Town of Lamoine, Maine
The Official Website of Lamoine's Town Government
Lamoine Planning Board
Minutes of March 5, 2013
Planning Board Members Present: Holt, Bamman, Donaldson (6:46pm), Tadema-Wielandt, Fowler (alt)
Code Enforcement Officer Present: M. Jordan
Members of the Public Mike Deyling (Summit Environmental), R. Pulver, P. MacQuinn, S. Salsbury, E. Bearor (attorney for the applicant), Elizabeth Boepple (attorney for Miro family), M. Miro, J. Miro, C. deTuede, D. Sanderson, (and others)
S. Salsbury declared that the new plan uses 100 foot setbacks for the new portion of this proposed pit (Map 3, Lot 8) as the revised Gravel Ordinance will require. After some discussion of this issue, Tadema-Wielandt suggested that the Board should at least review the application for completeness, and if it is deemed to be complete, the issue of whether to act upon it could be dealt with at a subsequent meeting. This was unanimously agreed, and the Board commenced its completeness review of the Site Plan Review application.
The Board found information present for all required sections of the SPR application (with the understanding that a mylar will be provided at a later date). Moved by Donaldson (Bamman) to find the application complete. Approved 4-0-1 (Donaldson)
Note: The Town's review form omits item #5 (maps) and is numbered incorrectly. The application does include the required information.
Chair Holt again raised a question regarding whether this application is different from the previously denied one. The Maine Municipal Association's Planning Board manual clearly states that boards need not consider repeated applications unless they are “substantially” different from the previously denied application.
Salsbury stated his opinion that “doubling” the setback on one side of the lot from 50 feet to 100 feet makes the application more in conformance with review criteria.
After some discussion, Bamman (Tadema-Wielandt) moved to table any further action on this matter until the next meeting. Approved: 4-1 (Fowler)
Before proceeding, Chair Holt announced that he had spoken with Maine Municipal Association regarding Gallagher's absence and whether, if an alternate voted tonight, it would disqualify Gallagher from participating in the remainder of the review of these two applications. He was told that an alternate may vote tonight and, providing Gallagher thoroughly acquaints himself with the minutes and video of this meeting, he may resume his place as a voting member of the Board vis a vis these applications.
The Chair also announced that, if the Board received additional information from the applicants, it has the right to require another public hearing.
The Board addressed the Review Standards in the Site Plan Review Ordinance , expressing concern about the following:
- Preserve and Enhance the Landscape:
Bearor, speaking for the applicant, encouraged the Board to move forward with further study on this matter.
Holt has consulted with the Maine Geologic Survey office to locate firms that might conduct such studies. They suggested three (Ransom; Drumlin; Emery and Garrett). Bamman asked M. Deyling if his firm (Summit Environmental) has “a close relationship with any of these firms so they would not be able to be objective” about the Summit report. Deyling indicated that the firm did not.
The Board reached consensus that Holt will contact Ransom (where Robert Gerber, author of the “Gerber Study” of Lamoine's aquifer done in the ‘80s works). If Ransom is unable to help, Holt will contact Emery and Garrett.
He will request: a) a peer review of existing materials, providing an evaluation of the accuracy and thoroughness of information in light of the review criteria and specifications in both ordinances that pertain to Groundwater; b) recommendations to the Board regarding the need for further data on the site that will assist the Board in reaching a well- documented decision about the permits; c) specification of procedures necessary to obtain those date (with costs of same, if possible).
Holt will inform the Board and the applicant when he has arranged a preliminary meeting with one of these firms.
The Board addressed the Review Criteria in the Gravel Extraction Ordinance, expressing concern about the following:
- erosion or sedimentation: (See SPR #18 notes above)
- water pollution…existing groundwater (See SPR#10 notes above)
- natural beauty: Public testimony raised concerns repeatedly on this matter; difficult to know how to “measure” “aesthetics”.
- public ways (See SPR #3 notes above)
- surrounding properties:
- Public testimony raised concerns repeatedly on this matter
- What might data on such impacts look like?
- Performance Standards (these relate to the company's operations)
Holt will contact Ransom, as noted above.
Bearor indicated that the applicant will look into a) completing the wetlands study (likely not until April); and b) obtaining a comprehensive study of wildlife habitats (“flora and fauna”) on the entire parcel.
If we do not meet with Ransom (or other firm) prior to our April Meeting, we will communicate at that point regarding progress on these plans.
Adjourned at 9:13 p.m.
Respectfully submitted (and with thanks to C. Tadema-Wielandt),
Gordon Donaldson, Secretary