Town of Lamoine, Maine
The Official Website of Lamoine's Town Government
Home
Town Hall
School
Fire Department
Boards
Calendars
Newly Added

Lamoine Planning Board

Minutes of June 5, 2012

Planning Board Members Present: Holt, Gallagher, Donaldson, Tadema-Wielandt, Jordan (alt)

Code Enforcement Officer Present: D. Ford

Members of the Public A. LaBossiere (LCC), R. McMullen, Eric and Susan Hann, Richard Brey

  1. Called to order by Chair Holt at 7:02 p.m.
  2. Consideration of Minutes - Minutes for the May 1, 2012 meeting were unanimously accepted, as printed.
  3. Code Enforcement Officer's Report
    1. Permits Issued. CEO Ford noted that most of the permits in the past month were for decks and other auxiliary structure. Tadema-Wielandt indicated that the total number of permits issued should read “8” instead of “9”.
    2. Enforcement Actions. CEO Ford indicated, in response to a question, that W. Pinkham has been reminded that he must complete the inspection process for the “multiple violations” of the Building and Land Use Ordinance, Map 10 Lot 29-7. He further informed the Board the Mr. Pinkham is working with the assistance of the Washington-Hancock Community Agency and that he believes Mr. Pinkham should be “given a little leeway” in rectifying the problem.
  4. Conservation Commission

A. LaBossiere reported that there was a “good turnout” at the Conservation Commission's “tick awareness” presentation. She updated the Board on the status of the open space survey, which is using the many maps of the town to identify what sorts of vegetation, animal life, aquatic conditions, and the like are present in open spaces in Lamoine. They have added a focus on charting points of public access to the shore.

  1. Old Business
    1. Richard McMullen: Application for a Commercial Permit for “change of use”, Map 4, Lot 21-A

The Planning Board reviewed the additional information requested of Mr. McMullen at the May meeting. It then conducted a completeness review for the application. Members of the Board noted several points of vagueness, such as the fact that the “storage” and the “parking” areas were the same and that precise distances to boundaries and structures were unclear. Moved by Donaldson (Gallagher) to find the application complete. Approved by Vote: 5-0

Mr. McMullen was handed a copy of the Review Criteria for a Commercial Permit and informed that the application needed to clearly provide information that would allow the Board to make a definitive finding on all criteria.

A Public Hearing was set for Monday July 2, 2012 at 6:30 p.m.

    1. Roseanna Rich (Map 9 Lot 9), application for Commercial Permit. Withdrawn
  1. New Business
    1. Eric and Susan Hann. Site Plan Review – Commercial Use for a Bed and Breakfast (Map 13 Lot 6).

The Hanns described the project. They purchased the house four years ago, “gutted it” and have completed construction of 4 new bedrooms within it, each with a bath, and to be used as a bed and breakfast. They have installed smoke detectors and a sprinkler system. They would serve breakfast and possibly provide bag lunches. The state has inspected for appropriate permits and has issued them.

The Hann's reside within the building as well.

At the request of Chairman Holt, the Board discussed the appropriate ordinance jurisdiction for this permit. The Table of Land Uses in the BLUO clearly states that the Planning Board must issue permits for a bed and breakfast, but no town ordinance explicitly describes the permitting process for this use. After discussing whether the Site Plan Review, the Home Occupation, or the Commercial section of the BLUO applies to this use, the Board by general assent indicated that the Commercial permitting process would be applied given that a) more than 50% of the structure will be used for the bed and breakfast and b) that the use is for the purpose of creating income from the sale of services.

The Board reviewed details of the application and requested more specific and complete information regarding:

      1. parking spaces for customers and the owner; ingress and egress of traffic so that parking would not hinder movement;
      2. a map of the entire lot showing all boundaries and abutters
      3. a more detailed map of the house, driveway, setbacks that reflects the present location of all pertinent structures (the application presented several different displays of this information)

Donaldson suggested that the Review Criteria listed in Section 7B (4) of the BLUO be applied to this application, as per Section 15D (3) of the BLUO. Holt and Jordan argued that these all do not apply to this project. Tadema-Wielandt pointed out that the application proposes a significant change of use to the property and thus required a public hearing, as indicated in the Commercial application procedures (15D (3)). After further discussion, the Board agreed to apply the Review Criteria in Section 7B (4), as per Section 15D (3) of the BLUO.

The Hanns were given a copy of these Review Criteria and it was suggested that they provide any further information that might assist the Board in making a definitive finding on all criteria.

A Public Hearing was scheduled for Monday July 2, 2012, following the McMullen Public Hearing, scheduled at 6:30 p.m.

  1. Other Public Matters. None arose.
  2. Ordinance Matters

MUBEC/BLUO Change Request.

The Board discussed the May 24, 2012 memorandum from Stu Marckoon regarding Maine Municipal Association's response to the town's inquiries about implementing the Maine Uniform Building and Energy Code (MUBEC). Stu presented several options for discussion. Jordan opined that the town has two choices: 1) adopt MUBEC or 2) remove all existing building standards from our BLUO. CEO Ford indicated that MUBEC is widely used in Southern Maine and that it “makes a lot of sense” in more densely populated areas; it will, he said, add cost to the owner because the builder must comply with many more requirements and the municipality must repeatedly inspect construction as it occurs.

Three points of fact emerged:

  1. All contractors are required by law to adhere to MUBEC building standards.
  2. It is highly unlikely that banks or other mortgage and loan institutions will issue mortgages/loans unless the proposed construction will meet MUBEC standards.
  3. Towns with population under 4,000 are not required to enforce MUBEC.

It was suggested that Lamoine might remove all references to building standards in our current ordinances and include a statement on the building permit application (and elsewhere) that the State of Maine requires construction to meet MUBEC standards and that all construction in Lamoine is subject these standards.

No consensus emerged and no motion was made on this matter. Board members agreed to learn more about the matter.

  1. Next Meetings:
  1. Adjourned at 9:05 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,

Gordon Donaldson, Secretary