SACO CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, :00 PM CITY HALL AUDITORIUM

Transcription

1 CITY OF SACO, MAINE Administration Kevin L. Sutherland, City Administrator Saco City Hall Telephone: (207) Main Street Saco, Maine Facebook: /sacomaine SACO CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, :00 PM CITY HALL AUDITORIUM I. CALL TO ORDER II. PUBLIC COMMENT III. AGENDA Presentation regarding Saco River Estuary by UNE and Chamber of Commerce A. Contract Zone Amendment: Park North P2 B. Saco Code, Chapter 112- General Assistance Maximums Amendment P14 C. Zoning Ordinance Amendments: Medical Marijuana Caregivers P27 D. Addition of Chapter 161-Prohibited Products to P30 Saco Municipal Code of Ordinances E. Zoning Ordinance Amendments pertaining to Shoreland Zoning, P31 including Section 504 and Section 7-1 F. Berry Road Extension P68 G. York County Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement P78 H. Financial Update for June 30, 2016 P92 I. Economic Development Update P95 J. Additional Requirements for Future Contract Zones/TIFs P96 K. 90 Temple Street Requests for Qualified Proposals P98 L. Police Chief Hiring Process P127 M. Round Table Discussions P129 IV. ADJOURNMENT

2 WORKSHOP ITEM: A WORKSHOP ITEM COMMENTARY AGENDA ITEM: STAFF RESOURCE: COUNCIL RESOURCE: Contract Zone Amendment Park North Bob Hamblen, City Planner Councilor William Doyle BACKGROUND: Applicant Elliott Chamberlain dba Park North Development LLC requests the Council s consideration of an amendment to the Park North contract zone, approved by the City Council on May 1, Mr. Chamberlain proposes that residential uses be allowed on the easterly most portions of Parcel 1, which was limited to commercial uses by the 2006 approval. The conceptual plan for Lot 18, one of two separate lots in Parcel 1, shows a mix of office, retail, and commercial space nearest Rte. One, with multi-family residential restricted to the third of the lot furthest from Rte. One. The proposed amendment would apply to the entirety of Parcel 1: both Lots 18 and 19. The Planning Board reviewed this item at public hearing on June 21, 2016, and forwards a positive recommendation for the amended Agreement. The City Council discussed this item during Workshop on July 11, EXHIBITS: 1. Contract Zone Amendment Requested by Applicant (see p. 5, Parcel 1) Items below were previously provided on July 11, Letter from Park North Development, LLC, 6/17/16 3. Minutes of June 21, 2016 Planning Board meeting 4. Plan of Park North and Concept Plans, Lot 18 RECOMMENDATION: Planning Board. Staff is supportive of the proposed amendment as endorsed by the SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to open the Public Hearing I move to close the Public Hearing and further move to set the Second and Final Reading of the contract zone document entitled Contract Zone Agreement By and Between Park North Development, LLC and Preston Properties, LLC as Applicants and the City of Saco, dated December 20, 2005 and amended through June 21, 2016, for the properties at 991 Portland Road and 3 Eastview Parkway, for October 3,

3 Contract Zone Agreement WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 1 By and Between Park North Development, LLC and Preston Properties, LLC as Applicants and the City of Saco December 20, 2005 Amended September 3, 2013 Amended September, 2016 (proposed) THE CITY OF SACO HEREBY ORDAINS: I. That the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Saco, dated January 2, 1985 and amended through March 4, 2013 is hereby amended as further described in this Agreement by and between Park North Development, LLC and Preston Properties, LLC (collectively referred to as the Applicants ) and the City of Saco. 1. The Applicants propose a mixed-use development on the parcels at 1031 Portland Road and Eastview Parkway (the Subject Property ). The Subject Property consists of two parcels identified on City of Saco tax maps as Tax Map 63, Lot 6 (currently owned by Park North Development, LLC) and Tax Map 64, Lot 6-1 (currently owned by Preston Properties, LLC) excepting only the portions of such parcels that are located within the Resource Protection District. The Subject Property for purposes of this Contract Zone Agreement shall not include these areas located within the Resource Protection District. 2. The Subject Property is an approximately 236 acre contiguous tract of largely undeveloped land with the exception of a multi-tenanted commercial building on the parcel identified as Map 64, Lot 6-1 at the corner of Eastview Parkway and Portland Road. 3. Map 63, Lot 6 is owned by Park North Development, LLC by virtue of a Quitclaim Deed with Covenant dated April 14, 2005, a copy of which has been submitted by the Applicant. Said deed is recorded in Book 14436, Page 83 at the York County Registry of Deeds. 4. Map 64, Lot 6-1 is owned by Preston Properties, LLC by virtue of three deeds each dated December 24, 2003, copies of which have been submitted by the Applicant. Said deeds are recorded in Book 13817, Page 172, Book 13817, Page 174 and Book 13817, Page 176 at the York County Registry of Deeds. 5. Evidence of right, title and interest is established by virtue of the above referenced deeds. 6. The Subject Property is in the Business Park (BP) zoning district. 3

4 WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 1 7. The Applicant has submitted a copy of Articles of Organization of Limited Liability Company filed with the Office of the Secretary of State, dated June 5, 2000, (for Preston Properties, LLC) and January 28, 2004 (for Park North Development, LLC) as both being authorized to do business or carry on activities in the State of Maine. Timothy H. Norton, 53 Exchange Street, Portland, Maine is named as Registered Agent for both Preston Properties, LLC and Park North Development, LLC. 8. The Subject Property has an area of 236 +/- acres. The Subject Property is proposed to be divided into four (4) Parcels with each Parcel to be further divided into multiple Lots as shown on a Plan dated November 7, 2005, prepared by Sebago Technics, One Chabot Street, Westbrook, Maine (the Plan )(as the same may be revised with the approval of the Council), for the purpose of constructing a multiuse development. In order to facilitate the multi use nature of the project, each Parcel shall have distinct space and bulk and use restrictions as set forth below. 9. The Applicant proposes certain uses that are allowed and consistent with the current zoning of the Subject Property. The Applicant further proposes certain additional uses, such as residential and multi-family housing and retail uses that are not allowed uses given the current zoning of the Subject Property. The Applicant has therefore made application for a Contract Zone under the provisions of Article 14 of the Saco Zoning Ordinance. 10. The Applicant recognizes that no public sewer system is readily available within the Portland Road right of way to service the Subject Parcel but the Applicant is aware that the City of Saco anticipates that Village Works, LLC, developer of a parcel of property on Cascade Road near the Subject Property may be extending the public sewer system across that property. The Applicant proposes to make provision for the extension of the City of Saco sewer system from its anticipated terminus at the southwesterly boundary of the Subject Property. If the Village Works, LLC development does not materialize than the Park North Development, LLC will pursue the extensions independently in order to accommodate this development. II. This contract amends the Saco Zoning Ordinance as follows: 1. This Agreement supersedes Article 4. District Regulations of the Saco Zoning Ordinance. District Regulations applicable to the Subject Property shall instead be governed by the terms of this Agreement. 2. Notwithstanding any contrary provision of Section or Section of the Subdivision Regulations of the City of Saco, the Applicant shall be authorized to implement a Low Impact Design stormwater management system for the Subject property. This system shall comply with existing City and State water quality and quantity standards. 3. 4

5 WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 1 The definitions of Front, Side and Rear Yards shall remain the same as in the Saco Zoning Ordinance. The following shall apply as the exclusive Space and Bulk Requirements applicable to the Subject Property Section and 412 shall be deemed amended accordingly but only as to the Subject Property: PARCEL 1: Minimum Lot Size: 7,500 Square Feet Minimum Street Frontage: 50 feet Minimum Front Yard: 50 feet for the front yard facing Route 1 if any, 20 feet for all other front yards Minimum Side Yard: 20 feet for Lots abutting a residential or conservation district; 10 feet for Lots not abutting a residential or conservation district Minimum Rear Yard: 20 feet for Lots abutting a residential or conservation district; 10 feet for Lots not abutting a residential or conservation district Maximum Building Height: 60 feet Maximum Lot Coverage: 40% Density: N/A PARCEL 2: Minimum Lot Size: Minimum Street Frontage: Minimum Front Yard: Minimum Side Yard: Minimum Rear Yard: Maximum Building Height: Maximum Lot Coverage: 40% Density: N/A 20,000 Square Feet 100 feet 75 feet for the front yard facing Route 1 if any, 30 feet for all other front yards 20 feet for Lots abutting a residential or conservation district; 15 feet for Lots not abutting a residential or conservation district 20 feet for Lots abutting a residential or conservation district; 15 feet for Lots not abutting a residential or conservation district 45 feet 5

6 WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 1 PARCEL 3: Minimum Lot Size: 7,500 Square Feet Minimum Street Frontage: 50 feet Minimum Front Yard: 20 feet (0 feet between units in a multi unit building) Minimum Side Yard: 20 feet for Lots abutting a residential or conservation district, 10 feet for Lots not abutting a residential or conservation district (0 feet between units in a multi unit building) Minimum Rear Yard: 20 feet for Lots abutting a residential or conservation district, 10 feet for Lots not abutting a residential or conservation district (0 feet between units in a multi unit building) Maximum Building Height: 45 feet Maximum Lot Coverage: 40% Density: Not more than 120 units Minimum Lot Area/Dwelling Unit 3,000 Square feet * total acreage of parcel divided by the number of units proposed Minimum Net Residential Density for multi-family dwellings 1,250 s.f. per unit PARCEL 4: Minimum Lot Size: 7,500 Square Feet Minimum Street Frontage: 50 feet Minimum Front Yard: 10 feet (0 feet between units in a multi unit building) Minimum Side Yard: 10 feet (0 feet between units in a multi unit building) Minimum Rear Yard: 10 feet (0 feet between units in a multi unit building) Maximum Building Height: 35 feet Maximum Lot Coverage: 40% Density: Not more than 300 units Minimum Lot Area/Dwelling Unit 12,500 s.f. *total lot acreage divided by the total number of units proposed Minimum Net Residential Density 1 lot or unit per 7,500 s.f. 6

7 WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 1 PARCEL 1: 4. The permitted and conditional uses otherwise applicable to the Subject Property pursuant to Section 410 of the Saco Zoning Ordinance (including Sections through ) (the Use Restrictions ) are hereby superceded and rendered inapplicable to the Subject Property and in their place, the following shall apply as the exclusive Use Restrictions applicable to the Subject Property and Section 410 shall be deemed amended accordingly but only as to the Subject Property: PERMITTED USES: 1. Dwelling units above the first floor as part of a mixed use building 17. Reserved Multi-family housing, no units within 600 feet of Rte. One right of way. 18. Health care clinics for humans 19. Hospitals 20. Essential Services 21. Animal hospitals and veterinarian offices 2. One caretaker s apartment within a non-residential use 3. Hotels and Motels 4. Retail Businesses and Uses with no more than 80,000 s.f. of floor area 5. Accessory retail sales of goods manufactured on the premises 6. Artist and crafts person studios 23. Accessory Uses 7. Eating establishments 24. Municipal Uses 8. Eating and Drinking establishments 25. Public Utility Building 9. Health and Fitness Clubs 26. Quasi-public Uses 10. Private Clubs 11. Financial Institutions with drive through 22. Any use permitted in the Resource Protection District 27. Public parks and playgrounds 28. Public Schools 12. Professional Offices 29. Private Schools 13. Business Offices 30. Commercial Schools 14. Personal Services 31. Nursery Schools 15. Business Services 32. Day care center 16. Repair Services 33. Adult day care centers, Types 1 and 2 CONDITIONAL USES: 1. Car washes 4. Reserved 2. Indoor recreation/amusement centers 3. Enclosed sports facilities 5. Commercial recreation 6. Radio and TV antennas 7

