Planning Board Meeting ~ March 5, 2025

2025-03-05 · Planning Board · 1:36:05 · watch on YouTube →

The Planning Board met on March 5, 2025 with all five members present. The board approved two sets of earlier minutes, then took up the Ruby Farm View subdivision amendment to add four lots on Map 5, Lot 78B, whose preliminary approval from a year earlier had lapsed when the six-month deadline for a final plan passed. The board found the application complete, waived the on-site water supply requirement for fire protection on the strength of the fire chief's acceptance of sprinklers, and reinstated preliminary approval with the drafted conditions plus a new condition requiring a solid waste plan; a second waiver, covering a future street connection to abutting land, was held over. The remainder of the meeting was a review of the three land use articles heading to the March 19 public hearing and the April 5 town meeting: resource protection, historic preservation changes, and a combined contract zoning and battery energy storage (BESS) article. George Thebarge went through the select board's final changes, including raising the threshold at which a solar project must go through contract zoning from 175,000 to 400,000 square feet of panels. The chair also announced Tyler Hutchinson's resignation, which leaves the alternate seat open.

What was discussed

1. 0:08
   Opening, roll call, Pledge of Allegiance

   The meeting opened after a delay while the YouTube stream and audio were checked. John Talbot called the roll, noted all five members present for a quorum, and led the Pledge.

2. 5:37
   Minutes of January and February meetings

   The minutes of two earlier meetings were moved, seconded and approved with no changes. The dates were read once as January 15 and February 5 and once as January 5 and February 5.

3. 5:37
   Town planner update on land use ordinance amendments

   George Thebarge reported that the select board had taken final action on the draft land use ordinance amendments and that an advertisement ran in the paper that day for the March 19 public hearing. The material is on the town website and bulletin board, with paper copies available.

4. 5:37
   Ruby Farm View subdivision amendment - completeness review

   George Thebarge summarised the history: the board granted preliminary approval a year ago after the town attorney advised treating the project as a phased subdivision, because the original infrastructure had not been completed in the required time. The six-month limit for submitting a final plan expired, but the phase one improvements are now finished, so the board was asked to act on the completeness of the application to add four lots. The applicant's representative, Rick Meek (?), of a consulting firm in New Gloucester, said a statement of completion of construction for phase one was included in the resubmission.

5. 11:29
   Changes since the earlier approval

   Juliet Caplinger asked what had changed from the previous submission. The transformer was moved out of the 50-foot buffer along Ruby Farm View Lane, the septic test pits were added to a new site plan sheet because the registry will not record the coloured plan, and erosion control and tree clearing limits remain items for the final plan.

6. 16:47
   Solid waste collection in the subdivision

   A board member raised the trash arrangements: the 13 existing homes set their containers at the end of the road, and the new lots would do the same. Under the town's contract, Pine Tree Waste (Casella) would supply two 64-gallon containers per household that must sit three feet apart for the automated arm, which the member said would need considerable space at the road end. The abutter John Faith (?) of 254 Swamp Road (?) said debris blows onto his corner and that a truck backing out onto Swamp Road, posted at 45 but driven at about 60, would be a hazard.

7. 21:57
   Board jurisdiction over phase one and the waste condition

   The board discussed whether it could require changes affecting the existing homes. George Thebarge said the board could withhold approval of the four new lots but likely could not enforce a change on the existing homeowners without an original condition, and the board agreed to restore a condition requiring a solid waste management plan as condition nine.

8. 27:50
   Vote on completeness and start of substantive review

   The board moved and voted that the application was complete, then moved directly to the substantive review of the same amendment. George Thebarge said the substantive issues had already been aired in the completeness discussion.

9. 33:04
   Conditions of preliminary approval

   George Thebarge walked through the draft conditions on packet pages 119 and 120, with the phase one items removed: peer review of the engineering plans and cost estimates, six months to file the final plan, vegetation clearing limits shown on the plan, an approved street name, an engineer's cost estimate, and a performance guarantee in the form of the town attorney's irrevocable letter of credit template or a cash deposit. Bonds would have to be reviewed by the town attorney, with no lot sales or building permits until the infrastructure is complete, as was done at Deer Creek Crossing.

10. 38:47
    Two waivers requested

    The applicant sought waivers of the on-site water supply for fire protection and of the requirement to provide a future street connection to abutting land. On the second, the board wanted confirmation that the abutting property has legal access to Ruby Farm View Lane or Swamp Road, and raised the separation between a new road and Ruby Farm View Lane if access came out on Swamp Road, so that waiver was held for a later meeting.

11. 43:50
    Abutter's question about drainage and the final plan hearing

    John Faith (?) asked how the four lots would handle leach fields given a stream that comes off that section of land. The board had not decided whether to hold a public hearing on the final plan, pointed him to the plans on the town website, and suggested he speak with the applicant, who has done the vernal pool and wetland work. The amendment is expected back before the board the first Wednesday in April.

12. 43:50
    Land use articles - overview of the three warrant articles

    The chair said the item was on the agenda so the board would be familiar with the final drafts before the public hearing on March 19 at 6:30 pm at the fire station. There are now three articles: resource protection, historic preservation changes, and contract zoning combined with the BESS standards into a single up-or-down vote. Members asked why the two were combined; the answer given was the town attorney's advice, so the town does not end up with one without the other.

13. 49:40
    Moratorium timing and the solar threshold

    The BESS moratorium was adopted at a special town meeting on November 19 and runs six months unless the select board extends it, and it stays in place until it lapses or standards are adopted. On solar, the planning board had recommended a contract zoning trigger of 175,000 square feet of panels, about 10 acres of development area, and the select board raised it to 400,000 square feet, described as about 20 acres of development area. A member pointed out a typo on packet page 133 where the figure appears as 400,000 in one place and 175,000 in the text.

