March 27, 2015  8:27 PM 
March 04, 2015
Other Notices
February 02, 2015
November 12, 2014
November 12, 2014

SHAPLEIGH PLANNING BOARD

MINUTES

Wednesday, January 28, 2015

Members in attendance: Roger Allaire (Chairman), Maggie Moody (Vice Chair), Madge Baker, Roland Legere, and Barbara Felong (Secretary). Diane Srebnick, Alternates Steve Foglio and Ann Harris were unable to attend. Code Enforcement Officer, Steven McDonough was also unable to attend.

**************************

The following words are not verbatim unless accompanied by quotation marks “ ”.

**************************

Public Hearing started at 6:05 p.m.

Conditional Use Permit – Existing Home Business ‘Whole Nine Yards’ Adding Sales of Docks – Map 3, Lot 5 (299 Shapleigh Corner Road) – Marc & Cara Boisse’, Applicants

Mrs. Boisse’ was present for the public hearing.

Roger A. began by stating the Conditional Use Permit being reviewed this evening was for selling docks because on the original permit approval for this property one of the conditions was: ‘There shall be no storage of any material incidental to the approved business stored on site (Map 3, Lot 5).’ Roger stated they were looking to change this condition. Roger also noted that there were no hours for business for Whole Nine Yards, as no business was conducted on site. Mrs. Boisse’ agreed.

Roger A. asked Mrs. Boisse’ to state what they wanted to do. Mrs. Boisse’ stated she would be adding the sales of docks to their business. She said there would be storage of parts, but she didn’t think there would be whole docks, they would be ordered for the customer; there would be samples of dock options and one dock set up on the front lawn as a display, so the customer could see what the product looks like. She said this is primarily what it would be.

Roger A. asked if there would be three or four docks on site to be sold? Mrs. Boisse’ did not believe so, she said the basic structure is the same, the insets are made of different materials which didn’t have to be on display. She said sample pieces would only be required, a dock looks like a dock regardless of its length. She added that she didn’t’ want a huge dock on her lawn. She said they only wanted something reasonable on display, so people could get an idea of what they look like.

Roland L. asked if there would be formal business hours? Mrs. Boisse’ stated they may move into that but she didn’t believe so to start. She thought they would let people know they were available by 9 a.m., she didn’t envision an open time and closed time presently. Roland asked her what she perceived would be a window for the future? Mrs. Boisse’ said with respect to dock sales maybe 9:00 a.m. to noon; with the present business people come to their house at all hours, so she didn’t think she could truly pick a time frame.

Roger A. said, if docks are going to be there, and should a neighbor complain about traffic at certain hours such as 4 in the afternoon, they would have to tell the customers to leave, as these hours were not approved. Roger stated because of this, she should consider hours of operation for the future. He said they might be able to grant 9 a.m. to noon, but again in the future what might they be? Mrs. Boisse’ asked if Roger wanted to know what future hours might be, and if so, she wasn’t sure as she would have to speak with her husband (who wasn’t present at the meeting at this time). Mrs. Boisse’ stated she could call him to discuss this with him. Roland L. noted she should also ask him what days they would be open.

Page 1 of 11

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 1/28/2015 Page 2 of 11

Mrs. Boisse’ asked the board if they wanted a wide window for hours, so people couldn’t complain that they were going outside of the approved hours? Madge B. said, yes. Roger stated that otherwise they would have to come back before the board for a change in hours; this would require an amendment to their permit and another two meeting process. Roger stated, therefore, it would be best for them to consider the future hours they may want. Roland L. noted they didn’t have to be open those hours but they could be if they wanted to. Mrs. Boisse’ said that she understood.

Roland L. asked if there would be any signage involved? Mrs. Boisse’ stated that there would be a banner put on the barn advertising the manufacturer. She said the signage that is there now for ‘The Whole Nine Yards’ would probably have a plaque on the bottom that said ‘dock sales’. Maggie M. asked if the banner counted as additional signage? Roger A. stated, “That is the CEO, he will take care of signage”. Madge B. thought it should be considered.

