Town of Buxton Planning Board
Monday, March 25, 2013 at 7 pm
Recorded by Krystal Dyer
Members in attendance: Keith Emery, David Savage, Christopher Carroll, John Vedral, Nichols Murray and Lawrence Curtis.
Members not in attendance: None
Others in attendance: Code Enforcement Officer Fred Farnham, Henry Huntley and Cliff Thomas and Chris MacClinchy from SMRPC, Shawn Emery.
Call to Order: Keith opened the meeting at 7pm
Pledge of allegiance:
Determine if able to conduct a Site walk for Daniel & Roberta Aceto are requesting an expansion of their Conditional Use permit for a warehouse & outdoor storage facility. Aceto Construction is located at 1027 Narragansett Trail on Tax Map 8, 20A-35.
David said we should wait. All members agree to wait until the April 8th meeting to schedule a site walk.
Chris MacClinchy of Southern Maine Regional Planning Commission to discuss updated shoreland zoning maps in comparison with State requirements.
Mr. MacClinchy I'm here to give a status update of the shoreland zoning maps. The last time SMRPC was involved, the town had not adopted the verbiage or the proposed map and was under the impression that the state was going to provide a map to comply with DEP regulations. There has since been a change of administration and DEP is no longer providing maps. Every town has to adopt a map to govern shoreland zoning in order to be in compliance with the State rule. They also will need new verbiage in the ordinance to coincide with the map. Last draft of the map that SMRPC provided was July 2009; it was his understanding, that there were a couple of outstanding issues to be addressed. Mr. MacClinchy displayed the map that indicates a 300 foot shoreland
zone with buffer. The Town now has a 250-foot buffer like the State.
Previously there were two questionable areas of wetland on the map. Two property owners were questioning whether their property should be in a wetland. These two areas are considered forested wetlands, SMRPC consulted with DEP weather there was enough evidence to exclude them from the map. DEP has indicated they can be removed from the map. Nowhere is there evidence that they meet the definition of areas that are outside of shoreland zoning regulations. SMRPC's recent discussion with DEP, stated that they are no longer enforcing the resource protection designations of shoreland zoning. Meaning you do not need to include the resource protection district on the maps. These areas are reflected by green on this map and no longer need to be there. They no longer need to meet the more restrictive
standards of the resource protection district.
One of the challenges Buxton faces is that their shoreland zoning guidelines and requirements are integrated throughout the entire ordinance, it is not a separate ordinance.
John said we have changed the 300 foot setback down to 250 feet and we are now the same as the state statute. Larry confirms that we do not have a current official shoreland zoning map for the town of Buxton and this map is required by the State. Mr. MacClinchy said yes, and you can get it from whom ever you want to get one from. At one point the State was going to provide each town with one if the town had not done one on their own. They are no longer doing that, so you now have to find a provider to make a map that complies with your zoning ordinance. SMRPC would like to work with the Town to create a current shoreland map. The Board would like a proposal for the cost. Krystal will give a current copy of the ordinance to SMRPC and said that Mike Morse did approve the ordinance amendments that were
voted on in June of 2011. Keith said the acceptance of this map would not be on the ballot for this June, we are just working on it now.
Chris asked if there is they will confirm with DEP that the map is accurate to State requirements. Mr. MacClinchy agreed, they would be in contact with Mike Morse of DEP. Once that hurdle is crossed the map changes should be minimal. Not aware of any new data related to shoreland zone and wetland inventory has not been updated.
Questions from attendees:
Henry Huntley confirmed with Mr. MacClinchy, by pointing on the map, that he had stated there were two areas that would not be in the resource protection. Henry asked if that makes any wetlands in those areas required to meet a 75-foot setback. Mr. MacClinchy said it was his understanding that those wetlands could come off the map, because they are no longer regulated. Henry continued, so the wetlands that are there, would have a 75-foot setback, anything other than resource protection? Mr. MacClinchy said correct, he thinks that is right. Henry said when this map was first presented it added shoreland zone to 7 or 8 properties, which upset a few landowners. Our group was against the map for this reason. It placed significant buffers on some streams. This is when the buffer went
from 300 down to the States minimum requirement of 250 feet and streams were also redefined. And the ordinance did not have a definition of forested wetlands. Mr. MacClinchy said the definition of forested wetlands was added due to the National Wetlands Inventory update. Henry stated that Inland Fisheries and Wildlife had said you did not have to regulate the forested or low value anymore. In a letter from Mike Morse dated 2010, he said if we do not create a map, they will impose an ordinance on the town. Henry said that after hearing you tonight, we are moving toward something that he is more comfortable with on the map and would be willing to support it. He would like an estimate for the new map and verbiage, if any. Henry said from the information shared tonight, he feels better about having a new map introduced.
Cliff Thomas points to a portion of the map saying it has been moved back from shoreland zone to resource protection because it is a forested wetland. Cliff is concerned with other wetlands that are indicated on this map, you will find that 99% of them are forested wetlands or wetlands that have less than ten acres of open water or emergent wetland. If this is the case, then they should not be on the map either. Cliff feels someone really needs to come back and look at this before you introduce another map. Cliff continued, down on Route 202 it is flooded by a man made dam. The map shows where two streams come together, this is where the shoreland begins. Mr. MacClinchy said the map is required to indicate the 100-year flood. Cliff said all resource protection should be removed. Cliff said to
the Planning Board, before you go spend a lot of money the Town does not have, you should have a field verification done. Cliff added "you would lose about 80% of the shoreland/wetland areas on the map." "I'm still under the impression that if we go with the State mandated ordinance, that all that stuff will go away." Mr. MacClinchy agreed to submit an updated proposal.
John asked Mr. MacClinchy to consider the comments made by the residents about the resource protection areas. John said, I see a separate layer, perhaps the whole layer can be removed. John asked if the ordinance says that the resource protection is separate from the shoreland zoning, the only reason they are on the map is because they were formerly required. John asked "Are they not required now?" Mr. MacClinchy said "the 100 year flood is required, but resource protection is no longer required."
CEO Report: none
Approval of Minutes:
March 11, 2013 -
" David moved to accept the March 11, 2013 minutes as amended, seconded by Nicholas. The motion passed with a 5 - 0 - 1. John abstained.
Approval of Bills: none at this time.
~March Maine Townsman
~Last review of the 2013 Ordinance amendments before public hearing on April 8th, 2013.
The Board reviewed the proposed amendments and discussed other amendments proposed by board members.
Attendees may address the Board on the evening's business:
" David moved to adjourn, seconded by John, a unanimous vote.
Approval Date: April 22, 2013
Keith Emery, Chair Signature Date