TOWN OF BUXTON PLANNING BOARD MEETING
Minutes
August 10, 2009
Recorded by Hilda Lynch
Board Members Present: David Savage, Sr.; Keith Emery; Jeremiah Ross, III, Harry Kavouksorian; James Logan, Caroline Segalla, and David Anderson
Board Members Absent: None
Others Present: Richard Meek, Jean Harmon, Marina Salang, Danny Reali, Pam Hurd, Herbert Hurd, Heather Pendleton, Annah Brunk, Dan Grover, Kimberley Grover, Patsy Thompson Leavitt, Neal & Louise Morrison
Chairman Harry Kavouksorian called the August 10, 2009, meeting of the Buxton Planning Board together at 7 p.m.
Pledge of Allegiance
Public Hearing: Annah-Joy & Greg Brunk
Annah reviewed her proposal to open a small childcare facility which would be run Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. The hours of operation would be 8:30 a.m to 12:30 p.m. They would be licensed for 12 children.
David S said he saw that they were eventually planning a full circle for people to drive in and out. Annah said it would not be completed for this fall. Keith thought the days would be Monday-Friday from 9 to 12. They had taken the recommendation of the Board initially. Harry said that they were advising them so that they wouldn’t have to come back before the Board if they wanted to change the hours. They would like to keep it 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. at this point. Caroline mentioned the submission of the license to the Code Enforcement Office.
Keith motioned, Harry seconded, to open the public hearing. All voted in favor.
The Board clarified that this would be opened as a daycare. Harry asked if there was anything from abutters, neighbors, or the general public. There were none.
Harry read the standard Conditions of Approval:
1. All elements and features of the application 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 conditions of the approval. No change from the conditions 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 & 10.
3. That the applicant be in compliance with all applicable provisions of
Section 11. (if applicable)
4. All outstanding bills paid before building permit is issued.
5. Limited to 12 children
6. Hours from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
7. Copies of the State license
8. A dumpster if they were to exceed the amount of trash which could be picked up
Keith motioned, David A. seconded, that based on previous discussions, we find the application to be in compliance with all applicable provisions of Articles 8.2.B, 10 & Section 11 (if applicable). All voted in favor.
David A motioned, seconded by Keith, to approve the application with the conditions stated and from previous meetings.
Motioned by Keith, seconded by David A, to close the public hearing. All voted in favor. Everything is all set.
Narragansett Business Park DEP approval
Richard Meeks of Sebago Technics stated that he went through the process of the preliminary approval. He mentioned that the Performance Guarantee was requested. Krystal told him that the Town Attorney had reviewed it and made a few comments. Harry mentioned that the Board members had just received it. There was an inspection and maintenance plan to identify who was responsible for storm water facilities. In addition, the relocation of the ponds was included in the packet. The Narragansett Business Park would be responsible for the maintenance outside of the right of way. Once the Town accepts the road, they would be responsible for items in the right of way. They’ve received info from Maine Historic Preservation, and no
properties would be impacted. The general notes were broken up. The note referring to approval of the three buildable lots has been relocated to the other sheet. They’ve received the DEP permit a month and a half ago. They had originally shown wetland impact which they’ve removed. They suggested that if it were desired by one of the applicants for a lot, it would come back under a separate application. They’ve submitted Park Place as the road name which he understands has been approved. Keith thought it had been approved by the Selectmen a few weeks ago. On the second sheet, there is a re-numbering of the notes.
Caroline mentioned Lot 3 and asked if any future owners would have to take care of the utility needs. There would be another pole set within the right of way, Richard responded. They’re proposing overhead lines. Sheet 4-7 Note 25 “submitted to engineer” – copies of anything should be submitted to the Code Enforcement Office since there’s no town engineer. She had a question on the actual Performance Bond. It looks like it is just for the construction of the road; she doesn’t see under drains, etc. included. Does it include everything? The original estimate includes overhead utilities, sedimentation control, the road itself. He didn’t include the soil filters as he didn’t think they’d be built at the same time as the road. Caroline asked for an itemized list of the items included in the Performance Bond. Richard said he submitted an engineering cost estimate which covers it. Caroline thinks the list should be attached to the Performance Bond so it would be clearer
for the Code Enforcement Officer.
