Vassalboro Planning Board
Minutes of July 14, 2009
Present:
Planning Board: Virginia Bracket, George Gould, Doug Phillips, Jay Nutting, Sally Butler
CEO: Paul Mitnik,
Public: Adam B. Ellis, Elwood Ellis, Richard Bradstreet, Mary Grow, Donald Crabtree, Voit Rich, Chuck Bucchino, Dick Tarr, Steve Roberge, Roland Lapointe, Anita P Lapointe, Nancy Tarr, Mary Sabins, Gus Smiley, Nancy Hinds, David Jenney
The meeting opened at 7:04 PM.
Review of June 2 Minutes: George motioned to accept the June 2 Minutes. Doug seconded. All in favor.
Conditional Approval of Shoreland Zoning Ordinance by Maine DEP
Paul explained that DEP conditionally approved the text of the Shoreland Zoning Ordinance effective July 17 subject to four minor edits in Section 12 in which sections are incorrectly referenced. The zoning map will have to be re-done with the proper notification of landowners whose land is being re-zoned to resource protection and new public hearings held. The zoning map changes will be voted upon at the next Town Meeting in 2010.
Dave Jenney questioned whether the rezoning would change the tax assessment values. Paul replied that he didn’t think so, due to the fact that most of this land would not be developed anyway due to land owner preference or various legal restrictions.
Doug asked if the new approved version of the ordinance should be used today, since it has already been approved at Town Meeting. Paul indicated no, since DEP must approve the Ordinance before it becomes adopted as indicated in section 7C of the current ordinance.
Paula and John Smiley
Shoreland Zoning Webber Pond
Expansion of Non-Conforming Structure
Tax Map 18, Lot 44
The Smiley’s are proposing to add a deck to their residence located at 39 Pleasant Point Rd. The deck will be of dimensions 18 X 8 feet which represents an expansion of 14%. This is within the allowance of the Shoreland Ordinance which limits expansions of non-conforming structures to 15%.
Doug asked if there was any record of any prior expansions for this property and Paul indicated that there were no expansions indicated in the Town files. A variance was obtained for a holding tank in 1996. The application as a whole was approved (Phillips / Nutting 5-0).
Roland Lapointe
Shoreland Zoning Three Mile Pond
Expansion of Non-Conforming Structure
Tax Map 9, Lot 83
The Lapointe’s were represented by their son-in-law, Dick Tarr who explained that he and his wife, Nancy, were planning on purchasing this property and moving there so the Lapointe’s, who are on in years can live there. Dick explained that he is not changing the footprint, only the volume, by expanding attic space upward and converting it to living space. No bedrooms are being added. The expansion is limited to 15% allowed by ordinance.
Doug asked if there was any record of prior expansions for this property. Paul indicated that a deck was constructed in 1985. However this is before the date regarded as a benchmark of considering expansions of non-conforming structures by DEP (January 1, 1989). Therefore there are no expansions for this property. The application was approved (Gould / Nutting 5-0).
Richard Bradstreet
Major Subdivision
Three Lots
Final Plan
Tax Map 4, Lot 27E
The final plan for Richard’s Bradstreet’s three lot subdivision located off of Sherwood Lane was presented. Adam and Elwood Ellis were present to add technical support to Dick. Ginny started by reviewing the final plan for completeness and going over the check list for final approval.
Doug asked about a performance guarantee for the road. Elwood replied that the guarantee was that no lots were being sold until the road was approved by Vassalboro’s Road Commissioner. Doug asked if this was on the Final Plan and Paul indicated that it was in the standard conditions. Doug indicated that the standard conditions only address the development of the road up to the addition of sub base gravel, but the road standards are much more comprehensive. Doug indicated that the standard conditions may have to be re-visited. The final plan was determined to be complete (Gould / Nutting 5-0).
Performance Standards – Findings of Fact for Permit Approval
A. Pollution
Evidence – Wastewater will not be discharged to a water body, but will utilize subsurface wastewater disposal systems. The subdivision is not within the watershed of a great pond.
