Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
 
11/01/2004 Minutes
Town of Gorham
NOVEMBER 1, 2004
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES

LOCATION: Gorham High School Cafeteria, 41 Morrill Avenue, Gorham, Maine

Members Present:                                Staff Present:  
HAROLD GRANT, CHAIRMAN          DEBORAH FOSSUM, Dir. of Planning & Zoning
DOUGLAS BOYCE, VICE-CHAIR.              AARON D. SHIELDS, Assistant Planner
THOMAS HUGHES                           BARBARA SKINNER, Clerk of the Board
CLARK NEILY                             
MICHAL PARKER                           
SUSAN ROBIE
MARK STELMACK

The Chairman opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. and read the Agenda.  The Clerk called the roll, noting that all Board members were present.

1.      APPROVAL OF MINUTES:  OCTOBER 18, 2004.

Michael Parker MOVED and Douglas Boyce SECONDED a motion to approve the minutes of October 18, 2004, as written and distributed.  Motion CARRIED, 7 ayes.  [7:02 p.m.]


2.      AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE & DEVELOPMENT CODE – AGENDA SCHEDULING OF ROADS OFFERED FOR ACCEPTANCE
PUBLIC HEARING
Proposed amendments to Chap. II, Sec. V, (E), (4), (b) to clarify when roads offered for acceptance are placed on an agenda to the Planning Board for public hearing and their recommendation.

Ms. Fossum said that the amendment has been forwarded to the Planning Board by the Town Council, its purpose being to clarify that roads offered for acceptance cannot be placed on the Planning Board agenda for public hearing until the Town Engineer has issued his final report stating that the road is complete and meets the appropriate specifications of the Town’s Land Use Code and the Planning Director, after consultation with the Town Engineer, has determined in writing that there are no outstanding conditions or restrictions placed on the applicable subdivision plan which have not been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the requirements of the plan.  She said that not only does a road have to be in satisfactory order for acceptance, but all other requirements and conditions of the subdivision have to have been met.

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD OPENED:   None offered.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD CLOSED.

Mr. Parker asked about the language that “… the Planning Director has determined in writing…;” Ms. Fossum said that in the written report provided to the Town Council, there will be a paragraph  added which affirmatively states that all conditions and requirements have been satisfactorily met, and further, even before it is scheduled to be heard by the  Planning Board, a report must state that all conditions and requirements have been met.  Ms. Fossum confirmed to Mr. Grant that the phrase “Town Engineer” can refer either to the Public Works Director, who is a licensed professional engineer, or to a consulting engineer hired by the Town.

Michael Parker MOVED and Thomas Hughes SECONDED a motion to recommend adoption of the proposed amendment to Chapter II, Section V. (E.) (4), (b) clarifying when roads offered for acceptance may be placed on an agenda to the Planning Board for Public Hearing.  Motion CARRIED, 7 ayes.   [7:05 .m.]


3.      FINAL SUBDIVISION – “NOTTINGHAM WOODS” – off WOODS ROAD – by CHASE CUSTOM HOMES & FINANCE, INC.
Request for final approval of an 8-lot residential subdivision and a 1,450’ proposed public road on 17 acres. Zoned Rural; M54/L12.

Jeff Perry, Sebago Technics, appeared on behalf of the applicant and stated that the two conditions placed at preliminary subdivision approval on March 15, 2004, have been met by the applicant, those conditions being (1) that the applicant has obtained the required permits from MDEP, and (2) any issues revealed during the nitrate study have been resolved.

Mr. Shields made the staff comments, saying that the Board has received the correction sheet for the error made in the net density calculations, which will be reflected on the final Mylar, and the preliminary conditions have been met.  Mr. Shields reminded the Board that at an earlier hearing the Board agreed not to require a future right of way to adjoining property due to topographic and wetland conditions on the site, and suggested that the Board should now vote on waiving this requirement.  He said the plans and legal documents are in satisfactory form for approval, and there is a change to Condition of Approval #10, wherein the last sentence in that Condition shall now read “The applicant shall be responsible for incorporating the Association and recording the approved documents…”

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD OPENED:   None offered.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD CLOSED.

