 6 p.m. for the above project. All voted in favor.
CEO Report: Fred reported that Earth Day at Pleasant Point was a real success. Clynk along with Low’s Variety who provided lunch, Aubuchon Hardware who provided wheelbarrows and other equipment, Carter Design Group who provided equipment and folks from the transfer station who provided the wood chips and the public works department who carried the chips and placed them strategically made the day run smoothly. It started about 8:30 a.m., and they wrapped it up at 4:30 p.m. The goal was to chip the entire south loop past the cemetery and all the way back. There were about 25-30 folks who did a great job. They would like to make it an annual event. Caroline asked about them having it on a weekend. Fred says they might try and do something on a weekend to involve some other folks.
Jim personally witnessed how much effort and work Fred put in because it was a phenomenal organizational task. Fred deserves a lot of credit. He was there at the end, and the result was incredible. He’d like to think this is a tradition that could be carried on and more people become involved. The park is a real gem, he thinks.
Jere feels that as an elected official he has people come and ask him questions. A question that has arisen is the use of the property behind Rt. 202 Trailer Sales and the storage that is perhaps located in the rural zone that must be relocated to the commercial zone. He wonders if some of the commercial zone has spilled over into the rural zone. He’d like to have Fred take some basic measurements. He’s had some of the neighbors express concerns to him about some of the storage items. Jere says he was asked several times on the site walk for Narragansett Business Park.
Caroline asked Fred what they do about services for engineering for storm water drainage or things like that. Do they have to send out to bid? Could they send plans to this person? David A. thought it would have to be approved by the Town. Jere stated that the applicant would pay for it if they needed it done. Jere mentioned that a lot of Boards have someone on retainer. Keith mentioned having someone as a backup. Caroline thinks that a lot of stuff needs to be looked at by an engineer. Keith asked if they could send some things to Augusta. Would it be appropriate to seek an engineering company that might do some of this work? Fred thought they might send out a letter inquiring about an interest by engineering firms and
to check on charges for a retainer. David A. says that as the bylaws are written that the applicant would pay before the town would pay the reviewer. Jim read from Page 13-2 of the ordinance – part of the paragraph states that the Board may request independent review of some or all of the application and its supportive documentation. It refers to costs as well. He believes this ordinance makes it very clear. The Board had some general discussion about this. Caroline didn’t think they should be scheduling a public hearing until everything is complete. Jim thought they’d eventually have a sense of the costs involved. Caroline asked about having someone come out to do an inspection. Would Fred be able to do most of this? Fred can do most of the erosion control and storm water inspections.
Approval of Minutes: March 23, 2009
- Keith motioned, seconded by Jere, to accept the minutes of March 23, 2009, as amended. Six in favor; David A abstaining.
April 13, 2009
- Caroline motioned, seconded by Keith, to accept the minutes of the April 3, 2009, meeting as amended. All voted in favor.
Approval of Bills:
David A. mentioned that $420 has been paid by the Blueberry Ridge applicant, and he would like to get the Board’s approval for this on the payment to SMRPC.
- Keith motioned, seconded by Jim, to pay SMRPC $420 for the peer review of the Blueberry Ridge subdivision to fulfill the overall obligation. All voted in favor.
To pay Portland Press Herald in the amount of $55.68 for the Blueberry Ridge Subdivision legal ad.
- Jim motioned, seconded by David S, to pay $55.68 to the Portland Press Herald for the Blueberry Ridge legal ad. All voted in favor.
The Maine Townsman
Responses from Bill Plouffe regarding Board questions
Appeals Board Workshop
Caroline asked for a one-page memo from Town Counsel regarding what the Planning Board can and cannot do. Harry asked Caroline to phrase the question the way she would like it stated, so he might get the question to Bill. There was some discussion about this.
Keith asked about moving the May 25th Planning Board meeting to Tuesday, May 26th.
- Jim motioned, seconded by Harry, to change the typical second meeting in May, which would fall on May 25th, Memorial Day, to Tuesday, May 26 at 7 p.m. All voted in favor.
- Jere motioned, seconded by Jim, to reconsider the motion to change the meeting from May 25 to May 26. All voted in favor.
- Jere motioned, seconded by David A, to change the regular meeting of May 25 to June 1, 2009, at 7 p.m. All voted in favor
- Motioned by Jere, seconded by Jim, to reconsider the public hearing date for Rebecca Turek. All voted in favor.
- Motioned by Jere, seconded by Jim, to hold a public hearing for Rebecca Turek on June 1, 2009. All voted in favor.
Keith got thinking about the last meeting regarding the Narragansett Business Park. He thought they would just have to vote if the new plan was a significant change. Harry stated they did a straw poll for that. Jere thought that the Board had voted. He wanted to know if someone came along two weeks later, where would they draw the line. It is Keith’s opinion that they didn’t need to vote to re-consider.
Harry mentioned that the ordinance changes have been made, and the amendments to the Buxton shoreland zoning changes have been made. Jere asked what they were going to do regarding the suggestions made by Town Counsel. Board members want to review this since they’ve just received it this evening. Caroline wonders if it would need more than one meeting. Jere thought they could see if they’re ready; and if not, they could take it off the agenda. Jere mentioned that the changes might not make it to the ballot, and this may need its own special town meeting. Jim thought that these are pretty substantial changes which might make it beneficial to have a separate meeting so people who are really interested could be there. Board members agreed that they wouldn’t want to rush it
along. Someone from Drummond Woodsum would like to meet with them regarding the changes. There was a question about scheduling a workshop for sometime in June. There was some discussion about the Board making a good faith effort. If the guidelines aren’t adopted by July 1st, then the DEP would review, Jere stated.
Jim would check with the shoreland zoning person from the DEP to find out what their deadline is for compliance and what the penalties are.
- Motioned by Jim, seconded by Jere, to adjourn the meeting at 10:45 p.m. All voted in favor.
Approval Date: __________________
Harry Kavouksorian, Chairman Signature Date