Roland L. asked if there was a designated area for customer parking? Mrs. Boisse’ stated yes, and thought it was discussed at the first meeting. Roger A. stated it was but there also needed to be an area marked on the plan where the dock would be located. He said Mr. Boisse’ stated it was going to be where the word grass was but again it had to be marked on the plan. Roger said that the board was told with respect to spare parts they would be either in the barn or behind the barn. Mrs. Boisse’ agreed.

Roger A. asked if there were any additional questions? There were none. The public hearing for this application was closed at 6:15 p.m.

-----------------------------------

Conditional Use Permit – Addition to Parsonage for ‘Mother-in-Law’ Apt. – Map 45, Lot 4 (600 Shapleigh Corner Road) – Trades Center, Inc., Dave Wade, Applicant; Shapleigh First Baptist Church, Property Owner

Mr. Wade was present for the public hearing along with Pastor Bosse and his wife.

Roger A. stated this permit was for an in-law apt. and asked Mr. Wade to give a summary of what they wanted to do. Mr. Wade began by reviewing the letter he had presented to the board at the last meeting. This letter stated in part: On behalf of the Shapleigh First Baptist Church, I am pleased to submit information and plans for a proposed addition to the existing parsonage. The initial use of this addition will be for a “mother-in-law” apartment. The future use would be for pastor support or education. The savings to use, light and heat large rooms of the church for small groups will be a plus. The floor plan includes a living and dining/kitchen area with a large bedroom with bathroom and closets and a den. Off of the kitchen will be a connecting enclosed porch accessing the existing house and a 10’ x 14’ deck as shown.

Mr. Wade stated the addition would have its own power, heat and septic. It will be connected to the house water with the ability to be winterized if it’s needed. I have spoken with the CEO and by treating it as a duplex, the fire separation and separation of the electric and heating will adapt well to this use. The addition would have its own septic and the approved HHE-200 design sheet has been attached.

Mr. Wade said the Church had approved the addition and is looking forward to the project. The addition will not have an adverse impact on the habitat of wildlife or surrounding area and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Traffic access and parking already exist for this addition. The site is in conformance with municipal flood hazard protection. The addition will add 1/3 of 1% more of additional runoff and would be handled by vegetation and will not impact the adjacent property. Prior to excavation a silt barrier will be installed to control runoff and sedimentation. He noted it would have its own septic system to handle solid waste and construction debris will be removed from the site. Due to the age of the parsonage itself,

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 1/28/2015 Page 3 of 11

materials removed are not expected to be hazardous. He said because the addition is on the rear of the building and the property has existing trees and buffers, additional landscaping is not planned, but ornamental flowers and plantings will be done by the homeowner.

Mr. Wade then said he would be happy to answer any questions.

Madge B. asked if there was any issue with lot coverage? Roger A. stated there had been a lot coverage issue but it was remedied at the last meeting. He said adding this building brings the coverage up to 3.26%. Madge asked if the paved parking counts as lot coverage? Roger said, no. Madge asked if it factored into stormwater? Roger said, “Stormwater, yes.” Madge asked if it was dealt with when the paving was put in? Roger asked Mr. Wade if the parking was figured in with respect to stormwater. Mr. Wade stated he believed the application referred to buildings. He said the paving is not included in his calculations, as it asked for what was occupied by structures. Roger said, right. Roger asked if Mr. Wade had anything calculated for what was currently existing. Mr. Wade said he could figure it out but did not have anything written down at this time. He said percentage of lot occupied by structures will be 3.26% on 7.5 acres.

Madge B. stated there was a fair amount of buffer between the parking area and the brook. Madge asked if the old parsonage counted? Roger A. said it did today but the board was notified at the last meeting that the old parsonage would not used and they would like to have it removed. It was deemed non-habitable. Mr. Wade agreed and said it was on Craig’s List for anyone that wanted to remove it. Roger noted it was too bad as it was a historic structure. Mr. Wade agreed.

