Town of Lamoine, Maine
The Official Website of Lamoine's Town Government
Planning Board Minutes
April 2, 2013
Planning Board Members Present: Holt, Bamman, Gallagher, Donaldson, Tadema-Wielandt, Fowler (alt)
Absent: Weber (alt)
Code Enforcement Officer Present: M. Jordan
Members of the Public: S. Salsbury, P. MacQuinn, S. Workman, S. Workman, C. Korty
The proposal, submitted by Robert Gerber, includes reviewing the written materials in the application and relevant materials contributed by members of the public. (See letter dated March 14, 2013.) If the Planning Board chooses, it would include review of oral testimony. Ransom's work would proceed in two phases: 1) review of materials and report to the Board; 2) if more data collection and analysis from the site is recommended and the Board elects to have this done, Ransom will review these materials as well.
The applicant has reviewed the proposal and agreed to pay the costs of this work as outlined in Gerber's letter.
Donaldson (Tadema-Wielandt) moved that the Town contract with Ransom Consulting,Inc. to do the work outlined in the March 14, 2013 letter from Robert Gerber. Approved: 5-0.
The Board also received a “Field Determination Form” dated 3/29/13 from the Maine Dept. of Environmental Protection Bureau of Land and Water Quality relating to the identification of “peatlands”. Wetland B does contain a peatland. This project would qualify for licensing “permit-by-rule” procedures.
S. Salsbury inquired about the Board's request for additional study of wildlife in the area. Board members referred him to the letters in the application from Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (see, at least, pages 43 and 191). It was the consensus of the Board that, due to the 9-12 month duration of a comprehensive study by a biologist, this requirement could be delayed until such time as the applications were approved by the Board. Salsbury indicated that no gravel operations or removal of vegetation would occur in the newly permitted area(s) until the study was completed and showed that operations could proceed.
Donaldson (Gallagher) moved to take the matter off the table and to act upon the applications. Approved: 5-0.
A Site Walk was scheduled for Wednesday April 17 at 4:15 and a Public Hearing for May 7 at 6:30.
S.W. Boatworks Applications for Commercial Building Permit and Site Plan Review Permit (Map 9 Lot 14).
S. Salsbury, representing the owner, summarized the proposals to build a “second 46'X60' boat shop identical to the one” completed on the site in 2012.
Chair Holt questioned whether this application is properly labeled “Commercial” rather than “Industrial”. The Board had considered the use proposed in 2011 for the first building an “industrial” use. (See June, 2011 minutes.) The minutes of a subsequent meeting, however, showed that the permit was issued for a “commercial” building/use. Industrial uses are not permitted in the Residential and Agricultural Zone.
Discussion ensued as to the definitions of these two terms and which one most accurately reflects the current application. Mr. Workman explained that “no boats will be manufactured in this new building”. It will, instead, be used for “small jobs” related to the boats such as construction of component parts and “repair” of boats and molds. Bamman pointed out that the Table of Land Uses permits “Industries & Business – Assembling & Manufacturing Products Related to the Secondary Processing of Wood/Marine Products” with Planning Board approval. This appears to describe Mr. Workman's oral description of the purpose of the second “boatshop”.
Moved by Bamman (Tadema-Wielandt) to find that this application falls within Land Use #15 Industries & Business (See full title above.). Approved: 3-2 (Holt, Donaldson)
The Board conducted a completeness review of the Site Plan Review Permit application and found information on all application requirements to be present and required the addition of:
I-3c a copy of Tax Map #20.
I-4a indication that the property is located in the Residential Zone as well as the RAZ.
I-4c indication on the map the pond on adjacent property
The SPR application was deemed complete with these three conditions.
During the discussion, Holt questioned the location of the completed Boatshop, noting that it was not in the location approved in the 2011 permit. Salsbury agreed that it was not. Donaldson inquired if the Code Enforcement Officer had indicated in the town records that the building had not been properly located. Both Salsbury and CEO Jordan noted that this practice was common.
The Board conducted a completeness review of the Building and Land Use Permit under Land Use #15 “Industry and Business”. The application follows the requirements for Industrial Uses, BLUO Section 15E required of Large Commercial and of Industrial applications. Information was located on all applications requirements (Section 15E 5 a-q) except item o(4) Fire Protection Plan. The Board deemed the application complete with two conditions:
1. that the man-made pond on adjacent property be added to the map
2. that the application be reviewed by the Fire Chief, considering all aspects of Section 15E6, and recommendations be incorporated in a Fire Protection Plan
A Site Walk was scheduled for Wednesday April 17 following the Gott site walk and a Public Hearing for May 7 following the Gott hearing.
10. Adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
Gordon Donaldson, Secretary