Mr. Stelmack asked if any issues had been uncovered during the nitrate study, the resolution of which was a condition of preliminary approval.  Mr. Shields replied that a question had arisen about the grading of the access road to the pond on Lot 1 entering the water table and interrupting the nitrate plume from the septic system on that lot, but Sebago Technics revised the grading of that road and the hydrogeologist confirmed that the cut was not entering the ground water table.

Douglas Boyce MOVED and Clark Neily SECONDED a motion to waive the requirement for a future right of way extension to adjoining property due to the site topography and the wetlands associated thereto.  Motion CARRIED, 7 ayes.  [7:15 p.m.]

Douglas Boyce  MOVED and Clark Neily SECONDED a motion to grant final subdivision approval of Chase Custom Homes & Finance, Inc.’s request for Nottingham Woods, a proposed 8-lot residential subdivision on 17 +/- acres off Wood Road with conditions of approval as posted prior to the meeting and discussed with the applicant.  Motion CARRIED, 7 ayes.  [7:16 p.m.]


4.      PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE / SITE PLAN –“VIP PARTS, TIRES, SERVICE” - off 14 COUNTY ROAD – by VIP, INC.
Discussion of a proposed 11,450’ sf automotive retail store with six automotive service bays on 2.1 acres on land of International Industrial Equipment at the former site of Roberts Welding. Zoned SR; M6/L5 & 6.

Rick Licht, P.E., Land Use Consultants, Inc., appeared on behalf of the applicants and introduced Dan Hourihan, President of Real Estate of VIP Auto.  Mr. Licht told the Board that, due to the Suburban Residential zoning of the property, the applicants have received the necessary Zoning Board of Appeals approval on October 21, 2004, to continue the nonconforming commercial use of the property.  He said that VIP is not a heavy duty auto service transmission-engine repair store; rather, its proposed use is basically a retail store, a clean operation which would do light oil changes, wiper changes, tire changes, and the like.  He said that the proposed building is an 11,400 square foot auto store, using the existing driveways, and based on the traffic study done for the Zoning appeal, making a one-way loop in and out, with left and right designated turns.  He said they would like to continue to use the front yard setback for parking as had been used by the Roberts Welding facility, pointing out that investigation has shown that there is a 95 foot DOT right of way and the parking would have to be “tweaked.”  He said they would propose a landscape buffer for this front yard parking.  Mr. Licht said the applicant would like to work with the planning process to deal with the left hand turn movement into the property, commenting that they would prefer to implement their traffic improvements with the overall improvements through PACTS to the Route 114/22 Overlap Project.  He said that this VIP store would probably be the wood framed,. peaked roof type of store, with a dumpster area in the back for daily recyclables and weekly storage of tires to be picked up.  He said it would be serviced by its own trucks

