Planning Board Meeting ~ January 14, 2026

2026-01-14 · Planning Board · 2:57:04 · watch on YouTube →

The Planning Board met on January 14, 2026, having rescheduled from the previous week for illness and lack of a quorum, with all four members present. The board took public testimony and then conducted preliminary review of the Greystone Ridge cluster subdivision, a 13-lot project off Pinkham Brook Road and Blue Jay Way on map 2, lots 35 and 42. Most of the evening went to an abutter's concerns about two wells, a brook and the location of the proposed road, and to the applicant's two waiver requests for road width and curb, which the board set aside pending the town peer reviewer's comments. A motion was made to grant preliminary approval with the draft conditions of approval and without the waivers; the transcript does not record the vote. The board then held sketch plan review for a 12-lot cluster subdivision at 335 North Road, map 5 lot 61, told the applicant to look at layouts that put less wetland in the open space, and set a site walk for January 25. Town Planner George Thebarge reported that the draft land use code and the minor policy changes are now posted for public review.

What was discussed

1. 10:44
   Call to order, roll call and agenda amendments

   The chair opened the meeting, noting it was rescheduled from the previous week for illness and lack of a quorum, and confirmed all members present. Two amendments were proposed, on the next meeting date and on the process for ordinance requests from other town committees; both were held to the end of the meeting and the second was withdrawn to the next meeting. A motion to approve the minutes as presented followed.

2. 10:44
   Town planner's report and draft land use code

   George Thebarge reported that the digitized draft of what will be called the land use code has been received and is about 183 pages, containing an even 100 editorial changes recommended by the consultant and no policy or administrative changes. The draft is posted on the town website and will be placed on the next agenda for the board to review over several meetings.

3. 16:50
   Road frontage clarification added as a seventh minor policy change

   Thebarge said the select board endorsed the board's recommended minor policy and administrative changes the previous night, and added a seventh at staff request. It would clarify that the required 300 feet of road frontage may be counted along turnarounds and curved property lines so long as it is contiguous, which the code officer and road commissioner said has been applied inconsistently in past subdivisions.

4. 16:50
   Greystone Ridge site walk summary

   The chair presented a draft written summary of the board's December 20, 2025 site walk of the Greystone Ridge subdivision. Thebarge explained that because there is no recording or minutes of a site walk, the written summary satisfies the state requirement for a record of who attended and when it was held.

5. 22:05
   Public hearing opened on the Greystone Ridge subdivision

   The chair read a scripted statement setting out the purpose of the hearing and the ground rules, including that the board's authority is limited to whether the application meets the adopted subdivision standards and that broader town growth policy is not before it. He also read the ordinance definition of an aggrieved party as someone with a particularized injury, not one shared equally by all residents.

6. 27:38
   Public testimony from an abutter

   James Balfour (?) of 980 Pinkham Brook Road, a resident of 33 years, said he does not oppose the development but raised concerns about a deep well and a shallow well on his land, the water quality of a wet area behind the wellhouse that he described as one of two origins of the brook, road salt and sand, the absence of any privacy fencing, and a small brook crossed by the staked road line. He said the area matches the description of a forested swamp on the state site and that he does not believe it was delineated correctly, calling it the wrong spot for a road.

7. 32:56
   Staff framing and the applicant's revisions to Greystone Ridge

   After a motion to close the public hearing, Thebarge described the review step: the board decides at a preliminary level whether the 13-lot cluster subdivision can meet the ordinance criteria and standards, working from a draft set of approval conditions it may add to. He listed the changes made since December, including a direct driveway for lot 2 off the new road, a circular turnaround for fire pond access, more detail on cluster building sites and clearing limits, adjusted frontage on lot 13, and two waiver applications.

8. 43:25
   Fire pond, hydrogeologist study and peer review timing

   Matt Pelter (?) of Terradyn Consultants said a 120,000 gallon fire pond is proposed by expanding the existing pond, that the fire chief had no initial concerns with the loop and dry hydrant arrangement, and that a hydrogeologist will go out in April to check the recharge rate and run a pumping test, which could change the size or require a liner. The board and Thebarge separated the state storm water review from the town's engineering peer review, which staff recommends applicants submit to after preliminary approval and before the final plan comes back to the board.

9. 49:09
   Limits of development and extended right-of-way

   The applicant set limits of development at approximately 20,000 square feet per lot rather than the usual 25,000, to be shown on the plan and written into the homeowners association documents so they are legally enforceable. The right-of-way was extended without extending the road, to create a snow storage area clear of the ditch turnout buffer and to provide the frontage for the last lot.

10. 54:19
    Waiver requests for road width and curb

    The applicant walked the board through three locations where a 10-foot lane with curb and no two-foot shoulder is proposed instead of the standard section, to direct runoff into rain gardens and ditch turnouts for treatment and to reduce fill at the wetland crossings. The board said it preferred to wait for the town peer reviewer before acting on the waivers, and a second Terradyn representative, Adrian (?), asked the board at least to indicate whether it was comfortable with the narrower road because a wider road would mean more wetland impact and different permit submissions to DEP.

