Planning Board Meeting ~ December 6, 2023

2023-12-06 · Planning Board · 2:18:13 · watch on YouTube →

The planning board took public comment, ran a completeness review on the Leisure campground expansion, and settled its position on the town's housing density amendment. A resident challenged the resource protection map, producing a state wildlife biologist's email saying only one Blanding's turtle has ever been recorded in Durham, in May 2000, and also objected that the planner's account of the board's November 1 motion did not match what was said. The board went through the site plan checklist for 24 Leisure Lane item by item, told the applicant which submissions it wants and where a written waiver request would be considered, and found the application incomplete. On housing it reviewed the answers to questions raised at the November 15 public information meeting, decided not to reopen lot sizes or duplex treatment, and voted to support the LD 2003 implementation proposal as presented with one clarification about non-conforming lots. Relief for landowners caught by the resource protection ordinance was confirmed as off the table for this year's town meeting.

What was discussed

1. 5:29
   Agenda amendments

   The board moved the residents' information exchange ahead of town officials, and agreed to add a discussion of possible mitigation for landowners affected by the resource protection ordinance to the draft amendments item, to be taken last if time allowed.

2. 10:51
   Public comment on the resource protection map

   Lois Kirby Chesley (?), of Methodist Corners and Runaround Pond Road, said the resource protection map is based on incorrect and incomplete information and that the town manager had described it as a 30,000-foot approximation. She read from an email obtained through a freedom of access request to Maine Inland Fisheries and Wildlife in which biologist Derek Yorks (?) said an adult Blanding's turtle found crossing a road in Durham in May 2000 was outside the species' known range, and that after 23 years with no further reports he is not optimistic there is a population there.

3. 16:05
   Public comment on how the November 1 motion was recorded

   The same speaker said the planner's email describing the November 1 vote did not match the motion John Talbot actually made, which was that George Thebarge would look into the legality of spot zoning and that the board would decide at its December meeting whether to go further. She asked the board to amend the minutes to record the actual wording, and said that if the motion is unclear it is the chair's job to help reword it.

4. 16:05
   Building activity report

   George Thebarge reported 18 single-family building permits for the year through October, up on the rate at the time of the comprehensive plan update but down from about 32 to 34 last year. Under the comprehensive plan, exceeding 45 in a single year would trigger a special meeting to consider a moratorium and an update to the plan. Members clarified that the 22 figure quoted is monthly permits of all kinds, including electrical and plumbing.

5. 21:22
   Housekeeping and upcoming meetings

   The next meeting was confirmed for January 3, which is also election day at the town office. February 13 was noted as the deadline for budget information to reach the select board for the town report. The Conservation Commission's solar presentation was set for the following evening at 6:30 at the Eureka Center, recorded but not live streamed.

6. 26:26
   Union Church

   John Talbot reported the Union Church committee has finished its work and is recommending to the select board that the building be sold to the Durham Historical Society, which offered a dollar. It would then need to go to a town meeting article.

7. 26:26
   Leisure campground: completeness review begins

   Juliet Caplinger recused herself as a neighbour. The board took up the site plan review application for expansion of the campground by 40 RV sites, Map 2 Lot 13, following conditional use approval on September 6. George Thebarge explained that only the planning board can determine whether an application is complete, and that his checklist and draft incomplete letter are staff work for the board to review.

8. 32:04
   Applicant's plan changes and the waiver question

   Ken, the applicant, described curving the internal road to keep sites 400 feet from a house at the end and moving the tank to give the fire department better access. John Talbot said items marked not applicable are the board's call rather than the applicant's, and asked for written waiver requests with a short justification for each, giving the landscape plan as an example where a wooded site with a wide vegetated buffer might justify one.

9. 38:04
   Whether conditional use documents carry over

   George Thebarge recommended treating the site plan review as a wholly separate application with its own complete supporting record, noting for example that the soils work submitted for the conditional use was a preliminary investigation showing test pit locations, not a septic system design. Brian Lanoie and John Talbot agreed the record needs to stand on its own for the future. The board agreed to accept the deed and legal rights documents already filed for the conditional use.

10. 43:22
    Applicant's position on state permitting and delay

    Ken (?) said the campground is a state-licensed facility and that the public water source, engineered septic and electrical work are all approved by the state, but only after town approval. He said he has been paying interest on borrowing while waiting, that state review will take about three more months, and that construction will not be finished until 2025.

