Bridgton Court Room
December 5, 2006
7:00p.m.

The Bridgton Planning Board was called to order at 7:00p.m. by Fred Packard, Chair. Those in attendance were: Fred Packard, Chair; Steve Collins, Vice Chair; Gordon Davis; David Diller; Dee Miller, Alternate; David Lee, Alternate. Absent were: Christopher McDaniel.

Fred appointed David Lee, Alternate, to act in the capacity of absent regular member, Christopher McDaniel.

Approval of Minutes – November 7, 2006

Steve motioned to approve the minutes as presented with the amendment as discussed. Gordon 2nd. 5 Approve / 0 Oppose

PUBLIC HEARING

Glennco Property, LLC
Hio Ridge Road; Map 8 Lot 23
8 Lot Subdivision
Represented by Craig Higgins

Mr. Higgins said this is an after-the-fact request for subdivision approval because of a stream that comes from Woods Pond and traverses this property. It wasn’t recognized as having been subject to stream protection district classification when the parcels of 40 acres or larger were created. We have identified the parcels greater than 40 acres and the sequence of transactions that occurred. The parcels are located off an existing road. We have shown on the plan the 75’ setback. We have an average density of 1 unit per 41.6 acres. We are not proposing any additional roads be constructed, therefore, our impact is minimal.

Steve said to Mr. Higgins did you get a copy of a letter from Andrea and Steve Lipinsky? Mr. Higgins said yes. I have included a copy in our latest submittal to you.

Fred closed the Public Hearing at 7:13p.m.

Steve motioned to grant preliminary approval conditional upon submission of the phosphorous plan and complete delineation of the stream. David D. 2nd. 5 Approve / 0 Oppose

OLD BUSINESS

Cornshop Brook Re-Development Project
Depot Street/Park Street/Pondicherry Park Trail
Preliminary Discussion
Page 2
Bridgton Planning Board
December 5, 2006

Represented by Micah Niemy, Assistant Community and Economic Development Director

We had a meeting with the engineer, Wright Pierce, on November 16, 2006. At that time we discussed the project and all the elements involved. At this point, all that is required from the Planning Board is a letter of support. I have given you a draft for consideration (copy attached). In the future we will make a formal presentation to the Planning Board.

David D. said how many parking spaces will be provided? Mr. Niemy said 65 spaces at the Depot Street location and about 35 at the Park Street location. The Park Street location is privately owned so we are negotiating a lease with the owner of Bridgton Books, Justin Ward.

David D. motioned to approve the letter of support submitted by Mr. Niemy and hereby gives Fred Packard, Chairman, the authority to sign on behalf of the Planning Board. Steve 2nd. 5 Approve / 0 Oppose

Fred signed the letter.

Woods Pond Partners LLC/Westwood Shores
Woods Pond/North Road; Map 4 Lot 39 (PO)
14 Lot Subdivision
Represented by Phil Libby

Steve motioned to table consideration of the application of Woods Pond Partners LLC as requested by the applicant. Gordon 2nd
5 Approve / 0 Oppose

Reny’s Store
Main Street; Map 23 Lot 126
Addition
Represented by George Parker

Mr. Parker submitted additional information to the Board for consideration. There have been a few modifications since we met to discuss the project in October. We have put in a secondary crossing of the stream to provide access which will be used primarily for pedestrians. We need to apply to DEP for a permit by rule for crossing the stream and a NRP permit for work within 25’ of the stream. We had originally planned for a two story atrium in the middle as you walk through the two entrances. We would like to accentuate that with a cupola, however, the Town of Bridgton has a 35’ height restriction. The peak of the current building is 40’. Dee said I wrote that portion of the Ordinance that Mr. Parker is referring to. This is not a full story and is considered an architectural feature, therefore, I do not believe the 35 foot
Page 3
Bridgton Planning Board
December 5, 2006

restriction would apply. David L. said can we waive that portion of the Ordinance? Fred said yes.

Mr. Parker said we looked at other options for the handicap ramp and are proposing to extend a 42” high wall along the edge of the overhang which will make the ramp less conspicuous.