8 WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 1 PARCEL 2: PERMITTED USES: 1. Hotels and Motels 16. Accessory uses 2. Accessory retail sales of goods 17. Essential services manufactured on the premises 18. Municipal uses 3 Eating establishments 19. Public Utility Building 4. Eating and Drinking establishments 20. Quasi-public uses 5. Accessory food service facilities 21. Public parks and playgrounds 6. Artist and crafts person studios 22. Commercial Schools 7. Health and Fitness Clubs 23. Nursery Schools 8. Financial Institutions with drive 24. Day care center through 25. Adult day care centers, Types 1 and 2 9. Professional Offices 26. Retail uses with less than 15,000 square 10. Business Offices feet of gross floor area 11. Business Services 27. Funeral Homes 12. Private Clubs 28. Personal Services 13. Health care clinics for humans 29. Reserved 14. Research and testing laboratories 30. Indoor Recreation/Amusement Center 15. Any use permitted in the Resource 31. Reserved Protection District 32. Agriculture 33. Self-Service Storage Facilities 34. Outdoor Recreation CONDITIONAL USES: 1. Fully enclosed light industry with no exterior storage 3. Wholesale Trade and Warehouses 2. Wireless Telecommunication Facilities 8

9 WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 1 PARCEL 3: PERMITTED USES: 1. Multi family dwellings 13. Any use permitted in the Resource 2. Professional Offices Protection District 3. Businesses Offices and 14. Home occupations Services 15. Accessory recreational uses 16. Congregate Housing, including multiple 4. Reserved individual rooms or dwelling units to be 5. Day care center occupied as a shared living environment, 6. Adult day care center which may include small individual 7. Accessory Uses apartments with kitchens or individual 8. Eldercare congregate living rooms, any of which may be combined with 9. Community living use shared community space, shared dining 10. Assisted living facility facilities, housekeeping services, personal 11. Nursing Home care services and other similar. 12. Hospitals PARCEL 4: PERMITTED USES: 1. Any use permitted of right in the R-2 District 6. Any use permitted in the Resource Protection District 2. Manufactured housing units 7. Boarding homes 3. Multi family dwellings in structures 8. Home baby sitting service containing no more than 8 units each 9. Adult day care center, Type 1 4. Elderly congregate housing 10. Community Center for the use of the 5. Home Occupations residents of land in Parcels 3 & 4 CONDITIONAL USES: 1. Any use permitted as a conditional use in the R-2 District and not otherwise listed herein as a use permitted as a matter of right 9

10 WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 1 III. This Contract Zone is subject to the following conditions and restrictions, as provided for in Section 1403 of the Saco Zoning Ordinance: 1. Development of the mixed-use development described herein as proposed by the Applicant is allowed on the Subject Property. 2. All structures constructed, located, renovated or reconstructed on the Subject Property shall be connected to and serviced by the Biddeford Saco Water Company and to the municipal sanitary sewer system. 3. The portion of the Applicants land shown on the Project Plan as Land to be Conveyed shall be conveyed to the City of Saco or its designee at no cost to the City no later than three (3) years after the first Certificate of Occupancy is issued for any dwelling unit or commercial structure on the Subject Property. 4. Development on Parcels 1, 2 3, and 4 shall be subject to either Subdivision or Site Plan review by the Planning Board as dictated by the Saco Zoning Ordinance or the Saco Subdivision Regulations. 5. City and Applicant recognize that the Sketch Plan submitted for purposes of Contract Zone consideration is limited in scope and detail. The project is subject to site plan and subdivision review by the Planning Board, and to any and all permits, licenses or approvals which the project may be subject to by the Maine Department of Environmental Protection, the Maine Department of Transportation, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and all other regional, state and federal agencies. 6. No site plan or subdivision approvals shall be granted by the Planning Board prior to an executed agreement being reached between the City and the Applicant for the design, financing and construction of a functional sanitary sewer collection and conveyance system serving the subject property, all connected to the existing City of Saco sanitary sewer system. 7. The street proposed to provide access to Parcels 1, 3 and 4 shall not be constructed as to cross the brook as shown on the Project Plan prior to agreement being reached between the Applicant, City and abutters as necessary for said street to be constructed as a through street to Cascade Road. 8. Applicant is responsible for the design and construction, in consultation with the City or entity designated by the City, of an off-road trail system. Said trail system may be deeded with use restrictions but in no circumstance shall any such restrictions bar free access or prohibit passive recreation by the public. Passive recreation may include activities such as walking, hiking, birdwatching, picnicking, cross-country skiing, or nature photography. Passive recreation shall not include activities that may result result in degradation of the trail system, including but not limited to motor vehicle use, removal of vegetation beyond that necessary for trail construction, disturbance of soil beyond that necessary for trail construction, and hunting. 10

11 WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 1 9. Failure of the Applicant to submit an application for subdivision review as proposed to the Planning Office for review and approval by the Planning Board within one (1) year of the approval of this Contract Zone shall render this Agreement null and void. This deadline may be extended for successive six (6) month periods at the discretion of the City Administrator upon written request submitted to the City Planning Office by the Applicant. In the event that this Contract Zone Agreement becomes null and void, the zoning applicable to the Subject Property shall revert to the Zoning in effect prior to the approval of the Contract Zone. 10. Except as addressed in this Contract Zone document, the project shall adhere to all other applicable provisions of the City of Saco Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations. 11. All details shown on the plans and application materials submitted to date and during the course of site plan and subdivision review by the Planning Board are hereby incorporated into this contract by reference. The site shall be developed in conformance with those plans and materials. Minor changes may be approved by the Planning Office of the City of Saco. Revisions to the Lot designations, lines or layouts within any Parcel may be made by the Applicant with the approval of the Planning Board but without further approval or consent of the City Council. Revisions to the Parcel boundary lines deemed by the Planning Board to be minor may be made by the Applicant with the approval of the Planning Board but without further approval or consent of the City Council. Revisions to the Parcel boundary lines deemed by the Planning Board to be significant to the Contract Zoning Agreement shall require prior approval of the City Council. 12. This Document and Contract Zone affects only the Subject Property identified herein. 13. This contract and its provisions shall specifically and exclusively apply to the Contract Zone request submitted by the Applicant. 14. This Document and the Contract Zone it creates shall not be transferable without approval by the City Council, provided however that upon receipt of final subdivision and/or Site Plan approval (as required), Lots and Units within the Subject Property shall be saleable to third parties. 15. Breach of these conditions, restrictions and/or Agreement by the developer shall constitute a breach of the contract. Said breach of contract shall constitute a zoning violation and shall be subject to enforcement action under the terms and procedures of 30-A M.R.S.A. Section The Council notes that the decision to approve this Contract Zone is significantly impacted by the agreement of the Applicant to extend the public sewer from Cascade Road to and across the Subject Property, (thereby making public sewer available to the northern segment of Route 1) as well as to make possible the potential for interconnecting public streets between the Subject Property and Cascade Road, each of which are significant public benefits to the City of Saco. 11

12 WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 1 IV. Pursuant to authority found in 30A M.R.S.A. Section 4352 (8), and the City of Saco Zoning Ordinance, Section 1403, and by vote of the Saco Planning Board on December 20, 2005, and the Saco City Council on May 1, 2006, the following findings are hereby adopted: A. The Subject Property is a parcel of an unusual nature and location, for the following reasons: 1. The Subject Property consists of 236 +/- acres of contiguous land with over 1650 feet of frontage on Route 1. Route 1 is a major transportation route in southern Maine and has the ability to carry a large capacity of vehicles on a daily basis. Route 1 is also the commercial corridor in this area which also makes it conducive to commercial, retail and mixed use residential development. 2. The Subject Property is located at the Scarborough/Saco town line and therefore will serve as a gateway to the City of Saco. Such a large parcel of land with such significant frontage in this location provides a rare opportunity to master plan a mixed use development in this critical location. In addition, because of its proximity to Scarborough and Portland, the mixed use nature of this project will be attractive to a wider region rather than servicing just the City of Saco. This will assist in achieving the goal cited in the Local Economy section of the Comprehensive Plan which identifies the desire to Maintain Saco s role as a retail and service center for the region 3. The Subject Property is located just east of the Maine Turnpike and North of the I-195 spur which the Saco Comprehensive Plan indicates is strategic in working with the Turnpike Authority to locate a new interchange in the Flag road/cascade Road area of the community. This development will serve to enhance those discussions. 4. The Applicant is agreeable to conveying the portions of Tax Map 63, Lot 6 and Tax Map 64, Lot 6-1 which are within the Resource Protection District (approximately 12 acres), identified as Land to be Conveyed on the Plan, to the City of Saco to be permanently preserved for the benefit of the public. B. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the Saco Comprehensive Plan, based on the following goals: Chapter 17, Section F. Land Use, Local Goals To guide development to identified growth areas that are compatible with the existing settlement pattern and that enhances the desired pattern of land use. The proposed uses promote a transition and mitigation of land use between residential development and commercial use. To accommodate the growth of commercial and industrial activities in designated growth areas where public services and facilities are or can be 12

13 WORKSHOP ITEM: A Exhibit Item: 1 provided. The proposed project provides significant commercial growth potential and proposes to extend public sewer to the Subject Property and across the Subject Property to Eastview Parkway and portions of Route 1 north of Cascade Road that are currently not served by public sewer.. To permanently protect environmentally and ecologically sensitive and scenic areas through outright purchase or conservation easements. The Applicant proposes to convey land within the Resource Protection district to the City, thereby protecting that land from future development To encourage a pattern of land use that can be served efficiently and that does not impose undue burden on the City s financial resources. The Applicants development encourages commercial development with ease of access and at a scale that will provide significant commercial expansion with substantial fiscal benefit to the City. C. The proposed use is consistent with, but not limited to, the existing uses and permitted uses within the original zone. The proposed contract continues the permitted uses currently allowed in the underlying zoning district, while adding additional compatible uses which are anticipated to enhance the development and appearance of the project. D. The conditions proposed are sufficient to meet the intent of Section Contract Zoning, of the Saco Zoning Ordinance. V. Based on the above findings, conditions and restrictions, the City Council hereby incorporates this Contract Zone agreement into the Saco Zoning Ordinance by reference. By signing this contract, both parties agree to abide by the conditions and restrictions contained herein. Adopted by the Saco City Council on May 1, 2006, and Adopted as Amended on September 3, 2013, and further Amended on September, CITY OF SACO PRESTON PROPERTIES, LLC By: Kevin L. Sutherland City Administrator By: R. Elliott Chamberlain Authorized Member PARK NORTH DEVELOPMENT, LLC By: R. Elliott Chamberlain Authorized Member 13

