Town of Buxton Planning Board
Minutes
Monday, September 22, 2014 at 7 p.m.
Recorded by Hilda Lynch
Members in attendance: Keith Emery, Chad Poitras, Mark Blier, Christopher Carroll, Jeremiah Ross, III, and Chris Baldinelli.
Members not in attendance: Lawrence Curtis
Others in attendance: Bill Hoffman of FST, Henry Huntley, Cliff Thomas, Code Officer Fred Farnham, Cliff Emery, Don Pederzini, Angela & James Michie, Galen Cunning, Stacey Barnes, Linda & Philip Townsend, Jr., Danny Bouzianis, Ron & Robin Milliken, Nancy ?, John Vedral, Chris Nadeau, of Nobis Engineering and John Wojtila of Zaremba Group, LLC.
Keith called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. with the Pledge of allegiance
Public Hearing for Old Port Realty, LLC for a 5,250 sq. ft. retail building with drive through and restaurant at the Roberts Corner project (Hannaford Complex). Tax map 9, Lot 33.
- Motioned by Jere, seconded by Chris B, to open the public hearing for Old Port Realty. Six voted in favor.
Danny explained that the building would be sprinkled for all three units and tied in to the Fire Dept. and alarm system. There would be a storage tank for sprinkling in case of fire.
Questions of Board members:
Will they be using the existing storage tank? No, it will be a separate tank - 2,000 gal. tank on the ground with a pump station.
Will they have their own water supply? Yes, but they will be tying in to the existing sewage system with an easement. They’ll have a meter for their share of the maintenance.
Are they allotted 1,000 gallons a day for water? This is an estimate based on other facilities they own. They’ll have an inspection a couple of times a year as they do for their Scarborough facility.
Keith asked Fred if he had any comments. He did not.
Keith reviewed a letter from an abutter, Don Pederzini. He asked if the planned retention pond would keep extra water from going across the road and flooding his hay field. Bill Hoffman says that there is a plan to keep the water from being any greater than it currently is. They’ll have a slow release system so the water will flow the same as it currently does. They’re required to control the rate of flow and can’t increase it beyond what it is today.
Questions from the Board:
How is the rate of flow determined?
Is the Hannaford complex releasing any ground water in addition to what was already flowing?
Will the new retention pond drain like the other one?
At what level will the culvert be installed to let water out?
Will the culvert be set higher than the current one so there shouldn’t be as much water flowing across the road?
Will the retention pond hold all of the water unless there is a really heavy rain?
Bill H. explained that new culvert would be higher than the current one. There will be small holes that will contain the rate of flow. The rise takes two days to drain down. The pond is being designed so that it would be large enough for a building to be built in back without requiring an expansion. After a review by the Fire Chief, they’ve elected to have a live hydrant and sprinkling of the building. The retention pond is not going to be for fire purposes. When the easements are granted for access to the hydrant by the tank, they’d also have an easement for future building.
Keith asked about any changes in the new plans. Bill reviewed that 1) the building will be moved back from the Portland Road by three feet; 2) The water main would be extended to the building for the sprinkler system; and 3) Piping will be put in for a future dry hydrant.
Keith asked if any abutters were present with questions:
Linda Townsend expressed concern that her well (Tax Map 9, Lot 37 Erlon Townsend, Heirs) is on the Pennell Road right near the retention pond. She said they had to go very deep for her well, and occasionally, they run out of water. She’s concerned about the blasting that will go on. Her well is about 100 ft. from the property line. She asked about any access to the Pennell Rd.
Bill explained that they’re going to line the retention pond with a plastic liner that is guaranteed to be water tight. There will be blasting for the retention pond, and there will be a pre-blasting survey done. Most often, they test the abutters’ wells, also. Hannaford has a well producing about 30 gallons a minute. Bill doesn’t believe they’d have an issue in testing her well before the blasting is done. Bill says the pond will be about 150 ft. from Linda’s well. Jere explained the process of the blasting survey - before and after. Bill says they’ll test for radon. There will be no access from the property onto the Pennell Rd. The question was asked whether Linda would need to give permission to test her well. Bill says they
wouldn’t need her permission. The company that does this work has their own insurance. Linda could decide what she wants her well to be tested for.
