Town of Buxton Planning Board
Minutes
Monday, May 11, 2015
Recorded by Hilda Lynch
Board Members Present: Chad Poitras; Jeremiah Ross, III; Keith Emery; Christopher Carroll; Chris Baldinelli; and Lawrence Curtis
Absent: Mark Blier
Others Present: Henry Huntley, Geoff Trott, Anthony Fusco, David Fogg, Lucien Fecteau, John Elmen, Mary Ann Saxby, Denise Farwell, Ken Johnson, Jean Harmon, Penny Booker, Elaine M, M. Quill, Louise McGinley, Anne Williams, Jerry Williams, Anita Charland, Ronald Charland, Randall Segler, Nancy Pierce, Carl Anderson, Ray McGinley and Cliff Thomas
Chairman Keith Emery called the May 11, 2015, meeting of the Buxton Planning Board together at 7:03 p.m.
Pledge of Allegiance
Public Hearing for proposed Ordinance amendments for proposed amendments, additions or deletions to Article 2 Definitions and Article 9.8, Land Use Section Regulations Table B of the Town of Buxton Zoning Ordinance.
- Motioned by Chris B, seconded by Larry, to open the public hearing. Six in favor.
Cliff Emery spoke for the Board of Selectmen. There is very little commercial land set aside in Town. All of the surveys and comprehensive plans show that the people want to keep the land commercial along the Rt. 202 corridor and not spread it throughout the community. They saw the two tracts of land under contract being turned into single-family dwellings, and this land would be forever lost to commercial development. It would take away from the decision-making of the community’s children and grandchildren. The land for business development in the community would be limited. From the Pease Rd. back to the car sales would be turned into commercial business property. They’re looking at what the townspeople say they want, so the Selectmen want to put it before the voters.
Discussion: Keith says his opinion is well known so he doesn’t have to repeat it. Any questions from abutters?
Maryann Saxby will be a potential abutter to the land on the Pease Rd. If no residential property is in there, do we have anything to assure it is tastefully done? Response: there is nothing in place at this point. Jere says that there is a difference in opinion in Town as to what the land should be used for. Keith says to keep it looking good, they might have a design plan. Cliff says that the Town of Windham set up the Rt. 302 corridor in Windham the best way they could. There is one road where the sewer and water is, and everything is right there. Only a quarter of a mile from the business corridor, it looks like the outskirts of Buxton. It is an option to spend lots of dollars on landscaping.
Andrew Fusco and David Fogg own the property that will be voted on. David says, if you don’t know where it is, it is where Bruce Buchanan made the metal wheels. He shows on the map the building where Normand Berube Builders would be. There would be a green belt all around it. He respectfully disagrees with those who think Rt. 202 should be commercially built up. He was driving along Long Plains Rd. recently and saw a seed store, automotive garage, saloon, a post office, senior retirement home, daycares, school and the new funeral home. It is mixed use and functions well. It is how a lot of people like to see their property. They have 45 acres that is unplanned as yet. Normand Berube Builders showed them the three developments they’ve built in Buxton, which convinced them
that some residential building would be good. They’ve built some very nice homes. He would like to encourage people to vote against the change in the Ordinance.
Andrew says they’re here to let people know about the land along Rt. 202. It’s a green-belted area. There’s a mile of trees and green. It’s a nice area before you go into the next intersection where Hannaford is. They’ve met the builders and have seen the workmanship. They want to make the people aware of voting on June 9.
Penny Booker, a Selectman, says the proposal has nothing to do with the quality of the buildings proposed. In her position, she has to look at a bigger picture. We don’t have a lot of land zoned for commercial building. She thinks that Rt. 202 is the logical place for this. They’re trying to keep it commercial, as it already is zoned.
Randall Segler asked if the development was given preliminary approval by the Board? Response: The Board has only had a brief meeting with BH2M. They haven’t reviewed any developments yet. BH2M wanted to give them a “heads up” on their planning. They were going to come back to the Board around this time. He has a problem with the article being done the way it is being done - making someone else pay for the Selectmen’s mistake. It was clarified that this wasn’t presented by the Planning Board. Mr. Segler talked about a bond issue to create jobs. The article will cost jobs for people in the building trades. It should be allowed to go before the Planning Board without being sent to the voters.
Keith agrees that it shouldn’t be allowed to be back dated. The Ordinance and books says they should be allowed to do it. The Board of Selectmen decided to allow it to be backdated. He thinks this is going in through the back door. If it is to be changed, Keith believes it should be done and dated as of the vote.
Chris C. says that they’re all volunteers, and the people working on the zoning may not have been able to see how the Town would look in the future. It may not have been picked up or was an oversight. Maybe, this is something that wasn’t taken care of along the way to preserve the intent of the Plan that we have.
Article 2. Function Hall
The proposed ordinance allows function halls in the following zones: Village, Rural, Business Commercial and Light Commercial. Larry agrees with the definition.
No one from the public came forward for comment.