14 WORKSHOP ITEM: B WORKSHOP ITEM COMMENTARY AGENDA ITEM: Amendment to the Saco Code, Chapter General Assistance Program Appendixes for Overall Maximums, Thrifty Food Plan & Housing Maximums. COUNCIL RESOURCE: Councilor Eric Cote STAFF RESOURCE: William Rankin, General Assistance Director BACKGROUND: Each year Maine Municipal Association presents municipalities with new Appendixes for their City Ordinance, which need to be reviewed and adopted. This year, the Over-All Maximums on Appendix A have increased slightly. The food maximums on Appendix B have remained the same since last year. On Appendix C, we used an average between the York County HMFA and the York/Kittery/ S. Berwick HMFA. Those amounts are up in all categories this year. The amounts in Appendix D have not changed. EXHIBITS: 1. Maine Municipal Association General Assistance Ordinance Appendixes (A, B, C, and D). 2. Letter from Department of Health and Human Services dated August 18, 2016 RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends approval of the General Assistance Ordinance Appendixes, A, B, C and D. SUGGESTED MOTION: The City of Saco hereby approves the First Reading of the, amendment to the Saco Code, Chapter 112, General Assistance Program, Appendix A- Overall Maximum, Appendix B Food Maximums, Appendix C GA Housing Maximums, and Appendix D Utilities, and further moves to set the Public Hearing for October 3,

15 WORKSHOP ITEM: B Exhibit Item: 1 General Assistance Ordinance Appendixes (A, B, C and D), Proposed Figures dated October 1, 2016 Appendix A - GA Overall Maximums # IN HOUSEHOLD MAXIMUMS MAXIMUMS Current Proposed 1 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ EACH ADDITIONAL $75.00 $75.00 Appendix B - Food Maximums # IN HOUSEHOLD WEEKLY MAX. WEEKLY MAX MONTHLY MAX MONTHLY MAX Current Proposed Current Proposed 1 $45.12 $45.12 $ $ $83.02 $83.02 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ EACH ADDITIONAL $ $

16 Appendix C GA Housing Maximums Unheated Units # BDRMS MONTHLY MONTHLY Current Proposed 0 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Heated # BDRMS. MONTHLY MONTHLY Current Proposed 0 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ WORKSHOP ITEM: B Exhibit Item: 1 16

17 WORKSHOP ITEM: B Exhibit Item: 2 17

18 WORKSHOP ITEM: B Exhibit Item: 2 18

19 WORKSHOP ITEM: B Exhibit Item: 2 19

20 WORKSHOP ITEM: B Exhibit Item: 2 20

21 WORKSHOP ITEM: B Exhibit Item: 2 21

22 WORKSHOP ITEM: B Exhibit Item: 2 22

23 WORKSHOP ITEM: B Exhibit Item: 2 23

24 WORKSHOP ITEM: B Exhibit Item: 2 24

25 WORKSHOP ITEM: B Exhibit Item: 2 25

26 WORKSHOP ITEM: B Exhibit Item: 2 26

27 CITY OF SACO, MAINE WORKSHOP ITEM: C Administration Kevin L. Sutherland, City Administrator Saco City Hall Telephone: (207) Main Street KSutherland@sacomaine.gov Saco, Maine Facebook: /sacomaine MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Michaud and the City Council FROM: Kevin Sutherland, City Administrator DATE: September 12, 2016 RE: Medical Marijuana Caregivers During the first reading of the zoning amendment, Council, in its motion, included I-1 as an additional location for this change. After that reading, I had asked for counsel opinion regarding the change as staff had identified some concerns around the I-1 zone and primarily for those reasons, had recommended to Planning and EDC the new definition be added to I-2 zone only. Here is the from Tim Murphy, our attorney: From: Tim Murphy [mailto:tmurphy@padzilla.com] Sent: Friday, August 19, :31 PM To: William Mann Subject: RE: Federal Funds used to develop Saco Business Parks - Proposed Amendment to Zoning to Allow Non-Residence based Medical Marijuana Caregivers in the I-1 Zone. Hello Bill: I want to limit my opinion to the legal implications of an expansion of medical marijuana into part of the I-1 zone. The generic issue of the value of allowing such use into the entire I-1 zone is a policy call for the EDC and the Council. However, this opinion relates to the legal issues around allowing this use in that portion of the I-1 that comprises the Spring Hill Industrial Park, meaning those lots that lie from FEDEX over to US Route 1, all developed in late 1999 following the purchased of the Arthur Willey Farm. That area, Spring Hill, is subject to certain covenants governing the sale, use and occupancy of all lots within (22 or so) the Park development. Those covenants can be found in Book 9521, Page 154 of the York County Registry of Deeds. As you might guess, the covenants govern the use/build out by lot purchasers, but we need also concede that they govern the City as the developer as well. The covenants are installed for the purpose of protecting City goals, and assuring the fair value of lots within the development. They limit, govern and control the use of lots in perpetuity, and until altered by the City as allowed in the covenants themselves. 27

28 WORKSHOP ITEM: C Several provisions of those covenants are likely applicable to the proposed use of growing and/or distributing medical marijuana. So, see Section 5.2 (G). This section prohibits a use in violation of federal law. Marijuana is still a so-called scheduled drug under federal law, and sale, distribution and possession of it is a crime, although it is not necessarily a crime here in Maine under state law. However, legality under state law does not absolve the use under federal law. Thus, sitting a medical marijuana use within Spring Hill is in violation of our Park covenants, and could expose the city to claims by existing lot owners, and by citizens as well. Arguably, parties could seek to enjoin the City from violating its own covenants, and such a claim would be seriously reviewed by a Superior Court. It could also be argued that Sections 5.3 (B) might also apply given the odors that are known to emanate from grow facilities. Again, this would potentially allow for additional claims against the City after the fact should odors in fact emanate from the use. The arguments governing the covenants would not apply to any land that sits outside of the Spring Hill section, unless there is another independent set of covenants governing such other land/lots. To my immediate knowledge, these lots are the only ones subject to covenants in the I-1 but I have not done an extensive review on that issue. In other words, other land within the I-1 zone, but which lie outside the Spring Hill Park, are not subject to the referenced standards, and so limi5tign covenants would not apply to them. That said, adoption of a medical marijuana use in any part of Saco (I-1, I-2, Spring Hill, etc) implicates the oath of office all members of the Planning Board, the Mayor and the City Councilor. See Section 9.05 of the Charter. The Charter/Oath requires that all these officials obey the laws of the United States It is certainly a curious position for public officials to be assisting others with the compromise of federal law. If asked, it would be my opinion that strictly enacting zoning does not expressly violate federal law, however, it violates the spirit and intentions of the oath by assisting another party to grow and distribute a scheduled drug that is illegal. One can rightly ask if government itself can violate its own laws, can we ask our citizens to obey those we pass and expect them to oblige. One final point as to Spring Hill lots, the covenants for these lots, and I have opined in this regard in the past, require uses that have been seen and reviewed and approved by the EDC. That has been my opinion when readings sections 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.8 in tandem. I ll quote from a 2009 opinion letter to Peter Morelli on this topic: In total, these sections make clear that any proposed use within the park must be reviewed and approved by the City acting through your office and the EDC. Please note that the development director was seen as a proxy of and for the City Administrator, and to my knowledge that office has deferred decisions to the director and EDC in most circumstances that I am aware of. The verbiage cited/found in those sections was put in to prevent the City from suffering a use it did not want/desire. That laudable goal can serve as an impediment though in cases where the EDC and the City Council do not see eye to eye. It appears the Council passed on authority over Spring Hill in part to your office/administrator and EDC. And, it s been my understanding that policy decisions and approvals on sales have generally been resolved by the EDC without the Council overruling the EDC. You may wish to confirm this with Peter Morelli who was far more familiar with these practices than me. 28

29 WORKSHOP ITEM: C You have also asked regarding the risk posed by claw back provisions on certain federal funds shared with Saco. As you know, federal funds were used to partially develop spring Hill, the Mill Brook park, and other areas/parts of the City (train station for example). From what I ve seen, federal grants expressly prohibit a grant recipient from violating federal law, along with other additional grant based conditions. So, for example, the City, as part of a grant used to extend city sewer lines along the ocean front (Seaside Avenue) was expressly barred from granting new building permits under certain conditions for any new home. Claw back provisions exist regarding the train station parcel. The issue to note regarding such grants is that permitting this use may, and there is no guarantee here, result in a claw back claim by the federal government. I would opine that the risk is low of a clawback, however, if it is sought, the potential claw back could be a fairly extensive number. I trust this addresses your inquiry, but if I can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to inquire. Tim Murphy 29

30 WORKSHOP ITEM COMMENTARY WORKSHOP ITEM: D AGENDA ITEM: STAFF RESOURCE: COUNCIL RESOURCE: Addition of Chapter Prohibited Products to Saco Municipal Code of Ordinances Kevin Sutherland Councilor Eric Cote BACKGROUND: Polystyrene, referred to colloquially as Styrofoam, is a synthetic polymer used to make meat trays, egg cartons, seafood, containers, cups, plates, bowls, and trays. However, polystyrene negatively impacts the environment because it breaks down into nonbiodegradable pieces that can harm wildlife and marine life. Polystyrene is an increasingly common form of litter, particularly along waterways and shores. Many states across the country including Massachusetts, New York, and Florida have implemented polystyrene bans. Currently in Maine, the towns/cities of Brunswick, Portland, and Freeport maintain a ban on the use of polystyrene in food packaging or retail sale. As polystyrene is harmful to the environment and easily substituted for other materials, we request that an ordinance be passed to add Chapter 161 Prohibited Products to the City of Saco s general code, which would prohibit the use of polystyrene in food packaging and retail sale in Saco. The sale and packaging of raw seafood would be exempt from this ban. The City s goal with this ordinance would be to replace polystyrene foam food containers with reusable, recyclable, or compostable alternatives. With regard to implementation of a polystyrene ban in Saco, we recommend the subsequent implementation of a monetary fine system for violations of the ban, should the ban be approved and go into effect. EXHIBITS: Exhibit Items were Previously Provided on 9/6/ Kevin Sutherland Memo to Council Addition to the Municipal Code of Ordinances Chapter 160 Prohibited Products 3. Appendix A Master Schedule of Revenues RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends consideration of the proposed changes. FUNDING: None needed. SUGGESTED MOTION: Be it ordered that the City Council hereby ordains and approves the Second and Final reading for the addition to the Saco Code, Chapter 160- Prohibited Products I move to approve the order 30