Discussion – None.
Approved - Gould / Nutting 5-0.
B. Sufficient Water
Evidence – A letter in the application from Delwin Philbrick indicated that wells in the area are 200 to 320 feet deep and have adequate capacity from 3 to 10 gpm. Proposed location of the wells indicated on the plan are a minimum of 100 feet setback from subsurface wastewater disposal systems which is consistent with the Maine Well Driller Rules. No hydrants are proposed.
Discussion – None.
Approved - Gould / Nutting 5-0.
C. Soil Erosion
Evidence – An erosion control plan is included in the road plans and is consistent with the Maine DEP Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook. The area of the subdivision is already open field and stabilized with vegetation. Adequate erosion control measures are proposed.
Discussion – None.
Approved - Gould / Nutting 5-0.
D. Traffic Conditions
Evidence – ME DOT permits are not applicable. The road will service only four lots and should not be subjected to hazards, traffic congestion, and unsafe congestion. Roads will be constructed per Town of Vassalboro Road Construction Ordinance for a private minor road.
Discussion – None.
Approved – Gould / Nutting 5-0.
E. Sewage Disposal
Evidence – Septic system designs on HHE-200 forms have been provided for each lot as designed by John Philbrick, a state certified site evaluator. Reserve locations for disposal beds are indicated on these forms.
Discussion – None
Approved – Gould / Butler 5-0.
F. Solid Waste
Evidence – The lack of significant issues of solid waste disposal from this subdivision is indicated on a form that the Town Manager, Mary Sabins, has signed.
Discussion – None
Approved – Gould / Nutting 5-0.
G. Impact on Natural Beauty, Aesthetics, Historic Sites, Wildlife Habitat, Rare Natural Areas, or Public Access to the Shoreland
Evidence – Letters provided from IF&W, Maine Natural Areas Program, and the National Registry of Historic Places have indicated that there are no special areas that warrant protection for this subdivision. There are no shoreland areas within the proposed subdivision.
Discussion – None
Approved – Gould / Nutting 5-0.
H. Financial and Technical Capacity
Evidence – The road is already partially constructed as Dick Bradstreet’s driveway and upgrading it to Town standards for a private minor road will not involve large expenditures of money; perhaps $10,000. The Town will be contacted throughout construction for inspection of the road.
Discussion – None
Approved – Gould / Phillips 5-0.
I. Impact on Ground Water Quality or Quantity
Evidence - This standard is not applicable, since the proposed subdivision is not located over a sand and gravel aquifer.
Discussion – None
Approved – Gould / Butler 5-0.
J. Flood Plain Management
Evidence – This standard is not applicable, since the proposed subdivision is not located within a special flood hazard area.
Discussion – None
Approved – Gould / Nutting 5-0.
K. Freshwater Wetlands
Evidence – Wetlands are delineated on the subdivision plan.
Discussion – None
Approved – Gould / Nutting 5-0.
L. Stormwater Management
Evidence – A storm water management plan has been waived by the Board as is permitted provided that it meets three criteria. A proposal to divert runoff to road side ditches along Rte 201 and away from the Dyer property by removing a culvert on the proposed road addresses a concern from the Dyers at an earlier meeting.
Discussion – None.
Approved – Gould / Phillips 5-0
The application as a whole was approved (Gould / Nutting 5-0).
Donald Crabtree
Major Site Review
Grand View Coffee Shop
Tax Map 9, Lot 104
Donald Crabtree was present to discuss plans to re-open his business that was destroyed in a fire for the Grand View Coffee Shop on Rte 3 featuring topless waitresses and waiters. The fire was determined to be caused by arson by the State Fire Marshall’s Office. Donald explained that he was seeking approval to build a new building with dimensions 30 X 100; extend hours; and allow employee parking and deliveries of propane, oil, and trash storage / removal in the rear of the proposed structure from Mudgett Hill Rd access. Donald was also seeking approval to expand the seating capacity from 25 to 80 customers.