Mr. Grant said that because of the 95 foot DOT right-of-way, there are 30 parking spaces shown in the front that appear to be totally within the front yard setback and about 5 on the side, all of which will be lost.  He said that if the building was simply being refurbished in place, it might be said that the parking could be considered grandfathered, but as the applicant is starting from scratch, the Code states clearly in Chapter II, under Performance Standards, that there is to be no parking in the front yard setback, and the Board has no authority to waive those standards.  Mr. Neily spoke about the 9 or 10 trips per hour referred to in the traffic study in connection with the former use, with the Appeals Board likening that number to the proposed use, saying that his experience driving by the site on a regular basis would call those numbers into question and that the current proposed trip number of 5 times as many is not at all similar activity.  Mr. Neily said his many years of experience studying traffic problems as a member of PACTS leads him to believe that the proposed use creates more traffic problems than are outlined in the traffic study.  Ms. Robie confirmed with staff if this site review is under Chapter IV, Site Plan Review, saying that under Site Plan Review the Board is required to assess the compatibility of a nonresidential use with the surrounding area in the Suburban Residential area, that she agrees with Mr. Grant that parking should not be in the front yard setback, and that particular attention should be given to the section of the Code dealing with the compatibility of this building with the other buildings in the area.  Mr. Licht said that during the planning process it would be their intention to present a number of options to the Board for the building, landscaping and buffering.   Mr. Grant suggested to the applicant that the building be moved up to the front line setback and place the parking beside it or behind it.  Mr. Grant referred the Board to the Dunkin’ Donuts project on Route 25, where the peak hour trip generation count of 100 vehicles tripped the DOT requirement of a right turn and center lanes, but this project will not go to the State and it will be the Board’s responsibility to advise the applicant what needs to be done, with staff perhaps talking to PACTS to determine what is proposed for the Route 114/22 Overlap Project.  Mr. Hughes asked what the VIP hours are; Mr. Licht replied that the stores are generally open 7 days a week, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., with 9 a.m. opening on Sundays.  

Mr. Hourihan spoke to the Board, saying that VIP is a Maine-based company with 49 stores, they are a very clean business and are valuable members of a community, and the architecture will be colonial in style.  Mr. Licht commented that there is an increase of 39 evening trips, going westerly, and the key movement is the left turn movement entering and exiting the site, but the key issue for them is the ability to use the front setback for parking with an increased level of buffering unless the Board is absolutely against it.

Mr. Hughes said he concurred with the Chairman, saying that his biggest problem is the parking in the setback.  Mr. Parker suggested that the applicant could consider rotating the building, and said he too was against parking in the front setback.  Mr. Stelmack concurred with the rest of the Board members, saying that he would not want to see parking allowed in the front setback and the fact that it had been allowed in the previous use does not mean it was ever approved as a legal use.  Mr. Neily asked staff to ascertain what the State proposes in the future for adding more traffic lanes in this area.  Mr. Grant suggested that staff consider working with PACTS consultants.  Ms. Fossum said that she had spoken with Eric Ortman, a staff member at PACTS, that Vanasse Hangen Bruslin has performed a traffic study for the Route 114/22 Overlap, that PACTS is currently in the process of selecting projects for the Biennial Transportation Improvement Program, that this project is on their list for consideration but Mr. Ortman said it is unlikely to be funded in this cycle.  Ms. Fossum said she confirmed this with David Cole, who sits on the Policy Committee of PACTS.  She said that Mr. Cole agreed that because of projects that are higher up on the list and which have experienced cost overruns, this project is unlikely to be included in the next two years, and even if it were to be funded in the next two-year program, the actual construction would probably be 4 to 5 years out.  Ms. Fossum said that as there is no guarantee of any State funding in the near future, it will be necessary to make the improvements now to go with this site.  She said she asked the Public Works Director for an initial impression of what improvements would be necessary in the corridor, and he would recommend at least a 3-lane cross section through there, a center turn lane, and also a deceleration and acceleration lane adjacent to this property.  

Mr. Boyce said that the Board and the Town have been extremely welcoming to businesses coming into Town when they are sited in locations appropriate for the uses and when the impact of those businesses can be mitigated.  He said he is disappointed with the Zoning Board of Appeals decision which caused the applicant to come forward before the Planning Board, saying that he believes that this application is for a use that is neither compatible with the underlying zoning of Suburban Residential, nor in character with the former businesses that operated on this site, but the ZBA’s decision is binding on the Planning Board, so effectively the applicant is zoned to be able to come before the Board.  Mr. Boyce spoke about other applications to rezone this part of Gorham in the past which have been denied because of traffic concerns, and said he is generally opposed to new business development along this stretch of road until the underlying zoning is changed, which should not occur until the transportation infrastructure is in place to accept the additional traffic caused by such new business.  