31 WORKSHOP ITEM: E WORKSHOP ITEM COMMENTARY AGENDA ITEM: STAFF RESOURCE: COUNCIL RESOURCE: (First Reading) Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments pertaining to Shoreland Zoning, including Section 504. Nonconforming Structures; Section 7-1. Natural Resource Districts/Shoreland Performance Standards Bob Hamblen, City Planner Dick Lambert, Code Enforcement Officer Councilor Kevin Roche BACKGROUND: These proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments would update Shoreland Zoning guidelines found in Articles 5 and 7.1, consistent with recent amendments approved by the Maine DEP. DEP staff has been asked to review the proposed changes, and should have comments by later this month. Formal acceptance of the changes by the DEP Commissioner will occur after Council action. The changes are best described as housekeeping, and are fairly minor in nature. The Planning Board considered the proposed Ordinance amendments at its August 2 meeting, held a public hearing and received no comments, then made a positive recommendation for passage. EXHIBITS: 1. Section Reconstruction in Shoreland Zones, amended 2. Section 7-1. Natural Resource Districts/Shoreland Performance Standards, amended 3. Memorandum from City Planner 4. Planning Board Minutes, August 2, 2016 RECOMMENDATION: drafted. Staff recommends acceptance of the proposed amendments as SUGGESTED MOTION: The City of Saco hereby approves the First Reading of the document titled, Amendments to Zoning Ordinance Sections and 7-1, dated September 12, 2016 and further moves to schedule a Public Hearing for October 3,

32 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 1 Amendments to Zoning Ordinance Sections and 7-1, dated September 12, 2016 (New language is underlined; language proposed for deletion is struck through.) RECONSTRUCTION IN SHORELAND ZONES Any non-conforming building or structure which is removed, damaged or destroyed, regardless of the cause, by more than 50% of the market value of the structure before such damage, destruction or removal, may be reconstructed or replaced provided that a permit is obtained within eighteen (18) months of the date of said damage, destruction or removal, and provided that such reconstruction or replacement is in compliance with all dimensional requirements of this Ordinance to the greatest extent practical as determined by the Planning Board in accordance with the purposes of this Ordinance. In no case shall a structure be reconstructed or replaced so as to increase its non-conformity. If the reconstructed or replacement structure is less than the required setback it shall not be any larger than the original structure, except as allowed pursuant to Section 504-1(3)above, as determined by the non-conforming floor area and volume footprint of the reconstructed or replaced structure at its new location. If the total amount of floor area and volume footprint of the original structure can be relocated or reconstructed beyond the required setback area, no portion of the relocated or reconstructed structure shall be replaced or constructed at less than the setback requirement for a new structure. When it is necessary to remove vegetation in order to replace or reconstruct a structure, vegetation shall be replanted in accordance with Section Any non-conforming structure which is located less than the required setback from a water body, tributary stream, or wetland and which is removed by 50% or less of the market value, or damaged or destroyed by 50% or less of the market value of the structure, excluding normal maintenance and repair, may be reconstructed in place if a permit is obtained from the Code Enforcement Officer within one year of such damage, destruction or removal. 32

33 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 Section 7-1 Natural Resource Districts/Shoreland Performance Standards Purposes (Amended 6/29/09) The purposes of this Article are to further the maintenance of safe and healthful conditions; to prevent and control water pollution; to protect fish spawning grounds, aquatic life, bird and other wildlife habitat; to protect buildings and lands from flooding and accelerated erosion; to protect archaeological and historic resources; to protect commercial fishing and maritime industries; to protect freshwater and coastal wetlands; to manage building sites, placement of structures and land uses; to conserve shore cover, and visual as well as actual points of access to inland and coastal waters; to conserve natural beauty and open space; and to anticipate and respond to the impacts of development in shoreland areas a. Applicability of the: The provisions of this Article apply to all land areas within 250 feet, horizontal distance, Normal high water line of any great pond or river, Upland edge of a coastal wetland, including all areas affected by tidal action, or Upland edge of a freshwater wetland, and All land areas within 75 feet, horizontal distance, of the normal high-water line of a stream. b. Official Shoreland Zoning Map The areas to which this Article is applicable are divided into the following districts as shown on the Zoning Map of the City of Saco, which is a part of this Ordinance: a. Resource Protection b. Saco River Overlay District c. Shoreland Overlay District d. Coastal Development Overlay District Resource Protection The RP District shall include the areas shown as RP on the Official Zoning Map and the following areas when they occur within the limits of the shoreland zone as mandated by 33

34 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 the State of Maine Mandatory Shoreland Zoning Act 38 M.R.S.A. 435 et. seq., except that areas which are currently developed need not be included within the Resource Protection District: 1. Areas within 250 feet, horizontal distance, of the upland edge of salt marshes and salt meadows that are rated moderate or high value by Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIF&W) as of January 1, 1973; and areas within 250 feet, horizontal distance, of the upland edge of freshwater wetlands and wetlands associated with rivers, which are rated "moderate" or "high" value waterfowl and wading bird habitat, including nesting and feeding areas, by the MDIF&W, that are depicted on a GIS data layer maintained by either MDIF&W or the DEP as of December 31, 2008; and the area within one hundred (100) feet, horizontal distance, of the upland edge of the unrated mapped freshwater wetlands along Stackpole Creek and the Nonesuch River. 2. Land areas within the 100 year flood plains adjacent to tidal waters as shown on FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Maps or Flood Hazard Boundary Maps. 3. Areas of two or more contiguous acres with sustained slopes of 20% or greater. 4. Areas of two (2) or more contiguous acres with hydric soils and supporting wetland vegetation that are not part of a freshwater or coastal wetland as defined, and that are not surficially connected to a water body during the period of normal high water. 5. Land areas adjacent to tidal waters that are subject to severe erosion or mass movement, such as steep coastal bluffs. 6. All land areas within seventy-five (75) feet, horizontal distance, of the normal high-water line of a stream. 7. All land area within 250', horizontal distance, from the following natural features: Cascade Brook Falls Nonesuch River Fault Saco Heath 8. All land area known as Stratton Island, Bluff Island, Ram Island and Eagle Island. 9. All land area currently being used as general public access to tidal beaches or the Saco River. 10. All land area within one hundred (100) feet, horizontal distance, of Philips Spring, Seal Rock Spring, Heath Road Spring and Jenkins Road Spring. 11. Areas designated by federal, state or municipal government as natural areas of significance to be protected from development, including: 34

35 Ferry Beach State Park Rachel Carson Wildlife Preserve. WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 Saco River Overlay District The Saco River Overlay District includes all lands subject to the jurisdiction of the Saco River Corridor Commission. The Overlay District includes all lands adjacent to the Saco River to a distance of five hundred (500) feet as measured on a horizontal plane from the mean high water line of the river or to the edge of the 100-year flood plain if the flood plain extends beyond five hundred (500) feet, up to a maximum of one thousand (1,000) feet from the mean high water line. Shoreland Overlay District The Shoreland Overlay District includes all lands subject to Shoreland Zoning as mandated by the State of Maine Mandatory Shoreland Zoning Act 38 M.R.S.A. 435 et. seq. that are not included in the Resource Protection District or the Saco River Overlay District. This Section also applies to any structure built on, over or abutting a dock, wharf or pier, or other structure extending beyond the normal high-water line of a water body or within a wetland. In addition, this Section applies to various areas listed on the State Register of Critical Areas. The provisions of this Article are in addition to the provisions of the underlying zone. Coastal Development Overlay District The Coastal Development Overlay District includes all lands subject to Shoreland Zoning as mandated by the State of Maine Mandatory Shoreland Zoning Act 38 M.R.S.A. 435 et. seq. that are not included in the Resource Protection District, the Shoreland Overlay Zone or the Saco River Overlay District. This Section also applies to any structure built on, over or abutting a dock, wharf or pier, or other structure extending beyond the normal high-water line of a water body or within a wetland. In addition, this Section applies to various areas listed on the State Register of Critical Areas. The provisions of this Article are in addition to the provisions of the underlying zone. c. Effective Date 1. Effective Date of Ordinance and Ordinance Amendments. This Article, which was amended by the municipal legislative body on November??, 2016 June 29, 2009, shall not be effective unless approved by the Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection. A certified copy of the Article as amended, attested and signed by the Municipal Clerk, shall be forwarded to the Commissioner for approval. If the Commissioner fails to act on this Article amendment within forty-five (45) days of his/her receipt of the amendment, it shall be automatically approved. 35

36 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 Any application for a permit submitted to the municipality within the forty-five (45) day period shall be governed by the terms of this Article as amended if the amendment is approved by the Commissioner. B. Repeal of Municipal Timber Harvesting Regulation. The municipal regulation of timber harvesting activities is repealed on the statutory date established under 38 M.R.S.A. section 438-B(5), at which time the State of Maine Department of Conservation s Bureau of Forestry shall administer timber harvesting standards in the shoreland zone. On the date established under 38 M.R.S.A section 438-B(5), the following provisions of this Ordinance are repealed: Section Timber Harvesting; Section RP Resource Protection District Selective timber harvesting according to a plan approved by a forester registered in the State of Maine on a non-commercial basis; and Section 3. Definitions, the definition of forest management activities. NOTE: The statutory date established under 38 M.R.S.A. section 438-B(5) is the effective date of state-wide timber harvesting standards. That date is the first day of January of the 2 nd year following the year in which the Commissioner of Conservation determines that at least 252 of the 336 municipalities identified by the Commissioner of Conservation as the municipalities with the highest acreage of timber harvesting activity on an annual basis for the period have either accepted the state-wide standards or have adopted an ordinance identical to the state-wide standards. 38 M.R.S.A. section 438-A(5) further provides that the Commissioner of Conservation shall notify the Secretary of State in writing and advise the Secretary of the effective date of the state-wide standards Land Use Standards Activities within the districts subject to these requirements shall conform with the following additional dimensional requirements Minimum Lot Requirements 1. The minimum lot size and lot area per dwelling unit for uses in the Resource Protection District are set forth in Table The minimum lot size and minimum lot area per dwelling unit in the Saco River Overlay District shall be the requirements of the underlying district unless a larger lot is required by the Corridor Commission s requirements. 36

