Lewiston Planning Board approves shoreland expansion at 5 Loon Drive

[0:04] Shanna Cox: No, it's on. How can you tell? It's the end of the, above the red door. There's a little black box, and you can see a little bit of yellow. I mean, red. It says on air. [0:16] Austin Gregory: I didn't know that was there. It's there. [0:19] Shanna Cox: It's not really that bright. Good evening and welcome. Today is Monday, August 24th. It is 5.30 p.m. My name is Shanna Cox, and we are calling this meeting to order. Will you call the roll for us? Certainly. Michael Marcotte. Present. Penthia Burns. Here. Lucy Bisson here. Shanna Cox. Here. Darren Gallant. Here. Heidi Bertels. Here. And from staff we have Craig Tebow, Land Use Planner, Jonathan Connor, the Director, and Linda Tripp, Administrative Assistant. Extraordinary. Yes. Thank you very much. Please let the record reflect that Amy Smith and Alex ex-pine let us know that they would be absent this evening. That due to that absence that Heidi Bartels will be a full voting member this evening. And I believe for the record we have appointed our filled position and Darren is now a full-time voting member all the time. Welcome to the team. Oh, welcome. Yeah, so in short everybody votes tonight. Are there any adjustments to the agenda, Craig? No, thank you. I'd like to make one. I'm just simply requesting to the board that other business items see the appointment of a member to the forestry board be held to the same time as the selection of secretary when we have a full board compliment. Is there any correspondence? No. Okay, let the record reflect that we also do not have any public hearings this evening. So we'll move forward with other business item A. Austin Gregory has submitted a shoreland zoning permit application for the expansion of an existing residence at five loon [2:05] Unidentified speaker: drive. Craig, do you want to queue us up? Sure, can. Thanks. So this property is five loon drive. It's located along No Name Pond in the shoreland zone and the No Name Pond conservation overlay. The project is proposing to expand the total footprint of the structure you see behind you by 120 feet, the 120 square feet. The parcel is approximately 6800 square feet and the whole project consists of removing and reconstructing the rear of the house approximately 218 square feet and adding a hundred and Twenty square foot screen porch addition also to the rear of the structure since because it's in a no-name pond because in the shoreland zone and because the expansion and also the reconstruction is less than a hundred feet from no-name pond it's supposed to typically conforming structures supposed to meet that hundred foot setback but existing structures are allowed to expand within a certain limitation when they are expanding within that hundred foot range they need to they need to Demonstrate that the setbacks are sorry that the site must conform to all setback requirements to the greatest practical extent as determined by the appropriate reviewing authority the appropriate reviewing authority being yourself so the RA zoning district typically requires a 25 foot setback from the road and the shoreland area standard requires a hundred foot setback from the pond the parcel ranges from 124 to 141 feet long or feet deep between the road and the pond and Loon Drive itself Also encroaches over the rear of the lot so shrinking that area a little bit more meeting all the setbacks is impossible or appears to be impossible given these dimensional limitations the proposal is to the applicant is proposing to keep the existing non-conforming setback of non-conforming front setback of 24 feet from Loon Drive and to maintain the setback of 60 feet from No Name Pond the additional footprint for the expansion will happen horizontally and will not affect either of these Setbacks due to the restrictions of the parcel staff is recommending that the board make a finding that the proposed relocation of the house meets the setbacks to the greatest practical extent So the applicant's put together an application, and it appears to meet all of the standards in the Shoreland Zone and the No Name Pond criteria. You'll see on the last page that there are three actions which we have listed as necessary. One to make a finding that the application itself is complete. To make a finding that the application Meets these or the proposal meets the required setbacks to the greatest practical extent and then three to approve with the two conditions noted in the review and [5:46] Shanna Cox: It's only for whomever might make that motion, should we get to that stage? It would only be the third motion that would require the accompanying conditions. That's right. Thanks. Yeah, for anyone who might make the motion, there's three separate motions or require three separate votes, and it's the third and final of those three that would attach the following conditions above one. And thank you. Just procedurally save us a step later. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Anything further before we invite the applicant up? Nope. Okay, great. Hi. Welcome. Yeah, you're gonna come on up and make yourself close to a microphone and introduce yourself. [6:27] Austin Gregory: Hello, I'm Austin Gregory, the applicant and also the owner of the home here. Welcome. Thank you. Is there [6:35] Shanna Cox: We'll open it up to questions. But is there anything that you'd like to preface with before we begin? [6:41] Austin Gregory: Not really. We're replacing an existing portion of the structure. It's quite old that is failing, so that's the reason we're replacing it, and then we're hoping to get a little bit more square footage from it. [6:52] Shanna Cox: Homeownerships awesome. That's it, thank you very much. Board, do you have any questions for staff or for the applicant? I [7:04] Unidentified speaker: guess I have a technical question for Craig first of all. Correct, this was really well done, like I assume you put this together, very informative, I learned a lot, thank you. The question of whether the application is complete is this, I'm, where's that coming from I guess is my question. So this is they asked to determine if the application is complete. Certainly I, there's some extra standards or extra sort of steps in the process because it's shoreland zone coming from state language just to be, I mean that 's just the safest way to like if we're being 100% safe with every application we would always make a motion as complete but this is you know just to be safe here that language which specifically is in the zoning land use code around shoreland zoning and the applicant has addressed the criteria it is in your staff review under review criteria about starting with will maintain safe and healthful conditions going down and down and down to beginning with you know language around piers docks and wharves, campgrounds, individual private campsites, most of that is not applicable for this case obviously, but the applicant hasn't created a narrative and an application that addresses everything. Yeah, I thought I was kind of looking for what it was. [8:31] Shanna Cox: And we do, we do include language like that from time to time in applications. And you, I feel like oftentimes it's tucked into, like it's complete, and then we go into the motion, and it's kind [8:42] Unidentified speaker: of bucketed into a further paragraph. I was going to say, usually you're hearing the application is already done, and you're not issuing anything tonight. You are actually issuing the permit, you are approving the issuance of a permit. So you are the, not only you the governing body for, you know, normal development, but in this instance tonight, you're ensuring that the application is complete because you are approving the permit. Welcome to being a member of code. Yeah. Is this what, with any no-name pond development, every single one would come to this board? Certain developments for expansions within the 100-foot setback, there are plenty of properties within a no-name pond conservation overlay that are, the actual overlay is quite broad, but it's basically within 100 feet of the pond. [9:35] Shanna Cox: Makes sense. Thank you. Thanks. Any questions for the applicant, Mr. Marcotte? [9:39] Unidentified speaker: Yeah, I heard you say what I thought I understood, you're replacing the whole camp. Nope, just that [9:46] Austin Gregory: rear portion. There's a front portion that does not need to be replaced because I saw a figure in the application, I said yeah, monetarily that was not in this day and age. No, so it's just that extra little area that doesn't currently exist. Exactly. Okay. Yeah, well and the rear portion, the 17 foot by 12 foot 9 portion, that's like a former addition that was built poorly, that is being [10:12] Unidentified speaker: removed and then replaced, and then replaced with something that goes even closer to the [10:17] Shanna Cox: it actually doesn't. A1, yeah, I found to be the most useful diagram. Oh, and if you go to A1, Mike, and it has the like current versus after side by side, I found that to be in terms of like how much additional area is being created and how it overlays with a footprint. I also really appreciated that. I mean, I don't know that the applicant that you would have chosen to, you, but you did go against to the house in terms of your expansion instead of closer towards the water. Yeah, that was smart. That was smart for in terms of setbacks and making it easier for us to say you literally did everything you could to [10:57] Unidentified speaker: stay within the footprint. So the current goes 17 feet two inches from the road set, from the house, and all of that's being replaced, so some removal. Well, actually all removal, right, and it's going to be 17 feet zero inches, so you're actually reducing it by two inches. That honestly, it is 17 [11:26] Austin Gregory: 17-2 I'm going to the stud and with the extra sheathing and everything it is actually 17-2 that dimension is misleading. [11:32] Unidentified speaker: It is that it's gonna be exactly the same, so it's okay. So it's basically removal and Reconstruction. Yeah, and okay and the screen ports not porch is Additional but that doesn't bring it any closer. No. [11:48] Austin Gregory: Any other [11:52] Shanna Cox: questions I would be seeking a motion okay. I will make a finding that the application submitted by Austin Gregory for a Shoreland Zone permit for five Loon Drive is a complete application pursuant to article 12 section 10. thank you second we need a second first okay so okay I will feel it yes okay. Michael Marcott. Yes. Penthea Burns. Yes. Lucy Bisson. Yes. Shanna