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD OPENED:   
David Verrier, 3 and 5 County Road, spoke in opposition to the project, based on the traffic, water and sewer issues.

Kimberly Mann, 70 Gray Road, asked the Board to consider the nature of this application as compared to the businesses there now, which are primarily farming related and small businesses with the owners living on the premises.  She asked the Board to consider what the future of this area of South Gorham should be.  She also commented about the traffic issues.  

Mr. Grant reminded the public that the Zoning Board of Appeals has ruled that VIP is not more nonconforming than Roberts Welding was, and the Planning Board must now work with that decision.

Royce O’Donal, 8 Mitchell Hill Road, spoke about the big difference between Roberts and VIP, that this use will be much larger and this is the wrong place for VIP.  Mr. O’Donal also commented that he disagreed with the comments made at the ZBA hearing about a third turning lane.

Darcy Nicely, 6 Rustic Ridge Road, said the scale of this business is too big, that as a grandfathered business, it should not engender more traffic, noise, dust, runoff, odor control, and its hours of operation must be compatible with the surrounding area.

Linda Verrier, 3 County Road, spoke about traffic issues, particularly the problem involved in left turns into Route 22 during rush hour.  
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD CLOSED.  [8:00 p.m.]

Mr. Neily suggested that the Board should see a revised plan before a sitewalk is scheduled.  Mr. Boyce said that if the Board decides to proceed with a sitewalk, the applicant should be required to bring a plan to the sitewalk that conforms with the Code in terms of the setback issues which were raised and that the Chairman indicated could not be waived.  Mr. Boyce said if the applicant agreed to do that, he would be amenable to having a sitewalk scheduled in advance of seeing a revised plan; the rest of the Board concurred.  The applicant agreed to work with staff to try to resolve some of the issues raised.  Ms. Robie suggested that the sitewalk should occur between 3:30 and 5:30 it at all possible.  


Stretch Break to 8:10 p.m.


5.      PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE / SITE PLAN – CO-GENERATION FACILITY – at UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN MAINE / GORHAM CAMPUS – by UNIVERSITY MAINE SYSTEM
Discussion of a proposed 2,760 sf plant to generate electricity for heating and hot water on campus. Zoned UR; M40/L13-18; 41/35-36; 101/6-7; 102/1-3 and 105/36.

David Early appeared on behalf of the University and introduced Kevin Davis, IEA (Industry and Energy Associates of Portland) and Todd Gammon of OEST Engineers.  Mr. Early pointed out the proposed site for the project, which is adjacent to the central heating plan on the campus, “ the back yard of the campus,” some 300 feet west of the 8-story residence hall.  He said that the project is similar to one at Wellesley College in Massachusetts, which is located in the center of that campus as well.  He said that the central heating plant provides heat for heating and for hot water for the  entire campus, and this facility will generate hot water for the heating system and also generate electricity with the same use of fuel.  The facility will be fired by natural gas, which is currently being serviced by Maine Natural Gas, and its total cost will be $2 million, which was approved by the Board of Trustees earlier this year.  The electric power will be sufficient for all of the residence halls, the dining center and the field house and will ensure power in the event of a power outage.  Not all of the University’s power requirements will be supplied by this facility, and it is proposed that the University will remain connected to the CMP power grid.  

Mr. Boyce asked about noise impact of this facility.  Mr. Kevin Davis said that there is a dormitory about 150 feet away from the proposed facility, so they are concerned about noise as well, and have asked for noise guarantees from the equipment suppliers and propose to treat the building for sound.  At the request of Mr. Grant, Mr. Davis explained that heat comes from the exhaust and the jack water of the engine, and the power comes from a generator attached to a auto cycle diesel engine which is powered by natural gas.  Mr. Davis said it was anticipated that some 750 to 900 kilowatts will be generated.  He said that the size is based on the heat that can be put into the University’s central heating system, that there will be two engines of slightly different sizes to meet different thermal loads, with the engine horsepower probably around 1000 horsepower.  

