April 28, 2017  9:30 PM 
March 31, 2017
Other Notices
March 31, 2017
March 31, 2017



Tuesday, February 28, 2017

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


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

The minutes from Tuesday February 14, 2017 were accepted as read.


Note: The board began with New Business as they were waiting for an applicant to arrive.

New Business:

Amendment to a Conditional Use Permit – Storage Building to Real Estate Office – Map 19, Lot 11 (55 Emery Mills Road) – Roger Berube, Owner

Mr. Roger Berube was in attendance along with Scott Sheppard of RE/MAX Realty One.

Along with the application, received was a copy of Shapleigh Tax Map 19, with Lot 11 highlighted; an aerial view of the property which depicted the existing structure to be used, denoting that the building is 40’ x 40’ in size with a 12’ x 8’ bump-out, and the building is located 110 feet± from State Rte. 109, 55 feet± from Primrose Lane and 55 feet± from the westerly sideline. Also received were additional pictures of the structure; an interior office sketch for the proposed office, a copy of the assessor’s information from the O’Donnell website and a letter from Mr. Berube giving further information about the application which read in part as follows:

The purpose of this letter is to provide you with further details and clarification to the application for an amendment to conditional use permit dated May 1, 2009 for Roger Berube on this lot M19/L11. The existing conditional use permit allows for the applicant to display a sign for his business “Roger Berube Builders’. This sign is located along the roadside in front of the vacant storage building at 55 Emery Mills Road (see attached pictures and map sheets for further clarification). The existing vacant building along the roadside was constructed and permitted for storage and has not been used since construction.

We are proposing that the vacant building be utilized as professional office space for real estate services and that the existing sign for Roger Berube Builders be replaced with a sign for RE/MAX Realty One. We have spoken with the Codes Enforcement Officer regarding this proposal and his suggestion was to submit the application for amending the existing conditional use permit. With this change the existing vacant storage space will be outfitted per code for professional office use as a real estate office, no other business use will exist on site. No new structures are to be constructed, just internal renovation of an existing permitted building.

Roger A. asked the applicant to explain what it was that he wanted to do on site. Mr. Berube began by stating he was with Scott Sheppard and he wanted to use part of the existing structure. Mr. Berube stated that the structure was 40’ x 40’ in size and Mr. Sheppard wanted to rent 20’ x 40’ for a real estate office.

Page 1 of 6

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 2/28/17 Page 2 of 6

Madge B. stated she did not have any questions this evening, she received the information and felt it was straight forward.

CEO McDonough wanted the board to be sure they knew the structure they were speaking of was the structure that was currently vacant, not the structure that has a day care and other businesses in it at this time. (Both structures are adjacent to each other.)

Mr. Sheppard stated that after he spoke with CEO McDonough it was determined the easiest thing to do was to amend the existing Conditional Use Permit to change the use from storage to a real estate business. Mr. Berube asked why he couldn’t keep both businesses? CEO McDonough had explained to Mr. Sheppard previously during their meeting, and he reiterated it to Mr. Berube this evening, that there was not enough property to hold additional businesses. Under Zoning Ordinance §105-19.A ‘Notes to Table on Dimensional Requirements’, there needs to be 80,000 square feet and 200 feet of road frontage per principal structure OR use.

Mr. Berube asked how long this has been in existence? The board stated it had been in effect for a long time. CEO McDonough stated that he had discussed this with Mr. Sheppard and had shown him the ordinance. Mr. Berube spoke of owning another lot and asked if he could do something else on that lot? The board thought it was possible but asked the size of the lot? It appeared the lot was small but a structure could probably be put on the lot, if it met setback requirements. CEO McDonough stated the road setback requirements, those being 75 feet from the center of the road, or 50 feet from the edge, whichever is greater. Side setback would be 25 to the side and 30 feet from the rear. It was noted that due to the size of the lot, it would not help to combine it with Lot 11 to increase allowed use, as there wasn’t enough acreage or road frontage.

Madge B. stated the board would need to do a site inspection. Roger A. agreed and said a Public Hearing would also be required. Members agreed that they would meet on site at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, March 14th, prior to the meeting. A notice to abutters will be mailed as well.

