 |
Town of Gorham
April 8, 2002
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
LOCATION: Gorham High School Auditorium, 41 Morrill Avenue, Gorham, Maine
Members Present: Staff Present:
DOUGLAS BOYCE DEBORAH FOSSUM, Dir. of Planning & Zoning
MICHAEL PARKER BARBARA SKINNER, Secretary to the Board
SUSAN ROBIE
RICHARD SHIERS
Members Absent:
HAROLD GRANT
THOMAS HUGHES
CLARK NEILY
Douglas Boyce, Vice-Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:04 PM and introduced the agenda. The Clerk called the roll, noting the absence of Harold Grant, Thomas Hughes and Clark Neily. Mr. Boyce stated that the four Board members present constituted a quorum. [The three other members, Grant, Hughes and Neily, had previously been recused].
1. ITEMS POSTPONED FROM THE APRIL 1, 2002, REGULAR MEETING
Any items that cannot be taken up at the April 1 meeting will be postponed to this meeting and heard in the order of their postponement.
Mr. Boyce announced that there were no items postponed from the April 1, 2002 meeting.
2. GRAVEL PIT EXPANSION “PARSONS PIT” PUBLIC HEARING (cont.)
Request for approval of a gravel pit expansion off Farrington Road. Zoned Rural (R) M62/L1, 10, 18-20; & Map 79/Lot 4.
Walter P. Stinson, P.E., Sebago Technics Inc., introduced Larry Grondin and Robert Low from R. J. Grondin & Sons, and Jon Whitten, Jr., P.E., of Sebago Technics Inc. and made the presentation for the applicant, stating that two new submissions had been made to the Town of a boundary survey and a hydrogeological survey. He stated that the boundary survey was of all of the land being proposed for expansion, which included the Parsons, Cotton and Phinney properties. Mr. Stinson said that the hydrogeology survey indicated that because the proposed pit operation would be well above the ground water table, it would not impact on that resource, and in response to questions from the Townsoil keeping water in a perched condition and that the pit operations would have no impact on that impervious material. Mr. Stinson indicated that after discussions with staff and the TownPhase IV-A would be the removal of the berm which would be constructed on the easterly edge of the relocated Farrington Road to maintain the required internal drainage and the installation of culverts for the drainage plan for the project. Mr. Stinson indicated that the road and site plans were revised to remove information concerning potential possible unapproved lots that might be developed later on.
Ms. Fossum presented the staff report. She indicated that prior to the meeting copies of the private way sheet had been provided without the subdivision lot information, which she distributed to the Board. Mr. Boyce indicated that he hoped the sheet had been provided for clarification of earlier questions. Ms. Fossum provided the staff report as follows: (1) this is still a proposal to expand the existing Parsons Pit by approximately 35 acres, 32 acres of which are land owned by John Phinney on which the applicant has an option and the rest of the expansion will occur on either Parsons or Cotton properties, over which Grondin has leases of 5 and 6 years respectively, which will allow the applicant to work in Phase I; (2) the proposal is limited to the removal of sand and gravel, the construction of a
private road and the subsequent reclamation of all disturbed areas; (3) there has been no proposal made to haul fill or other material into the pit or to bury stumps; (4) in order for the applicant to proceed beyond Phase I and Phase II, he will be required to go before the Town Council to ask for approval to discontinue a section of the existing Farrington Road and at the same time offer the new segment of roadway which is proposed for construction to the Council; (5) there will have to be some kind of agreement worked out as to how the work in Phase III will occur, as there may need to be some temporary rerouting of traffic as those portions of the existing Road are brought up to the same construction standard as the proposed new Road; (6) a Condition of Approval is being recommended requiring the applicant to go before the Town Council prior to Phase III and secure all approvals necessary to proceed with Phases III, IV and IV-A; (7) the plans show 100 foot buffers on
either side of the Farrington Road right of way, 200 foot buffers from abutting residential properties to the south/southwest, as well a 200 foot buffer from the Jones lot and an existing dug well on the Phinney land; (8) the Townthe construction details based on peer review comments; (12) the applicant has removed background information regarding the subdivision; and (13) all the Special Exception Approval Standards are listed for review if the Board goes forward tonight in approving the application, as well as specific sections of the Site Plan Review ordinance and the basic requirements for gravel pits under the Planning Board
Mr. Boyce stated that he had communicated some questions to staff and the Town
In response to an inquiry from Mr. Parker, Mr. Stinson responded that if the owner of the Cotton land decides to sell, the applicant has the opportunity of first refusal to buy it, and if he does not buy it, he loses the right of way through the Cotton property. Ms. Robie asked with regard to all of the properties if the applicant has the right to reclaim the pit if for any reason the lease is terminated; Mr. Stinson answered that the applicant has the right and the obligation to do so. Ms. Robie requested a plan note that there would be no stumps buried on the property; Mr. Stinson replied that part of the proposal was to construct a berm between the Parsons property and the land to the west which would have stumps from the site deposited there, but that there would be no back hauling of stumps into the
