March 02 2010 minutes

Vassalboro Planning Board
Minutes of March 2, 2010

Present:
Planning Board: Virginia Bracket, George Gould, Douglas Phillips, Jay Nutting
CEO: Paul Mitnik,
Public: Bill Branch, Betty Branch, Mr. and Mrs. Marc Roderick, Danna Wilson, Howard Wilson, Jeffrey Freeman, Ken Bragdon, Peter Fernald Sr., Michael Willette, Ken MacKenzie, Renee MacKenzie, Shawn Nutt, Al Hodsdon, Paul Morneau, Linda Butterfield, Linda White, D. Blaschke, Marshall N Crandall IV, Bill Parker, Bill Pullen, Fred Pullen, Bernie Welch, Jody Lalime Welch, Dave Jenney, Holly Weidner, Leah Cook, Mary Grow

The meeting opened at 7:03 PM.

Review of February 2 Minutes: The February 2 Minutes were approved (Phillips / Gould 4-0).

Shoreland Zoning Ordinance Public Hearing
Amendments to Ordinance

Ginny opened the hearing by explaining that the amendments to the Ordinance involved mapping changes and minor text changes. The text changes were explained in the handouts on the table. The map changes involved areas that were being upgraded from Limited Residential to Resource Protection District and an area along the Outlet Stream from the Town Office to the boat launch in East Vassalboro that were being changed from Limited Residential to Limited Residential / Commercial. The upgrades to Resource Protection were mainly due to state requirements. The floor was then opened to public comment.

Marshall Crandall IV spoke first saying that he was opposed to the change to a Resource Protection District along China Lake. He lives eight houses down from the boat launch on Main St. He said that he doesn’t want to give up any land; oil and gas from boats cause more pollution than erosion from new homes, and was upset that swimming wasn’t allowed in the lake here. Ginny said that the prohibition against swimming has nothing to do with the Town. This was passed in 1910. Paul indicated that this proposal near China Lake will not effect harvesting or clearing of timber, due to the fact that these properties have no lake frontage and their boundaries are more than 75 feet from China Lake. Cutting of timber in a Resource Protection District is prohibited within 75 feet of the lake high water mark, except to remove safety hazards. Ginny said that the Water District actually has carbon filtration treatment which removes gas and oil.

Mark Roderick who lives on Main St near China Lake also indicated that he also did not want to give up land rights. The new proposal could result in a setback from the lake of an additional 140 feet from the existing requirement. Mark indicated that he wanted to know how his land taxes would be reduced to compensate for this loss. Ginny indicated that the changes proposed for re-zoning to Resource Protection were as a result of a state mandate. The tax issue could not be addressed here tonight; you had to appeal tax issues to the Town Tax Assessor and the Appeals Board.

Jeffrey Freeman said that he had 375 feet of frontage on the Kennebec River and that he was opposed to the changes to upgrade to Resource Protection District. He did not want to give up 140 feet of land rights and had to be compensated in his taxes. Paul indicated that the land on the Kennebec was rezoned due to either being greater than 20% slope or within the 100 year flood plain. This included virtually all of the Kennebec River shoreline.

Al Hodsdon commented that the rezoning changes went too far and the land along the Kennebec should be re-looked at. Al believed that the Shore land Zone should be only 75 feet along a river. Paul stated that the Shoreland Zone has always been 250 feet along a river. It is 75 feet along streams in some towns, but 250 feet along streams in Vassalboro.

Paul said that the land along the Kennebec River could be re-looked at but doubted that very many areas would fall out of the mentioned categories. Doug indicated that we were willing to re-visit the Kennebec and China Lake.

Bernie Welch asked why the abutters to Outlet Stream weren’t notified in a letter. Ginny explained that that was being made less restrictive going from Limited Residential to Limited Residential / Commercial. The written notification is required only for those areas being re-zoned to a Resource Protection District. It was decided that if any changes were made to mapping, another hearing would have to be held. The Public Hearing closed at 7:45.

