May 06, 2016  6:28 PM 
April 29, 2016
Other Notices
April 13, 2016
March 25, 2016
March 09, 2016



April 12, 2016

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


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


The planning board meeting started at 7:30 p.m.

The minutes from Tuesday, March 22, 2016 were accepted as read.


Amendment to a Major Subdivision – Red Pine Estates – Add an Additional Lot to 5 Lot Subdivision, 6th Lot to Consist of 5.6 Acres – Map 11, Lot 28F (Newfield Road) - Nickolas Richardson, Applicant

Mr. Richardson was not present for the application, he was unable to have the required additional information ready for members, and therefore, the board will wait for further information before they put him back on the agenda.


Construction of a Private Way – Map 5, Lot 43 (16 Hooper Road) – Douglas & Sharon Ridley, Applicants

Mr. Ridley was present for the review of the application.

Members received, in addition to the application, a letter from Steven Horne, LLC, Professional Land Surveyor, which gave a summary of the information provided and cited that Mr. Ridley was creating the Private Way as access and frontage for his existing single family residence which contains 15 +/- acres. The letter also referenced a ‘proposed lot’ which will contain approximately 81,000 square feet. This lot is being conveyed to a family member, therefore, exempt from subdivision review, and the new lot will not be using the new private way access but will be accessed directly from Hooper Road. The letter also spoke about the direction of storm water flow on the property and the fact there is an 8” culvert under the driveway; that the turnaround area as built is not to private way specifications (24’ x 24’) at this time but a turnaround does exist, so the applicant requests consideration to waive the requirement. And because of driveway location and the fact the driveway only serves one lot, the letter states MDEP review or a maintenance review is not required. Lastly, the letter states that the driveway cross section is depicted on the site plan.

Also provided was a site plan depicting the proposed private way and lot to be conveyed to family, drafted by Steven Horne, PLS #2389, dated 4/4/2016; a partial copy of Shapleigh Tax Map 5 highlighting the location of Lot 43; a copy of the deed for Lot 43, as registered at YCRD July 1, 1981, Book 2813, Pages 99-100; and a Memo dated 11/1/2014, from John Auger, PE #6060, citing the driveway specifications and stating that the driveway as built meets the minimum standards for a Private Way for the Town of Shapleigh.

Page 1 of 4

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – April 12, 2016 Page 2 of 4

Roger A. began by asking Mr. Ridley if any of the private way had been constructed yet? Mr. Ridley stated that it was all done. Roger asked if at the present time Mr. Ridley was going to stop at approximately 250 feet. Mr. Ridley was under the impression the board had to approve 200 feet of it for road frontage. Roger said the private way could go any distance, and on the plan it shows it as being 255 feet in length. Mr. Ridley said whatever Mr. Horne put on the plan is what he wanted approved.

Roger A. asked if there would be a second lot accessed from the private way? Mr. Ridley said, no. He said the lot he was proposing to create for family will be accessed from the Hooper Road.

The board continued to review the plan and specifications received. The board also reviewed §105-60.1 ‘Private ways.’, specifically, Section E) The construction of private ways shall meet the following minimum standards:

Number of Lots Served

Standard 1 2 or more

Minimum roadway width (feet) 12 16

Minimum subbase (heavy road gravel, 12 15

maximum size 4 inches) (inches)

Wearing surface (crushed gravel) (inches) 2 2

Maximum length of dead end (feet) 1,500 1,500

Maximum grade 10% 8%

Minimum grade 0.5% 0.5%

Turnaround at dead end Hammerhead or Hammerhead or


Steve F. noted that the private way at this time would only be serving one lot. Roger A. asked if the private way would be paved? Mr. Ridley stated it was already paved, and the paved surface would not serve more than what was already there (one lot). Mr. Ridley also stated that the plan showed the full size required (16 feet) but the pavement was actually only 12 feet wide. Roger stated that if another lot was added the pavement would have to be widened.

CEO McDonough and Diane S. asked if the drainage was on the plan? Roger said the road was crowned and there was one culvert. There are arrows on the plan that denote the movement of surface water. Roger noted that both a Licensed Engineer, John Auger, and Steven Horne, Land Surveyor, were used for this project.