operation and there would be no problem in adding a note about prohibiting the back hauling of stumps. Mr. Stinson indicated that the number of stumps would be minimal, not like a stump dump. Mr. Stinson said that the berm which would be removed would be the one just east of the new section of Farrington Road, not the one at the Parsons property and Phinney land. Ms. Robie also expressed concern about the removal of vegetation around the bog and would like to see created a 25 or 50 foot buffer around the bog to protect it. Following further discussion and comments from Mr. Boyce and Mr. Parker, Mr. Stinson stated as work would be starting at the bog elevation and going back at a slope of 3 to 1, as work got deeper it would be farther and farther away from the bog and the walls of the pit would slope, so that it would not be an issue. In response to a question from Mr. Boyce, Mr. Stinson stated that he did not believe that the bog would be considered a
natural resource and that while the application would be reviewed by the state, he does not believe it would come under the protection of the NRPA as wetland because it does not meet the necessary criteria. Mr. Stinson indicated that to work in the bog itself would constitute a disturbance of a wetland which would require a permit, while working up to the edge of the bog does not require a permit. The applicant made the decision to stay out of the bog to avoid triggering a permitting mechanism with DEP. Following the discussion, Mr. Stinson indicated that the applicant would agree to a 25 foot set back around the wetland as much as is possible, given the area where the road is being constructed and the grades on the road.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD OPENED:
Sandra Jensen, 67 North Street: Expressed her concern that while landowners can do as they please with their property so long as they meet code and do not break any laws, it appears that the vision for the Town, as expressed in the Comprehensive Plan, is not being interpreted into law in the Land Use and Development Code to preserving open space in the Town and what is the Planning Board proposing to make sure that open space is left in the future. Expressed her opinion that public comment doesn
There being no other speakers, Mr. Boyce left the Public Comment Period open until the conclusion of the public hearing in order to accommodate anyone else choosing to speak at a later time. [7:50 PM]
Mr. Boyce stated that without impacting the mining operations of the pit, he hoped the applicant would consider providing some additional buffering for the closest abutting neighbors in a larger radius of perhaps 500 feet by having timber harvesting restricted while the pit is operational. Mr. Stinson replied that he believed that the 200-foot buffer is governed by ordinance and that because that was part of the agreement for sale of the property, the issue could not be addressed until the applicant has spoken with the previous owner. Mr. Grondin asked if the applicant could be required by ordinance to provide more than the 200-foot buffer; Mr. Boyce replied that the code does not require it, but he would like the applicant to consider suspending the timber harvesting rights until the pit operations are
completed. Mr. Grondin indicated that they would certainly entertain such a request but would need to talk with the former owner. Mr. Boyce asked staff to craft a condition to enable applicant to make inquiry of the former owner on this issue. Mr. Boyce asked if the work on the north side of Farrington Road could be considered part of Phase III instead of having it in Phase II; Mr. Stinson agreed. Mr. Boyce asked if the portion of the excavation of the area west of the bog and north of the road relocation could be delayed until near closeout of the balance of the pit when Farrington is being reconnected at both ends; Mr. Stinson replied that it might not be possible because of the road sequencing and the requirement to deal with the Council on the discontinuance of Farrington Road. Mr. Grondin stated that the latest it could be delayed to is Phase III because once the road is in and accepted, it would not be possible to mine within 100 feet of it. Mr.
Parker stated he believed that the request to postpone the work is not practical once the road is in. Mr. Parker asked Mr. Stinson to describe what would happen to Farrington Road in Phase III; Mr. Stinson replied that the applicant was committed to keeping the road open during the entire conduct of the operation with some temporary lane closings and/or detours while the work is ongoing, and that traffic will be maintained from one end of Farrington Road to the other. He further stated that Note 11 on Sheet 2 shows that at any given time there can be only two crossing points and should a third crossing be needed, one of the other two must be closed, and any future crossings must be approved by Public Works. Mr. Boyce asked Mr. Stinson to confirm the limits of excavation on the east side of the bog; Mr. Stinson confirmed that the limits are as they show on the plan.
Mr. Boyce asked staff if the Boardstand now that would restrict a Council in the future from taking an action on the road until it was actually on the ground, which dictated the current phasing plan. Mr. Stinson indicated that he had learned that the Town had an easement on the road and did not own the land. Mr. Stinson expressed a problem with Condition of Approval #8 and suggested that perhaps it could be amended; Ms. Fossum suggested a return to the initial wording of the Condition.