Madge B. said she was only concerned because of Pump Box Brook. Mr. Wade stated he understood and that they were 151 feet from the brook. He said they were well beyond the 75 foot buffer and the amount of vegetation between the structure and the brook is substantial. Madge thought this would be the case. Mr. Wade said they were adding very little, 1/3 of 1% to the property, 1000 square feet on the entire property. He noted there would be sediment control during construction and beyond the trees were grasses and vegetation. He thought as a guess it would be adding 300 to 400 gallons of stormwater coming across and the area would absorb that without issue. Madge understood and thanked Mr. Wade.

Roger A. asked if there were any additional questions? There were none.

Nothing further was discussed.

The public hearing closed at 6:25 p.m.

************************

The planning board meeting started at 6:30 p.m.

The minutes were accepted as read.

************************

Conditional Use Permit – Existing Business ‘Whole Nine Yards’ Adding Sales of Docks – Map 3, Lot 5 (299 Shapleigh Corner Road) – Marc & Cara Boisse’, Applicants.

Mrs. Boisse’ was present for the review of the application.

During the first review Mr. Boisse’ presented to the board an application which stated ‘The current business “The Whole Nine Yards” will now be selling docks.’ Along with the application was a sketch plan which

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 1/28/2015 Page 4 of 11

depicted the existing barn, a parking area, grass area, and that the opening onto the road would be 30 feet in width. There were also two notes that read as follows: ‘The 2 existing trees would be removed for visibility.’ ‘This drawing shows the driveway / parking area enlarged by 740 sq. ft.’ Roger A. asked how many docks would be on hand and Mr. Boisse’ stated excess docks would be behind the barn and there was a certain dollar value he was required to purchase up front. He stated whatever $20,000 would buy is how many he would have. It was noted that Mr. Boisse’ would need to put the location of the display dock(s) on the plan at the final review. Also noted was the fact that the opening on the road had to be 26 feet in width, not 30 feet as currently depicted on the plan, so that would have to be changed on the plan as well.

Roger A. began review of the pertinent ordinances.

105-21 – Traffic. Roger A. stated access to the site was safe (minimum site distance in this location is 315 feet at 45 mph).

Madge asked if the board has the site distances for the record? Roger thought they were mentioned at the last review. Maggie stated she went by this location and believed they were fine. Madge thought the board should get the distance for the record. Roger noted two trees were being taken down for better visibility as well.

105-22 – Noise. There will be no noise generated from the activity.

105-23 – Dust, fumes, vapors and gases. There is no dust, fumes, vapors or gases, generated by this activity.

105-24 – Odors. N/A - There will be no obnoxious odors generated.

105-25 – Glare. There shall be no additional lighting added to the home or barn.

105-26 – Stormwater runoff. There are no changes being made to the existing structures or property that would cause a stormwater problem.

105-27 – Erosion control. There are no changes being made to the existing structures or property that would cause an erosion problem.

105-28 – Setbacks and screening. There shall be only one single dock being displayed, all other materials shall be stored in the barn or behind the barn.

105-29 – Explosive materials. There shall be none on site and none to be generated.

105-30 – Water quality. There is no waste or hazardous material being stored outside.

105-31 – Preservation of landscape; landscaping of parking and storage areas. There are no changes being made to the site with respect to the landscape, except for the removal of two trees for visibility.

105-32 - Relation of proposed building to the environment. The existing building(s) fits in well with the surrounding area.

105-33 – Refuse disposal. Refuse will be removed by the applicant.

105-34 – Access control on Route 109 & 11. There is an existing approved driveway entrance onto Route 11, minimum site distances can be met.

105-40 – Home occupations. Roger A. stated the original permit was approved under a home occupation and therefore he read what the rules governing this approval were:

A. Home occupations shall be carried on wholly within the principal building or within a building or other structure accessory to it.

