Appeals Board, Jun 16, 2009

APPEALS BOARD     June 16, 2009


         The Sedgwick Board of Appeals met at the Sedgwick Town Office Tuesday, June 16, 2009 at 7 pm to hear a continuance of the Eggemoggin Heights appeal. Present were Board members Michael Rossney, Danny Weed, Steve Tobey, and Chairman Fred Marston.  Also present were several members of the public, Jon and Jane Thomas from the Weekly Packet, Richard Duffy, attorneys Roy and Patterson, CEO Duane Ford, Selectman Nelson Grindal, Pam Johnson and Tom McKechnie, representatives of the appellants, Planning Board Chairman Palmer Little, and Barbara Grindle.

            The meeting was reconvened at 7:10 pm with Tobey Woodward absent.  He will be kept informed about this meeting so that he can participate next week.  CEO Ford sent some information to the Town lawyer and Appeals Board Chairman that he requested be sealed.     Parker Waite objected to the papers being sealed, but agreed that as long as they were going to be explained thoroughly, he would withdraw his objection.       

            The first thing that the CEO asked for was public input for amendments for the present state-mandated Shoreland Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance.  Second, he felt that several breaches of procedure were seen at the last site visit from members of the public.  The major breach was removing pollywogs from one vernal pool and carrying them around while checking for other vernal pool sites.  Third, there can be a waiver from DEP regarding the 75’ setback from streams.  The appellants do not want a waiver for any setbacks.

            Road construction has been done since the last site visit.  Perhaps a new site visit can be arranged when the roadwork is finished and culverts installed.  There was discussion about whether individual members should walk the site at their, and the owners, convenience or whether it should be done as a group.  Mr. Patterson said that all 5 should hear the same information.  Ms. Johnson and Mr. McKechnie do not feel that there is need for another site walk.  Mr. Waite felt that the road construction timing may have harmed the vernal pool inhabitants.

            Mr Patterson reiterated that there seem to be three items to be discussed.  1) the stream setback, 2) road placement and construction and 3) vernal pools.

The meeting was then turned over to the appellants for their presentation.  Ms. Johnson read a letter covering their concerns and Mr. McKechnie then presented an itemized list of concerns.  Item #1 – Withdrawn because the Planning Board minutes were amended and approved (see last meeting minutes); Items 3 & 4 – Withdrawn because the Vernal Pool study and Wetlands study have just been provided by Mr. Roy; Item #2 Withdrawn because the maps registered at the Hancock County Registry do include road cross sections, drainage plans and suggested house locations; Item # 5 – Mr. Roy to get the DEP letter on the wetlands for the next meeting; Item # 7 – Road construction not started on Eggemoggin Court.  They and Inland Fisheries and Wildlife agent Greg Burr request a 75’ clearance on the end of the road.  The plans currently are only 25’ from the stream.  Mr. Roy and Mr. Duffy will check with the engineers to see if it will cause lot changes and engineering problems; Item # 8 – Mr. Roy will check to see what the state requires for perennial stream requirements; Item # 9 – The appellants would like to see a 60 ft easement on all roads with a 24’ travel area to be accessible for all emergency vehicles; Item # 10 – A request that all roads and driveways be of permeable material and not paved (this could be put in the covenants because the ordinance states that roads should be paved); Item # 6 – Request that soil should be tested for pesticides and other toxic residue, if contaminated should potential buyers be notified?

            Doug Jones asked about the Trust Account and performance bond moneys.  The Planning Board does not usually ask for any money except the application money because the Ordinance says that they “shall” require it.  They felt that “shall” meant that they had a choice of charging it or not.  Mr. Patterson stated that “shall” means that it is mandatory to ask for these funds.

            Mr. Thomas asked if the roads have to be inspected by public officials to meet standards.  Once these roads are built and settled, they must be inspected and must meet specific standards or be brought up to the standards required by the Ordinance.

            The Appellants finished their presentation and next week their requests will be addressed and Mr. Duffy will have the opportunity to present his rebuttal.

            It was decided to announce two more meetings, June 30 and July 7, at 7 pm, and hope that the July 7 meeting will not be needed. The next meeting will be Tuesday, June 23 at 7 pm at the Town Office.

            This meeting was adjourned at 10:05 pm.

                                    Barbara Grindle, Assistant to the Selectmen