Ms. Robie brought up the question of site contamination from a recovery well installed by the Department of Environmental Protection in 1996 to recover oil from a leaking oil tank originally installed in 1965.  Mr. Early said that in 2002 the DEP asked the University to remove a replacement fiberglass tank which had been installed in 1982.  He said the recovery well has about 6 inches of oil in it, the Board will be shown its location during the sitewalk, and will be provided with documentation of the site assessments by the DEP.  

Ms. Robie asked if the facility will have an exhaust stack; Mr. Early replied that it will a muffled engine exhaust and said that part of the permitting process includes obtaining an air omissions license from the DEP.  Mr. Early said that the 3 boilers in the central heating plant are run year round, and with the new facility in place, the hot water requirements will not be produced by the boilers but will be taken off the  waste heat from the engines as electricity is generated.  

Mr. Grant said that the Board will want to see information about noise generation, particularly in light of the subdivision nearby.  In response to a query from Mr. Boyce, Mr. Early said noise attenuation would be achieved through a combination of the equipment, its design, and the building that will house the equipment.  Mr. Stelmack expressed concern about the recovery well and asked that the Board be provided with all reports from the DEP, as well as a plan showing the location of the leak.  Mr. Stelmack asked Mr. Early to address parking and erosion control as well.  Ms. Robie asked that the Board be provided with sound data from the Wellesley facility.  Mr. Grant commented that two major concerns are the oil spill and noise, and asked that staff interface directly with DEP to secure any reports.  In reply to Mr. Parker, Mr. Early said that there will be a net decrease of 6 parking spaces where the facility is to be constructed, but that there will be no new employees involved.

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD OPENED:   None offered.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD CLOSED.


6.      PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE / SUBDIVISION – off SHAWS MILL ROAD - by JOHN & KIMBER CROSS
Discussion of a proposed 2-lot subdivision to add one new duplex lot on 3.9 acres.  Zoned SR; M81/L30.001.

Les Berry, BH2M, explained that in 2001 the applicants cut a 3.9 acre lot out of their 86 acre farm for the purpose of building a duplex house.  He said that action was not a subdivision because the applicants were living in the farmhouse and had done so for 5 years.  At this point, Mr. Berry said that the applicants would like to take the 3.9 acre lot, divide it in two and create another duplex, a simple subdivision, and therefore the applicants would like a waiver of soils mapping, topographic survey, net residential density calculations and the boundary survey for the entire farm.  Mr. Grant said that if the applicants provided a
tax map at the site walk the Board could determine whether or not a boundary survey is required.  

Ms. Fossum pointed out that this project falls within the 2500 foot Water Resource Protection radius for the Dingley Springs Association so the boundary will need to be located.

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD OPENED:   None offered.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD CLOSED.

Mr. Parker asked if the overall lot needs to be considered along with the 3.9 parcel.  Mr. Shields said that staff needs additional information, such as whether this 3.9 acre parcel is a mortgage parcel and if it is completely deeded off, and said that this ties into the entire parcel.  Mr. Grant also commented that a boundary survey may be required if the public water extension ordinance is passed by the Council.  

Mr. Grant directed that a sitewalk be scheduled.


Mr. Grant asked to be recused from participation in the following Agenda item as he has done in the past.  

Michael Parker MOVED and Mark Stelmack SECONDED a motion to recuse Mr. Grant from participation in the discussion of this item.  Motion CARRIED, 6 ayes (Mr. Grant recused).  [8:46 p.m.]

Mr. Boyce, Vice-Chairman, took the Chair.

7.      PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE / GRAVEL PIT AMENDMENT - “PARSONS PIT” – off FARRINGTON ROAD – by R.J. GRONDIN & SONS, INC.
Discussion of proposed amendments to allow excavation down to the groundwater table; temporary realignment of Farrington Road, and creation of a wetlands mitigation bank. [On land of Grondin Aggregates, LLC] Zoned R; M62.L18-19.