B. Not more than two persons outside the family shall be employed in the home occupation.

C. There shall be no exterior display, no exterior sign (except as permitted by the provision of this chapter), no exterior storage of materials and no other exterior indication of the home occupation or variation from the residential character of the principal building.

D. No nuisance, heavy traffic, waste discharge, offensive noise, vibration, smoke, dust, odors, heat, glare or radiation shall be generated.

E. If existing off-street parking is required to be expanded, it shall be adequately screened from the road and adjacent lots (for example, with a dense screen of evergreens) and shall not be located between the house and the road.

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 1/28/2015 Page 5 of 11

Madge B. asked if this was still a home occupation? Roger stated this was a home occupation. Madge thought this was being turned into a retail operation. Roger said they didn’t have enough land to become retail, as they only have just over 2 acres. Madge asked how the board can approve this under the standards because there will be exterior display? Roger said the only exterior display will be the one dock outside the building. Madge asked if the off-street parking was being changed? Roger said, no, and when it was originally granted there were no customers going in and out. He said it was granted as a home occupation because there was not going to be customer(s) coming to the location. Plus there is not more than two persons outside the business employed. Mrs. Boisse’ stated, “Correct, it’s my sons and son-in-law.” Madge asked if the hours should be limited to make it less likely a retail operation? Roger said the board could make it a condition and to be sure there is no additional outside storage of materials to keep it a home occupation. Madge noted the business isn’t grandfathered because it has not been there very long. Roger agreed.

Mrs. Boisse’ asked about the earlier conversation where the board asked for a broader range of hours of operation, should they also ask for the ability to store more docks on the lawn? She stated Mr. Boisse’ voiced concern during their telephone conversation that if she stated only one dock would be on the lawn and then he wanted to put a boat lift, would that be a problem? Roger A. said this is starting to look like a business and that isn’t allowed. Madge agreed because it didn’t appear there was acreage for a retail operation and the board’s job is to keep the retail as small as possible. Maggie M. stated that looking at the previous minutes they talked about the number of docks and Mr. Boisse’ stated there would be 10 or 15 but perhaps he was exaggerating as he was talking about the cash flow requirement. Mrs. Boisse’ said she was referring to putting two docks instead of one, is that going to be an issue, so she was asking if she should ask for more than one dock? Roger said Mr. Boisse’ had stated he would have one in the grass area and the remaining items would be behind the barn for storage. Maggie thought perhaps he was talking about sections? Mrs. Boisse’ stated that because she wasn’t present, she could not speak as to what Mr. Boisse’ said.

105-43 – Off-street parking and loading. There is adequate parking for what is being proposed. The board had discussed that the entrance would be limited to 26 feet in width and not the 30 feet that was initially proposed on the sketch plan. This was changed on the plan.

Madge asked if it was 30 feet at this time? Mrs. Boisse’ didn’t know how wide it was but agreed it was wide. Madge asked if there would be any new construction? Roger said the only thing would be the removal of two trees for visibility but he noted Mr. Boisse’ was made aware he could not widen the entrance to 30 feet.

105-46 – Sanitary provisions. There is an existing State approved septic system on site for the home, none is required for this change in use of the property.

105-47– Signs and billboards. Any signage shall be obtained through the Code Enforcement Office.

Roger A. asked if there were any questions? Madge B. asked Mrs. Boisse’ what hours her husband suggested for the business? Mrs. Boisse’ stated they thought 8 a.m. thru 6 p.m., 7 days a week. She didn’t think they would actually be in operation all these hours.

Roger A. stated the board received a message via the answering machine that there was a concern with Mr. Boisse’ parking his vehicles on Route 11. The caller wanted the board to be sure this was not going to

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 1/28/2015 Page 6 of 11

continue, especially with the additional business being conducted. The message was left on Monday, January 26, 2015.