Jim’s comment had to do with the DEP’s suggestion about the removal of the impacts. His experience is that it is appropriate, and he would like to see a note on the Plan to include this upfront, that a Tier One approval would be needed for any additional impact.
Harry asked Fred if he had any further questions. Harry asked for abutters or members of the general public. Harry stated that they had not had a chance to look at the attorney’s notes. Jere thought they should make it a condition of approval. Caroline concurred.
Keith motioned, seconded by Caroline, to close the public hearing. All voted in favor.
Harry read the standard Conditions of Approval:
1. All elements and features of the application 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 conditions of the approval. No change from the conditions 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 & 10.
3. That the applicant be in compliance with all applicable provisions of
Section 11. (if applicable)
4. All outstanding bills paid before building permit is issued.
5. The general note stating that any additional wetland fill would require DEP review and approval.
6. The Bond must be itemized and with the list of items it includes attached.
7. The Planning Board would review any future lots developed.
Any lighting fixtures in the future would have to have specs checked by CEO. Fred said they’d have to come back on that. The hours of operation – would they limit this? Board members thought that would pertain to later approvals.
Caroline asked if Fred is okay with under drain inspections. The site be inspected at the beginning, middle and end of the construction. Keith said that the Public Works Director would be inspecting anything within the right of way. The under drains and erosion control would be inspected by Fred. Fred said this will happen anyway.
David S asked about a response from the Dept of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife. Richard stated that they had received a letter from the Fisheries Dept. but nothing with the Wildlife section. The Board has a copy of the Fisheries Dept. letter. He hasn’t been able to get anything from them. Jere asked if the copy they wrote was in the file. Keith asked about the wildlife approval. Richard said he’s spoken with someone there, and Harry asked if they’d try one more time to get something.
Motioned by Keith, seconded by David S, that based on previous discussions we find the application to be in compliance with all applicable provisions of Article 13. Six in favor, David A opposed.
Motioned by Keith, seconded by Caroline, to approve the application with the conditions stated and from previous meetings. Six in favor; David A opposed.
Caroline asked about the revised notes on the Plan, and Jere asked that they be included on the Mylar before they sign it. They would check the Performance Bond at that time. Technically, the application won’t be complete until the Findings are voted on, Jere stated.
Submission of Pleasant Ridge Subdivision drainage change
Fred spoke about the change on Lots 3, 2, and 1 that would be connected with a common drain. It won’t be within the Town right of way. It would be at the end of Lot 1. Harry referred to the letter from Fred and David. Fred said the developers disproved this original plan. These are house drains that Fred is referring to. There should be easement language for individual lot owners, Jim stated. Jim mentioned that the Plan still includes the under drains under the road. Jim is suggesting that the Plan would need to be revised, and they can’t act upon it without this. Caroline mentioned that the Homeowner’s docs would need to reflect this as well as the deeds. Caroline asked how it was proposed
initially? Fred stated that they would have been individual ones originally. Keith mentioned that it would be corrected if they brought up a little more fill. Jim is curious what the Town Attorney would think about this proposal. Jim has a concern for future home buyers who could get stuck with a drain problem. Jere asked if the Findings have been signed yet? Board members agreed that they hadn’t signed them. There was a question about the signing of the Mylars. Fred has issued two building permits. Caroline asked Fred about a list of engineers to review. She said that unless Fred feels that they will work or an engineer gives them info, she wouldn’t be able to give him the green light. If something like this comes to Fred, she would like to see him have the ability to send things out that he could then bring to the Board. Jere said he doesn’t think there’s anything that says that the
developer can’t put under drains in. Jim says that Caroline has a good point that this is an amendment to the subdivision. Caroline mentioned that it affects a lot of things. Jim thinks they may want to consider raising the foundations so that each lot can have their own drains. Jim thinks there are legal issues. The buyers of these three lots would need to know this. It becomes something different when the drains cross other lots.