- Jere motioned, seconded by Chris B, to close the public hearing for the ordinance amendments. Six voted in favor.
Public Hearing for Geoffrey Trott of EOS Design, LLC is requesting a Conditional Use permit for a Light Manufacturing Research Facility (for composting toilets for boats) to be located at 306 Simpson Road. Tax Map 11, Lot 31-1.
- Motioned by Jere, seconded by Chris B., to open the public hearing. Six voted in favor.
Geoff owns a small manufacturing company in Portland; they’ve designed and built composting toilets for boats and RV’s. They resemble a woodshop but they’re cutting plastic and bending metal. They have 2500 square feet in Portland, and they’re looking for another facility. The product gets shipped by USPS, FEDEX and UPS - but primarily mail. They use freight for overseas shipping. Less than two trucks would be going in and out per month. Right now, they’re doing small shipments. As well as incoming shipments now, they’re planning to fill the trucks up more for outgoing shipments. They would be insulating and putting some windows in the second floor. They’d be needing parking and turnaround space for the trucks and space for a composting toilet for himself and
the employees.
Keith says they’ve received the Fire Chief’s paperwork and something from the Williams’ attorney. They won’t be discussing it tonight as they’ve just received it. Keith says it needs to go to the Town attorney for an opinion.
Chad says there was a major setback for the property. Where does it stand? They can approve with the condition that they cut back the building to allow for the 50 ft. setback.
Larry has an e-mail from the Town attorney that he reviews. Larry asked Geoff if he’s willing to go to the Board of Appeals. Chris B. says that the owner would have to go before the Appeals Board, and Mr. Trott is not the owner. Chris B. asked if he is still willing to move forward. He says he’s willing to do so if the owner is willing to make the improvements.
Keith asked if there were comments from the abutters.
Carl Anderson owns the chicken house and barn that sits close to it. The buildings are very well constructed. The chicken barn has been there for 50 years. The old barn has been there for 100-150 years and Mr. Anderson has lived there for over 50 years himself. A neighbor says the barn has always leaned the way it does now--at least for the 50 years before Mr. Anderson lived there. He says that one rule doesn’t fit all situations. One can get a variance. When he moved in 50 years ago, there were about six families. The chicken barn hasn’t hurt anything because now there are more like 30 families in there. He thinks the beauty of the building is in the eye of the beholder. It has been there so long, and it has been there when all of the neighbors moved in. He
doesn’t think they should be complaining too much about the chicken barn being there. If you’re going to tear some of the barn down, you might as well tear down the whole barn. The barn is sturdy. Chad says the barn is secure, but the chicken barn would have to have 17 ft. taken off it or would have to have a variance for the setback (50 ft.). Chris B. explained it further. Jere asked if Mr. Anderson subdivided the property. He did. He raised chickens for quite a few years. The requirements became too tough - the business began to need a lot of heating oil and grain, which was expensive. All of the chicken growers moved south. He divided as much land as he could between the barn and the chicken house, which is how it came to be too narrow to the border. He owned about 20 acres when he bought it. There is 65 ft. between the two buildings. He didn’t know anything about zoning back then and doesn’t
now. Larry asked it the outside of the building is sheet metal. Part of it is post and beam and part of it is a balloon construction.
John Elmen, an attorney representing the Williams’ across the street, spoke. He went out to the site on Thursday and has reviewed the record. From a technical, legal standpoint, he concurs with the Attorney for the Town. There was a variance request in 1989, and the Appeals Board ruled against it. The person seeking the appeal wanted to use the building for storage, and the issue of the setbacks came up at that time. To the extent that the property is nonconforming, the building is an illegally nonconforming structure, which can’t be used for anything. The current applicant doesn’t really have a standing to be here requesting the use. In this case, until the setback is adjusted or a variance is given, he doesn’t believe the use should be considered. He mentioned the
hurdles that would need to be gotten over. He doesn’t think the variance would be an easy thing to argue. To the extent that the property is an illegal structure, everyone is wasting their time, he thinks. He thinks there is a precedence that says Towns are not supposed to spend their time and resources for an illegal request. He would ask the Board to deny the request because it is not a legal option at this time. Jere says that anything that came before the Board couldn’t be considered if that were the case. If it is an illegal option, it couldn’t be considered. Until the time that the variance is granted or the structure reduced in size, the issue is not ripe for being heard, John says. At the very least, the application is incomplete until someone provides you with a plan to overcome the setback issue. It doesn’t make sense to consider what is possible. There is an illegal structure that can’t be used without
further action.
Chad is surprised that any financial institution would consider financing if there’s a title issue. Elman says that it is not so much title as a land use issue. If a financial institution knows of a problem, they’re not going to sign off. Chris C. says that these issues hadn’t really occurred to them until they’d been on site. John would prefer not to read his letter. Providing it to the Board makes his letter part of the record. John is not sure how it was sold twice, but he thinks there is more concern today for sales than in past years.
Carl Anderson says he built the chicken barn and it has been sold three or four times since.