Another question was asked by Mark about the two and a half days for drainage. Bill says that all water going into the pond will discharge through a pipe. Mark wanted to know if the current pond was designed the same way. Bill says it was designed with a different type of liner system, which is why it sometimes goes dry. Mark wanted to know if they’re guaranteeing that this one will hold water. Bill says that is definitely going to happen.
Don Pederzini expressed his concern about the water crossing the road. He doesn’t want a single drop of water more ending up in his hayfield across the street than is currently coming into it. If the water comes in there and he can’t get a tractor into that area of the field when the hay is ready to be cut, he is losing money. The culvert currently taking care of the vernal pool is sending water into his field and destroying more hay. Has he had any issues since the development has started? Don admitted that, to his knowledge, the Hannaford development having been there the last seven years hasn’t affected his property. He hasn’t noticed any difference over the past 20 years.
Keith asked if there was anyone from the general public:
Cliff Emery, a resident, asked what kind of establishment would be on the opposite end from Dunkin’ Donuts. Danny reported that there will be two additional units - three store fronts altogether with individual doors. There might be an additional door for pumps and things like that. They’re currently marketing the other two store fronts, but nothing has yet been determined. They could look at a doctor’s office, sub shop, hair salon, etc. Cliff asked if there would be any time restrictions. Danny says they’re looking at 4 a.m. - 10 p.m. Chris B. asked if anyone had a problem with the time frame. Keith says he doesn’t believe there are any restrictions in the ordinance. Jere asked if they would be agreeable to a condition of 4 a.m. to 10 p.m. Danny would like to keep it at 11 p.m. just in case.
A question was asked about lighting. They will have the same kind of lighting that Hannaford now has, only more energy efficient.
Keith stated that the checklist indicates that they’ve received all of the information that they’ve asked for. Do they want to close the public hearing?
Cliff Thomas was curious about the water flow, also. He heard this evening that the rate of flow would not be increased. He didn’t hear that there would be more water dumped across the road during a period of time. Keith believes that State law regulates the flow of water.
- Motioned by Chris B., seconded by Mark, to close the public hearing. Six voted in favor.
Some additional questions were asked by the Board:
Is Old Port Realty comfortable with the hours given? Yes. Is there a guarantee on the liner for the retention pond? Yes. Would they make this a condition? Yes. Could they address the issue that Mr. Pederzini has? Bill responded that the DEP handles storm water control. Chris B. asked if the person at the DEP that Mr. Pederzini should contact would be Chris Woodruff. Should he get hold of Fred if any problems arise? Keith assumes he would come to the Code Enforcement Office first. What would going to DEP do? Bill says he’s done dozens of these, and there has never been a callback. Jere explained the mechanism that Mr. Pederzini would go through with the DEP. He would have litigation as an option, also. Keith believes there are
problems with water going across the street towards the funeral home. Danny says that whatever the engineer designs will be attached to the contract for construction. The contractors would have to come back to fix a problem. They want to be good neighbors.
Keith 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.
Additional conditions:
5. A copy of the easement for the fire pond will be provided.
6. A letter from the State Fire Marshall regarding the sprinkler system (post installation) will be provided.
7. A letter from Chief Schools signing off on all provisions will be provided, including building
numbering.
8. A copy of the agreement stating that the maintenance will be provided by a third party.
9. The hours of occupancy will be 4 a.m. to 11 p.m.
10. The waterproof liner is maintained to be waterproof.
- Chris C. motioned, seconded by Chris B.,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). Six voted in favor.
- Jere motioned, seconded by Chris B., to approve the application with the conditions stated and from previous meetings. Six voted in favor.
Galen Caning of 4 Pease Road is inquiring into a zone change, to extend the Business-Commercial Zone corridor along Route 202 from Pease Road to Duck Pond Corner (Route 22). It is currently Residential; Tax Map 6, Lot 28.