Roger A. stated there was no parking allowed on Route 11 and it could be subject to fines by the Sheriff’s Office. Pastor Bosse was in the audience, as his application was to be reviewed next, and he asked how far the vehicle had to be off of Route 11? Roger said it had to be out of the State’s right-of-way. Roger did not know what it was in this location. He stated it changed depending on the location, it could be 50 feet or 75. Mrs. Boisse’ stated that she was under the impression that it was their property up to their rock wall. Roger said a surveyor would have to determine this based on the right-of-way. Mr. David Wade who was also in the audience for the next application, stated that usually where the telephone poles are located is where the right-of-way ends but he noted this isn’t always the case. Roger said you could contact DOT but even there they may not have an answer right way, they would need to research the location. He said he believed that on Back Road the right-of-way was moved out to 80 feet.

Madge B. asked if the parking area on the plan was in existence at this time? Roger said, right. Madge asked if they park trucks there? Roger said, yes, they have their own vehicles they park there. Madge asked if they had space for retail that won’t interfere with their parking? Roger thought their vehicles were usually in the barn. Mrs. Boisse’ agreed and said at times they park on the other side of the property. Roger said during the day they are usually in and out. Madge asked Roger if he saw a problem with the parking plan? Roger did not. Maggie M. added that she never noticed it to be overly full of vehicles in this location. Madge didn’t think they would have more than one customer at a time. Roger agreed. Mrs. Boisse’ stated she could not guess how many there would be.

Roger A. asked if there were any other questions? There were none.

Roger A. reviewed Shapleigh Zoning Ordinance 105-73.G “Standards applicable to conditional uses”.

1) The use will not have an adverse impact on spawning grounds, fish, aquatic life, birds or other wildlife habitat. Roger stated, it will not.

2) The use will conserve shore cover and visual, as well as actual, access to water bodies. N/A

3) The use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Roger stated it is, the Comprehensive Plan encourages small businesses along Rte 11. Roger noted this was a home occupation vs retail.

4) Traffic access to the site is safe. Roger stated it is, the site distance meets the minimum required for the posted speed limit of 45 m.p.h. There shall be no vehicles parked on Route 11.

5) The site design is in conformance with all municipal flood hazard protection regulations. Roger stated it is. The home is not in a flood zone.

6) Adequate provision for the disposal of all wastewater and solid waste has been made. There is a State Approved septic design for the home and it is in place.

7) Adequate provision for the transportation, storage and disposal of any hazardous materials has been made. Roger stated there was none generated, therefore, N/A.

8) A stormwater drainage system capable of handling twenty-five-year storm without adverse impact on adjacent properties has been designed. Roger said the existing home has been on site for a great period of time with no history of storm water issues. There are no changes being made to the existing home or landscape for this business.

9) Adequate provisions to control soil erosion and sedimentation have been made. There are no changes being made to the site for the new business. N/A

10) There is adequate water supply to meet the demands of the proposed use and for fire protection purposes. Roger stated there is, the property is in close proximity to a fire hydrant / fire pond.

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 1/28/2015 Page 7 of 11

11) The provisions for buffer strips and on-site landscaping provide adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the development, such as noise, glare, fumes, dust, odors and the like. There are no changes being made to the surrounding area. There is no additional lighting being added.

12) All performance standards in this chapter applicable to the proposed use will be met. They shall.

Roger A. stated the conditions of the permit would be:

1) Hours of Operation shall be 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., seven days a week.

2) There shall be no further amendments to this home based business unless more land is obtained, as there is not enough property for a retail establishment.

3) There shall be no more than one dock stored outside, placed in the designated area on the plan provided. All other docks shall be stored either inside or behind the existing barn.