Leah Cook
Crown O’ Maine Organic Cooperative
After - the- Fact Permit
Major Site Review Pre-Application Meeting
Shoreland Zoning Commercial Use
Tax Map 23, Lot 85-1

Leah Cook is operating an organic food co-op to distribute foods at the former location of the Kennebec Bean Co. in North Vassalboro. It is a building owned by the Marcoux’s who obtained permitting at this site last year. Leah will be occupying a portion of the building that was permitted under the Marcoux’s site plan as cold storage and three stores. This change in use trips permitting under the Site Review Ordinance. Paul indicated that the size of the area that is being used is greater than 5000 square feet which makes this a major project. Leah indicated that they have been in operation for about six weeks that makes this an after-the-fact permit. She was not aware that permitting from the Town was necessary.

Leah indicated that produce that is distributed from growers is shipped primarily in Maine so that it can be guaranteed to be fresh. Ginny asked how trucks will be getting in and out. The access is from Main St across from Carl’s Quick Stop. George asked if more than one floor was being utilized. Leah indicated that they were using some space on the second floor. Doug pondered the issue of cumulative impact, given that this is one additional use of this building to that already permitted. He was not sure the Ordinance addressed that. Paul said that cumulative impact could be addressed through the Marcoux’s permitting if necessary.

Leah asked about sound levels, since refrigeration trucks may run all night there. The consensus was that this noise level would be low and would not likely result in complaints from neighboring properties. Doug asked if the operation was strictly distribution and not retail. Leah responded that it was strictly distribution and had no plans for retail. Ginny went over the requirements of the ordinance including the site plan, addressing the narrative criteria, including the lease agreement, and notifying abutting properties by certified and return receipt mail. Leah indicated that she would work closely with Paul through the application process. She will return for next month’s meeting for the hearing needed for the permit.

Michael Willette
Minor Site Review Pre-Application Meeting
Cell Tower
Map 7, Lot 12

Michael Willette is the owner of Stargate Cell Tower operating out of Winslow. He has been working with T-Mobile. He is proposing to put a cell tower that is about 190 feet high off Bog Rd near the Webber Pond Rd intersection. It will be directly across from the Community School property. He will lease this property from the owners. The tower will be about 300 feet off Bog Rd. The location of the tower will be in the middle of a field and hence clearing of land will not be necessary.

Doug questioned whether or not the project will be a major rather than a minor given the road and area needed for the tower. The road itself could involve over 3000 square feet of clearing. Michael indicated that he would work with Paul to determine whether or not the project is a major or minor. Doug indicated that fencing and lighting of the tower could be issues that needed to be addressed.

Paul Morneau
Expiration of Subdivision Permit
Mystic Ridge Subdivision
Tax Map 12, Lot 16

Paul Morneau was on the agenda for consideration of revocation of his subdivision permit which was permitted on March 15, 2005. Section VI (E) of Vassalboro’s Subdivision Ordinance states that “failure to complete substantial construction of the subdivision within five years of the date of approval shall render the plan null and void.” Ginny pondered what was meant by complete substantial construction since that was not defined within the Ordinance.

Ginny read about the deficiencies in the road in the notice of violation issued by Paul Mitnik, CEO. There is inadequate base material, inadequate gravel depth, inadequate width, right of way not cleared, inadequate culverts, road not aligned, and lack of a turnaround.

Paul Mitnik explained how former Town Manager Michael Vashon, Road Commissioner Gene Field, and he had met with Paul Morneau in the spring of 2008 in an attempt to correct the road issues. An agreement was reached in which the road would be built to standards up to the lots that were sold. This meant that the road needed to be built to standards up to John Elliott’s driveway who is currently occupying Lot 3 of the subdivision which is about 380 feet of road. Paul Mitnik indicated that he and Gene Field have seen very little progress in the road which still does not meet standards required in Vassalboro’s Road Construction Ordinance.

A gate was proposed to be built at the end of Lot 3 after the first three lots were sold. Access to the remaining lots will be from another entrance to the subdivision south of Horse Country Lane.

Paul Morneau described the problems that he has encountered with this subdivision. He has been in litigation for three years and has not been able to sell lots. He had four lots sold but had to return the money to the potential buyers since a sale could not be completed with the subdivision approval in litigation. There has been wet weather frequently the last two years which has made it difficult to construct the road. He has had health problems and was recently struck by lightning. He needs to sell more lots to build the road. He wants an extension so that he can build the road to standards up to Lot 3.