Cox. Yes. Darren Gallant. Yes. And Heidi Bertels. Yes. Okay. Then I will make the second one. Make a finding that the application submitted by Austin Gregory for a shown land zone permit for five loon drive for the relocation of a portion of the existing house and new expansion within 100 feet of the pond meets the required setbacks to the greatest practicable extent pursuant to article 12 sub 2 subsection c 3 relocation thank you second thank you a second by Darren Michael Marcotte yes Penthea Burns. Yes. Lucy Bisson. Yes. Shanna Cox. Yes. Darren Gallant. Yes. And Heidi Bertels. Yes. Okay, now, I will make a motion that the application submitted by Gregory, Austin Gregory, I'm sorry, for a shoreland zone permit for Five Loon Drive meets all the necessary criteria contained in the zoning and land use code article 12, section two, shoreland area standards and that approval be granted with the following conditions one that the expansion of the non-conforming house be recorded at the registry of deeds within 90 days of approval of this shoreland zone permit and that proof be provided to the city of said finding prior to the issuance of a building permit to that all other requirements of the shoreland area ordinance and requirements of the no name pond overlay that apply to this application be met by the applicant at the time of a building permit i'll second thank you okay any discussion on this motion michael marcotte yes panthea burns yes lucy bisson yes shanna cox yes darren gallant yes and heidi bertels yes congratulations. Congratulations. Thank you so much. Good luck. Nice work on this. Yeah. [14:36] Unidentified speaker: Do you want hot coffee, some in your house plan? [14:41] Austin Gregory: I actually would take one. Yeah. Yeah. Sure. [14:43] Unidentified speaker: Turn that blue. I was gonna say. Yeah, here. That was actually my other comment is that you chose some very nice paper for this. You did. Do it on purpose, but Staples tricked me. Yeah. [14:52] Shanna Cox: Give like more. Huh. Yeah. This one works. If you want another set. [14:58] Austin Gregory: Right. That's the best way to do it. [15:00] Unidentified speaker: So we'll follow up with a letter of approval and as far as recording at the don't have the process but it's over at the courthouse in Auburn we should have that for you either tomorrow or probably tomorrow. All right, thank you for drawing up my house. [15:28] Shanna Cox: It does, it's so faint, it's just very faint. Okay, it's really hard to see. We're next considering a report out on de minimis subdivision amendments. The I is a portion of the road cul de sac was split out and conveyed to 17 Challenger Drive in relation to a redesign of the road terminus. Do we have any materials for either of these items? [15:52] Unidentified speaker: No, it's just a report out. [15:54] Shanna Cox: Then report away, sir. [15:59] Unidentified speaker: Well, I think this was part of a larger project that we've been discussing with Gendron on Challenger Drive. My expectation is that there will be a larger development review project. Associated with this coming in the next six to 12 months. This one, well, nine Nash Street, this was basically one nine Nash Street conveying a portion of the lot to 15 Nash Street, basically two small residential properties just agreeing to sell some land one to the other. 15 Nash's was a pretty small narrow a lot, so it's becoming more conforming. It still is a little non-conforming in terms of frontage, but it is becoming a little bigger. Yes, sir. But it doesn't make nine non-conforming, right? No, both, yeah, nine will remain. Fully conforming. I have a question about this really quick. So I haven't seen anything like this, these types of reports to us. This is happening very often, that second one in particular. I know it says subdivision amendments. Is that something that you're normally bringing to us if they are prior. Amendments or sort of prior projects that were reviewed and approved by the Planning Board. So that second one was, I believe they both were. So I remember sometimes it's decades ago, so really like it could be a very, in the case of nine Nash trees it's very minor, but if they were reviewed and approved by the Planning Board then de minimis change even if it's done by staff we would. [17:51] Shanna Cox: Still need to report out. I just have a question for you gentlemen. I was on Goddard Road taking a left on to Alfred plured and there's a lot of they cleared a whole bunch of trees across the street like just to the you know where Apple Road cut you know you go an Apple Road and right there in front of and there was heavy equipment in there and stuff. I just wondering what is it what are they doing I'm sure it's gender in but I'm just curious it's the [18:35] Unidentified speaker: Project off of I believe what you're referring to that you talk about the clearing that you can see off the turnpike no this is I'm sitting [18:43] Shanna Cox: At the corner of Goddard and Alfred plured and the lands directly in front of so on the other side of Alfred plured there's heavy equipment there's I noticed there was a lot of cleared trees and stuff last week but now there was heavy equipment and piles of dirt and so I don't know if this is a continuation of Gendron's gravel pit or I that's why I'm asking since