37 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 3. The minimum lot size and minimum lot area per dwelling unit in the Shoreland Overlay District and the Coastal Development Overlay District shall be the requirements of the underlying district. 4. If more than one residential dwelling unit, principal governmental, institutional, commercial or industrial structure or use, or combination thereof, is constructed or established on a single parcel, all dimensional requirements shall be met for each additional dwelling unit, principal structure, or use Minimum Shorefront Requirements 1. Lots in the Resource Protection District shall have a minimum shore frontage of two hundred (200) feet. 2. Lots in the C-1 or R-1a Districts subject to the Saco River, Coastal Development Overlay or Shoreland Overlay provisions shall have a minimum shore frontage of one hundred fifty (150) feet. 3. Lots in all other districts subject to the Saco River, Coastal Development Overlay or Shoreland Overlay provisions shall have a minimum shore frontage of one hundred (100) feet. 4. If more than one residential dwelling unit, principal governmental, institutional, commercial or industrial structure or use, or combination thereof, is constructed or established on a single parcel, all dimensional requirements shall be met for each additional dwelling unit, principal structure, or use Minimum Lot Width Within one hundred (100) feet, horizontal distance, of the normal high water line of a water body or upland edge of a wetland, the minimum width of any portion of any lot shall be equal to or greater than the required shore frontage for the proposed use Maximum Height Principal or accessory structures and expansions of existing structures which are permitted in the Resource Protection, Saco River Overlay, Shoreland Overlay, and Coastal Development Overlay Districts, shall not exceed thirty-five (35) feet in height. This provision shall not apply to structures such as transmission towers, windmills, antennas, and similar structures having no floor area. Cupolas, domes, widow s walks or similar features shall be exempt Principal and Accessory Structures 37

38 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 1. All new principal and accessory structures shall be set back from the normal high-water line of freshwater bodies, the Maximum Spring High Tide Level (MHHW) of tidal waters, and the upland edge of a wetland, depending upon the district in which they are located as shown in Table The water body or wetland setback provision shall neither apply to structures which require direct access to the water as an operational necessity, such as piers, docks and retaining walls, nor to other functionally water-dependent uses. 3. The lowest floor elevation or openings of all buildings and structures including basements shall be elevated at least one foot three feet above the elevation of the 100 year flood, the flood of record, or in the absence of these, the flood as defined by soil types identified as recent flood plain soils. Accessory structures may be placed in accordance with City Code Chapter 106. Floodplain Management, and need not meet the elevation requirements of this paragraph. 4. The total footprint area of all structures, parking lots and other non-vegetated surfaces within a resource protection district, shoreland overlay district, conservation district, or residential district shall not exceed twenty (20) percent of the lot or a portion thereof, located within the shoreland zone, including areas previously developed. In a business or industrial district including the B-5 Marine Business and Residential District, the total area of all structures, parking lots and other non-vegetated surfaces shall not exceed seventy (70) percent. The total footprint area of all buildings shall not exceed twenty (20) percent of a lot, or a portion thereof located within the Coastal Development Overlay District. With the exception of the B-4 and B-5 districts, non-vegetated surfaces shall not exceed a total of twenty (20) percent of the portion of the lot located within the shoreland zone. This limitation does not apply to public boat launching facilities regardless of the district in which the facility is located. In the B-4 and B-5 districts located adjacent to coastal wetlands, or rivers that do not flow to great ponds, non-vegetated surfaces shall not exceed a total of seventy (70) percent of the portion of the lot located within the shoreland zone. The total developed area nonvegetated surface shall not exceed forty (40) percent of a lot or a portion thereof located within the Coastal Development Overlay District. For the purposes of calculating lot coverage, non-vegetated surfaces include, but are not limited to the following: structures, driveways, parking areas, and other areas from which vegetation has been removed. Naturally occurring ledge and rock outcroppings are not counted as nonvegetated surfaces when calculating lot coverage for lots of record on March 24, 1990 and in continuous existence since that date. 38

39 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 For the purposes of this Article, a building is a structure designed for habitation, shelter, storage, or as a gathering place that has a roof. For the purposes of this rule, the foundation is considered to be a part of the building. A porch with a roof, attached to the exterior walls of a building, is considered part of the building. The total developed area non-vegetated surface shall not exceed forty (40) percent of a lot, or a portion thereof located within the Coastal Development Overlay District. For the purposes of this Article, development is the alteration of property for human-related use including, but not limited to buildings, decks, driveways, parking areas, lawns, landscaped areas, and areas of non-native vegetation, and any other appurtenant facilities, but excluding temporary structures. 5. Notwithstanding the requirements stated above, stairways or similar structures may be allowed with a permit from the Code Enforcement Officer, to provide shoreline access in areas of steep slopes or unstable soils provided that the structure is limited to a maximum of four (4) feet in width; that the structure does not extend below or over the normal highwater line of a water body or upland edge of a wetland, (unless permitted by the Department of Environmental Protection pursuant to the Natural Resources Protection Act, 38 M.R.S.A. section 480-C); and that the applicant demonstrates that no reasonable access alternative exists on the property. 6. For principal structures, water and wetland setback measurements shall be taken from the top of a coastal bluff that has been identified on Coastal Bluff maps as being highly unstable or unstable by the Maine Geological Survey pursuant to its Classification of Coastal Bluffs and published on the most recent Coastal Bluff map. If the applicant and the permitting official(s) are in disagreement as to the specific location of a highly unstable or unstable bluff, or where the top of the bluff is located, the applicant may at his or her expense, employ a Maine Registered Professional Engineer, a Maine Certified Soil Scientist, a Maine State Geologist, or other qualified individual to make a determination. If agreement is still not reached, the applicant may appeal the matter to the Board of Appeals. 7. On a non-conforming lot of record on which only a residential structure exists, and on which it is not possible to place an accessory structure meeting the required setbacks whether from water body, tributary stream or wetlands, the Code Enforcement Officer may issue a permit to place a single accessory structure not to exceed eighty (80) square feet in area nor eight (8) feet in height, with no utilities, for the storage of yard tools and similar equipment. The accessory structure shall be located as far from the shoreline or tributary stream or wetland as practical and shall meet all other applicable standards, including lot coverage and vegetation clearing standards. The accessory structure shall not be located closer to the shoreline, tributary stream or wetland than the principal structure. 8. Retaining walls that are not necessary for erosion control shall meet the structure setback requirement, except for low retaining walls and associated fill, provided each of the following conditions are met: 39

40 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 a) The site has been previously altered and an effective vegetated buffer does not exist; b) The wall is at least 25 feet, horizontal distance, from the normal high-water line of a water body, tributary stream, or upland edge of a wetland; c) The site where the retaining wall will be constructed is legally existing lawn or is a site eroding from lack of naturally occurring vegetation, and which cannot be stabilized with vegetative plantings; d) The total height of the wall, in the aggregate, is not more than 24 inches; e) Location is outside the 100-year floodplain on rivers, streams, coastal wetlands, and tributary streams, as designated on the Federal Emergency Management Agency s (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps or Flood Hazard Boundary Maps; f) The area behind the wall is revegetated with grass, shrubs, trees, or a combination thereof, and no further structural development will occur within the setback area, including patios and decks; and g) A vegetated buffer area is established within 25 feet, horizontal distance, of the normal high-water line of a water body, tributary stream, or upland edge of a wetland when a natural buffer area does not exist. The buffer area must meet the following characteristics: (i) The buffer must include shrubs and other woody and herbaceous vegetation. Where natural ground cover is lacking, leaf or bark mulch or an equivalent alternative acceptable to the Code Enforcement Officer shall be utilized; (ii) Plantings, native species only, shall be installed to retard erosion and provide for effective infiltration of stormwater runoff; (iii) A minimum buffer width of 15 feet, horizontal distance, is required, measured perpendicular to the normal high-water line or upland edge of a wetland (iv) A footpath no greater than four feet in width may traverse the buffer at a right angle. (h) All permits required by the Maine DEP and/or other regional, state or federal agencies shall have been issued prior to the start of work. Piers, Docks, Wharves, And Other Marine Structures Extending Over Or Below The Normal High-Water Line Of A Water Body, Or Within A Wetland 1. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS All applications for temporary piers, docks, wharves and other marine structures shall be reviewed by the Code Enforcement Officer, and all applications for permanent piers, docks, wharves and other marine structures shall be reviewed by the Planning Board. All such applications shall be reviewed for conformance with the following standards listed below. If the reviewing authority is unable to reach a decision using the criteria below due to either inconclusive or conflicting information, the reviewing authority will require the applicant to submit an environmental impact analysis assessing the proposal's impact on natural areas, 40

41 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 including impacts of the proposed structure in conjunction with other adjacent or abutting structures. The reviewing authority may also require that the proposal be modified to ensure conformance with the standards set forth below. Mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to, changes in the design and construction of the marine structure, or changes in magnitude, duration, and location of activities carried out at the marine structure. An application shall be approved by the reviewing authority if there is a finding that: a) No more than one pier, dock, wharf or similar structure extending or located below the normal high-water line of a water body or within a wetland is allowed on a single lot; except that when a single lot contains at least twice the minimum shore frontage as specified in Section , a second structure may be allowed and may remain as long as the lot is not further divided. ab) bc) cd) de) ef) fg) Access from the shore shall be developed on soils appropriate for such use, as determined through consultation with the local Soil and Water Conservation District Office. Whenever possible, access from the shore to the marine structure shall be placed on bedrock. Measures shall be taken to minimize soil erosion both during and after construction. The proposed location of the marine structure shall not unreasonably interfere with access to existing marine structures or points of public access, nor shall it unreasonably interfere with existing developed or natural beach areas. The marine structure shall be designed, sited, and constructed to mitigate unreasonable adverse impacts on significant wildlife habitats or unique natural areas including, but not limited to: fin fish and shellfish fisheries, salt marshes, eel grass beds, shorebird feeding and nesting habitats, critical fish spawning and nursery areas, etc. Unreasonable interference with the natural flow of any surface or subsurface waters, or impedance of the flow of the current of any river or channel shall be minimized during the construction and subsequent use of the marine structure. The marine structure shall be designed, sited, and constructed so as not to encroach upon Federally designated navigation channels or mooring areas or otherwise obstruct by any means whatsoever the free use of piers, docks, and other common landing places. The marine structure shall be no larger than necessary to accomplish the purposes for which it is designed, notwithstanding the dimensional limits listed below. Its size and construction shall not change the intensity of the adjoining land use, and by no means shall exceed a total distance of more than 1/3 the width of the water body, when proposed for coastal or inland waterways. The applicant may request a variance from the dimensional requirements due to the additional requirement of handicap access or unusual wind or wave conditions. 41

42 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 Max. Width Max. Length Private Piers Six (6) ft. 100 ft.* Commercial Piers Twelve (12) ft. 100 ft.* Ramps Four (4) ft. As appropriate Docks, Floats 200 sq. ft * landward of the mean low water line gh) hi) ij) jk) kl) New subdivisions that propose docks as part of the subdivision, shall provide a community dock in lieu of the development of docks on individual lots. The applicant may request a variance for additional community docks provided a demonstrated need can be shown for the additional facilities. No new structure shall be built on, over or abutting a pier, wharf, dock or other structure extending beyond the normal high-water line of a water body or within a wetland unless the structure requires direct access to the water as an operational necessity. No existing structures built on, over or abutting a pier, dock, wharf or other structure extending beyond the normal high-water line of a water body or within a wetland shall be converted to residential dwelling units in any district. Except in business districts including the Marine Business and Residential District, structures built on, over or abutting a pier, wharf, dock or other structures extending beyond the normal high-water line of a water body or within a wetland shall not exceed twenty (20) feet in height above the pier, wharf, dock or other structure. New permanent piers and docks on non-tidal waters shall not be permitted unless it is clearly demonstrated to the Planning Board that a temporary pier or dock is not feasible, and a permit has been obtained from the Department of Environmental Protection, pursuant to the Natural Resources Protection Act. m) Vegetation may be removed in excess of the standards in Section of this ordinance in order to conduct shoreline stabilization of an eroding shoreline, provided that a permit is obtained from the Planning Board. Construction equipment must access the shoreline by barge when feasible as determined by the Planning Board. (a) When necessary, the removal of trees and other vegetation to allow for construction equipment access to the stabilization site via land must be limited to 42