11. 48:29
    How the application fee was calculated

    Members asked how the site plan review fee and escrow were set for a project with no commercial building or conventional parking lot. George Thebarge said each RV site was treated as 400 square feet of parking area and multiplied by 40, using the ordinance's per-thousand-square-feet-of-parking language. The board accepted the methodology and noted the reasoning is now on the record.

12. 53:47
    Checklist: copies, deeds and septic

    The board agreed two full-size plan sets rather than ten is acceptable but wants a written waiver so the decision is documented, noting that most overturned board decisions turn on procedural errors. The deed and legal rights documents from the conditional use file will be accepted. Septic system test pit logs were not waived; the board wants the HHE-200 level documentation showing where each system is going.

13. 59:09
    Checklist: drainage, stormwater and sight distances

    The board asked for a stormwater plan or a waiver request, with the concern being water leaving the site toward the ditch on Route 136 or a neighbour's property. On the main entrance it noted the only material on file is a letter saying the entrance is grandfathered, which says nothing about sight distances, and asked the applicant's engineer either to show the required distance in both directions on the plan or file a waiver.

14. 1:04:56
    Checklist: sewer, campsites and pedestrians

    George Thebarge said 40 RV sites on a shared water and sewer system is a semi-public system rather than a household septic, and Ken (?) confirmed an engineered system is required by the state above 2,000 gallons. The board asked for that design to be submitted. On campsite detail it discussed whether a typical site detail would suffice and raised pedestrian circulation and speed limits within the campground.

15. 1:10:32
    Checklist: landscaping, signage, lighting and wildlife

    Members indicated a landscaping waiver would likely be accepted given the heavily wooded site and existing buffer. On signage they want a speed limit sign and campsite numbering so the fire department can find sites in an emergency. The campground has no interior lighting and describes itself as a dark-sky site, so a waiver would be considered. Letters from Maine Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and on historic resources are required as standard procedure.

16. 1:16:10
    Checklist: erosion and stormwater waiver conditions

    Tyler Hutchison read the ordinance provision allowing these submissions to be waived only if the site is not in the Runaround Pond watershed, the work does not change drainage patterns, and impervious surfaces are under 5% of the lot, with calculations submitted alongside the waiver request. It was clarified that only the new disturbance for the expansion is at issue, not the existing campground.

17. 1:21:31
    Finding of incompleteness

    The board voted to find the application incomplete. George Thebarge will revise the notice of incomplete application to reflect the evening's decisions, circulate it to the board for comment and then send it to the applicant, who was told to get waivers and submissions in two weeks before the January 3 meeting.

18. 1:21:31
    Housing density: answers to public questions

    George Thebarge summarised his memo answering the questions raised at the November 15 public information meeting, covering driveways and addressing, non-conforming lots, accessory apartments in subdivisions, and lot sizes. He also confirmed he had told the select board and town manager that the board was not pursuing resource protection relief in this round.

19. 1:27:41
    Driveways and road standards

    Under the current ordinance a driveway may serve no more than two dwellings, so three units on one lot would require a road built to street standards. Members raised fire apparatus access, the ability of trucks to pass on a long wooded driveway, and what happens if units are later sold to unrelated owners. The board reached a consensus not to change this, while acknowledging that requiring a road adds cost and works against the affordability aim, and agreed no vote was needed.

20. 1:38:26
    Selling individual units and lot sizes

    George Thebarge explained that individual units can be sold as condominiums under state law and the town cannot prevent it, and cannot require more than 300 feet of road frontage per lot. Jill Gastonguay's suggestion was that smaller per-unit lot sizes would block splitting and separate sale, which members discussed but did not adopt, and it was clarified that the 300-foot frontage requirement is unchanged.

21. 1:49:15
    Accessory apartments and non-conforming lots

    Members noted that in a cluster subdivision with one-acre lots, an accessory apartment could be added unless the covenants say otherwise, and the new state law expressly does not override private covenants. A change was added to section 16.3 clarifying minimum lot size so that a one-acre lot can carry a single family home and an accessory apartment but is not grandfathered from the new requirements for more units.

22. 1:55:14
    Whether to reopen lot sizes and duplex treatment

    George Thebarge laid out the August alternative, which would have given duplexes a two-acre rather than two-and-a-half-acre requirement, against the simpler two, four and six acre approach presented in November. John Talbot said the November 15 meeting drew only about ten people and produced no clear direction, leaning if anything toward more land per unit, consistent with the earlier survey. Members discussed that a duplex cannot be split down the middle without a condominium, and then agreed to keep the two, four and six approach.