11. 1:04:51
    Wetland delineation near the abutting property

    A board member said the wet area where the road is proposed looked like something that should have been flagged from the start and that runoff appears to be pushed toward the abutter's lot. The applicant reported that its wetland scientist, Eric (?), visited in July during drought, found no wetland hydrology and concluded the soils did not support a jurisdictional wetland under Army Corps criteria, though he called it marginal and close; the board asked that his delineation report and emailed response go to the town's peer reviewer.

12. 1:15:10
    Drainage patterns, existing culverts and trails

    The applicant described how offsite flow is kept in its existing pattern, with a 36-inch embedded culvert and ditching intended to avoid overloading the downstream culvert or flooding the abutting property, and said no increase in flow is expected. Existing trails were added to the plans, including a 20-foot easement said to connect to Lunt Road; a culvert and the shallow wellhouse were missed by the surveyors before the holidays and will be added in later submissions.

13. 1:20:21
    Buffer and fencing along the abutting property line

    The applicant offered fencing or screening near the corner where the road comes closest to the abutter's house and said the client is willing to work with him on species and placement. Asked how far the road could be shifted, the applicant said there is no room within the 50-foot right-of-way and that a 25-foot vegetated buffer is not achievable there, though some screening could fit at the corner; a board member noted the town is moving toward requiring a buffer in this situation.

14. 1:25:44
    Vernal pool, clearing limits and lot 2 access

    The applicant said MDIFW (?) confirmed the pool is a vernal pool but not a significant one because it is man-made, and agreed to send the agency an updated tree clearing plan, with any seasonal clearing restrictions for bats coming through the Army Corps process. Access to lot 2 will connect to the fire pond turnaround, and signage will be posted to keep the fire access clear.

15. 1:31:21
    Request to swap lot 3 with the storm water basin

    A board member, Brian Stickney (?), asked the applicant to look at flipping the lot 3 building area with the storm water basin to move the basin away from the abutting property. Michelle Harrison, one of the applicants, said lot 3 was deliberately placed to give the abutter a back yard barrier, and Balfour (?) said he preferred the layout as drawn; the applicant said the basin has been modeled for the 100-year storm and will still look at it.

16. 1:41:46
    Storm water basin buffer and transformer location

    The board asked whether the tree buffer around the storm water basin would be protected in perpetuity and concluded it is, because the area is open space with a clearing limit already shown. The board also asked whether the transformer between lots 6 and 7 could be moved off a property line; the applicant said CMP typically sites them within a 10 by 10 easement but would look at it.

17. 1:47:17
    Draft conditions of preliminary approval

    Thebarge summarised the fourteen draft conditions, covering peer review of road design, utilities, storm water, the fire pond, sedimentation controls and construction cost estimates; a performance guarantee; a six-month deadline to file the final plan; DEP permits; erosion control to DEP standards; clearing limits shown on plans and referenced in deeds; road naming; road design standards; storm water easements; homeowners association documents on the town attorney's template; and the cluster criteria determination. The board agreed to add hydrology and the wetland delineation to the list of items for peer review.

18. 1:53:12
    Buffering condition and motion on preliminary approval

    Rather than adding a new condition, the board agreed to record buffering as discussed at the preliminary plan meeting under existing condition six, citing section 617C on required buffers, with the wording left broad enough to cover vegetation or fencing without committing either side to a solution. A motion was then made to grant preliminary subdivision approval for the Greystone Ridge subdivision with the draft conditions of approval, excluding the waiver requests at this time.

19. 1:58:22
    Sketch plan review, 335 North Road: staff comments

    Thebarge introduced the sketch plan for a cluster subdivision on a 44.2 acre parcel at map 5 lot 61, with a 2.1 acre parcel and the existing farmhouse retained, 12 new lots off a 1,600-foot dead-end road and about 26 acres of open space. He said the board should consider whether the open space reflects intentional preservation or is mainly constrained land left over after the lot layout, and raised the vernal pool buffer covering parts of several lots and the question of whether a high intensity soil survey is needed.

20. 2:04:18
    Conservation subdivision design process and an alternative layout

    Thebarge described a four-step conservation subdivision design process attributed to Randall Arendt and showed an alternative layout he had sketched, saying he was not designing the project but illustrating that other configurations might better meet the intent of the cluster ordinance. He noted the large unbroken forested habitat block as a possible preservation tradeoff against the farmland soils, and said no decisions can be made at sketch stage.

21. 2:09:31
    Applicant presentation for the North Road sketch plan

    Craig Burgess of Acorn Engineering, for RV LLC (?), said the layout was driven by preserving the barn lot, currently registered as a wedding venue, and by avoiding all wetland impact, including on the house lots. He described individual wells and septic systems with test pits on each lot, an existing MDOT driveway permit at the entrance, a project under one acre of new impervious area so no DEP storm water law permit is required, and a Maine construction general permit to be filed before construction.