Ginny asked if any of the items in violation were fixed. Al Hodsdon, who was representing Paul Morneau, said that the right of way up to Lot 3 was recently cleared and a culvert is in place. He acknowledged that the road still needs a lot of work. There is not enough sub base, and the road needs to be aligned and widened.

Doug indicated that a performance guarantee is necessary for an extension in the permit to have the road completed to Lot 3. An estimate is needed for the cost of constructing the road and a guarantee such as a performance bond should be presented at the next meeting. He proposed to give an extension until October of this year to bring that part of the road up to Lot 3 in compliance with road standards.

Paul Morneau indicated that he had the materials and equipment to build the road himself, but has not been able to do so with the mentioned problems. Al indicated that they were proposing that an escrow account available to the Town will be established.

Paul Mitnik asked about the road plans in the file which indicated paving the road in writing but no paving was indicated in the detail cross section of the road. The information appeared contradictory. Al Hodsdon thought that Paul may have had the preliminary road plans that were not final and said that he would send the final road plans to Paul. Paul asked if an agreement with the escrow account was going to be presented at the next Planning Board meeting and Al said yes.

William Pullen
Freddies Service Center Inc.
Minor Site Review Expansion
Tax Map 21, Lot 14

Freddies Service Center located on Main St in East Vassalboro is proposing an addition to the rear of their garage. Their existing business is motor vehicle repair, a towing service, and sales of motor vehicles. The addition will be of dimensions 20 x 40 feet which is a 50% increase from the existing garage (40 X 40 feet). Although the existing garage is within the Shoreland Zone of the Outlet Stream, the addition is outside of the Shoreland Zone. Hence Shoreland Zoning permitting is not triggered. Bill Pullen indicated that the addition will result in the building being about the same size prior to the fire that destroyed the building several years ago but the building now is further back from Main St than the former building.

The site plan and application were checked for completeness by Ginny. The application was determined to be complete (Gould / Nutting 4-0). The application was then checked for compliance with performance standards.

Performance Standards – Findings of Fact and Conclusions for Permit Approval

Standard
1.Provisions for vehicle loading and unloading and parking and for vehicular and pedestrian circulation on the site and adjacent public streets.
Findings –The parking area is 77 feet by 45 feet and is located to the front of the garage. The addition is to the rear of the garage and will replace temporary storage facilities. The garage is an existing business and the addition will not change its operation.
Discussion – None
Conclusions – Parking and traffic circulation is not changing from existing conditions. The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
2. Location or height of proposed structures and uses will not be detrimental to other public or private development in the neighborhood.

Findings – The height of the proposed structure will be similar to the previous structure.
The use of the business is not changing.
Discussion – None
Conclusions – The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
3.Provisions for on-site landscaping, provides adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the neighborhood.
Findings – The lot is very small and there are limited opportunities for landscaping. The use is consistent with other uses on Main St.
Discussion – None
Conclusions - The standard is met. Gould / Nutting 4-0

Standard
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.
Findings – The existing business has city water and sewer. The addition will not result in the need for additional water or sewer capacity.
Discussion – None
Conclusions - The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
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.
Findings – The additional storm water generated from the addition is minimal. The runoff from the addition will drain to rear away from the Outlet Stream.
Discussion – None.
Conclusions - The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
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.
Findings – Temporary erosion control measures will be addressed in the building permit process. No long term erosion control impacts are anticipated. No excavation is proposed for the addition.
Discussion – None.
Conclusions – There should be no impact to ground and surface water. The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
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.
Findings – No additional lights are proposed for the addition.
Discussion – None
Conclusions – The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
8.An applicant for Site Plan approval has provided evidence of his financial capability to complete the development as planned.
Findings – The cost of the addition is estimated to be $8500. The existing business is successful.
Discussion – None
Conclusions – The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
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.
Findings – The area for access is not changing.
Discussion – None
Conclusions: The driveway and parking areas are large enough for fire trucks and emergency vehicles. The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
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.
Findings – The proposed addition will not change the operation of the existing business.
Discussion – None
Conclusions – The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

The application as a whole was approved Gould / Nutting (4-0).