23. 2:05:29
    Vote on the housing proposal

    Tyler Hutchison moved that the board supports the LD 2003 implementation as presented on November 15 with the modification under question four in the packet, on non-conforming lots, as the only change. The board also agreed no further public information meeting is needed and that the proposal can go to the select board.

24. 2:10:30
    Remaining questions and website posting

    The answers to the public information meeting questions will be posted on the town website. Members confirmed the proposal does not remove the 50% maximum size limit on an accessory apartment relative to the initial dwelling, and that if the town's article fails at town meeting the state law takes effect on July 1, with only the town's own proposal appearing on the warrant.

25. 2:15:40
    Resource protection relief

    Juliet Caplinger said relief for people whose existing houses and driveways ended up in resource protection is off the table for this year but should be worked on for next year. The idea of routing it through the board of appeals had been thought legally questionable. She suggested Conservation Commission members with wetlands knowledge might help residents assess their lots, while the board of appeals remains the formal route.

26. 2:15:40
    Codification of the land use ordinance

    George Thebarge noted the town has a budget request going forward for codification of the land use ordinance, which would produce a list of perhaps 20 pages of items that need fixing, some straightforward conflicts with state law. He urged setting reasonable expectations with the budget committee about how much can be accomplished.

What was decided

• 10:51
  Accept the November 1, 2023 meeting minutes; moved by Juliet Caplinger, seconded by Allan Purinton, carried 4-0-1passed
• 1:21:31
  The site plan review for 24 Leisure Lane is incomplete, pending waivers or submissions as noted in the notice of incomplete application prepared by George Thebarge; moved by Tyler Hutchison, seconded by Allan Purinton, carried 4-0 with Juliet Caplinger recusedpassed
• 1:27:41
  Agreed by consensus, with the chair saying no vote was needed, not to change the ordinance provision limiting a driveway to two dwellings, so three units on one lot would require a road built to town street standardspassed
• 2:05:29
  The Planning Board supports the LD 2003 implementation proposal as presented on November 15, 2023, with the modification under question four of the packet clarifying how the multiple dwelling unit provisions apply to non-conforming lots as the only change; moved by Tyler Hutchison, seconded by Allan Purinton, carried 5-0passed

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.

Motions the minutes record

The town's own written account of what was decided, taken from pb_meeting_minutes_12-06-2023_0.txt. It owes nothing to the recording or to a model: the clerk typed it, with the vote. Where the summary above claims a decision this list does not carry, the summary is the part to doubt.

• accept the November 1st, 2023 meeting minutescarried 4-0-1

  Moved by Juliet Caplinger, seconded by Allan Purinton

• the site plan review for 24 Leisure Lane is incomplete, pending waiver or submissions as noted in the document notice prepared by the Town Plannercarried 4-0

  Moved by Tyler Hutchison, seconded by Allan Purinton

• the Planning Board support the LD 2023 implementation proposal as presented on November 15, 2023 with the modification outlined under item 4 of the agenda packet “will comply with the multiple dwelling units to apply to …carried 5-0

  Moved by Tyler Hutchison, seconded by Allan Purinton

• adjourn the meetingcarried 5-0

  Moved by Allan Purinton, seconded by Juliet Caplinger

Worth knowing

• 10:51
  A state wildlife biologist's email obtained by a resident says the only Blanding's turtle recorded in Durham was one adult found crossing a road in May 2000, outside the species' known range, with no further reports in 23 years. The resident argued the resource protection map that relies on it is based on incorrect information.
• 16:05
  Eighteen single-family building permits were issued through October, down from about 32 to 34 last year. The comprehensive plan sets 45 in a single year as the trigger for calling a special meeting to consider a moratorium.
• 26:26
  The Union Church committee is recommending the select board sell the building to the Durham Historical Society, whose offer was one dollar. The sale would need a town meeting article.
• 2:15:40
  Relief for landowners whose existing houses and driveways were put into resource protection will not be on this year's town meeting warrant. For now the board of appeals remains the only formal route for those owners.

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: 5 passages of motion language, against 4 decisions summarised.

Elsewhere

← 2023-11-15 Planning Board2024-01-03 Planning Board →All meetings