|1.||CALL TO ORDER|
|2.||APPROVAL OF MINUTES|
DECEMBER 21, 2000 MEETING
DECEMBER 28, 2000 MEETING
|3.||REVIEW APPLICATION FOR JUNKYARD|
|4.||REVIEW APPLICATION FOR LOW|
INCOME HOUSING - WEBSTER MILL PLACE
These minutes were approved at the February 8, 2001 Planning Board meeting with the following changes:The date is incorrect on the header of pages 2 and 3 and should be changed to January 11, 2001
Page 2, paragraph 4, "Mr. Greer responded that it will be...."
Page 2, paragraph 9, "submitted exactly what they required."
TOWN OF LIMINGTON
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
The Planning Board meeting was called to order by Wendy Walker, Chairperson, at 7:00 P.M. on January 11, 2001 at the Limington Municipal Building.
Regular members present: Wendy Walker, Chairperson; Stanley Blake, Jr.; Chris Clark, Raymond Coffin: Diane Hubbard; Harold Jordan.
Regular members absent: Kreg Rose.
Alternate members absent: Ron Perkins.
Also present: Priscilla Tucker, Secretary; Freeman Abbott, C.E.O.
Richard Jarrett videotaped the meeting,
The first order of business was the approval of the December 21, 2000 and December 28, 2000 meeting minutes.
The approval was tabled as there were not enough members at this meeting who attended those meetings.
Wendy Walker, Chairperson, did make the following correction to the December 28, 2000 minutes:
Page 3, paragraph 9, first word on second line should be changed from dubic yards to cubic yards.
The final revised ordinance modifications, shall be included in the agenda package for the January 25, 2001 meeting. These modifications have been presented to the Selectmen.
The next item on the agenda was the application by Michael Harmon to operate a junkyard. The checklist of materials was reviewed. The ground coverage was not presented but Mr. Hannon said that it was probably 50 x 100 feet.
Wendy Walker said that because the lot contained only 2.9 acres and it is a non-conforming lot and therefore the junkyard cannot be approved.. She will check with the Town Attorney to make sure she is correct. If the Planning Board cannot act on this then it will be up to Mr. Harmon to work out arrangements with the C.E.O.
The Public Hearing will be scheduled on the application but may have to be canceled.
Planning Board Minutes
January 11, 2001 Meeting
The next item on the agenda was the application of Webster Mill Place. Wendy Walker, Chairperson, explained that the goal this evening was to determine if the application was complete.
Tom Greer, P.E., with Pinkham and Greer, Consulting Engineers, reviewed the changes made in the plans of the project. He reviewed the various reports. He stated that they had not received EPA approval but expected it within the next month. The nitrate impact analysis was updated to include the new lots included on the plan. The drainage reports were updated. The revised application has been submitted to D.O.T. He stated that the entrance is the same as it was on the last site walk.
Mr. Greer stated that they will request a waiver for a reduction on the road from twenty-four (24) to twenty (20) feet.
Diane Hubbard asked if the road would be private and Mr. Greer responded that I [it] will be but it is designed to meet the Town specifications.
Each section of the application was reviewed to be sure that all of the materials necessary for completion were provided. The only item missing was the D.E.P. approval so the Board cannot move forward until that materials is provided.
Wendy Walker, Chairperson, stated that the Town will request an independent water study. Mr. Greer said that it would be more of a peer review than a study.
The following will attend the meeting: Tom Greer; Cynthia Thayer; Wendy Walker, Chairperson; Diane Hubbard, Planning Board member; Richard Jarrett.
Richard Jarrett asked why the applicant provided mass balance figures in the original application and left them out of this application.
Mr. Greer responded that Cynthia Thayer reviewed the ordinance and submitted exactly what the [they] required.
A meeting will be scheduled with independent water study company.
Nancy Bozenhard asked what the time frame was for this project and Wendy Walker stated that a public hearing cannot be scheduled until the DEP information is presented and the water study is complete.
Planning Board Minutes
January 11, 2001 Meeting
The Planning Board then discussed the zoning ordinance modifications. It was felt that an informational session be held for the public. A sample ballot should be published in the newspaper. A short line on the front of the paper to indicate the ballot is in the paper and/or a line in Jongerden's article.
The following motion was made by Chris Clark:
MOTION: To adjourn the January 12, 2001 meeting of the Planning Board.
The motion was seconded by Stanley Blake, Jr. and earned unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 8:15 P.M.
Mr. Richard Jarrett
280 Tucker Road
Limington, ME 04049
January 11, 2001
Limington Planning Board
PO Box 240
Limington, ME 04049
Re: Webster Mill Place Application
Dear Planning Board Members,
You have now before you the revised application (dated 12/20/00) for the Webster Mill Place. This application also includes a revised hydrogeological study entitled "Nitrate Impact Assessment" (dated 12/19/00). Unfortunately, the revised study contains less information than the previous study. For the reasons explained below, I urge you to not accept this application as complete and to not schedule a public hearing until the applicant submits a more complete study.
The Planning Board has before it the daunting responsibility of certifying that among other issues, this proposed project will not result in water pollution. This is an especially important consideration since the project is located on an aquifer and is also located very near the Town's aquifer protection district. Compounding the problem is the history of ground water contamination in the area. This job is not to be taken lightly. While the applicant currently has the responsibility of demonstrating that the proposal is safe, it is the Town which will bear the cost if the Planning Board certifies that the design is safe and then later finds that the water will be polluted. It is the Townspeople, not the applicant, who will end up paying if a problem results.
Over the past few years, over half a dozen different hydrogeological studies have been submitted to the Limington Planning Board from various applicants. Every study submitted including the previous study for the Webster's Mill Place, have included two basic calculations: the septic plume analysis and the mixing model calculations (or mass balance approach). As you may recall, I questioned some of the calculations in the mixing model in the previous submission. Specifically, I questioned why the maximum groundwater adsorption rate (or recharge rate) of 50% was assumed for all soils, including the significant portions of the parcel which contain ledge and steep slopes where one would expect a much lower recharge rate. Rather than address these concerns in the new study, the new study simply eliminated the mass balance approach entirely. The only calculations that appear in the new report are the septic plume analysis. Note that I did not question the septic plume analysis in the previous report.
If this project is to gain approval, the applicant has the responsibility of proving to the Limington Planning Board that the project will not result in ground water contamination. The Board unquestionably has the authority to ask for a complete hydrogeological study so that it can have some basis for making an informed decision. The Board has also already expressed its concern about the importance of this issue and has stated that they will be conducting an independent study as well. With this background, it is unbelievable to me that the applicant would submit a knowingly incomplete study.
My request to the Board is therefore that the Board not accept this application as complete. The "mixing model calculations" that were submitted in the original study should be redone and included with the revised application. Holding a public hearing without this material available in advance would also be a disservice to the public. I therefore also ask that the public hearing for the preliminary plan not be scheduled until after the applicant supplies this critical information. Please also note that this omission was done by the applicant for reasons known only to the applicant. Any accusations by the applicant that the Board is delaying the process are without merit. This information was requested by the Board and is needed for evaluating the proposal. The only reason that the application is incomplete is because the applicant has chosen to withhold the data.
Return to top of page
Please note that
is not the official website of the Government of the Town of Limington.
Please note that www.Limington.org is not the official website of the Government of the Town of Limington.