Ken MacKenzie
Mackenzie Landscaping
Minor Site Review
Tax Map 9, Lot 70

Ken MacKenzie is proposing to sell palletized rock and bulk materials for landscaping from a Route 3 location on the land that includes a former craft shop at the south intersection of White House Rd. There are currently items there for display only. He is planning to purchase the south end of Lot 70 pending approval from the Planning Board for his business. His office will be in a small garage which will be remodeled. Paul indicated that the current garage may not meet setback requirements from the roads but is grandfathered so long as the footprint of the building is not expanded.

The septic system will be re-located in-between the garage and craft shop. Ken will have a bathroom serving one employee which will tie into the septic system. The craft shop will utilize three employees of capacity from the septic system. Paul indicated since the Wastewater Rules require 20 gpd per employee, the 80 gpd design for the septic plan is adequate.

Doug asked about which road would be used for access to the site. Ken indicated that he was planning on using the access from the Whitehouse Rd. Ginny replied that there have been issues with parking along state Route 3 with the craft shop. The site plan and application was determined to be complete (Gould / Nutting 4-0). The application was then checked for compliance with performance standards.

Performance Standards – Findings of Fact and Conclusions for Permit Approval

Standard
1.Provisions for vehicle loading and unloading and parking and for vehicular and pedestrian circulation on the site and adjacent public streets.
Findings –Two parking areas are proposed; 12 X 32 and 26 X 70 feet with their access from Whitehouse Rd.
Discussion – A discussion ensued about the discouraging access from the Route 3 side of the property. The consensus was due to the extreme ditching on that side, access from that side was difficult. Signage was a possible solution. Ken indicated that he could tell customers not to park along Route 3 and ask them to move their vehicles if they do so.
Conclusions – The design of the site with parking access from Whitehouse Rd and the difficult access from Route 3 over a drainage ditch should result in discouraging customer access from Route 3. The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
2.Location or height of proposed structures and uses will not be detrimental to other public or private development in the neighborhood.

Findings – The only structure proposed for the site is an office to be reconstructed from an existing garage. The use is consistent with other uses along Route 3.
Discussion – None
Conclusions – The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
3.Provisions for on-site landscaping, provides adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the neighborhood.
Findings – The lot is very small and there are limited opportunities for landscaping. The lot is to the end of a pie shaped lot and has limited residential neighbors.
Discussion – None
Conclusions - The standard is met. Gould / Nutting 4-0

Standard
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.
Findings – The septic system proposed for the business and an adjoining business is adequately sized. The owner will dispose of the waste generated at the site. No additional burdens to the Town will result.
Discussion – None
Conclusions - The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
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.
Findings – The storm water drainage from the site will be small due to the small size of the lot. Runoff will be absorbed in the gravel or surrounding lawn or be absorbed into the road ditch.
Discussion – None.
Conclusions - The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
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.
Findings – Temporary erosion control measures such as silt fencing should be adequate since no major construction is occurring. No long term erosion control impacts are anticipated.
Discussion – None.
Conclusions – There should be no impact to ground and surface water. The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
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.
Findings – The owner has proposed to take all the necessary precautions to ensure that exterior lights will illuminate only signs and items on the property.
Discussion – None
Conclusions – The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
8. An applicant for Site Plan approval has provided evidence of his financial capability to complete the development as planned.
Findings – The cost of construction is estimated to be $10,000. The existing business is successful and can finance the proposal.
Discussion – None
Conclusions – The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
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.
Findings – The proposed changes for access from the Whitehouse Rd will improve access for emergency vehicles..
Discussion – None
Conclusions: The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

Standard
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.
Findings – The business is also in a Winslow location and does not generate high traffic or noise. The owner is a good neighbor and respects abutting land owners.
Discussion – None
Conclusions – The standard is met. Gould / Nutting (4-0)

The application as a whole was approved Gould / Nutting (4-0).

The meeting adjourned at 10:00.