Madge B. asked if the condition was that there would be no more than one dock visible from the road? Mr. Boisse’, who just arrived at the meeting, stated that people could see behind the barn as they drove down the road. He said the surplus would be behind the barn. Madge wanted Mr. Boisse’ to know that there had been some discussion earlier about putting a banner on the barn advertising the product. Mr. Boisse’ stated he had one banner, approximately 2’ x 6’ in size. Roger said signage was up to the CEO. Madge said her concern was that this should not start looking like a retail business because that isn’t allowed in this location. She thought putting up a banner advertising a product could not be allowed. Madge didn’t mind the business sign because they had a business but she said that technically the board should not be allowing them to do retail at this location. Mr. Boisse’ asked if it was retail if he brought the dock to the customers house? Madge said, “The retail is encouraging people to come there to buy docks. Then you are selling docks. Unfortunately, you can’t do that because you don’t have the acreage.” Mr. Boisse’ stated he was confused. Roger said businesses require two acres and your home requires two acres. He said they would need 4 acres for both the house and the business. Roger noted that the home occupation was ok. He read from the ordinance again for Mr. Boisse’ §105-40 ‘Home occupation’, which notes that there can be no exterior sign or display of products.

Madge B. said that she wanted a condition that states they could not put up a sign or banner advertising a make of docks. She said she didn’t care that they had a business sign but she believed the minute you put up what looks like an advertisement it becomes retail. Madge understood that the CEO hands out the signage but she wants it noted in the record that a banner isn’t allowed. Roger said, ok. Roger said again the original conditions of approval were:

1) There shall be no storage of any material incidental to the approved business stored on site (Map 3, Lot 5).

2) Any signage shall be permitted through the Code Enforcement Office.

Roger added that the approval letter, dated August 27, 2008, also stated that ‘The application is to operate a property maintenance business, having the office in your home. The business operation which includes landscaping and light carpentry will be conducted off-site.”

Roger added one additional condition of approval which is:

4) There shall be no signage advertising the dock manufacturer, or any other marketing of products sold.

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 1/28/2015 Page 8 of 11

Maggie M. made the motion to approve the Conditional Use Permit to add the sales of docks on Map 3, Lot 5, allowing one dock to be placed on the grass area, as noted on the sketch plan provided and all other docks and related material shall be stored either inside the existing barn or behind it, with the above stated four conditions. Roland L. 2nd the motion. All members were in favor. Motion passed unanimously, 4 – 0.

Nothing further was discussed.

Findings of Facts

1. The Owners of Shapleigh Tax Map 3, Lot 5 are Marc & Cara Boisse’.

2. The property is located in the General Purpose District and according to the Assessor’s office contains 2.05 acres.

3. This location currently has a home-based business known as ‘The Whole Nine Yards’ which is a permitted property maintenance business, having a home office, permitted in August 2008. The business operations which includes landscaping and light carpentry, are all conducted off-site.

4. The applicants applied to sell docks at their current home / business location for ‘The Whole Nine Yards.’

5. The applicants provided a sketch plan along with their application which depicted the existing barn, parking area, grassed area, and location of where a single dock will be displayed.

6. The Planning Board reviewed Zoning Ordinance §105-40 ‘Home occupations’ in its entirety, along with all chapters that pertained to the proposed change to the existing use of the property. The board agreed the permit would meet the applicable ordinances with applied conditions.

7. A notice was mailed to all abutters within 500 feet of the property and a Public Hearing was held on Wednesday, January 28, 2015.

8. The board unanimously agreed to approve the Conditional Use Permit allowing the sales of docks on Map 3, Lot 5 with conditions, after review of the pertinent ordinances including §105-73 ‘Conditional Use Permits’, citing all conditions of approval could be met.

9. The conditions of the permit are as follows:

1) Hours of Operation shall be 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., seven days a week.

2) No further amendments shall be allowed on Map 3, Lot 5, to this home based business, unless more land is obtained, as there is not enough property for a retail establishment.

3) There shall be no more than one dock stored outside, placed in the designated area on the plan provided. All other docks shall be stored either inside or behind the existing barn.

4) There shall be no signage advertising the dock manufacturer, or any other marketing of products sold.