Nothing further was discussed.


After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit – Retaining Wall – Map 27, Lot(s) 11A – James Power, Applicant; Tara Gilbert Representing

Mrs. Gilbert was in attendance, along with her husband Brad.

Roger A. asked Mrs. Gilbert to let the board know where they were with respect to the application. Mrs. Gilbert began by providing the board members with a copy of a sketch plan for the wall which included showing the location of a silt fence, where erosion control mulch would be placed, and that gravel backfill would be added behind the wall. A copy of the information provided by the DEP on how to put in a silt fence and what type of mulch would work best, was also provided.

Mrs. Gilbert stated that she spoke with engineer Geoffrey Aleva from Civil Consultants in South Berwick Maine, and he said he was unable to certify the wall because he did not design it. She said he inferred nobody else would be able to either.

Mrs. Gilbert stated that the plan she presented this evening was drawn up by reviewing the Permit by Rule guidelines, for the wall that is almost completed, the wall that is in question. She also stated that Cameron Adams of the MDEP suggested the mulch mixture that should be used and he also said they could do a silt fence or hay bales for erosion control.

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 2/28/17 Page 3 of 6

Mr. Gilbert said he went to the site to take measurements of the wall and it is not four feet in height but it is 46” high on the right side (facing the wall) and 40” high on the left side. He believed they could stay below the four feet which would require engineering. He stated that the wall they intended to do, a continuation of the wall, that is only three and one-half feet in height.

Mr. Gilbert stated there was rebar thru the middle of the existing timbers currently and there are also deadman into the earth. He wished that they had checked with the Town first, prior to construction but he knew the new wall was built to a much better standard than what had been there which was built 60 years prior. He said he wasn’t trying to make an excuse, just stating what they had done. He also realized they would have to go by the Permit by Rule guidelines to continue.

Mrs. Gilbert stated that from the DEP standpoint she understood the DEP permit was good for three years and if they stayed below four feet in height, they would not need an engineered plan. She asked the board if this was correct? Roger A. said, “True, but if you start a new wall three years from now, you will need a new permit.” Mrs. Gilbert said, “Yes.” Roger stated that the Planning Board permit was only good for two years from the date of approval.

Mr. Gilbert said the wall is under four feet in height. Roger A. asked what the rod size was that they put thru the wall and Mr. Gilbert stated he believed it was 3/4 inch. He said he was not totally sure but his brother-in-law is a builder and he was the one that determined the size necessary. Mr. Gilbert stated that there was also a bracket tied to each one of the ties, attached to the wall on each end. He referred the board to the pictures they received.

Madge B. asked what it was made out of? Roger A. said it was 6” X 6” pressure treated wood. Roger asked if there were tie-backs coming back. Mr. Gilbert said there were, Steve F. agreed and stated they could be seen in the pictures provided. Mr. Gilbert came up to the board with the pictures pointing out what he was talking about.

Roger A. asked how high the water rose in the summer? Mr. Gilbert stated that typically to the second board. He added that it was a no wake zone but it didn’t really slow people down.

Mrs. Gilbert asked going forward what needs to happen? CEO McDonough asked what the highest point was of the wall? Mr. Gilbert stated 46 inches. CEO McDonough asked if they were requesting to do more than what they have already done? Mrs. Gilbert was not sure, if they stay within the four foot height, so they can do it themselves, then perhaps. She said they had permission to extend the wall from the DEP but she wasn’t sure if they could get approval to do more from the Planning Board. She also said she had to speak further with her father to see what his opinion was.

Mr. Gilbert said they could not do anything further until fall due to the water coming up. Mrs. Gilbert said if it is cost effective they may move forward. They would like to replace other parts of the wall. She said if they had approval to do more they might be able to do it this fall.

Steve F. and Roger A. noted that at present the application was to do the 55 feet, but the application did ask for an additional 125 feet. Mrs. Gilbert said there was still a question as to how much her father wanted to do and it was dependent in part on whether or not they could do it themselves. Roger asked if they wanted to do a total of 180 feet, then stop? Mrs. Gilbert said that she believed so.