Mr. Parker said there is an existing building with paving. Because of our increase in grass along with the water coming off the roof surface, it is cleaner and represents a decrease in phosphorous from what is there now. Twelve years ago when borings were done it indicated that groundwater was less than 4’ underground. If you install a basin or infiltrator you may have the potential of draining groundwater into the brook. I need guidance from the board of what you think is a reasonable solution. Fred said I agree with Rob Baker, Code Enforcement Officer, and feel the intent is to reduce phosphorous into the system. It is not the amount of water but what is in the water. Dee said digging anything is going to be more disruptive. Is it possible during the excavation stages to leave an area for crushed gravel to help spread the water out. Mr. Parker said the engineer suggested putting the water out onto the ground and letting it run on the surface like it does now. Dee said isn’t that area where your trucks are going to be going? Mr. Parker said I wouldn’t want the water to cause a hazard. Mr. Baker said what about crushed stone, like a French drain around the perimeter of the foundation.

George Sawyer, Sawyer Engineering, said I have talked with Mr. Parker about the situation there. The best way to deal with roof water is to run it directly into the stream and not over a parking because of contaminants it could pick up on the way. DEP has determined that a quick disbursement is better rather than have it drain out over time.

Mr. Parker said the existing building is within 50’ and the new building will be within the 50’.

David L. said how will the building be heated? Mr. Parker said the older portion is heated with oil the new sections are propane.

Steve motioned to schedule a Public Hearing for Tuesday, January 9, 2006 at 7:00p.m. David D. 2nd. 5 Approve / 0 Oppose

Coastal Guide Service Inc./Eric O’Connell
Off Frost Farm Road; map 8 Lot 39B
13 Lot Subdivision
Represented by George Sawyer, Sawyer Engineering

Mr. Sawyer said this is for a 13 lot subdivision located off Frost Farm Road. The road that leads in has been changed from Roberts Road
Page 4
Bridgton Planning Board
December 5, 2006

to Carissa Drive. Carissa Drive will serve 11 of the 13 lots. The wetlands have been defined on the plan. The land is currently wooded but has been cut over recently. There are no buildings on the site now but we are proposing single family residential lots. The lots have been tested and we have shown the test pits on the plan. We have done a phosphorous study. The road has been built up to the condition that it is in now, at least to the width, during the forestry operation. There is an existing house past Lovella Drive and will be left as a driveway. Casey Drive will be brought up to town standards.

Fred said how wide is Carissa Drive? Mr. Sawyer said it is approximately 20’.

Mr. Sawyer said for the phosphorous, we assume there will be one house on each lot. There will be no restrictions on the amount of clearing. In order to meet the requirements we have shown a 50’ buffer on all downhill sides of the road and in some cases there are 75’ buffers. The road will be sloped to the south, to the left as you go in, all the runoff from the road drains into the wooded buffer.

Steve said what is the buffer shown on lot 13? Mr. Sawyer said the buffer is to serve the house and the buffer has to be outside the wetland so we have set it at 50’ off the edge of the wetland. Steve said the buildable portion of lot 13 is only the western section. Mr. Sawyer said correct.

Steve said I am skeptical of the statement that the road wasn’t widened because I went out and looked at it. Mr. Sawyer said this parcel was owned by one person and logged by one person. Steve said what is the length of Carissa Drive? Mr. Sawyer said 2,500–3,000’ Steve said if that was increased 5’ that would be 15,000sf and even then the phosphorous would still be within limit.

Mr. Baker said the road continues in for quite a distance, do we need to maintain the name, Carissa Drive, all the way through? Fred said we should confirm that with Dawn Taft, Addressing Officer.

Mr. Baker said make sure to specify any waivers and add the non-conformance clause.

Mr. Sawyer said I talked with Mr. O’Connell about a road association and it is his understanding that there is a road association for the lots that were created when Jonathan Whitney subdivided. Mr. O’Connell is willing to join the road association, however, we can’t find any legal documents for the road association. Fred said is it in the by-laws or covenants that they will become part of the road association? Mr. Sawyer said yes, and we can put it on the mylar. Fred said yes.
Page 5
Bridgton Planning Board
December 5, 2006

Mr. Baker said according to the language for the buffer areas, for example, if I wanted to put in a lawn I could encompass the whole buffer area. Mr. Sawyer said in the legend it is referred to as a wooded buffer and there is a definition for maintenance of the buffer. I will add that language to the plan for reference.