Caroline asked how this would work. Jim doesn’t feel they should discuss this without a representative here from Berube because this will require an amendment. He thinks the engineer should be here. Harry asked if Krystal would write them a letter stating that this is an amendment to the subdivision so a representative would have to come before the Planning Board to discuss it for approval. Jim would like to have the applicant go back to the soils person. Fred said that the foundation is already in Lot 3. Harry believes it is a change to the Plan so they should come and present it. David S asked what Berube’s issue is? Fred said each one could have a sump pump in it and the water would go down the west side of the
road. They want positive drainage. The Board concurs that Berube would need to come back to the Board.
David A asked if the Board was going to do anything about the letter of credit. Harry believes this is another open issue. Caroline says this needs to be sent to the applicant, and they need to respond. She mentioned adding verbiage of 30 days. Caroline will speak with Krystal about this.
Jerry Oliver of 17 Henderson Drive is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for firewood processing and bark mulch sales at Tax Map 7, Lot 26
Harry asked if anyone was here to present this item. No one was present.
Jere motioned, Jim seconded, to amend the agenda to proceed to the next item on the agenda. All voted in favor.
Daniel & Jennifer Jackson are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to house six goats at 165 Long Plains Road; Tax Map 1, Lot 194-8.
Jennifer reviewed her proposal to house six goats on their property on the Long Plains Rd. It is for her 14-year-old daughter for a 4-H project. She described the goats. They would be taking the two kids. Their area would be about 200 ft. off the road out behind her home. The front of the pen would be visible in her backyard and the rest would be in the wooded area. The existing front part of the area was originally a kennel. The first 30 ft. from the road or other properties, it doesn’t look any different. There’s a 4 x 6 building for shelter where they will store hay in the top. About 60 ft. back, there is an area where any waste would be. They’re going to work it into a compost pile. Harry asked if they would be opposed to removing it regularly? Jennifer said they would if it is a condition. They’ve had people express interest in coming and taking it away. Harry asked if there would be 6 goats? She said they have plans for three right now; but if she
should want to breed, she’d like to have the maximum be six.
There was a question about them being pets, and she stated that they would be. They’re 150 plus from any wells. Caroline says that it looks like part of a subdivision back in 1981. Are there any restrictions? Jennifer said that she spoke with Krystal, and she didn’t have the current deed on file. Jim mentioned a note that he thinks that a small note was it. Caroline asked about the Plan which shows all the lots, she’d like to have the wells shown – the distance from the manure piles and from the stream. Caroline would like them placed on the larger map. From the manure pile to where it goes down to the brook, it has to be at least 500 ft., Jennifer thought. Harry mentioned they could look at it on
the site walk. Jennifer mentioned that they wouldn’t be able to get to the brook because there have been so many trees fallen, etc. Caroline asked if the existing shed is 30 ft. from the property line. There was a 50 ft. tree buffer they left, and the shed would have been outside of that.
David S asked about the smaller map. He sees the well distances from the manure pile and would like to see the distances from the goat area to the nearest house on each side. From the back of her house to the beginning of the chain link fence is 90 ft.; the abutters would be 100 plus the 90 ft. They’d like it shown that the abutters are more than 100 ft. from the goat area. Jim gave her his copy of the map. She clarified if they wanted just the homes. Board members wanted wells as well. Krystal and Fred would be able to help her. Jere mentioned that new aerial maps have been done that she could access on the internet. David S asked about her daughter’s involvement in 4-H. He wanted to know if this would
continue once her daughter is no longer in 4-H. Right now, her daughter is going to keep them; but if her daughter should outgrow them, they will go back to where they’ve come from.
Harry asked if they had enough information for a site walk.
Jere motioned, Harry seconded, that they hold a site walk on August 17, 2009, at 6 p.m. All voted in favor.
Robert & Marina Horr are applying for a subdivision amendment to Pinkham Development #3 for a land exchange to adjust property lines at 54 Seavey Drive; Tax Map.
Danny Reali and Marina Horr reviewed their proposal. Danny distributed some paperwork to the Board. Danny Reali is presenting with Marina. They went to the Selectmen to see how they could resolve the issue of encroachment on town property and have developed an even exchange of land. They will give the town the exact square footage from the back of the property for the piece they’re requesting.