Anyone from the general public? No
Keith says that he thinks at this point that more information is needed so they would continue the public hearing. He knows they’ve approved things with Conditions; and if the conditions are not done, then the project wouldn’t move forward.
Jere asked if Geoff would like the public hearing to be continued or if he looking for an answer this evening? Geoff doesn’t have a strong opinion. Jere stated the two options - seek a variance or they can decide to remediate the problem of the setback by removing a portion of the structure. Is that something Geoff wants to explore? The best outcome for him, Geoff says, would be for the Board to allow the permit assuming he would make the changes to the barn.
John Elman wants to reinforce that going through the permitting process is going to take a fair amount of time. He thinks it is worthwhile that all of the legal obstacles be removed or addressed and a final determination be made. If the process continues, they may find out that it is for naught. It seems like a waste of the Board’s time. Keith says their job is to research and get the information they need, no matter the time. They’re more concerned about the use than the legality, Jere says. The important thing is the applicant’s request for the use of the property less the encumbrances. He gave examples that aren’t under the purview of the Board. John suggests that they don’t spend the time or energy until they know there’s a legal basis for it. Chris B. thinks
that this application and others throughout the town would be dependent upon Code Enforcement. He doesn’t see that there is an issue with the enforcement because there are plenty of abutters who would see that all the t’s are crossed and i’s are dotted. Since it was a commercial use before, another business use would be acceptable once the legal issues are resolved. Chris C. thinks that they’re supposed to base their reviews on some legal standing. His concern about doing something without having standing is that there could be an onslaught of proposals, and people could try and poke holes in the ordinance to see what they could get away with. Chris C. gave an example.
Louise McGinley asked, how about it being grandfathered? She is the owner of the property. Jere asked if there is an agreement between them and if she’s aware of what Geoff wants to do with the property. She is.
Cliff says that Geoff came in a good faith situation - not knowing what was going to occur. The Board has been through the process. He doesn’t know if everything else was all right. It would be too bad to deny it based on an issue that could be solved. If it was continued to the next meeting, then the issues may be solved. They’re here for the applicants. If you’ve been through the process, you’ve already spent all of his money. During the next meeting, the applicant could come in with a settlement. Let them come in with an agreement. He thinks that denying it tonight will have wasted all of the time and money that has already been spent.
Keith asked what the wish of the Board was? Jere is in favor of approving with two additional conditions besides the usual ones. Larry has been on the record as in favor of the project prior to this, but now he’s hung up on “illegal nonconformance” from the Town’s attorney. Chris B. asked about the conditions being a part of the approval. Larry is trying to think of the Attorney’s position and the applicant not wanting to waste time. Larry would be in favor of continuing. Chad and Chris C. are in favor of continuing. Jere says they need either the variance or the reduction of the structure.
- Jere motioned, seconded by Chris C, that they continue the public hearing until May 26. Six in favor.
Jay Ruginski is requesting an amendment of the fire protection plan for Ruginski Acres Subdivision, previously approved June of 2004. Tax Map 3, Lot 99 & 99-1.
This item was skipped because Jay Ruginski has withdrawn his application. Larry asked if there was a time limit for a subdivision done in 2004--coming back before the Board. The answer is, No. Keith only knows the time limit of a project having to be started within a year of the approval.
CEO Report: None
Approval of Minutes:
April 27, 2015 - Chris B. motioned, seconded by Larry, to approve the minutes as amended. Six voted in favor.
Approval of Bills: None
Communications:
SMRPC - Superior Court decision
Nadeau and Surveyors - Welcome to the Flood Zone
Barn at Flanagan Farm - how it has been revived
Other Business:
Gail Landry has made a significant investment in the property, the Barn at Flanagan Farm. Does the Board feel they should approve a change in one of the Barn‘s facilities? The Board doesn’t know what the building being constructed will be. If they approve a project, it should come back to the Board if there are any changes. Jere thinks the Code Enforcement officer doesn’t think that Gail needs to come back before the Board. Larry says they do have a question about it, and should they look at the original plan? Jere says the new structure was not on the original plan. Keith thinks it should come before the Board. Chris B. thinks the owners should come in to make sure everything is “up to snuff.” The Board is not thinking it should
be an issue, but they think it should be addressed. Board members think there is plenty of parking and attendants to show people where to park. Chris B. thinks they should call them back to make sure everything is done properly. The additional building will serve the people who are already there - for rehearsal dinner, etc. They would request that they come back.
Other Business: none.
Attendees may address the Board on the evening’s business:
Nancy Pierce - She notes on the Flanagan Farm project and doesn’t recall the owner’s proposal about a walk going into the woods. Larry believes there is a Civil War gravesite that the walk goes to. Nancy is concerned about people overseeing ceremonies because of the possibility of smoking and potential fire. The Board will have Krystal provide them with the original plan to see if the walk was on it.
- Motioned by Larry, seconded by Chris B. to adjourn the meeting at 8:38 p.m. Six voted in favor.
Approval Date: ________
________________________ ___________________
Keith Emery, Chairman Date
| 