----------------------------------------

Conditional Use Permit – Addition to Parsonage for ‘Mother-in-law’ Apartment – Map 45, Lot 4 (600 Shapleigh Corner Road) – Trades Center, Inc., Applicant; Shapleigh First Baptist Church, Applicant

W. David Wade of Trades Center, Inc., was present along with Pastor Bosse of the First Baptist Church, and his wife.

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 1/28/2015 Page 9 of 11

The board previously received an application which stated ‘Proposed 1,000 SF w/deck addition to existing Parsonage for separate “Mother-in-law” apartment – Plans attached.’ Mr. Wade, representing Pastor Bosse at the public hearing earlier this evening and at the initial review, read from a letter he provided which described the intended use of the mother-in-law apartment, as well as possible future uses.

Roger A. stated there was a letter received and he read it to the board and applicants, it read as follows:

Dear Sir,

I own the house across from the church at 599 Shapleigh Corner Road. I do not object to Reverend and Mrs. Bosse’s project on the rectory, in fact I think it’s a wonderful gift to the church and town.

Sincerely,

Anna Maz L. Fullerton

599 Shapleigh Corner Road

Shapleigh, ME 04076

Roger began review of the pertinent ordinances.

105-21 – Traffic. Roger A. stated the access to the site was safe. The driveway is currently in existence.

105-22 – Noise. There will be no noise generated from the activity.

105-23 – Dust, fumes, vapors and gases. There is no dust, fumes, vapors or gases, generated by this activity.

105-24 – Odors. N/A - There will be no obnoxious odors generated.

105-25 – Glare. There shall be no glare as it is located well off the road.

105-26 – Stormwater runoff. Best Management Practices shall be used until construction is completed and a contractor licensed thru the DEP shall be used.

105-27 – Erosion control. The area shall be regrassed and landscaped once the addition is completed.

105-28 – Setbacks and screening. The existing screening shall not be removed and the structure is well away from neighboring properties.

105-29 – Explosive materials. There shall be none on site and none to be generated.

105-30 – Water quality. There is a State approved septic design submitted for the addition and there is no hazardous material being generated or stored on site.

105-31 – Preservation of landscape; landscaping of parking and storage areas. There are no changes being made to the site with respect to the landscape or parking areas. There will be minimal disruption with this project.

105-32 - Relation of proposed building to the environment. The existing building fits in well with the surrounding area.

105-33 – Refuse disposal. All construction material will be removed from site by way of a dumpster, recycled or small items to the Shapleigh Transfer Station.

105-34 – Access control on Route 109 & 11. There is an existing approved driveway entrance onto Route 11.

105-42 – Multifamily dwelling units. Roger stated this application meets or exceeds all the minimum requirements for a two-family dwelling unit.

105-46 – Sanitary provisions. Roger stated submitted was a Subsurface Wastewater Disposal System Application, dated 11/26/2014, done by Kenneth Gardner, SE #73 for a 1 bedroom apartment.

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 1/28/2015 Page 10 of 11

105-51.1 – Soils. Roger stated the area will be returned to as near to existing as possible, and Soil Engineer Kenneth Gardner designed the septic system.

Roger A. asked if there were any additional questions? There were none.

Roger A. reviewed Shapleigh Zoning Ordinance 105-73.G “Standards applicable to conditional uses”.

1) The use will not have an adverse impact on spawning grounds, fish, aquatic life, birds or other wildlife habitat. Roger stated, it will not.

2) The use will conserve shore cover and visual, as well as actual, access to water bodies. N/A

3) The use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Roger stated he didn’t know if this was addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, but noted a residential structure is allowed on Rte. 11.

4) Traffic access to the site is safe. Roger stated it is, the entrance is in existence with no issues.

5) The site design is in conformance with all municipal flood hazard protection regulations. Roger stated it is. The home will not be in a flood zone.

6) Adequate provision for the disposal of all wastewater and solid waste has been made. There is a State approved septic design for this addition, done by Kenneth Gardner, SE #73, dated 11/26/14.

7) Adequate provision for the transportation, storage and disposal of any hazardous materials has been made. Roger stated there was none generated, therefore, N/A.

