Town of Buxton Planning Board
Minutes
Monday, November 10, 2014
Recorded by Krystal Dyer
Members in attendance: Chad Poitras, Mark Blier, Christopher Carroll, Keith Emery, Larry Curtis.
Members not in attendance: Jeremiah Ross, Christopher Baldinelli.
Others in attendance: Code Officer Fred Farnham, John Wojtila, Durwood Parkinson, Chris Nadeau, Dan & Olive Collomy, Susan & James Dunn, Mark Pulsoni, Galen Cunning, Stacey Barnes, Cliff Thomas, Henry Huntley, Chief Nathan Schools, Tom Kennie and Cliff Emery.
Keith called the meeting to Order at 7:02 p.m. by commencing with the pledge of allegiance.
Continued Public Hearing: Zaremba Group, LLC, requesting a conditional use permit for a proposed 9,100 sq. ft. Dollar General at 422 Narragansett Trail. A portion of Tax Map 5, Lot 47.
John Wojtila from the Zaremba Group introduced Chris Nadeau of Nobis Engineering, Durwood Parkinson of Bergen & Parkinson Law firm and Richard Dolby of MUBEC Inspection Services. Richard has fourteen years’ experience as a fire investigator, plans examiner for The State Fire Marshal’s Office, twenty-three years’ experience as director of Code Enforcement Officer for the city of Augusta and as Director of Building Codes and Standards for the Maine Department of Public Safety. Mr. Wojtila points out one outstanding item is the Fire Chief’s recommendation for the building to be sprinkled. Mr. Wojtila re-stated the relative items in the proposal and stressed the 9,100 sq. ft. building, is to be constructed with non-combustible material. Dollar General is a free standing store with no history of
fire risk. It is designed to be compliant with building codes IBC and NFPA, minimizing the fire risks. At the last meeting they offered a monitored fire alarm system. The site is presented with no variances with the Town of Buxton and it meets all setbacks. The approximate cost for the building to be sprinkled is not a cost this site could withstand.
Durwood Parkinson attorney for Municipal and Land Use Law, begins by responding to the letter from the Town’s attorney, David Kallin. The letter gives the Board a road map on how to address this issue. There cannot be a requirement for a sprinkler unless the Board has “site specific fact”. There are no site specific facts that would justify this position for the sprinkler requirement, they are asking the Board to re-consider.
Richard Dolby has been involved in many construction projects and measuring for life safety and practicality. NFPA is more restrictive than 101 Life Safety Code, which requires the building to be sprinkled if over 12,000 sq. ft. in size. The proposed building is safe based on the occupant load, occupancy type, and the construction. In a non-combustible building, the largest danger is the contents. The alarm system would be a plus in this building. To put a sprinkler system in this building would be unnecessary according to the codes, due to the size, occupancy and construction materials.
Chief Schools, revealed these are all the same issues that we have been discussing and as in my letter and many phone conversations. The issues as a municipality are the building content, life safety and the effects on our community. Do we improve our own code or follow IBC or NFPA with no public water on site or even near the site.
Chris C. asked Chief Schools to assist the Board to define any site specific condition that would require the sprinkler in this building. Chief Schools referenced Articles 8.3.a and 8.2.b.8 of the ordinance saying that some type of adequate water supply is required on site.
Chad asked if this was approved without a sprinkler system, could the Fire Department tap into the Hannaford complex system. Currently there is no water source on site, having no public water supply system or any other suppression. Part of their fire suppression is a pressurized hydrant run off of the 53,000 gallons storage tank. Chad continues, Hannaford did the due diligence to cover themselves in the event of a fire. Dunkin Donuts took the responsible business move and put in sprinklers, it was not mandated. The Chiefs recommendation for the Dunkin Donut complex is due to the building being a mixed use building. After extensive conversations they have agreed to put in a fire pond and sprinkling the building.
Mark has a disconnect with the two extremes, NFPA says we do not need sprinklers, the Fire Chief recommends sprinklers, here is a proponent for sprinklers telling us it does not need to be sprinkled. Chief Schools is looking out for the needs of our town. This property does not have a public water supply or any other suppression on site. Every town is different. NFPA’s limit is 12,000 sq. ft., but it does not have any provisions as to other water sources, like hydrants, ponds etc. A large public building without the water supply would be putting our people at risk. The Towns resources are limited for this site.
Referencing the applicant’s answers to 8.2.b.8, “use on site well”, Chris C. said it does not address the question appropriately. Keith said there is an adequate supply of water at Osborn’s.
Larry reiterates with Chief Schools, it is in your opinion that there is not an adequate water supply to meet the demands of the public proposed use. Chief Schools confirms.
Attorney Parkinson quoted the letter from the town’s attorney “you can require the installation on the basis of site specific condition.” Adding “There is no current ordinance requiring sprinklers. “
Richard Darby spoke by listing practical ways the fire can be handled. John Wojtila references the letter from Drummond/Woodsum, it should be known that the Planning Board does not have the authority to rewrite the building codes at this time, and should not require a sprinkler system on the basis of conditions that are town wide. The lack of water supply is not a site specific condition. It would cost Dollar General approximately $150,000 to install a sprinkler system.