43 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 no more than 12 feet in width. When the stabilization project is complete the construction equipment accessway must be restored. (b) Revegetation must occur in accordance with Section (c) A permit pursuant to the Natural Resource Protection Act is required from the Department of Environmental Protection for Shoreline Stabilization activities. n) A deck over a river may be exempted from the shoreland setback requirements if it is part of a downtown revitalization project that is defined in a project plan approved by the legislative body of the municipality, and may include the revitalization of structures formerly used as mills that do not meet the structure setback requirements, if the deck meets the following requirements: (a) The total deck area attached to the structure does not exceed 700 square feet; (b) The deck is cantilevered over a segment of a river that is located within the boundaries of the downtown revitalization project; (c) The deck is attached to or accessory to an allowed commercial use in a structure that was constructed prior to 1971 and is located within the downtown revitalization project; (d) The construction of the deck complies with all other applicable standards, except the shoreline setback requirements in Section 7.1-4; and (e) The construction of the deck complies with all other state and federal laws. New permanent structures, and expansions thereof, projecting into or over water bodies shall require a permit from the Department of Environmental Protection pursuant to the Natural Resources Protection Act, 38 M.R.S.A. section 480-C. Permits may also be required from the Army Corps of Engineers if located in navigable waters. 2. APPLICATION SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS In addition to the information listed in Article XI of this Ordinance, Site Plan Review, all applications shall contain the following information: a) A photocopy of relevant locational maps indicating the site of the project; b) Site plan, plan and section drawings (to scale) of the proposed structure, including an indication on separate scale drawings of any shoreline stabilization or other modification required by the project; c) A complete list of materials to be used, including a list of all intended coatings (paint, etc) for all proposed marine structures Campgrounds Campgrounds shall conform to the minimum requirements imposed under State Licensing procedures, Section 703 of this Ordinance, and the following: 43

44 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 1. Campgrounds shall contain a minimum of five thousand (5,000) square feet of land, not including roads and driveways, for each site. Land supporting wetland vegetation, and land below the normal high-water line of a water body shall not be included in calculating land area per site. 2. The areas intended for placement of a recreational vehicle, tent or shelter, and utility and service buildings shall be set back a minimum of seventy-five (75) feet, horizontal distance, from the normal high-water line of water bodies, tributary streams, or the upland edge of a wetland Parking Areas 1. In addition to the requirements of Section 708 of this Ordinance, parking areas shall meet the shoreline and tributary stream setback requirements for structures for the district in which such areas are located, except that in the Marine Business and Residential District parking areas shall be set back at least twenty-five (25) feet from the normal high-water line or the upland edge of a wetland. The setback requirement for parking areas serving public boat launching facilities in other districts may be reduced to no less than fifty (50) feet from the normal high-water line or upland edge of a wetland if the Planning Board finds that no other reasonable alternative exists. 2. Parking areas shall be designed to prevent stormwater runoff from flowing directly into a water body, and where feasible, to retain all runoff on-site. 3. All parking spaces shall be nine (9) feet wide and eighteen (18) feet long, except that parking spaces for a vehicle and boat trailer shall be forty (40) feet long Roads And Driveways The following standards shall apply to the construction of roads and/or driveways and drainage systems, culverts and other related features. 1. Roads and driveways shall be set back at least seventy-five (75) feet, horizontal distance, from the normal high-water line of water bodies, tributary streams, or the upland edge of a wetland unless no reasonable alternative exists as determined by the Planning Board. If no other reasonable alternative exists, the road and/or driveway setback requirement shall be no less than fifty (50) feet, horizontal distance, upon clear showing by the applicant that appropriate techniques will be used to prevent sedimentation of the water body. Such techniques may include, but are not limited to, the installation of settling basins, and/or the effective use of additional ditch relief culverts and turnouts placed so as to avoid sedimentation of the water body, tributary stream, or wetland. On slopes of greater than twenty (20) percent the road and/or driveway setback shall be increased by ten (10) feet, horizontal distance, for each five (5) percent increase in slope above twenty (20) percent. This paragraph shall neither apply to approaches to water crossings nor to roads or driveways that provide access to permitted structures, and facilities located nearer to the shoreline due to an operational necessity. 44

45 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 2. Existing public roads may be expanded within the legal road right-of-way regardless of its setback from a water body, tributary stream or wetland. 3. New roads and driveways are prohibited in a Resource Protection District except to provide access to permitted uses within the district, or as approved by the Planning Board upon a finding that no reasonable alternative route or location is available outside the district, in which case the road and/or driveway shall be set back as far as practicable from the normal high-water line of a water body, tributary stream, or upland edge of a wetland. 4. Road and driveway banks shall be no steeper than a slope of two (2) horizontal to one (1) vertical, and shall be graded and stabilized in accordance with the provisions for erosion and sedimentation control contained in Section Road and driveway grades shall be no greater than ten (10) percent except for short segments of less than two hundred (200) feet. 6. In order to prevent road and driveway surface drainage from directly entering water bodies, tributary streams or wetlands, roads and driveways shall be designed, constructed, and maintained to empty onto an unscarified buffer strip at least (50) feet plus two times the average slope, in width between the outflow point of the ditch or culvert and the normal high-water line of a water body, tributary stream, or upland edge of a wetland. Surface drainage which is directed to an unscarified buffer strip shall be diffused or spread out to promote infiltration of the runoff and to minimize channelized flow of the drainage through the buffer strip. 7. Ditch relief (cross drainage) culverts, drainage dips and water turnouts shall be installed in a manner effective in directing drainage onto unscarified buffer strips before the flow gains sufficient volume or head to erode the road, driveway or ditch. To accomplish this, the following shall apply: a. Ditch relief culverts, drainage dips and associated water turnouts shall be spaced along the road or driveway at intervals no greater than indicated in the following table: Grade (Percent) Spacing (Feet) b. Drainage dips may be used in place of ditch relief culverts only where the grade is ten (10) percent or less. 45

46 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 c. On sections having slopes greater than ten (10) percent, ditch relief culverts shall be placed at approximately a thirty (30) degree angle down slope from a line perpendicular to the centerline of the road or driveway. d. Ditch relief culverts shall be sufficiently sized and properly installed in order to allow for effective functioning, and their inlet and outlet ends shall be established with appropriate materials. 8. Ditches, culverts, bridges, dips, water turnouts and other storm water runoff control installations associated with roads and driveways shall be maintained on a regular basis to assure effective functioning Mineral Exploration and Extraction Mineral exploration to determine the nature or extent of mineral resources shall be accomplished by hand sampling, test boring, or other methods which create minimal disturbance of less than one hundred (100) square feet of ground surface. A permit from the Code Enforcement Officer shall be required for mineral exploration which exceeds the above limitation. All excavations, including test pits and holes shall be immediately capped, filled or secured by other equally effective measures, so as to restore disturbed areas and to protect the public health and safety. Mineral extraction may be permitted under the following conditions: 1. A reclamation plan shall be filed with, and approved by the Planning Board before a permit is granted. Such plan shall describe in detail procedures to be undertaken to fulfill the requirements of paragraph 4 below. 2. No part of any extraction operation, including drainage and runoff control features shall be permitted within seventy-five (75) feet, horizontal distance, of the normal high-water line of any water body, tributary stream, or the upland edge of a wetland. Extraction operations shall not be permitted within one hundred and fifty (150) feet, horizontal distance, of any property line. 3. Gravel pits within the shoreland zone shall be set back as far as practicable from the normal high-water line and no less than seventy-five (75) feet and screened from the river by existing or planted landscaping vegetation. 4. Within twelve (12) months following the completion of extraction operations at any extraction site, which operations shall be deemed complete when less than one hundred (100) cubic yards of materials are removed in any consecutive twelve (12) month period, ground levels and grades shall be established in accordance with the following: 46

47 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 a. All debris, stumps, and similar material shall be removed for disposal in an approved location, or shall be buried on-site. Only materials generated on-site may be buried or covered on-site. b. The final graded slope shall be two to one (2:1) slope or flatter. c. Top soil or loam shall be retained to cover all disturbed land areas, which shall be reseeded and stabilized with vegetation native to the area. Additional topsoil or loam shall be obtained from off-site sources if necessary to complete the stabilization project. 5. In keeping with the purposes of this Ordinance, the Planning Board may impose such conditions as are necessary to minimize the adverse impacts associated with mineral extraction operations on surrounding uses and resources Agriculture 1. All spreading of manure shall be accomplished in conformance with the Manure Utilization Guidelines published by the former Maine Department of Agriculture on November 1, 2001, and the Nutrient Management Law (7 M.R.S.A. sections Manure shall not be stored or stockpiled within three hundred (300) feet horizontal distance, of a water body, tributary stream, or wetland. All manure storage areas within the shoreland zone must be constructed or modified such that the facility produces no discharge of effluent or contaminated storm water. 3. Agricultural activities involving tillage of soil greater than forty thousand (40,000) square feet in surface area, within the shoreland zone shall require a Conservation Plan to be filed with the Planning Board. Non-conformance with the provisions of said plan shall be considered to be a violation of this Ordinance. 4. There shall be no new tilling of soil within seventy-five (75) feet, horizontal distance, from water bodies; nor within twenty-five (25) feet, horizontal distance, of tributary streams, and wetlands. Operations in existence on the effective date of this ordinance and not in conformance with this provision may be maintained, provided that such tilling is conducted in accordance with a Soil and Water Conservation Plan. 5. Newly established livestock grazing areas shall not be permitted within seventy-five (75) feet, horizontal distance, of water bodies, nor within twenty-five (25) feet, horizontal distance of tributary streams, and wetlands. Livestock grazing associated with on-going farm activities, and which are not in conformance with the above setback provisions may continue, provided that such grazing is conducted in accordance with a Conservation Plan that has been filed with the planning board Timber Harvesting Reserved. 1. Timber harvesting shall conform with the following provisions: 47