The Board discussed how they were going to review the application. Ginny first proposed to look at the new building first and the new uses of extended hours and seating capacity and deliveries to the rear of the building as a separate review. After further discussion the Board decided to approve the new uses and building together as a major site review application.
Donald indicated that he is in the process of obtaining approval from the State Fire Marshall Office for the handicap access and life safety standards that are required for a public building. Donald presented a new site plan that indicated the new footprint of the building to be slightly to the north (right if looking at proposed building from Rte 3). Ginny started the review of the Site Plan for completeness. Ginny asked if the overflow parking area located to the south would be used and Donald indicated no. Doug indicated that no building plans were presented indicating the height and materials, ect. Paul indicated that the site plan contains the footprint of the structure and the building plans may be addressed through the performance standards. The plan was determine to be complete (Gould / Nutting 5-0).
Performance Standards – Findings of Fact for Permit Approval
1. Provisions for vehicle loading and unloading and parking and for vehicular and pedestrian circulation on the site and adjacent public streets.
Evidence – The property has an active Driveway Entrance permit from Maine DOT. Entrance to property is from Rte 3 rather than Mudgett Hill Rd which will result in less congestion of traffic. Parking of forty spaces for eighty occupants is more than adequate when compared to other Towns. The parking lot of dimensions 40 ft by 300 ft provides an adequate area for emergency vehicles
Discussion – Doug thought that the provision 1(e) of the performance standards for a major development would require access from Mudgett Hill Rd rather than Rte 3. After further discussion, it was decided that there would actually be less congestion from Rte 3 access where the road provides for more vehicles. The number of parking areas was discussed. Paul indicated that Vassalboro does not have a standard for the required number of parking spaces per customer for various business. Other towns that do typically use three or four customers per parking space, so Donald’s ratio of two appears reasonable.
Doug asked that a condition be put on the permit to prohibit parking in the interior corner parking spaces at the areas of turns in the parking lot. Doug asked that a condition be added to prohibit parking on Rte 3. Paul said that this would be hard to enforce. A discussion of the state law for parking on highways ensued which allows parking along side highways provided that ten feet of clearance is provided from the centerline and views are not obstructed for vehicles on the highway it was decided that this state law would be met here.
Approved - With condition to prohibit parking in interior corner spaces at parking lot turns. Gould / Butler 5-0.
2. Location or height of proposed structures and uses will not be detrimental to other public or private development in the neighborhood.
Evidence – The height of the proposed structure will be similar to the previous structure.
The building will be farther away from Mudgett Hill Rd.
Discussion – It was here that the structure itself can be reviewed. Donald indicated that the walls would be eight feet high which is similar to the former structure.
Approved – Gould / Butler 5-0
3. Provisions for on-site landscaping, provides adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the neighborhood.
Evidence – There are trees located around the property line. No removal of vegetation is proposed. The dumpster will be screened from view.
Discussion – None
Approved – Gould / Butler 5-0
4.The proposed use will not impose undue burdens so as to exceed the capacity of the sewers, sanitary and storm drains, water, solid waste, fire protection, and other public facilities.
Evidence – The business will dispose of its own solid waste. There is adequate capacity in the existing septic system for the business. The State Fire Marshall Office will approve standards related to the Life Safety Code and handicap access.
Discussion – None
Approved – Gould / Butler 5-0
5. The Site Plan provides sufficient information to show that storm water will be adequately drained from the site with no adverse impact on other property or publicly owned drainage systems.
Evidence – There are no changes proposed that will affect storm water quantity or quality.
Discussion – None.
Approved – Gould / Nutting 5-0
6. Soil erosion and other adverse impacts on the soil ground water and surface water shall be prevented. Ground water will not be adversely impacted in quality or quantity.
Evidence – Temporary erosion control measures will be addressed in the building permit process. No long term erosion control impacts are anticipated.
Discussion – None.