David A would like to know how this has happened? He thought they had gotten a variance for the building of a garage which they ignored. Now, there’s a pool on the town land. Marina said they didn’t realize when they were putting the pool in that they weren’t on their property. It wasn’t until the day the pool was filled in that the Code Enforcement Officer came and told them there was a problem. David A asked if they’d made application to the Town for the construction of the pool. She said the garage was put in four or five years ago. She said they had the line stated that said they had 10 ft. The pole they were going by, the surveyor found that the subdivision owners had put in was 16 ft.
off. David A said the surveyors found the pin was off 16 ft. The pins have now been re-set correctly. They believed they had gotten the appropriate setback for the garage. He doesn’t know how they’re going to vote on this at town meeting.
Jim believes he would want certainty if he were building an in ground pool. Fred said that if they were to take a look at the entire survey, they would find that their lot was a little unusual. A cemetery is part of the lot which further restricts what can be done. The diagonal road makes their property line diagonal. He said they did make the effort to come for a variance; but because of the misplacement of the marker, it seemed more logical to improve the whole situation by making the land better for them. The town would be gaining an equal amount of land, which is better than where the triangle is because there’s wetland and a gully which will be up near where the baseball diamond is. It looked like a win-win situation. The
problem wasn’t intentionally done by the landowners. The uniqueness of the land line could throw others off enough to skew what you’d normally think.
Caroline asked if this would require a vote by the voters. This is David’s other concern that the Town Meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday night. Keith says they couldn’t do anything until after this meeting.
Fred says that the Board needs to set up a public hearing. Fred would like to see the time frame shortened. David A asked how could they have a Town Meeting this soon? Keith says the voters will approve the land swap. Then, they would come back to the Board for the setting of the site walk. If the public doesn’t vote to do the land swap, nothing can be done. Jean Harmon spoke about them coming before the Board to propose a change and their needing to own the land. Jim says that they can have just a purchase and sale agreement. Keith says the difference is that this is public property being discussed. David A clarified that Jean is saying that they have to have a right to the property before the Planning Board can do
anything about this. The Town’s Attorney has approved and prepared the deeds for it. Jim mentioned any one coming to them to “fix” something that they’ve done which they’ve considered a mistake. Jere said it does set a precedent that he doesn’t feel is a good one. Jim says that in a new subdivision it wouldn’t happen. The Board of Appeals – the pool and garage are clearly a result of the applicant’s error. Jean stated that the pool is on Town property and the homeowners would fill in the pool but this doesn’t take care of the garage. Was a building permit issued for the garage and the pool, Jere asked. Jere doesn’t think it is Fred’s job to physically verify; it is the burden of the owner. Caroline asked about the legal counsel. Caroline asked if there were any wetlands, which she would want depicted on the Plan. Caroline clarified it going
before the voters for approval. She asked what would happen if the Board doesn’t approve it. If a majority of the Board votes not to approve this amendment, then it would die.
Jere thought they could set a site walk contingent on the voter’s approval. Jim mentioned the setback from cemeteries. David S asked about the extent of the town land. The pool was put in around 1990. Greg Drew was a Selectman and said that he would put a letter in their file saying everything would be fine. The secretary remembers it being put in but now it is not there. Later, someone was hired to take things out of files; and the letter is no longer there. They thought everything was fine. Clifford Emery did the garage pad, and he thought they could have made the garage bigger. Even making it smaller, there is a problem.
Jere motioned, Caroline seconded, that a site walk be held on August 17, 2009, at 6:45 p.m. contingent on a positive town vote on Wednesday, August 12, 2009. Six in favor; Keith opposed.
If it doesn’t pass at Town Meeting, they will assume that this won’t be continued. The Town Meeting starts at 7 p.m. here on Wednesday, August 12, 2009. Copies of notices are available at Town Hall. There is a map attached. Jean stated that they were approached, and the Selectmen thought this was a positive approach. The Board was trying to be accommodating since the Town is the abutter. Keith doesn’t understand why Greg Drew put a letter in the file; he didn’t think that he had the authority.
CEO Report:
There has been a change in the hours of the Code Officer for inspections. He is working 32 hours a week on a part-time basis. He will be working 7 a.m. until 1:30 p.m. on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Fridays. He will work 11:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. on Wednesdays for inspections as needed. This was part of his budget because there has been a downturn in the number of activities. He felt this was the way to go. When Thanksgiving comes, he will switch to a 4-day week.