14. 54:41
    How the solar threshold and contract zoning would work

    The threshold is measured as the flat surface area of the panels, so an applicant will have to show the square footage of panels on its plans. Anything at or above 400,000 square feet goes through contract zoning, which involves the select board, the planning board and a town meeting vote; the board's own role is a recommendation on consistency with the comprehensive plan.

15. 1:00:04
    Sound standards, warrant notes, and the Conservation Commission

    The select board added language at section 5.8.5 saying the standards apply unless otherwise specified in a contract zoning agreement, so a town meeting could set different sound limits for a large project; the day and night limits were given in the discussion both as 55/45 and as 65/55 decibels. The explanatory notes will stay in the drafts for the public hearing but come off the warrant articles. George Thebarge said the Conservation Commission asked the previous night for solar farms to be removed from the contract zoning requirement, apparently unaware that the select board had voted unanimously a week earlier to raise the threshold to 400,000 square feet.

16. 1:05:19
    Contract zoning as a tool and objections to combining the articles

    Members discussed contract zoning as the town's only leverage over a very large project, using the example of a 500 or 600 acre solar farm or a large warehouse, and as a way to negotiate benefits to the town. At least one member said again that they do not like the two subjects being combined into one vote; others noted the articles could be separated and brought back at a special town meeting if the combined article fails.

17. 1:11:04
    Conduct at the public hearing

    George Thebarge advised that, because the board is making a recommendation, members should inform rather than argue for or against at the hearing they are holding, and speak personally on the town meeting floor instead. He has prepared a slide presentation on all three articles. Members were told the resource protection article came back from the select board unchanged.

18. 1:17:02
    Historic preservation article

    George Thebarge explained that the town has eight properties listed on or eligible for the National Register, a de facto district around them that never went through the required process, and three overlapping jurisdictions, which he said has produced confusion for property owners. The proposal moves the standards into section 5.14 and converts the Historic District Commission to a town-wide advisory body with 45 days to advise the code officer. The select board added that a subdivision or a commercial site plan next to one of the properties also triggers the advisory review, at sections 8.6.2.B.2 and 8.6.K on packet page 150.

19. 1:22:05
    Effect of an advisory opinion and drafting errors

    The board would not be bound by the commission's advisory opinion, but George Thebarge said going against it could open the town to a challenge from either the developer or an abutter. A member raised the example discussed the previous night of a gas station proposed across from a historic property and questioned a conflict with standards that apply to work on the same lot. Brian Lanoie identified a duplicated paragraph, subsections f and g, in the standards, which had been deleted once and reappeared.

20. 1:27:47
    Subjectivity of historic standards and town meeting schedule

    George Thebarge used the Freeport McDonald's as an example of requiring a design to be modified rather than refused, and described the Interior Department standards as subjective but upheld by the courts. Speakers at the March 19 hearing will get three minutes each. Town meeting is April 5, with the land use articles moved up to follow the budget and precede the business items.

21. 1:33:19
    Next meetings, board vacancy, adjournment

    The next meetings are the public hearing on March 19, which one member said he cannot attend, and the regular meeting on Wednesday April 2. The chair announced that Tyler Hutchinson has resigned, thanked him, and asked members to look for someone interested in the alternate seat, noting codification work and a comprehensive plan approaching the end of its ten-year life. A motion to adjourn was moved and seconded; the recording does not state the result clearly.

What was decided

• 5:37
  Accept the minutes of the January and February meetings as presented. Moved and seconded, approved 5-0.passed
• 27:50
  Find the Ruby Farm View subdivision amendment to add four lots (Map 5, Lot 78B) a complete application. The chair counted four hands and counted Juliet Caplinger's (?) raised hand as approval as well.passed
• 38:47
  Waive the requirement for an on-site water source for fire protection, on the basis that the fire chief accepts the use of sprinklers. Moved and seconded, approved 5-0.passed
• 38:47
  Hold over the waiver of the requirement to provide a future street connection to abutting land until the applicant shows the abutting property has legal access without using this road. Not voted on at this meeting.tabled
• 38:47
  Reinstate preliminary plan approval for Ruby Farm View with the conditions of approval as drafted plus a ninth condition requiring a solid waste plan. Moved and seconded, approved 5-0.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

• 16:47
  Under the town's contract, Pine Tree Waste (Casella) would supply two 64-gallon containers per household, which must be set three feet apart for the automated arm. The 13 existing Ruby Farm View homes now carry their trash to the end of the road; the board added a condition requiring a waste plan and said the hauler will drive a subdivision road it considers navigable if asked.
• 43:50
  The public hearing on the land use ordinance amendments is March 19 at 6:30 pm at the fire station, and town meeting is April 5, with the land use articles placed after the budget rather than at the end.
• 1:00:04
  The select board raised the point at which a solar project must go through contract zoning from the planning board's recommended 175,000 square feet of panels to 400,000 square feet, and voted unanimously to do so. The Conservation Commission, apparently unaware of that change, asked the night before for solar to be taken out of the contract zoning requirement altogether.
• 1:33:19
  Tyler Hutchinson has resigned, leaving an alternate seat open on the Planning Board; the chair asked for candidates who could attend nearly all meetings, with codification and a comprehensive plan update coming up.

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

Elsewhere

← 2025-02-05 Planning Board2025-03-19 Planning Board →All meetings