Roger A. asked if they would have a time frame for completion? Mrs. Gilbert asked if they wanted to do 180 feet in two years, but then decided they didn’t want to do it all, could they do that? Roger A. said yes, but

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 2/28/17 Page 4 of 6

once you begin the project, the silt fence has to stay in place until the project is completed and the vegetation is established. The fence has to stay in place the entire time.

Mrs. Gilbert said it sounded like they can’t do it piecemeal. Roger said that she was correct, it has to be monitored. Mrs. Gilbert thought it sounded like it was best to get approval for the 55 feet and then come back for additional wall. Roger A. said yes, because whatever you are approved for, the silt fence has to stay in place for that period of time. CEO McDonough noted that silt fence has to be between the wall and the water, therefore, it will not work when the water is up to the wall, so the silt fence will not be able to be maintained.

Roland L. asked if this activity had to be done by someone with the proper certification? CEO McDonough stated that the homeowner can do the work themselves.

Mrs. Gilbert asked about the diagram regarding the silt fence. It stated they had to go back 25 feet, was this 25 feet from the actual construction? Roger A. said, no, this was 25 feet in length along the project. She asked how far back did it have to go? Roger said that they have to ensure no erosion will go into the lake but they also needed enough room to have a working area. Roger said that if there is a significant storm event and you only have 25 feet of silt fence, erosion will come around the end of it, so you need to be sure there is enough put into place to keep all silt from going into the lake. Roger said this type of project is always a fall event and there is only a minimum amount of time to do it. Mrs. Gilbert said based on this, they probably shouldn’t propose the entire 180 feet. Roger said if they would have it completed in November of 2017 they could propose it. Mrs. Gilbert was not sure. At present 30 feet of the 55 feet proposed is finished.

Mr. Gilbert asked if they should only get the permit for the 55 feet and then come back before the board for additional work. Madge B. agreed that this would make more sense.

Mrs. Gilbert said Civil Consultants spoke about gravel behind the wall and Cameron Adams also spoke about using gravel and said whatever Civil Consultants said, they would likely agree with. She noted there wasn’t much space between the earth and the wall. Roger A. said crushed stone works well. CEO McDonough noted they would need filter fabric behind the wall as well. Mrs. Gilbert asked how this would be placed? CEO McDonough stated that when they came to his office for the building permit he would explain how it should be placed.

CEO McDonough asked if there were any trees being disturbed? Mrs. Gilbert said there were no trees disturbed. Mr. Gilbert agreed and noted that Mr. Powers does not want any trees disturbed and said he was very environmentally inclined. Mrs. Gilbert said they are only replacing what fell down with respect to the wall.

Madge B. asked if the board was going to look at the wall and then vote on it? Madge said the board hasn’t talked about mulch or replanting. The board needs a date of completion for the mulch to be placed. She asked if the wall would be backfilled and the mulch placed by November 1st? Mr. Gilbert said they wanted to begin as soon possible to have the backfill done by Memorial Day for the 35 feet. Madge asked if they would do the rest in the fall? Both applicants said, yes. Mrs. Gilbert said the rest of the 55 feet.

Roger A. said at present there is no silt fence up. Roger asked if any of the wall was in the water yet? Mr. Gilbert said, not as of this evening. Mrs. Gilbert said there was no beach in front on the wall in the summer time.

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 2/28/17 Page 5 of 6

Board members discussed doing a site inspection as soon as the snow melted, so they could see the site and it was easier to get to the site. Madge B. said based on this, the board might want to wait until April to reschedule the final meeting. Roger A. thought this might be a good idea.

CEO McDonough asked if the board knew when the water would come back up? Roland L. did not know when they would change the water level. He believed the dam was closed at this time. CEO McDonough was asking because he was concerned about whether or not a silt fence could be put up.

Roger A. said the first thing that should be done at this time was to get the wall backfilled as soon as possible, to support what has been done. Steve F. noted it would do no good to put up a silt fence, as it would be under water. Madge B. didn’t believe there would be any additional construction this spring. CEO McDonough said it sounded like there could be no silt fence put up between the water and the wall, so no additional construction can take place. Mr. Gilbert said the only thing they would be doing was putting gravel behind the existing wall, whatever the board wants to have placed there. Madge said, “Right”.