Galen would like to get re-zoned for commercial so he could put in a small wine manufacturing operation. He would also like to eventually have a small retail business.
Questions from the Board:
How far back was he thinking to extend the zone? Galen thinks it would be about 100 ft. back as he is thinking about a tasting room in the barn. He would like 1000 ft. along Rt. 202.
Would this mean overlaying his neighbor’s properties? Keith says he would like to keep it consistent with the zoning in other areas of Rt. 202, which he thinks is 1000 ft. The change would have to go to the Town for a vote in June, 2015, if the Board is agreeable. If not, Galen would have the option of getting signatures on a petition. Galen understands he could have a home occupation, but he is looking to expand in 4-5 years.
Has Galen talked with any of the other landowners? He has talked with a couple of them and has not heard any objections except people wanting to keep it rural. He’s willing to talk with his neighbors.
Keith asked what the Board thinks. Chris B. believes he could support it. Jere sees a lot of vacant commercial lots now around town. Keith stated that Galen would like to use his own property. Cliff stated that one doesn’t have to change anything when an area is zoned commercial; there could still be homes there. Galen would like to have a long-term business there. Jere explains spot zoning.
Should this be zoned commercial? Would he have to come to the Planning Board for that? Several replied that he would. Mark would like both sides of the road to be the same. He would like to hear from the abutters. Chad thinks it is a wonderful idea. He would support it as long as they could meet the conditions that are set forth. Keith would like to see Galen’s neighbors’ input. Others like this idea.
Galen asked how far back he would have to go to talk with neighbors. Chris B. showed him on the map the area that they would be talking about; they’d be looking at a number of lots. Keith asked him to come in and talk with Fred so he could follow the width of the zone. He’d be about 600 ft. back from his property line if he were to look at 1000 ft.
Jere explained how Galen could get this on the ballot if the Board doesn’t support it. It may or may not require Planning Board approval. It would be permissible to have a home occupation. Keith requests that Galen bring his list to the Code Enforcement Office when he has it ready. They would need it before the beginning of April.
Zaremba Group, LLC, submitted an application for a proposed Dollar General at 422 Narragansett Trail; a portion of Tax Map 5, Lot 45.
Chris Nadeau, an engineer from Nobis Engineering, represented the Zaremba Group, LLC. They’re looking at a 9,100 sq. ft. store on a 2.25 acre lot. On July 21st, they came before the Board. They now have engineered drawings. The changes they’ve made are primarily related to parking. They’re proposing to have the number of parking spaces to meet the ordinance but not all of them paved.
Dollar General is a general merchandise store. It was started in the early 1900s. They sell items from $1 - $60. You could compare it to a CVS or Rite Aid without the Pharmacy. They’re building one in N. Waterboro. Stores are open from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. They’d have one large truck a week delivering.
They’re proposing to share a driveway with the owner of the other parcel of land. He’s heard from DOT that they wouldn’t need an additional permit. They’re only allowed one access point. They’ve issued full engineered drawings to DOT. There is an existing driveway permit, so another is not needed. Mr. Nadeau will provide documentation. The existing permit was granted before Hannaford was there. Chris C. asked if it has been documented that the entrance is a safe entrance, because he’s concerned about a left-hand turn going North. Is Chris N. referring to the truck turning as part of the application? He says he was, and he would be happy to provide DOT documents. They’ll have a well but will have very low water and septic usage.
They’ll put a septic under an area of the parking lot. They’ll put a retention pond in back, which will drain into a large wetland area, eventually to a brook that flows to the north. The proposed architecture has not changed. There’s a building sign and a pylon sign.
Chris C. asked if they could look at the design and make some changes so it doesn’t look like a metal box. Mr. Nadeau will remind the owners about that.
In the application, they submitted the info requested. There’s a section that says that parking should be located at the side or rear of the building. Mr. Nadeau believes the Planning Board would have some say about this. Jere refers to Bill Plouffe’s letter, and says he was pretty adamant that it had to be in the rear or on the side. In 10.7.b, there is no flexibility on the number of spaces. They would move the building out closer to the street if parking wasn’t allowed in front. In 10.7.b, the Planning Board may waive any of the following requirements. One of them is in regard to the surfacing. Chris N. says that they don’t like to pave more than necessary because it creates more runoff. The retention pond is being sized to accommodate all parking spaces as
if they were paved.
