Vassalboro Planning Board
Minutes of February 3, 2009
Planning Board: Virginia Bracket, George Gould, Gary Coull, Doug Phillips, Sally Butler
CEO: Paul Mitnik,
Public: Ben Murray, Bruce Murray, Mary Grow, Sarah Luce
The meeting opened at 7:00 PM.
Review of January 6 Minutes: George motioned to accept the January 6 Minutes. Sally seconded. All in favor.
Shoreland Zoning Webber Pond
New Residential Structure
Tax Map 19, Lot 11
Ben Murray was back for the third time after two prior denials to add a duplex. This time the Murray’s proposal involved adding two single unit residential structures. The first residential unit will replace an existing structure on Lot 11. The existing structure will be moved to the other side of Murray Road outside the shoreland zone limit of 250 feet. It is this new residential unit that the Murray’s are seeking approval from the Planning Board for a Shoreland Zoning Permit.
The second unit will be added at a later date on the opposite side of Murray Road outside of the shoreland zone limit of 250 feet. This does not need Planning Board approval or a Shoreland Zoning Permit. A new lot will be created here containing the new residential unit and the moved structure from Lot 11. This new lot will be created from land added from Lot 13. Both lot 13 and the new lot will be greater than one acre in size.
The existing wastewater disposal field will need to be expanded to accommodate the new residential structure on Lot 11. A new wastewater disposal system will have to be constructed to accommodate the two new structures on the new lot. Paul noted that the septic plans were not yet done but believed that the Shoreland Zoning Permit for Lot 11 could be made conditional to obtaining approval for the septic plans. Ben indicated that he wanted to get approval from the Board before proceeding with the designs for the septic systems. The Board was agreeable to this.
A new road will be constructed to accommodate dwellings that the Murray’s own at 31 and 33 Murray Rd which will be sold on the open market. The old road will be reclaimed with vegetation. Paul noted that this will not create a subdivision, since the re-located structure and most of the existing structures were built before 1971 and are therefore exempt from the subdivision law. Ben submitted the required written soil and erosion control plan. Paul noted that proper erosion control here would be important.
George made a motion to approve subjected to the condition for an approved septic plan. This was seconded by Doug. All in favor.
Subdivision Application Process
Paul presented some new application forms that he proposed to be used for future subdivision applicants. Also included was a check off list that would be used by the Board Chair to assure that the application is complete. The basic difference of the new forms compared to the existing ones is the additions for the applicant to address the performance standards on the application. There were also some items for the major subdivision that are requirements for submittal that are not included on current application.
Paul explained that he needs more information by applicants to address meeting the performance standards. A finding of fact must be made for all approvals, approvals with conditions, and denials. The burden of proof is upon the applicant to demonstrate that the performance criteria are being met. The proposed application would put the burden of proof on the applicant to adequately address the performance criteria.
Ginny indicated that it may be awkward to be going back and forth from the check off list to the application. Doug suggested including the check off on the application itself. Ginny indicated that the multiple items for the performance criteria should include a space under each item to be addressed; otherwise everything would likely not get addressed. Ginny inquired about where the performance guarantee was located on the new application. It was discovered that it was left off and should be included.
Paul will make the suggested changes and present the new forms at a future meeting.
Shoreland Zoning Ordinance
The ongoing process for revising the Shoreland Zoning Ordinance so that it will be consistent with new requirements was discussed next. The appeals section and the definitions section were reviewed. It was decided that much of the procedural stuff in our existing Ordinance that is omitted in the state guidelines should be included in the revised Ordinance. A discussion ensued about whether there should be fees assessed for appeals. Paul thought that there should be fees to cover his time spent on appeals. Doug and Gary thought that there should be no charge for appeals. The consensus of the Board was that there should be no charge for appeals.
Under repetitious appeals, the consensus was to omit the one year period that, after which passed, would allow a repetitious appeal. It was decided that new evidence would need to be presented to re-consider an appeal. Paul mentioned that there were three definitions in our current Ordinance that were left out of the new guidelines. The consensus was to retain these definitions in our revised Ordinance. We decided that we should meet the 17th of February to give the Ordinance its final review before going to DEP and Town Meeting for approval.