Mr. Sawyer said Glen Garland, Fire Chief, asked about a fire pond. He was at the property and met with the owner today. We have proposed a 20x40x6’ fire pond to be located on the left hand side of the road as you enter.

Mr. Garland said is there a turn-a-round at the bottom of Casey Drive? Mr. Sawyer said yes.

Mr. Sawyer said I would like to ask for a waiver of the paving requirement. Mr. Baker said if the waiver is granted then it has to be sited on the mylar that it is a non-conforming road.

David L. motioned to waive the paving requirement. Gordon 2nd.
5 Approve / 0 Oppose

The Board established a finding of fact and conclusions of law which will be reviewed at the next regular meeting.

Steve motioned to approve the application as submitted and presented conditional upon the addition of notes being added to the mylar concerning the necessity of the buyers to join a road association, that the road is to be private forever more, and the definition of wooded buffers be added to the erosion control drawing. Plan approval is also conditioned upon compliance by the applicant with the plans and specifications which have been received by the planning board in connection with the development proposal as well as with any oral commitments regarding the project which were specifically made by the applicant to the Board in the course of its deliberations. Gordon 2nd.
5 Approve / 0 Oppose

NEW BUSINESS

Robert and Gail Stone
Kezar Heights Road; Map 16 Lot 2C
2 Lot Subdivision
Preliminary Discussion
Represented by Jonathan Bliss, Bliss & Associates

Mr. Bliss said this property is located in the Kezar Heights Subdivision originally approved in 2004. They are proposing to divide their lot into two five acre lots. The original subdivision approval allowed for lots to be divided into lots no less than 5 acres. The
Page 6
Bridgton Planning Board
December 5, 2006

original Stone property was 11.12 acres. There was an abutter sale that took place last year due to the fact that their well was on the Stone’s property. That will be reflected on this plan.

Fred said there was a mass of errors done by the original Kezar Heights owners. Some of the lots were split by roads which normally are acceptable to create separate parcels, however, some of the new title companies would not give clear title because they said this did not come to the Planning Board for a subdivision review and approval. As a result, we received it as a defacto subdivision. We just recognized the lots and did not require stormwater or phosphorous at that time.

Fred said we should have contours shown on the plan. Mr. Bliss said I will show 5’ contours.

Mr. Bliss said should I notify the abutters? Fred said yes if you are going to submit a formal application that has to be part of it.

Fred said to Mr. Baker, do we need to require a stormwater and phosphorous study? Mr. Baker said yes.

Approved Application(s) as per Bridgton Site Plan Review Ordinance 4.A.1

A. Bailey’s Coffee House/Ron and Carol Recchino
82 Main Street; Map 22 Lot 91
Retail Coffee Shop

Topics for Discussion

A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Paris Farmers Union
Board Review and Chair Signature

Fred read the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the record (see file). Dee said the advertising features and landscape plan are really supposed to be reviewed by the Planning Board. Will the plans be available to the Board to review? Gordon said we decided it could be up to the Code Enforcement Officer. Dee said the Ordinance doesn’t leave it up to the Code Enforcement Officer it is supposed to be a part of our review of their application. Fred said we authorized the Code Enforcement Officer to review them. Dee said I understand that but I would like the opportunity to review them, it does not change the Findings.



Page 7
Bridgton Planning Board
December 5, 2006

Steve motioned to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as submitted and hereby gives Fred Packard, Chairman, the authority to sign on behalf of the Planning Board. Gordon 2nd. 5 Approve / 0 Oppose

Fred signed the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.

B. Reminder: Legal Seminar
January 16, 2006

Fred said Mr. Spencer, the Town’s attorney, is planning on conducting a legal seminar which will involve the Board of Appeals and the Planning Board. The Board of Selectmen have also been invited to attend. There are several issues that need to be addressed so it is very important that we all attend.

C. Appeal; David Randall/Randall Marina
Board of Appeals – December 28, 2006

Steve motioned to adjourn the meeting at 10:10p.m. David D. 2nd.
5 Approve / 0 Oppose

Respectfully submitted,
Georgiann M. Fleck
Municipal Secretary