Can there be parking in front? Can some parking area be grass? Fred says when this came up before he took a look around town. The loading docks have to be on the side or back. You wouldn’t want parking in the same area. Fred says most businesses have parking in front of the building.
Mark would rather see parking in the front than the front of the building closer to the road. Chris C. asked how the unloading would be done. Mr. Nadeau explains on the sketch, he shows where the proposed parking spaces of grass would be located. Chris C. asked if it is a raised loading dock. It is flush, Mr. Nadeau says. Jere asked Mr. Nadeau to contact the Fire Chief for his input regarding fire needs. Chris B. asked if there is any chance of contamination from old cars that have been stored there. Mr. Nadeau says they have tested the land they’re purchasing, and he can ask further questions about it.
Keith thinks they have everything that they need except for seeing the building design. Does the Board feel they have enough information to schedule a site walk? Could some stakes be put in where the building will be? Mr. Nadeau says they could.
- Motioned by Chris B, seconded by Chris C, to schedule a site walk for the above next Monday evening, September 29, at 6 p.m. Six voted in favor.
Francoise Paradis is requesting an amendment to her co-housing community project, Greensward Hamlet, located on Marshall Lane; Tax Map 10, lot 147. Previously approved as a conditional use permit on June 9, 2008.
Francoise says it is a simple request. Of her 29.7 acres, she would like to take about 6 acres out as she shows on the map which would reduce the number of units that were approved. One building has been built. She would swap land with the abutter Ben Lord. He’s going to do some work for her including the widening of the road to Town. When she’s talked with Butch Yarumian, it would come out to about four units or one building that would need to be removed from her previous plan. They have one building with two units now. People are more interested in duplexes. It will probably be the building that is farthest away that would be eliminated from the plan. They would have to eliminate one garage - Garage #1 probably.
Jere asked if she could provide a boundary survey showing which buildings are going to be eliminated and what the boundaries are of the acreage being taken out of the project.
Chris B. asked about the road construction. Francoise is not changing the road. She’s going to swap the land to get the road up to specs.
Keith reviewed that they would need to see a new plan with new calculations - showing the acreage that comes off, the new calculations for the buildings and what buildings will come off the previous plan.
CEO Report: None this evening.
Approval of Minutes:
August 25, 2014 -
- Chris C. motioned, seconded by Mark, to accept the minutes as amended. Six voted in favor.
Approval of Bills: Portland Press Herald in the amount of $24.80 for the Poitras public hearing.
- Motioned by Chris B, seconded by Chris C, to pay the bill. Six voted in favor.
Communications:
~Don Pedarzini letter regarding the new project
~Saco River Corridor Commission - save the date October 11 at 9 a.m. at the Buxton Town Hall - along the Saco
& Little Ossippee - to find out what is happening next to protect the waterways
~Saco River Corridor Commission - Schedule for months of October and November
~Letter from Caroline Segalla regarding work on a Comp Plan - Comp Plan is at a standstill - what should be
done next?
Other Business:
~Carry Forwards: The Selectmen want this info, but Keith doesn’t know what is planned to carry forward. Did they carry anything forward last year? Keith says mapping. They’ll wait until Larry Curtis is available to look at the money that has been spent.
Attendees may address the Board on the evening’s business:
Cliff Thomas has sent to the Planning Board a letter dealing with parking in front of buildings. Aceto wanted six parking spaces in front of his building. He had to revise his plans in order to revamp his site in order to provide parking (six spaces) on the side of his building. He suggests that Mr. Aceto be compensated in some way for having to revamp his plan and move parking to the side of his building.
- Motioned by Jere, seconded by Chris C., to adjourn at 9:30 p.m. All voted in favor.
Approval Date: ___________
________________________ ___________________
Keith Emery, Chairman Date
[type or paste agenda here]
| 