Jon Whitten, Sebago Technics, appeared on behalf of the applicants and presented an overall view and history of the property.  He explained that wetlands mitigation has become a major need in Southern Maine, and the State has approached the applicant about creating a “wetlands bank” to offset wetland impacts from other projects.  The applicant is asking to amend the reclamation plan of this gravel pit to excavate to groundwater level in certain areas, with the original 2002 approved lowest pit elevation of 245 feet now being proposed at 234 feet, which will lend itself to wetland creation.  He said that the applicant is not expanding the limits of excavation but is simply lowering it.  He said that a variance permit will be required from DEP, which they are currently pursuing.  Mr. Whitten said that the applicant is also asking for approval to build a temporary access road through the pit and that Farrington Road would be reconstructed on its original alignment, albeit at a different lower elevation.  He said that the wetland area will be created as a reclamation plan to this project, and will be its last step, with Farrington Road 10 to 12 feet above the wetland elevation.  Mr. Whitten said that the applicant would like to discuss with the Town what the requirements for a temporary road would be, such as being a certain width gravel road or a paved road.  

Mr. Shields commented that the only two areas at this time for discussion are the temporary roadway and the groundwater level, which Mr. Whitten has explained.  

Mr. Neily asked how the level of the reconstructed Farrington Road will compare to the land around it.  Mr. Whitten said it will essentially be the same as the cornfield presently in existence, with perhaps slopes not steeper than 3% maximum.  Mr. Whitten replied to a question from Mr. Parker that the elevation of peat bog in the northeast corner will remain the same and unimpacted.  Ms. Robie asked what is meant by a forested wetland; Mr. Whitten replied that as the trees in that area have already been cut down, the applicant will need to hand plant thousands of plants to create that type of wetland.  Mr. Whitten said that the actual reclamation of the pit will be loaming and seeding if the wetlands creation project does not go through.  Mr. Whitten assured Mr. Stelmack that Boyle Associates will be involved with this project. Mr. Stelmack suggested that Boyle Associates be present at any site walk to be scheduled and that documentation be provided to support their contention that the “…Farrington Road project site due to its geology, its hydrology and the location within the watershed is uniquely suited to be a location for wetland mitigation,” including any graphics and maps.  Ms. Fossum told Mr. Stelmack that she would recommend the hiring of a wetlands expert; the Board concurred that such an expert should be retained.

In response to a comment by Mr. Neily, Mr. Boyce said that it is required that wetlands be created or preserved when projects elsewhere impact wetlands in order to fulfill the environmental obligations of these projects.  Ms. Fossum said that wetlands loss is a major problem, that wetlands have a very high value, and that during a preliminary sitewalk, representatives of MDOT, Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, EPA and other specialists were excited about not only the 20 acre wetlands being proposed but the existing upland area that supports it.  Mr. Parker commented that the abutters to this property will probably be excited about the possibility of a wetlands bank being created; Ms. Fossum said they have been and will continue to be notified about the project.  Mr. Whitten told Mr. Boyce that the temporary road will be in service for about 2 to 3 years.  Ms. Robie asked if the proposed modification to the gravel pit expansion extinguishes the possibility of house lots.  Ms. Fossum replied that it does not entirely, as there is still a remainder area that could be developed in the future.  Mr. Shields said that that it does extinguish 6 to 8 house lots within the area proposed as a wetlands bank.  Mr. Whitten replied that some 15 acres of the center section of the property are not currently included in any proposal to be preserved or to become part of any wetland creation.  Mr. Boyce asked that the applicant show whether or not any part of the property will be developed for residential use.  