22. 2:21:20
    Vernal pool, corrected wetland boundary and open space composition

    The non-significant vernal pool will be revisited in late March or early April 2026, and the applicant intends to pull lot lines back so the pool is outside the lots rather than rely on a permit by rule for up to 25 percent buffer disturbance. Burgess (?) explained that the earlier straight wetland line came from the delineator, Alex Finemore (?), using tax map parcel data about 50 feet off the surveyed boundary, and said wetlands make up roughly 46 percent of the proposed open space against an ordinance limit of 50 percent.

23. 2:31:46
    Grading, fire protection and house sizes

    Burgess (?) said the site is generally flat with no steep slopes and the road would sit about two feet above existing grade with no major cut or fill. Homes will be sprinklered off their own wells rather than served by a cistern or pond, the hammerhead turnaround will be coordinated with the fire department, power will be underground from New Brook Road, and the houses were described as standard market ranches and colonials of roughly 1,600 to 2,000 square feet, not affordable or workforce housing.

24. 2:37:37
    Board direction on cluster intent and wetland setbacks

    Board members said the open space appears to be largely leftover wetland and asked the engineer to come back with one or more alternate layouts that better meet the intent of a cluster subdivision, including shrinking lots toward the 40,000 square foot minimum buildable area to return land to open space. The board also pointed to the cluster standard requiring a 50-foot buffer from the edge of any wetland before the building envelope is drawn, and asked that the stream in the corner be counted as surface water in the net residential calculation.

25. 2:42:55
    Site walk and next meeting scheduling

    The board set a site walk for the North Road sketch plan on the 25th at 1 p.m., meeting at the barn or the MDOT entrance if plowed, and asked the applicant to flag the road line and bring printed plan copies. Because of member absences on February 4, the board agreed to try for February 3 subject to the room being available, with the 4th as the fallback.

26. 2:53:26
    Durham Heights update and adjournment

    Thebarge reported that nothing further has come before the board on Durham Heights and that the clearing now underway there is timber harvesting rather than a violation, in his interpretation, noting gravel has been placed only to get a pickup truck off the road. A motion to adjourn followed.

What was decided

• 10:44
  Motion to approve the meeting minutes as presented, seconded and put to a vote.outcome unclear
• 22:05
  Motion to accept the planning board site walk summary for the Greystone Ridge subdivision, seconded and put to a vote.outcome unclear
• 32:56
  Motion to close the public hearing on the Greystone Ridge subdivision application, seconded and put to a vote.outcome unclear
• 49:09
  The two Greystone Ridge waiver requests, for the road not being built along the full length of the right-of-way and for a narrower curbed road section at three locations, were left undecided until the town's peer reviewer has commented.tabled
• 1:53:12
  Agreed to address buffers and fencing under the existing draft condition of approval on required buffers, section 617C, rather than adding a separate condition.passed
• 1:53:12
  Motion to grant preliminary subdivision approval for the Greystone Ridge subdivision with the draft conditions of approval, excluding the waiver requests at this time. No second or vote is recorded in the transcript.outcome unclear
• 2:42:55
  Site walk for the 335 North Road sketch plan set for the 25th at 1 p.m., meeting at the barn.passed
• 2:48:13
  Agreed to try to hold the next meeting on February 3 instead of February 4, subject to the meeting room being available, with February 4 as the fallback.passed
• 2:53:26
  Motion to adjourn.passed

An outcome reads "unclear" where the recording does not state it plainly. The recogniser drops short words, and "the motion does not carry" is one missing word from its opposite.

Worth knowing

• 10:44
  The digitized draft land use code is about 183 pages and contains an even 100 editorial changes. It is posted on the town website for public review and will be on the board's next agenda.
• 27:38
  An abutter said the Greystone Ridge road is staked through a wet area he believes is a forested swamp and close to two wells on his property. The applicant's wetland scientist visited in July during drought and concluded it was not a jurisdictional wetland but called the determination marginal; the board sent the delineation to the town's peer reviewer and the applicant is sending a hydrogeologist to look at the wellhouse area.
• 43:25
  The proposed fire pond is 120,000 gallons, expanded from the existing pond. A hydrogeologist is scheduled for April to test the recharge rate and run a pumping test, which could require a larger pond or a liner.
• 2:21:20
  On the 335 North Road sketch plan, wetlands make up roughly 46 percent of the proposed open space against an ordinance limit of 50 percent, and the board pressed the engineer to redraw the layout so the open space is not mostly constrained land.

Motion language found in the transcript

Located by pattern matching, with no model involved: "I move that", "I'll second", "all those in favour". This is an independent check on the summary above: 3 passages of motion language, against 9 decisions summarised.

Elsewhere

← 2025-12-10 Planning Board2026-02-03 Planning Board →All meetings