Keith asked about Maranatha Farms. Will they be coming before the Planning Board for all of the additions they’ve put on. He thinks they have expanded quite a bit even if they have been grandfathered in. They have put on more buildings and more training space for the dogs which is expanding their original grandfathered use. His opinion is that they need to come before the Board. Caroline asked if Keith had come in to look at the file. He thinks they’ve gone well beyond the original approval for the kennel. He thinks they’ve added three buildings and have gone well beyond the original plan.
Harry mentioned that a resident called to complain about the goat milking operation on Hall Rd. He spoke for the public that the Code Enforcement Officer needs to be called. Harry understands that Fred has gone out to the property. Tim Clements’ goats on Hall Rd. are being discussed. He went up on Monday and again on Tuesday to see what the situation was. Basically, he has two places for his goats—one behind the garage on the right side of Hall Rd--a 12 X 6 enclosure with six goats in there. On the other side, opposite the garage, there are seven goats. They didn’t make any noise at all. Tuesday, he stopped and talked with Tim. He felt they were very docile and gentle and no blatting. He didn’t witness or see anything that would be considered a disturbance. He talked with another abutter who said he hadn’t heard anything over the week-end. Harry clarified that their permit allowed up to 24. Keith went in one day – Sunday afternoon for a couple of hours – and he
didn’t hear them. He talked with a neighbor who said he hadn’t heard anything or smelled anything. He said they wouldn’t know they were there. Fred said that he thought they make some noise around feeding time, but there is nothing sustained. Fred thought the conditions were being met.
Approval of Minutes: June 22, 2009
Caroline will send corrections to Krystal so they may review at the next meeting.
Approval of Bills: Pay Portland Press Herald $20.01 for legal ads for Pinkham.
Motioned by Jere, seconded by Keith, to pay the Portland Press Herald $20.01 for the legal ad for Pinkham daycare operation on Chicopee Rd. All voted in favor.
Pay Southern Maine Regional Planning Commission $40 for Shore land Zoning Updates. This would complete the 2009 budget figure.
Motioned by Jere, seconded by Jim, to pay SMRPC $40 for the Upland Zoning updates. All voted in favor.
David asked if the Board wanted a reconciliation report in the next packet. He could put something together in a summary form. He will have it ready for the next packet.
Communications:
E-mail from Jon Lockman of SMRPC – Jim thinks the Selectmen should review the e-mail, not the Planning Board. He suggests this be forwarded to the Selectmen. Would Krystal please send it to them.
There was a question about when the Comp Plan was completed. It has been 19 years since the Comp Plan has been updated. This is the point that needs to be made.
Ron & Mary Arborio have withdrawn their plan for a drive through because what they wanted to do was not a permitted use for that property.
Other Business:
Review Findings for Pleasant Ridge Subdivision – The Board has approved the Plan. They will need to come back, and there will be new Findings. There was a question about whether there will be any further building permits issued. They need to confirm whether the Findings have to be signed before building permits can be issued. Jim doesn’t believe it is Fred’s job to represent an applicant who is not here. The perception is that Fred is working for them. Jere feels that Fred wants to expedite the process, which is why he sometimes will present. There was some discussion about the changing of an agenda and how it should be done.
Review Findings for Hazel Pinkham
Motioned by Caroline, seconded by Jim, to approve the Findings for Hazel Pinkham’s daycare. All voted in favor: 7-0.
Review Findings for Narragansett Business Park
There are additions from tonight’s meeting that will need to be added for the above.
Review and approve By-Laws
David S asked about the Pledge of Allegiance being included in Section 7. David A didn’t feel that it would be needed as it is a process. Caroline will review some things with Krystal.
Review proposed Shoreland Ordinance changes and map
Board members couldn’t see what the highlights are. Jere asked about having a meeting with J.T. Lockman. Keith thinks he should attend the next meeting. Caroline asked if everyone could come ready to vote on sheds, setbacks, etc. at the next meeting. She will make a list of those things. They will need to designate changes that only apply to the shore land zone.
Motioned by Jim, seconded by Jere, to adjourn the meeting at 9:21 p.m. All voted in favor.
Approval Date: __________________
_________________________________ _______________
Harry Kavouksorian, Chairman Signature Date
| 