48 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 a. Selective cutting of no more than forty (40) percent of the total volume of trees four (4) inches or more in diameter measured at 4 1/2 feet above ground level on any lot in any ten (10) year period is permitted. In addition: i. Within seventy-five (75) feet, horizontal distance, of the normal highwater line of water bodies, tributary streams, or the upland edge of a wetland, there shall be no clearcut openings and a well-distributed stand of trees and other vegetation, including existing ground cover, shall be maintained. ii. At distances greater than seventy-five (75) feet, horizontal distance, of the normal high-water line of water bodies or the upland edge of a wetland, harvesting operations shall not create single clear cut openings greater than ten-thousand (10,000) square feet in the forest canopy. Where such openings exceed five-thousand (5,000) square feet, they shall be at least one hundred (100) feet, horizontal distance, apart. Such clearcut openings shall be included in the calculation of total volume removal. Volume may be considered to be equivalent to basal area. b. No accumulation of slash shall be left within fifty (50) feet, horizontal distance, of the normal high-water line of a water body. In all other areas slash shall either be removed or disposed of in such a manner that it lies on the ground and no part thereof extends more than four (4) feet above the ground. Any debris that falls below the normal high-water line of a water body or tributary stream shall be removed. c. Timber harvesting equipment shall not use stream channels as travel routes except when: i. Surface waters are frozen; and ii. The activity will not result in any ground disturbance. d. All crossings of flowing water shall require a bridge or culvert, except in areas with low banks and channel beds which are composed of gravel, rock or similar hard surface which would not be eroded or otherwise damaged. e. Skid trail approaches to water crossings shall be located and designed so as to prevent water runoff from directly entering the water body or tributary stream. Upon completion of timber harvesting, temporary bridges and culverts shall be removed and areas of exposed soil re-vegetated. f. Except for water crossings, skid trails and other sites where the operation of machinery used in timber harvesting results in the exposure of mineral soils, shall be located such that an unscarified strip of vegetation of at least seventy-five (75) feet, horizontal distance, in width for slopes up to ten (10) percent shall be retained between the exposed mineral soil and the normal high-water line of a water body or upland edge of a wetland. For each ten (10) percent increased slope, the unscarified strip shall be increased by twenty (20) feet, horizontal distance. The provisions of this paragraph apply only to a face sloping toward the water body or wetland, provided, however, that no portion of such exposed mineral soil on a back face shall be closer than twenty five (25), horizontal 48

49 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 distance, feet from the normal high-water line of a water body or upland edge of a wetland Clearing or Removal of Vegetation For Activities Other Than Timber Harvesting 1. Within a Resource Protection District, the cutting or removal of vegetation shall be limited to that which is necessary for uses expressly authorized in that district and shall be demonstrated on a lot clearing plan to be presented to the CEO or Planning Board as appropriate. 2. In areas that are not in RP, except to allow for the development of permitted uses, within seventy-five (75) feet, horizontal distance, from any water body, tributary stream, or the upland edge of a wetland, a buffer strip of vegetation shall be preserved as follows: a. There shall be no cleared opening greater than two hundred fifty (250) square feet in the forest canopy (or other existing woody vegetation if a forested canopy is not present) as measured from the outer limits of the tree or shrub crown. However, a single footpath not to exceed six (6) feet in width as measured between tree trunks and/or shrub stems is allowed for accessing the shoreline provided that a cleared line of sight to the water through the buffer strip is not created. b. Selective cutting of trees within the buffer strip is allowed provided that a well distributed stand of trees and other natural vegetation is maintained. For the purposes of this section, a "well-distributed stand of trees" adjacent to water bodies, tributary streams, and wetlands, is defined as maintaining a minimum rating score of 16 or more per 25-foot by 50-foot rectangular area (1250 square feet) as determined by the following rating system. Diameter of Tree at 4-1/2 feet Above Ground Points Level (inches) 2 - <4 in <8 in <12 in in. or greater 8 c. For the purposes of Section b other natural vegetation is defined as retaining existing vegetation under three (3) feet in height and other ground cover and retaining at least five (5) saplings less then two (2) inches in diameter at four and one-half (4 ½) feet above ground level for each 25-foot by 50-foot rectangular area. If five (5) saplings do not exist, no woody stems less than two (2) inches in diameter can be removed until 5 saplings have been recruited into the plot. 49

50 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 Notwithstanding the above provisions, no more than forty (40) percent of the total volume of trees four (4) inches or more in diameter, measured at 4 1/2 feet above ground level may be removed in any ten (10) year period. d. Pruning of tree branches, on the bottom 1/3 of the tree is allowed. e. In order to maintain a buffer strip of vegetation, when the removal of stormdamaged, diseased, unsafe, or dead or hazard trees results in the creation of cleared openings, these openings shall be replanted with native tree species unless existing new tree growth is present. f. In order to protect water quality and wildlife habitat, existing vegetation under three (3) feet in height and other ground cover, including leaf litter and the forest duff layer, shall not be cut, covered, or removed, except to provide for a footpath or other permitted uses as described above. The provisions contained in paragraph 2 above shall not apply to those portions of public recreational facilities adjacent to public swimming areas. Cleared areas, however, shall be limited to the minimum area necessary. 3. At distances greater than seventy-five (75) feet, horizontal distance, from the normal high-water line of any water body, tributary stream, or the upland edge of a wetland, there shall be allowed on any lot, in any ten (10) year period, selective cutting of not more than forty (40) percent of the volume of trees four (4) inches or more in diameter, measured 4 1/2 feet above ground level. Tree removal in conjunction with the development of permitted uses shall be included in the forty (40) percent calculation. For the purposes of these standards, volume may be considered to be equivalent to basal area. In no event shall cleared openings for any purpose, including but not limited to, principal and accessory structures, driveways, lawns and sewage disposal areas, exceed in the aggregate, 25% of the lot area within the shoreland zone or ten thousand (10,000) square feet, whichever is greater, including land previously cleared. This provision shall not apply industrial or business districts including the Marine Business and Residential District. 4. Legally existing nonconforming cleared openings may be maintained, but shall not be enlarged, except as allowed by this Section. 5. Fields and other cleared openings which have reverted to primarily shrubs, trees, or other woody vegetation shall be regulated under the provisions of this section Hazard Trees, Storm-Damaged Trees, and Dead Tree Removal. (1) Hazard trees in the shoreland zone may be removed without a permit after consultation with the Code Enforcement Officer if the following requirements are met: 50

51 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 (a) Within the shoreline buffer, if the removal of a hazard tree results in a cleared opening in the tree canopy greater than two hundred and fifty (250) square feet, replacement with native tree species is required, unless there is new tree growth already present. New tree growth must be as near as practicable to where the hazard tree was removed and be at least two (2) inches in diameter, measured at four and one half (4.5) feet above the ground level. If new growth is not present, then replacement trees shall consist of native species and be at least four (4) feet in height, and be no less than two (2) inches in diameter. Stumps may not be removed. (b) Outside of the shoreline buffer, when the removal of hazard trees exceeds forty (40) percent of the volume of trees four (4) inches or more in diameter, measured at four and one half (4.5) feet above ground level in any ten (10) year period, and/or results in cleared openings exceeding twenty-five (25) percent of the lot area within the shoreland zone, or ten thousand (10,000) square feet, whichever is greater, replacement with native tree species is required, unless there is new tree growth already present. New tree growth must be as near as practicable to where the hazard tree was removed and be at least two (2) inches in diameter, measured at four and one half (4.5) feet above the ground level. If new growth is not present, then replacement trees shall consist of native species and be at least two (2) inches in diameter, measured at four and one half (4.5) feet above the ground level. (c) The removal of standing dead trees, resulting from natural causes, is permissible without the need for replanting or a permit, as long as the removal does not result in the creation of new lawn areas, or other permanently cleared areas, and stumps are not removed. For the purposes of this provision dead trees are those trees that contain no foliage during the growing season. (d) The Code Enforcement Officer may require the property owner to submit an evaluation from a licensed forester or arborist before any hazard tree can be removed within the shoreland zone. (e) The Code Enforcement Officer may require more than a one for-one replacement for hazard trees removed that exceed eight (8) inches in diameter measured at four and one half (4.5) feet above the ground level. (2) Storm-damaged trees in the shoreland zone may be removed without a permit after consultation with the Code Enforcement Officer if the following requirements are met: (a) Within the shoreline buffer, when the removal of storm-damaged trees results in a cleared opening in the tree canopy greater than two hundred and fifty (250) square feet, replanting is not required, but the area shall be required to naturally revegetate, and the following requirements must be met: 51

52 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 (i) The area from which a storm-damaged tree is removed does not result in new lawn areas, or other permanently cleared areas; (ii) Stumps from the storm-damaged trees may not be removed; (iii)limbs damaged from a storm event may be pruned even if they extend beyond the bottom one-third (1/3) of the tree; and (iv) If after one growing season, no natural regeneration or regrowth is present, replanting of native tree seedlings or saplings is required at a density of one seedling per every eighty (80) square feet of lost canopy. (b) Outside of the shoreline buffer, if the removal of storm damaged trees exceeds 40% of the volume of trees four (4) inches or more in diameter, measured at four and one half (4.5) feet above the ground level in any ten (10) year period, or results, in the aggregate, in cleared openings exceeding 25% of the lot area within the shoreland zone or ten thousand (10,000) square feet, whichever is greater, and no natural regeneration occurs within one growing season, then native tree seedlings or saplings shall be replanted on a one-for-one basis Exemptions to Clearing and Vegetation Removal Requirements The following activities are exempt from the clearing and vegetation removal standards set forth in Section 15(P), provided that all other applicable requirements of this chapter are complied with, and the removal of vegetation is limited to that which is necessary: (1) The removal of vegetation that occurs at least once every two (2) years for the maintenance of legally existing areas that do not comply with the vegetation standards in this chapter, such as but not limited to cleared openings in the canopy or fields. Such areas shall not be enlarged, except as allowed by this section. If any of these areas, due to lack of removal of vegetation every two (2) years, reverts back to primarily woody vegetation, the requirements of Section 15(P) apply; (2) The removal of vegetation from the location of allowed structures or allowed uses, when the shoreline setback requirements of section 15(B) are not applicable; (3) The removal of vegetation from the location of public swimming areas associated with an allowed public recreational facility; (4) The removal of vegetation associated with allowed agricultural uses, provided best management practices are utilized, and provided all requirements of section 15(N) are complied with; (5) The removal of vegetation associated with brownfields or voluntary response action program (VRAP) projects provided that the removal of vegetation is necessary for 52