Mrs. Gilbert said that what the board was stating was they would be only fixing what is there now. CEO McDonough said that is correct, no further construction will take place until fall when a silt fence can be put up between the water and the wall.

Madge B. wasn’t sure when the board needed to see it but they would have to before fall. Steve F. said his opinion was that what is done is done except the backfill, so what the board would be looking at is the continuation. He said the board also could look at what has been done before issuing the after-the-fact permit for the construction. Madge said if the board is giving a permit to continue then the board definitely has to see the site. Steve asked if the board can do both what has been done and what they want to do in the future? Madge was not sure. Steve wondered if it should be two applications? Roger A. said he would have no issue with looking at both, what is there now and the continuation now. Madge did not want to issue a permit without a site inspection. She added that they will not backfill until the snow is gone, so he felt the board had time to visit the site before making a final decision. Roger agreed since they were not looking at completion until Memorial Day weekend.

Madge said if the application is scheduled for the first meeting in April, then the permit can be issued after the board has visited the site. She said she didn’t want to issue the permit for the remaining 25 feet without seeing the site. Madge said the board can schedule a site visit by the first meeting in April.

Mrs. Gilbert wanted to know if the board would rather they put the backfill in before they visit the site, because if the snow leaves they may be able to do that. Along with the erosion control mix. Steve F. asked if the board could see the tie-backs now? Mrs. Gilbert said, yes. Mr. Gilbert said there is a gap between the wall and the soil.

Steve F. said he would like to see the applications separated. At this time, deal with what has taken place and then a new one for additional wall replacement. Madge B. agreed. Barbara F. asked if they were looking at the 30 feet only at this time or the 55 feet? Steve said they were looking at the after-the-fact permit, therefore the rest of the wall should be on a separate permit in his opinion. Madge agreed. Roger A. said the board could vote on the after-the-fact and then an amendment to the permit for additional length of wall.

Madge B. moved for approval of the after-the-fact Conditional Use Permit for the 30 feet of wall that has been replaced. She noted that it probably isn’t exactly 30 feet.

Shapleigh Planning Board Minutes – 2/28/17 Page 6 of 6

Roger A. stated a condition of approval would be that the wall would be backfilled by June 15, 2017. Madge added, “Along with the mulch”.

Roland L. said that before the vote is taken, he wanted members to know that he was opposed to a vote until the board has a chance to see what has been done. He was not saying they were misrepresenting themselves but they cannot take immediate action due to the weather conditions, so he felt a responsibility to see the site. He said the board can wait until it is easier to access the site. Madge B. suggested that Roland keep an eye on the location and when he feels the board can see what the board needs to see, let Barbara F. know. Roland said he will send an email to all the members letting them know when it can be accessed.

Mrs. Gilbert asked if they had to be present for the final vote? Madge B. stated they did not have to be, and Roger A. agreed. Steve F. asked CEO McDonough if he would inspect the backfill of this wall, just as he would a foundation? CEO McDonough stated, “Yes”. He said in reality they will have to dig some dirt that has washed in behind the wall, the width of a shovel, and then lay fabric on the earth and fill the area with stone. Madge B. said that would be done with the building permit which is why she was not going on about that.

Madge B. withdrew her motion for approval, and asked that it be put onto the agenda after the board is able to see the site. Roger A. said it will be tabled until the board can see the site and it can be put back onto the agenda.

Nothing further was discussed.


Growth Permits – There are growth permits available.


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

The next meeting will be held Tuesday, March 14, 2017 at 6:30 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 6:00 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 6:30 p.m. Please contact the Land Use Secretary if there is a question in scheduling, 207-636-2844, x404.

NOTE: Beginning on the 1st meeting in November, the Planning Board shall meet beginning at 6:30 p.m. This schedule remains in effect until the first week in April.

Respectively submitted,

Barbara Felong,

Land Use Secretary planningboard@shapleigh.net