Mr. Boyce invited additional public comment so that the public hearing could be closed.
PUBLIC COMMENT CONTINUED:
Sandy Jensen, 67 North Street, abutter, asked for clarification as to how DEPperson performing the review for DEP. She stated that the Town receives notification that a permit has been issued some time after the fact.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED [8:33]
Mr. Boyce asked who will benefit from the use of this private way prior to its anticipated conveyance to the Town as a public street; Mr. Stinson replied that it is similar to a private way in a subdivision and that as soon as the road is built and the ends are tied in, it will be available for public use, but they will request the Town to accept it as soon as possible.
Mr. Boyce suggested a recess period in order to review Special Exception criteria, Conditions of Approval, revised Conditions of Approval and new information
Michael Parker MOVED and Susan Robie SECONDED a motion to recess in order to review Special Exception criteria and Conditions of Approval. Motion CARRIED 4-0. [8:35 PM]
Recess 8:35 to 9:10 PM
Mr. Boyce apologized for the length of the recess but indicated that it had been necessary to review Conditions of Approval drafted prior to the meeting and as a result of tonightfor crushing. In response to Mr. Boyce
Michael Parker MOVED and Richard Shiers SECONDED a motion to create a Condition of Approval to state that crushing activities, if any, shall be sited at least 400 feet from the nearest abutter
Mr. Parker commented that during the break the applicant expressed a willingness to monitor and replace if necessary the dug well on the Jones property, and asked if there was a Condition of Approval stating that. Ms. Fossum read into the record Condition of Approval #15, “That the applicant shall monitor and replace the well used by the Joneses and located on the applicant
Following discussion, it was the consensus of the Board to consider the Special Exception Approval Standards as one.
Michael Parker MOVED and Mr. Shiers SECONDED a motion to waive the reading of the Special Exception Approval Standards into the record. Following discussion and the comments of Ms. Fossum, the motion FAILED 0-4. [9:18 PM]
Mr. Boyce read the Standards into the record as follows:
Chapter I, Section IV E. Special Exception Approval Standards:
1. The proposed use will not create or aggravate hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic on the roads and sidewalks, both off-site and on-site, serving the proposed use as determined by the size and condition of such roads and sidewalks, lighting, drainage, and the visibility afforded to pedestrians and the operators of motor vehicles on such roads.
2. The proposed use will not cause water pollution, sedimentation, erosion, contaminate any water supply nor reduce the capacity of the land to hold water so that a dangerous or unhealthy condition results.
3. The proposed use will not create unhealthful conditions because of smoke, dust, or other airborne contaminants.
4. The proposed use will not create nuisances to neighboring properties because of odors, fumes, glare, hours of operation, noise, vibration or fire hazard or unreasonably restrict access of light and air to neighboring properties.
5. The proposed waste disposal systems are adequate for all solid and liquid wastes generated by the use.
6. The proposed use will not result in damage to spawning grounds, fish, aquatic life, bird or other wildlife habitat, and, if located in the Shoreland Overlay District, will conserve (a) shoreland vegetation; (b) visual points of access to waters as viewed from public facilities; (c) actual points of access to waters; and (d) natural beauty.
Michael Parker MOVED and Susan Robie SECONDED a motion that the six Special Exception Approval Standards be considered as one. [No further discussion.] Motion CARRIED 4-0. [9:29 PM]
Michael Parker MOVED and Richard Shiers SECONDED a motion that the Special Exception Approval Standards have been met by the applicant. [No further discussion.] Motion CARRIED 4-0. [9:30 PM]
Ms. Fossum suggested that the new Conditions of Approval be read into the record, as follows: (1) during the meeting there was consensus to revise proposed Condition #8 as follows: “That prior to commencement of Phase III the applicant shall obtain the official discontinuance of Farrington Road and if necessary the temporary closing or rerouting of portions of Farrington Road by the Gorham Town Council;” (2) Conditions #5 and #6 would be altered by changing the word “or” to “and” before the phrase “Planning Board approval;” and (3) the following new Conditions were added:
That the applicant shall coordinate with the woods operator to delay cutting in certain areas abutting adjoining landowners as shown on a plan until the mining operation is completed, including reclamation;
That the applicant will revise the final plans to show a 25
That if Farrington Road is discontinued, an alternative route will be made available for public use;
That the applicant shall monitor and replace the well used by the Joneses and located on the applicant
That a note shall be added to the plan stating that no stumps will be hauled into the site or buried on site.