Approved – Gould / Nutting 5-0
7. The provisions for exterior lighting do not create hazards to motorists traveling on adjacent public streets and are adequate for the safety of occupants or users of the site and such provisions will not damage the value and diminish the usability of adjacent properties.
Evidence – Lighting will be primarily on the building as was the case on the former building. The lights will not be bright. Lights out back will be on an eye.
Discussion – There was concern raised by the Board that lighting at the south and north ends of the parking lot would not be adequately lit since these areas are away from the building. It was deduced that the lighting from the sign may provide some lighting for these areas. Voit Rich who was seated in the audience stated that historically lighting was provided on utility poles in the parking lot. Voit lives next door and has for a number of years. Donald indicated that the cost for such lights is high and the user must sign a 15 year contract with CMP. The Board stated that it was more concerned about lighting distractions to Rte 3 and there shouldn’t be any.
Approved – Gould / Butler 5-0
8. An applicant for Site Plan approval has provided evidence of his financial capability to complete the development as planned.
Evidence – Donald owns the land outright.
Discussion – Donald stated that he was not interested in a partnership, even though he’s had some offers and never has never had any loans and doesn’t plan on borrowing money for construction of the new structure. Ginny stated that the concern that she had from lack of proof of financial commitment was that Vassalboro could get stuck with unfinished skeleton of building which is what happened in another part of Town. George asked if Donald could get a letter of reference from a bank. Donald said he had no bank. Paul mentioned that section XII-C said that the Board could require a Performance Bond or conditional agreement. Nancy Hinds who was seated in the audience felt that it was important to document financial capacity with such things as letters of reference.
Approved – Gould / Nutting 3-2
9. The proposed development will not create safety hazards and will provide adequate access for emergency vehicles to the site, and to all buildings on the site.
Evidence: The driveway and parking areas are large enough for fire trucks and emergency vehicles.
Discussion – None
Approved – Gould / Butler 5-0
10. The proposed development will not adversely affect the use and enjoyment of abutting property as a result of noise, vibrations, fumes, odor, dust, glare, or other cause.
Evidence: A coffee shop should not result in much noise, odor, dust, and glare.
Discussion – None
Approved – Gould / Nutting 5-0
Next the discussion progressed to what was needed to approve the application as a whole. Paul asked about the proposed hours which had not been mentioned yet, although extending the hours was mentioned. Donald replied 6AM to 1 AM. A discussion evolved about the hours and Ginny thought that the hours for the Adult –Only Business Ordinance should be used or 8 AM to midnight. Doug mentioned that this ordinance didn’t apply to something that was formerly licensed under the Site Review Ordinance.
Chuck Bucchino who was seated in the audience asked why the Adult –Only Business ordinance didn’t apply to the renewal of the business. Ginny replied as long as the renewal did not substantially change sexually oriented uses, that ordinance would not apply.
Doug thought that the Board should consider a condition to remove the debris (which is currently in a pile on the property) from the fire before the coffee shop re-opens. Donald indicated that the removal of this debris would cost him approximately $16,000 and thought that this money should be going into the building. Jay proposed a competing condition which would give Donald up to one year after the business opens to remove the debris. Finally Doug proposed a condition to require that the exterior of the building be completed before the business opens. The Board voted on the conditions as follows.
Conditions to Permitting
1. Prohibit parking at interior corner spaces
Approved 5-0 (see Performance Standard #1).
2. Remove debris from fire within one year of opening
Approved – Nutting / Butler 4-1
3. Hours of business 6 AM to 1 PM with seats limited to 80.
Approved – Gould / Nutting 4-0
4. Requirement to complete exterior of building prior to opening.
Approved – Gould / Phillips 5-0
Donald asked about the possibility of adding topless dancing to the business. Paul replied that the interpretations from two attorneys that were consulted indicated that this would fall under the new Adult- Only Business Ordinance. Donald also asked about the topless car wash which had already occurred on the Friday and Saturday preceding the meeting. Doug felt that this would also fall under the new ordinance.
The application as a whole was approved (Gould / Nutting 5-0).
The meeting adjourned at 10:30.