it worked out today that I was going by and that's not the project that we had come before us no not where they turn the road that was you can see that one from the turnpike and that one's off challenger drive if you go to the end of challenger drive you see it and i saw that one day the stuff that 's the one i'm thinking of right yeah this is something you know totally different and it's it's a you know god is one that goes from river road [19:42] Unidentified speaker: Up to Alfred Parkway where I remember I don't know if it still is the National Guard on the [19:50] Shanna Cox: Right hand side yeah it is the National Guard Armory is right on the right and there's A plastic and you're looking right straight ahead plastic place I was just out there too and I don't Remember seeing anything and it was it's right just like two weeks ago yeah so if you if you come up Goddard Road and you know you stop at the stop sign hopefully there's a lot of [20:11] Unidentified speaker: Construction and stuff so and directly across the street behind the woods is the Gentron pit right [20:16] Shanna Cox: Yeah, I know it's somewhere there and so I am I'm just wondering is it a continuation of the Gendron pit or what are they doing? This is [20:29] Unidentified speaker: It's news to us if we'll go back there and look obviously property owners have a right to you know do some clearing on the property they want we if it's something that they just got a permit in we can double check and find out what's going on up there, but it's just news to us [20:43] Shanna Cox: I'm just nosy that you know me. Yeah, it's, yeah, because Goddard used to take, you know, it was a jog, and what is Apple Road was continuation of Goddard Road. They changed it when they built Alfred Plourd, they, because it separated the road, because before it just took a jog and it continued. But, so it's like, yeah, it's in that corner. [21:14] Unidentified speaker: Then I'm just curious, I'm just like I said, I can tell you that the demolition permit was just submitted, I believe today, if I'm not mistaken, for 66 Alpha Floored Parkway. I saw it in our emails, and that is directly across the street from that. Okay, so maybe it might be, it might be setting up for a demolition of [21:37] Shanna Cox: that property. Okay, yeah, cuz there's no, there's no housing or anything on that [21:42] Unidentified speaker: property, it's just woods. Correct, but if you, if you kind of look caddy corner from Goddard, there's a driveway over there that goes back out, that's 66 Alfred Port Parkway. Anytime someone can squeeze [21:57] Shanna Cox: caddy corner into a senate, so thank you for that. Yes, that's, that's a good one. All right, thank you. [22:02] Unidentified speaker: Thank you. I mean, if you will, we'll look into it and we'll, we'll get you, get some information. [22:07] Shanna Cox: Absolutely, we're holding item 5c until we take up the secretary position that's open. Was there any other business? Sorry, I was gonna ask, first of all, [22:24] Unidentified speaker: candy corner and kitty corner are two different things. I don't know that [22:27] Shanna Cox: they are. Depends on where you're from, it'd be my, yeah, I think it's the [22:34] Unidentified speaker: same corner. Yeah, and speaking of tree cuts, and I was always curious, says is a permit required if somebody's cutting a tree on their lot in the house lot? No, there isn't. Okay, well while [22:48] Shanna Cox: we're on the subject of cutting trees, I would call attention to somebody within this building, [22:52] Unidentified speaker: so there's, they will call attention to this building on the third floor, almost guaranteed [22:57] Shanna Cox: somebody will call there's, there is somebody giving a shout out in Lewiston Rocks for some very large pine trees that need to be removed, and they are hopeful that it is maybe next year's holiday tree. You're welcome. Tell whoever procures holiday trees to go check that out. It's the arborist, I think he, yeah, checks it out. Who else would we trust other than see? Okay, reading of the minutes, shall we? Yes, I'll make a motion. I read them and I didn't find any issues. Since Zoe is no longer here to look, we're relying on you. Yeah, well and I didn't find any, so I make a motion that they be accepted as presented, the August 10th 2026. Yes, is there a second? A second, thank you very much. Will you call the ball, Michael Marcotte? I'm staying since I wasn't here, okay. Penn? Thea Burns? Yes. Lucy Bisson? Yes. Shanna Cox? Yes. Darren Gallant? Yes. Heidi Bertels? Yes. And by the way, Michael, you can vote on them even if you were not here, because we've had that discussion before. I made them research at once. You can still choose not to. I still choose not. That's fine. Motion carries though. And now we're looking to adjourn, so that motion to adjourn, Heidi can get back to her second. Thank you. All in favor? Aye. Happy Monday, everyone. John's getting credit for attending a planning board meeting. I don't know. This is, yeah, I think it's going to be pretty much of a record. I mean, it's six o'clock and we're out of hour. [24:28] Unidentified speaker: All right. Heading to, okay. 25 minutes. Sounds like a lot. That's funny. [24:33] Shanna Cox: All right. I did not get everything done today, so I'm grateful for you. God bless you.