That crushing activity, if any, shall be sited at least 400 feet from the nearest abutter
Ms. Fossum indicated that some of these Conditions have been discussed with the applicant, but not all were and the stump proposal is one where it is necessary to make sure the applicant agreed. Mr. Stinson indicated that they had no objection to the limitation of hauling stumps on to the property, but they would like to dispose of their own stumps in the berm as shown on the plan if the Condition allows that. Mr. Shiers indicated that he did not consider creating a portion of a berm with the stumps as burying them, so long as they are above ground, the problem is if they are below ground, and if that is clarified in the Condition and the applicant understands what the intent of the Board is then that is alright. Mr. Boyce and Mr. Parker concurred with Mr. Shiers, with Mr. Parker indicating that the
Condition should add the description of the berm as being along the Parsons property line. Mr. Boyce asked about the Condition dealing with Farrington Road; Mr. Parker replied that this Condition makes public the private way until the road is turned over to the Council and formalizes the necessity for the Council to do something which they perfectly well plan to do anyway. Mr. Boyce asked if this conflicts with the CouncilConditions of Approval.
Michael Parker MOVED and Richard Shiers SECONDED a motion to approve the proposed expansion of the Parsons Pit on Farrington Road, including the proposed private way, and grant the applicant, R.J. Grondin & Sons, a Permit for Expansion for an Existing Pit, with the conditions of approval as posted prior to the meeting and discussed with the applicant. DISCUSSION: Ms. Fossum confirmed that the private way approval is incorporated in the motion. Motion CARRIED 4-0. [9:43 PM]
3. ADJOURNMENT
Richard Shiers MOVED and Michael Parker SECONDED a motion to adjourn. Motion CARRIED 4-0. [9:44 PM]
2. GRAVEL PIT EXPANSION “PARSONS PIT”
Final Approved
Conditions of Approval
That this approval is dependent upon, and limited to, the proposals and plans contained in this application and supporting documents submitted and affirmed by the applicant and that any variation from the plans, proposals and supporting documents is subject to review and approval by the Planning Board, except for de minimums changes which the Director of Planning may approve;
That the applicant shall submit the final required plan revisions to the Parson
That if any lots are split that will take their frontage from the private way, there shall be a private way maintenance agreement approved by the Town in accordance with the Standards for Private Ways, Chapter II, Section V, H., 3).
That the applicant shall obtain all local, state and federal permits required for the expansion of this gravel pit prior to the commencement of mining in any of the proposed expansion areas;
That prior to the commencement of the expansion and within 30 days of Planning Board approval, the applicant shall request that the Town Planner schedule a meeting between the applicant and appropriate Town Staff to review the approved plans, conditions of approval, and site construction requirements;
That prior to the commencement of the pit expansion and within 30 days of Planning Board approval, the applicant shall provide GIS data delineating the limits of the pit expansion in a form acceptable to the inspecting engineer, the Code Enforcement Officer and the Town Planner;
That prior to the transition from an internally drained pit operation to an externally drained pit operation, the applicant shall provide a revised drainage plan for review and approval by the Planning Board;
That prior to commencement of Phase III, the applicant shall obtain the official discontinuance of Farrington Road and, if necessary, the temporary closing or rerouting of portions of Farrington Road by the Gorham Town Council;
That if Farrington Road is not discontinued, the applicant will return to the Board for approval of Plan revisions prior to commencing any work in Phases III, IV and V;
That the applicant shall provide a separate reclamation bond for each Phase of the Gravel Pit operation and each reclamation bond shall be approved by the Town as to amount and language;
That the Town shall be notified of any proposed changes in ownership of the pit or change in pit operator and that the Planning Board shall review and approve such change in ownership or operator to determine whether the proposed new owner/operator has sufficient financial and technical capacity to comply with all applicable ordinance requirements and the conditions of this approval;
That the applicant shall coordinate with the woods operator to delay cutting in certain areas abutting adjoining landowners as show on a plan until the mining operation is completed, including reclamation;
That the applicant will revise the final plans to show a 25
That if Farrington Road is discontinued, an alternative route will be made available for public use;
That the applicant shall monitor and replace the well used by the Joneses and located on the applicant's property if it is compromised by the mining operation;
That a note shall be added to the plan stating that no stumps will hauled into the site or buried on site. Stumps may be used on site in the construction of the berm along the Parson's property;
That crushing activity, if any, shall be sited at least 400 feet from the nearest abutter's property line; and
That these conditions of approval shall be recorded at the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds within thirty (30) days of the Planning Board approval and a dated copy of the recorded Decision Document shall be returned to the Town Planner within fifteen (15) days of the date of recording.
| |