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD OPENED:
Mr. Neily pointed out Helen and Wade Jones in the audience, abutting north side property owners, commenting that they were probably too timid to speak, and asked on their behalf if this project will in any way impact their land.  Mr. Whitten said that the only impact is a small 2-1/2 acre parcel proposed for forested wetlands, and the rest is simply preservation of the existing property conditions.  Mr. Jones asked what impact excavation to the water table level will have on his well.  Mr. Whitten replied that there is only a small portion of the site that will reach the water table level, it is not planned to pond water on the property, and no downgrading of the water table level is anticipated.  Mr. Boyce suggested that it would be useful to have the applicant's hydrogeologist make some affirmative findings addressing the residential well question.  Ms. Fossum said it would be helpful for Mr. Whitten to show on the plan those areas where upland preservation is planned as well as forested areas.  Ms. Fossum told Mr. Stelmack that an attempt at wetlands creation by Shaw Brothers was made in the mid 1990s.

Mr. Boyce instructed staff to schedule a sitewalk and notify the abutters of the day and time.  [9:28 p.m.]


8.      ADJOURNMENT

Michael Parker MOVED and Thomas Hughes SECONDED a motion to adjourn.  Motion CARRIED, 6 ayes.  (Mr. Grant recused).   [9:30 p.m.]


Respectfully submitted,


________________________________
Barbara C. Skinner, Clerk of the Board
___________________________, 2004

P:\TOWN\PLAN\PLBD\Agendas\Minutes\PBMN05FY\PBMN110104.doc
3.      FINAL SUBDIVISION – “NOTTINGHAM WOODS” – off WOODS ROAD – by CHASE CUSTOM HOMES & FINANCE, INC.

Approved
Conditions of Approval
1.      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 minimis changes which the Director of Planning may approve;

2.      That the applicant is responsible for obtaining all local, state and federal permits required for the development of this project;

3.      That prior to the commencement of any site improvements, land clearing and/or earth-moving activities associated within the approved subdivision, the applicant shall arrange pre-construction meeting’s with the Planning Department, Review Engineer, Public Works Director, Fire Chief, Code Enforcement Officer and the Planning Director to review the proposed schedule of improvements, conditions of approval, and site construction requirements;

4.      That prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits within the subdivision, each structure shall be properly numbered with the number visible from the street year round;

5.      That 3 (three) complete sets of the final approved plan set will be delivered to (1) the Inspecting Engineer, (2) Public Works Director, and (3) Director of Planning one week prior to the pre-construction meeting;

6.      That the applicant shall be responsible for the cost and installation of all required street signs to be placed in locations approved by the Fire Chief and Police Chief;

7.      That the applicant shall provide property line information and site information in auto-cad (version 2000) format to the Town of Gorham Tax Assessor prior to the scheduled pre-construction meeting;

8.      That all homes within the subdivision will be sprinkled and the sprinkler plans must be submitted to the State Fire Marshal’s office and the Gorham Fire Department for review and permitting. The plans to Gorham Fire shall be submitted at least two weeks prior to the start of construction of the system in each building;

9.      That the applicant’s engineer shall certify that the streets or ways have been constructed in accordance with the specifications of the Town of Gorham’s Land Use and Development Code and in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the Planning Board. Furthermore the applicant’s engineer will be responsible for providing record drawings accurately reflecting these improvements as required by the Code;

10.     The applicant shall create a homeowners association or other legal entity acceptable to the Town and shall submit the association documents or declaration creating the association or other legal entity in a form acceptable to the Town Attorney.~ The documents or declaration shall specify the rights and responsibilities of each lot owner with respect to the maintenance, repair, and plowing of all streets within the subdivision, and shall state that the homeowners association and/or the lot owners shall be responsible for all costs related to the street.~ The applicant shall be responsible for incorporating the Association and recording the approved documents in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds within 90 days of the date of approval of the subdivision by the Planning Board; and

11.     That these conditions of approval and the Final Plan shall be recorded at the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds within thirty (30) days of the Planning Board’s endorsement of the final plan, and a dated copy of the recorded Decision Document shall be returned to the Town Planner prior to the commencement of construction or conveyance of any lots within the subdivision.