8) A stormwater drainage system capable of handling twenty-five-year storm without adverse impact on adjacent properties has been designed. Roger stated the site would revert back to as close as existing once the project is completed. Roger stated the Best Management Practices shall be in place until the project is completed which includes landscaping.

9) Adequate provisions to control soil erosion and sedimentation have been made. Roger stated Best Management Practices shall be used to control soil erosion and sedimentation until the project is completed. The person doing the BMP shall have DEP certification for installation and maintenance.

10) There is adequate water supply to meet the demands of the proposed use and for fire protection purposes. Roger stated there was.

11) The provisions for buffer strips and on-site landscaping provide adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the development, such as noise, glare, fumes, dust, odors and the like. Roger stated the buffer strip is in existence and isn’t going to be removed.

12) All performance standards in this chapter applicable to the proposed use will be met. They shall.

• Roger A. stated the only condition of approval would be that Best Management Practices be used and maintained until the project is completed.

Pastor Bosse asked what that meant and Mr. Wade explained that the excavator had to be licensed to put up the silt fencing and oversee it during construction. He stated once the project is completed the fencing will stay up until the grass has regrown. It was important that it is removed correctly, so the silt is cleaned up. Roger A. said it is to ensure that no erosion would go into Pump Box Brook. He noted it was a sensitive area in town and there had been some issues in the past from previous development that should not have happened. Roger said DEP had fined the town and contractors, so the board tries to ensure it is protected. Pastor Bosse said he was glad to hear that. Mr. Wade agreed.

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 1/28/2015 Page 10 of 11

Madge B. moved for approval of the Conditional Use Permit to add a 1000 sq. ft. addition with an open deck, to the existing parsonage located at Map 45, Lot 4, per the plans provided and the above stated condition. Maggie M. 2nd the motion. All members were in favor. Motion passed unanimously, 4 – 0.

Nothing further was discussed.

Findings of Facts

1. The Owner(s) of Shapleigh Tax Map 45, Lot 4 is the Shapleigh First Baptist Church.

2. The property is located in the General Purpose District, and according to the Assessor’s office contains 7.54 acres.

3. This location presently has an existing parsonage w/garage, church and education center, old parsonage and barn. Currently 2.95% of the property is covered by structures, with the addition lot coverage will be 3.26%.

4. The proposed addition meets side, rear and front setbacks to lots lines and road.

5. The applicants provided along with the application a description of the ‘Preliminary Scope of Work’ dated 11/10/2014 provided by Trades Center Inc.; a Site Plan Design drafted by W.D. Wade of Trades Center Inc., dated 12/13/2014; a Preliminary Addition Layout, done by Trades Center Inc., dated 11/10/2014; a Subsurface Wastewater Disposal System Application, dated 11/26/2014, done by Kenneth Gardner, SE #73 for a 1 bedroom apartment; a sketch of the proposed addition provided by Trades Center Inc., an introduction to the project letter from W.D. Wade, dated 12/18/2014 and a letter from Janie Silcoks, Church Clerk, dated 12/17/2014, which stated Mr. Wade could represent the church in all aspects of the parsonage project before the Planning Board.

6. The Planning Board reviewed Zoning Ordinance §105-42 ‘Multi-family dwelling units’, along with all chapters that pertained to the proposed change to the existing use of the property. The board agreed the proposed project could meet all applicable ordinances.

7. A notice was mailed to all abutters within 500 feet of the property and a Public Hearing was held on Wednesday, January 28, 2015.

8. The board unanimously agreed to approve the Conditional Use Permit for a 1000 sq. ft. addition and open deck, to the existing parsonage on Map 45, Lot 4 with one condition, after review of the pertinent ordinances including §105-73 ‘Conditional Use Permits’, citing all conditions of permit could be met.

9. The condition of permit is as follows: Best Management Practices shall be used and maintained until the project is completed.

**************************

Growth Ordinances – Growth Ordinances are available.

**************************

The Planning Board meeting ended at 7:30 p.m.

Respectively submitted, Barbara Felong, Land Use Secretary

planningboard@shapleigh.net