Town of Otisfield
Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
September 19, 2006
1. Call to Order: The regular meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.
2. Attendance: Members present were Chairman, Rick Micklon, Vice Chair, Stan Brett, Dan Peaco, Mike McAllister, Shirley Hamilton, Alternate / Recording Secretary, & CEO, Zak Horton. (Maureen Howard arrived @ 8:00PM)
3. Quorum: Board had a quorum.
4. Secretary’s Report:
A. Meeting Minutes from September 5, 2006. Motion to accept minutes. DP/MM – Unanimous.
5. Discussion & Comments from public:
A. Beth Damon: Ordinance Committee Chair: Submitted a draft of new “definitions” for PB review. Used an AVCOG comprehensive list of definitions as a starting basis. First draft presented tonight for the PB to identify issues and areas that need more discussion. The font in Italics is an OC recommended change or the current verbiage in the ordinance. Plain font is what was recommended by AVCOG. RM: PB will review as soon as possible and discuss. On next agenda under PB discussion. October 3, 2006.
B. Kathleen Shaller, regarding Map U7, Lot 17. New home construction on Beehive Lane; applicant is Mahoney / represented by Damon Builders. Letter dated September 12, 2006 submitted from land abutters on Beehive lane. Kathleen stated she was surprised that the plan, as it was, got voted down. Road was moved more then what she deemed a little bit. Does not want to stop the Mahoney’s from building home, but does not think this is a good change. Offering to personally use a different driveway access if it could change the definition of this section of Beehive Lane from a road to a driveway (by using a different access then it’s only two people using the road). She stated that w/ the change, parking might now be an issue. Abutter notification
was not done for the PB approval process. RM: PB took all the necessary and proper channels in notifying abutters, both during the Site Walk and the regular PB Meeting. Meetings are properly posted for the public, they now have internet access on the town’s website to view PB meetings, agendas, and minutes, and are encouraged to contact the CEO regarding concerns about building permits and applications affecting their neighborhoods. Jon Damon: Permission will be granted before road is moved on any property other than the Mahoney’s. RM: PB has to follow ordinances. Cannot change town ordinance for any individual neighborhood. Discussion: Jon Damon: Project will not begin for several months. Would coming back before the PB, when the definition of a “road” may have changed, be advantageous? RM: Willing to check with AVCOG and MMA regarding the question, but currently falls under existing ordinance definitions. DP & MM: Feel PB should start and end by
current ordinance definitions. SH: Discuss w/ MMA, it was approved under current definition. SB: If there is a change he has no problem w/ applicant coming back. PB will take abutter input under advisement.
6. Shoreland Zoning Applications:
A. Charles A. Grasso, Map U7, Lot 19B. Application to rebuild a bunkhouse on Thompson Lake. ZH notified early August of property not having a permit for construction, next day a stop work order was issued. Mr. Grasso: Intent was to repair building; roof, sills, etc., but then realized it needed replacement. Applicant didn’t know permit was necessary. Bunkhouse was torn down and then rebuilt. Stopped immediately when he found out he had a complaint. ZH: Building is 75 – 80% complete. Currently no electricity. Mr. Grasso: Not planning to insulate right now, possibly in the future. Mr. Grasso met w/ ZH and filled out an application. He asked that Zak not deny him and let the PB review it. He feels that this is the most “practical” location and would cause more
disturbance to move it. ZH: His belief that it could have been constructed outside the 100’ zone. RM: Site walk may be necessary. Options: 1) If denied, move camp outside 100’ zone w/ PB’s approval, 2) take the camp down and leave it down or 3) leave as is w/ conditions placed. Open room was converted to two separate rooms. RM: Not as concerned about going from two rooms to four rooms. RM: This is looked at as a structure. DP: According to the ordinance once it’s down, it must be moved outside 100’ buffer zone. Practically speaking it could have been relocated. SB: The size of building is small, no hardship to move it back to the 100’ mark. MM: PB has allowed this in the past. SH: Feels she would have to see it, because of the word “practical”. RM: Would you be opposed to having an independent 3rd party asking what kind of impact it would have if it was moved verses if it stayed. Mr. Grasso: No. RM: Not opposed to
scheduling a site walk. RM: ZH to contact DEP about issue being reviewed. If the word practical applies, DEP will let us know. RM: Independent third party is needed to determine if the location is practical. Tabled and moved on this until we hear from DEP.
7. Residence - Based Business Applications:
A. None.
8. Site Plan Applications:
A. None.
9. Subdivision Application:
A. None.
10. Miscellaneous:
A. Residence Based Business’s PB would like to address question #3. Add as question # 4 Does this applicant own the property? If not, is there a letter of authorization from the owner? Change the others question #’s respectively. Question # 16, Will there be fuel storage on this property? If yes, please explain. Remove from future workshop items. This has been resolved.
B. Storm Water Management issues added to the application next to Erosion Control with an example. (Ken Bartow’s suggestion) *moved on discussion.
C. Model Notice of Decision. – Notify applicants of approval. Letter should be sent. Draft submitted as template will be used to notify applicants of approval/denial. Remove from future workshop items. This has been resolved.
D. Shoreland Zoning Permit Application. *Moved on discussion.
E. Site Plan Determination Form *Fuel Storage needs to be addressed. Addressed in item A on Residence Based Business form. Remove from future workshop items. This has been resolved
F. Model Application Form. (Subdivision) Notify applicants of approval. Letter should be sent. Draft submitted as template will be used to notify applicants of approval/denial. Remove from future workshop items. This has been resolved.
11. Upcoming Dates:
A. Planning Board Meeting October 3, 2006 at 7:00 PM.
12. Discussion & comments from Code Enforcement Officer:
A. FAQ’s for CEO submitted to PB members for review. * Moved on discussion
13. Discussion & comments from Board:
A. Memo to Fire Chief regarding public notice of “Underground Utilities/ Shut-Off Switch”. Letter submitted from Chief Hooker to PB members for review. RM: Will revise letter and converse w/ MH, bring it back to PB for review, then it will go to BOS. * Moved on discussion, draft still in progress.
14. Adjournment:
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:05 PM. MM/DP – Unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Tanya Taft, Secretary.
Approved by:
Rick Micklon, Chair
Otisfield Planning Board
Approved on: 10/03/06
| 