As a resident, Cliff Emery offers the option of putting in a dry hydrant or holding tank. If the sprinkler cannot be done because of state codes, we can ask them to install other water protection. John Wojtila would be willing to do a 10,000 gallon underground holding tank and the alarm system.
Chief schools said a 10,000 gallon is adequate for a single family dwelling. We need to look at the building size, dimensions, etc. to determine the national fire flow formula for this building.
Chris B. agrees with the chief, but should put the tank size to match the amount of water needed for the site. Chad would like to see it sprinkled, but if there was a figure of what the national standards would be for that size building. John Wojtila said we would still be under what is in the new code. Chad said it’s the content that is flammable. Mark agree with Mr. Wojtila, they are under the national standards, offer is to install 10,000 gallon tanks. He is okay with the offer.
Larry read a one section of the letter not yet quoted from, Article 1.3, "to provide safety from fire and the elements." This provides the Planning Board with authority to attach conditions of approval that are not expressly required elsewhere in the Ordinance or in the applicable building codes when specific site-specific conditions require such conditions of approval to further the purposes of the Ordinance. Larry continues to say that the lack of water is not a town wide problem, there are certain sites in town where this is a problem and this is one of them.
Keith said the 10,000 gallon is a good starting point. Larry agrees, the Board does not have the authority to sprinkle, but we (The Board) are charged with the duty to protect the town and we need to make sure there is an adequate water supply.
Attorney Durwood Parkinson added, that if it is possible to get a consensus if the 10,000-gallon tank would work or we would like to table the application. Chad, Chris, and Larry would like to hear from Chief Schools to know whether a 10,000 gallon tank is adequate. Mark and Keith are okay with the 10,000 gallon tank.
Chief schools is holding with his original statement of needing to sprinkle the building, but achieve this figure he would need to go back to the national fire flow formula. Length x width x height. He does not have the information here tonight, but would be happy to get back to you tomorrow.
Resident, Galen Cunning asked Mr. Wojtila “what is the plan to protect your investment against fire?” John Wojtila replied “Dollar General does not have a history of these buildings possessing a fire risk. They are protecting their investment with the materials used to construct the building.”
The Board took a five minute break for the Fire Chief to research the codes to determine the proper tank size.
Meeting continued: Chief schools stated the initial Length x width x height without any involvement comes to 3,000 gallons x the percent involved, which rounds out to about 12,000 gallons. The minimum holding tank for a sprinkler system is a 28,000 gallon to meet NFK for a national sprinkler system. There was further discussion between the Board members on the tank size and agreed on a 10,000 gallon tank.
• Motioned by Chris to close public hearing at 8:25 p.m. Seconded by Larry, the motion passed with a 5 – 0 vote.
Having no further discussion, Keith read the 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: no discussion:
5. 10,000 gallon holding tank for fire protection.
6. Fire alarm system to be tied into a dispatch center or fire alarm company.
• Motion Chris C., seconded by Mark, 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).
• Chris C. motion to approve the application with the conditions stated and from previous meeting. Seconded by Larry, the motion passes with a 5 – 0 vote.
Galen Cunning of 4 Pease Road is returning with an update on the proposed zone change along Route 202 from Pease Road to Duck Pond Corner.
Galen Cunning came before the board back in September requesting to re-zone Narragansett Trail from Pease Road to Duck Pond Corner. The Board suggested that he contact the abutters. Mr. Cunning knocked on doors and sent out a letters. Through this process a few of the abutters were hoping for 500 feet rather than the 1,000 feet recommended by the Board. The original proposal was for 300 feet, but the Board wanted to mirror the existing Business/Commercial District from Pease Road in the southwesterly direction along Route 202. In the final proposal Mr. Cunning would like to make it a community effort, since it does affect the community and propose 500 feet.
Abutters: James Dunn has property on both Narragansett Trail and Pease Road. He has no objection to 500 feet.
CEO Report: None
Approval of Minutes:
October 27, 2014
• Motion Larry, seconded by Chris C. to approve the minutes as amended. All voted in favor.
Approval of Bills: Portland Press Herald in the amount of $22.80 for the Zaremba Group, LLC.
• Motion by Larry, seconded by Chad, a unanimous vote.
Communications: none
Other Business:
~Review proposed Article 12 Road Acceptance Regulations
Selectman, Cliff Emery and Highway Director, Tom Kennie gave an over view of the proposed amendments for Article 12 of the Town of Buxton Zoning Ordinance. Recently two large parcels of land sold and if developed, we want to make sure the roads are constructed to these standards. This proposal was compared with three other surrounding communities and molded into one. Keith has an issue with 12.2, the 18 or 24 inches – in his opinion, it should be one or the other. Cliff explains, that if you have a deep stump or clay it gives you the option to dig the extra 6 inches. Eighteen (18) inches is standard now. Keith announced, if it stays this way, you will not have my support. The Board would like to look over the amendments and review at the next meeting.
Attendees may address the Board on the evening’s business: none
Adjourn:
Motioned by Larry to adjourn at 9:26 p.m. seconded by Mark, a unanimous vote.
Approval Date: __1/12/15_________
________________________ ___________________
Keith Emery, Chairman Date
| 