The surveyor depicted the location and size of the private way and the engineer stated how it is built. There is also a road cross section on the plan. Roger said that unless at the site inspection the board feels they need additional information, there appears to be enough. Mr. Ridley stated he had lived at this location for over 30 years and there has not been a water issue, other than one time when there was heavy rain and the fields were frozen, then there was some runoff. He noted the property was relatively flat.

Roger A. noted that the plan does state that the Town of Shapleigh is not responsible for the road and no maintenance agreement is required because only one residence will be using the private way. Roger said the criteria for the construction of the private way was certified by an engineer. The right-of-way needed to be a minimum of 200 feet for road frontage and it is 255 feet in length. A hammerhead turn-around was created, 24’ x 24’, but the paved area isn’t quite to that specification, so if the private way ever accesses more than one lot the pavement will have to be widened.

Roger A. stated the board would need two mylar copies for the next meeting. One copy will get recorded at the York County Registry of Deeds, and one copy will be returned to the Planning Board for the Assessor’s office, once there is a book and page number received from YCRD. The board also needs a paper copy for

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – April 12, 2016 Page 3 of 4

the file. Roger said the mylars would have to be returned back to the Planning Board within 90 days or the approved plan will be null and void.

Roger A. stated a notice to abutters will be mailed and a site inspection will be held at 6:30 p.m. Roger will meet members on site, the other members will meet at the town hall and then go to the site.

Nothing further was discussed.


Conditional Use Permit – Repair Existing Retaining Wall – Map 27, Lot 5 (188 16th Street Loop) – Kris Glidden, Applicant

Mr. Glidden did not attend the meeting, so the application was not reviewed. Barbara F. will send a memo reminding Mr. Glidden of the next meeting and requesting his attendance.

Board members will do a site inspection prior to the next meeting.



Roland Legere asked fellow board members if a marijuana production facility was considered agricultural? He noted that Sanford was trying to slow down the number of facilities. CEO McDonough stated he had received telephone calls regarding this as well.

Barbara F. said that at this time she has several local ordinances on her desk, along with the State guidelines, this at a request of Madge B. She stated she has not had time to read them thoroughly to date but would give board members a copy to review prior to the next meeting. Roland L. asked if they were related to marijuana production? Barbara said, yes. She asked board members to review it once received, to see how it should be addressed, and by whom, the Planning Board or Selectmen, etc.

Roland L. agreed the Town should be proactive. Board members discussed whether or not it was agricultural, which does not require Planning Board review or is it a business. Roger A. believed it was a business. Barbara F. noted that after a brief review of one ordinance, she read several rules for the establishments such as they required 24 hour surveillance and outdoor lighting, a security system and the plants must be grown wholly indoors. A State license is always required.

Board members could not decide whether or not this would fall under agricultural or commercial. CEO McDonough thought at the very least it needed to be noted under §105-17 ‘Land Uses’, put into the table, and also the board has to decide how to regulate it. If they want to require a Conditional Use Permit, it should be listed in the table. Barbara F. reminded the board that a State permit is required, regardless if it is agricultural or not. Diane S. believed they could be talking about two different things, dispensaries and actual growing sites. She thought perhaps the growing sites could be agricultural.

Board members agreed the board needed to discuss this further. Barbara F. will get a copy of current ordinances and the State’s guidelines to members for future discussions.

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – April 12, 2016 Page 4 of 4

Growth Permits

There are Growth Permits available.


The Planning Board meeting ended at 8:20 p.m.


The next meeting will be held Tuesday, April 26, 2016 at 7:30 p.m. The Planning Board meets the 2nd and 4th Tuesday of each month unless it falls on a holiday or Election Day. Any scheduled public hearing takes place at 7:00 p.m. prior to the scheduled meeting. Also, should there be a cancellation due to a storm event, holiday or Election, the meeting will typically be held the following Wednesday, also at 7:30 p.m. Please contact the Land Use Secretary if there is a question in scheduling, 207-636-2844, x404.

Respectively submitted,

Barbara Felong

Land Use Secretary