53 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 remediation activities to clean-up contamination on a site in a general development district, commercial fisheries and maritime activities district or other equivalent zoning district approved by the Commissioner that is part of a state or federal brownfields program or a voluntary response action program pursuant 38 M.R.S.A section 343-E, and that is located along: (a) A coastal wetland; or (b) A river that does not flow to a great pond classified as GPA pursuant to 38 M.R.S.A section 465-A. (6) The removal of non-native invasive vegetation species, provided the following minimum requirements are met: (a) If removal of vegetation occurs via wheeled or tracked motorized equipment, the wheeled or tracked motorized equipment is operated and stored at least twentyfive (25) feet, horizontal distance, from the shoreline, except that wheeled or tracked equipment may be operated or stored on existing structural surfaces, such as pavement or gravel; (b) Removal of vegetation within twenty-five (25) feet, horizontal distance, from the shoreline occurs via hand tools; and (c) If applicable clearing and vegetation removal standards are exceeded due to the removal of non-native invasive species vegetation, the area shall be revegetated with native species to achieve compliance. (7) The removal of vegetation associated with emergency response activities conducted by the Department, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Coast Guard, and their agents Revegetation Requirements. When revegetation is required in response to violations of the vegetation standards set forth in Section 15(P), to address the removal of non- native invasive species of vegetation, or as a mechanism to allow for development that may otherwise not be permissible due to the vegetation standards, including removal of vegetation in conjunction with a shoreline stabilization project, the revegation must comply with the following requirements. (1) The property owner must submit a revegetation plan, prepared with and signed by a qualified professional, that describes revegetation activities and maintenance. The plan must include a scaled site plan, depicting where vegetation was, or is to be removed, where existing vegetation is to remain, and where vegetation is to be planted, including a list of all vegetation to be planted. 53

54 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 (2) Revegetation must occur along the same segment of shoreline and in the same area where vegetation was removed and at a density comparable to the pre-existing vegetation, except where a shoreline stabilization activity does not allow revegetation to occur in the same area and at a density comparable to the pre-existing vegetation, in which case revegetation must occur along the same segment of shoreline and as close as possible to the area where vegetation was removed: (3) If part of a permitted activity, revegetation shall occur before the expiration of the permit. If the activity or revegetation is not completed before the expiration of the permit, a new revegetation plan shall be submitted with any renewal or new permit application. (4) Revegetation activities must meet the following requirements for trees and saplings: (a) All trees and saplings removed must be replaced with native noninvasive species; (b) Replacement vegetation must at a minimum consist of saplings; (c) If more than three (3) trees or saplings are planted, then at least three (3) different species shall be used; (d) No one species shall make up 50% or more of the number of trees and saplings planted; (e) If revegetation is required for a shoreline stabilization project, and it is not possible to plant trees and saplings in the same area where trees or saplings were removed, then trees or sapling must be planted in a location that effectively reestablishes the screening between the shoreline and structures; and (f) A survival rate of at least eighty (80) percent of planted trees or saplings is required for a minimum five (5) years period. (5) Revegetation activities must meet the following requirements for woody vegetation and other vegetation under three (3) feet in height: (a) All woody vegetation and vegetation under three (3) feet in height must be replaced with native noninvasive species of woody vegetation and vegetation under three (3) feet in height as applicable; (b) Woody vegetation and vegetation under three (3) feet in height shall be planted in quantities and variety sufficient to prevent erosion and provide for effective infiltration of stormwater; (c) If more than three (3) woody vegetation plants are to be planted, then at least three (3) different species shall be planted; 54

55 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 (d) No one species shall make up 50% or more of the number of planted woody vegetation plants; and (e) Survival of planted woody vegetation and vegetation under three feet in height must be sufficient to remain in compliance with the standards contained within this chapter for minimum of five (5) years (6) Revegetation activities must meet the following requirements for ground vegetation and ground cover: (a) All ground vegetation and ground cover removed must be replaced with native herbaceous vegetation, in quantities and variety sufficient to prevent erosion and provide for effective infiltration of stormwater; (b) Where necessary due to a lack of sufficient ground cover, an area must be supplemented with a minimum four (4) inch depth of leaf mulch and/or bark mulch to prevent erosion and provide for effective infiltration of stormwater; and (c) Survival and functionality of ground vegetation and ground cover must be sufficient to remain in compliance with the standards contained within this chapter for minimum of five (5) years Erosion and Sedimentation Control 1. All activities which involve filling, grading, excavation or other similar activities which result in unstabilized soil conditions and which require a permit shall also require a written soil erosion and sedimentation control plan. The plan shall be submitted to the permitting authority for approval and shall include, where applicable, provisions for: a. Mulching and re-vegetation of disturbed soil. b. Temporary runoff control features such as hay bales, silt fencing or diversion ditches. c. Permanent stabilization structures such as retaining walls or riprap. 2. In order to create the least potential for erosion, development shall be designed to fit with the topography and soils of the site. Areas of steep slopes where high cuts and fills may be required shall be avoided wherever possible, and natural contours shall be followed as closely as possible. 3. Erosion and sedimentation control measures shall apply to all aspects of a proposed project involving land disturbance, and shall be in operation during all stages of the activity. The amount of exposed soil at every phase of construction shall be minimized to reduce the potential for erosion. 55

56 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 4. Any exposed ground area shall be temporarily or permanently stabilized within one (1) week from the time it was last actively worked, by use of riprap, sod, seed, and mulch, or other effective measures. In all cases permanent stabilization shall occur within nine (9) months of the initial date of exposure. In addition: a. Where mulch is used, it shall be applied at a rate of at least one (1) bale per five hundred (500) square feet and shall be maintained until a catch of vegetation is established. b. Anchoring the mulch with netting, peg and twine or other suitable method may be required to maintain the mulch cover. c. Additional measures shall be taken where necessary in order to avoid siltation into the water. Such measures may include the use of staked hay bales and/or silt fences. 5. Natural and man-made drainage ways and drainage outlets shall be protected from erosion from water flowing through them. Drainage ways shall be designed and constructed in order to carry water from twenty-five (25) year storm or greater, and shall be stabilized with vegetation or lined with riprap. (Amended 4/3/02) Septic Waste Disposal Soils All subsurface sewage disposal systems shall be installed in conformance with the State of Maine Subsurface Wastewater Disposal Rules, and the following: a) Clearing or removal of woody vegetation necessary to site a new system and any associated fill extension, shall not extend closer than seventy-five (75) feet, horizontal distance, from the normal high water line of a water body or the upland edge of a wetland; b) A holding tank is not allowed for a first-time residential use in the shoreland zone. All land uses shall be located on soils in or upon which the proposed uses or structures can be established or maintained without causing adverse environmental impacts, including severe erosion, mass soil movement, improper drainage, and water pollution, whether during or after construction. Proposes uses requiring subsurface wastewater disposal, and commercial or industrial development and other similar intensive land uses, shall require a soils report based on an on-site investigation and be prepared by state-certified professionals. Certified persons may include Maine Certified Soils Scientists, Maine Registered Professional Engineers, Maine State Certified Geologists and other persons who have training and experience in the recognition and evaluation of soil properties. The report shall be based upon the analysis of the characteristics of the soil and surrounding land and water areas, maximum ground water elevation, presence of ledge, drainage conditions, and other pertinent data which the evaluator deems appropriate. The 56

57 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 2 soils report shall include recommendations for a proposed use to counteract soil limitations where they exist Water Quality No activity shall deposit on or into the ground or discharge to the water of the State any pollutant that, by itself or in combination with other activities or substances, will impair designated uses of the water classification of the water body, tributary stream or wetland Archaeological Site Any proposed land use activity involving structural development or soil disturbance on or adjacent to sites listed on, or eligible to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places, as determined by the permitting authority, shall be submitted by the applicant to the Maine Historic Preservation Commission for review and comment, at least twenty (20) days prior to action being taken by the permitting authority. The permitting authority shall consider comments received from the Authority prior to rendering a decision on the application. (Note: The Maine DEP issued Department Order #80-09 conditionally approving the Saco Zoning Ordinance as adopted on June 29, 2009, with a single condition: that the italicized text in the paragraph below be deleted. This condition is reflected in the text of Section 7.1). Resource Protection The RP District shall include the areas shown as RP on the Official Zoning Map and the following areas when they occur within the limits of the shoreland zone as mandated by the State of Maine Mandatory Shoreland Zoning Act 38 M.R.S.A. 435 et. seq., except that areas which are currently developed or lots that appear on a recorded subdivision plan which has obtained municipal approval and Site Location of Development approval or an NRPA permit prior to the effective date of this amendment need not be included within the Resource Protection District: ### 57

58 Memorandum WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 3 To: Mayor Michaud, City Council, City Administrator From: Bob Hamblen, City Planner; Richard Lambert, Code Enforcement Officer Re: Shoreland Zoning, Proposed Amendments Date: Workshop, Sept. 12, 2016 The Board is asked for its review and a recommendation to the City Council on proposed amendments to Articles 5 and 7.1, the City s Shoreland Zoning Ordinance. The last round of SZ amendments was in 2009, a significant one with several policy-oriented changes. The latest round of revisions put forth by the DEP, found in the attached, amended copies of Articles 7-1 and 5, are largely housekeeping in nature. It is clear from several of the proposed changes that the DEP stays on top of nagging little issues, and when it becomes obvious that a way to circumvent a given requirement has been discovered, or a section of the requirements needs clarification, staff develops new language in response, and the model ordinance is updated. The bigger issues that are proposed for amendment are as follows: Nonconforming structures Timber harvesting Revegetation Nonvegetated surfaces Disability variances Definitions Shoreline stabilization Structures and uses extending over, or located below, the shoreline A few of these items in a bit more detail: Nonconforming Structures The proposed amendments limit the expansions of nonconforming structures based on footprint (by square footage or percentage, whichever allows more expansion) and height, instead of floor area and volume. 58

59 Timber Harvesting WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 3 Any ordinance that is not consistent with the 2015 Guidelines is not considered consistent with the Statewide Standards for Timber Harvesting and Related Activities in Shoreland Areas (SWS). Compliant SWS are needed for a municipality to receive assistance from the Maine Forestry Service (MFS) for the regulation of forestry activities. Municipalities that have not amended their ordinances to comply with SWS or have a state-imposed ordinance are responsible for enforcing these noncompliant ordinances without MFS assistance. As Mr. Morse from the DEP suggests, Make your (and Dick s) life easier and repeal timber harvesting in the slz! MFS can handle it just fine. The draft proposes to do just that language is suggested for deletion. Revegetation There are many changes related to clearing or removing vegetation. Among the most significant includes the 2006 shift from the 25 by 25 plot system to a 25 by 50 revegetation plot system. The old system required landowners to maintain vegetation points in any plot; while onerous on the landowner, it makes investigating violations easier on CEOs. With the new 25 by 50 system, the landowner must lay out plots in the area to be thinned adjacent to one another without overlap. Fewer plots are needed making it easier for the landowner, but when investigating violations this is more onerous on CEOs, who now have to match the plots that were laid out by the landowner. Regardless of which system is used locally, the provisions must preserve a certain number of saplings per plot. In addition to the plot system changes in the 2015 Guidelines require amended ordinances to include specific standards for the removal of hazardous, dead, and storm-damaged trees, including revegetation requirements. The exemptions provisions in the 2015 Guidelines have also been substantially modified. We ve forwarded the draft changes to Mike Morse, the southern Maine Shoreland Zoning coordinator for the DEP, and hope to have comments back prior to the public hearing. The amendments have been provided to the Code Enforcement Office for review. If Councilors have any questions or concerns, contact either Dick or myself at your convenience. Thanks. ### 59

60 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 4 Minutes, Planning Board August 2, 2016 Members Present: Neil Schuster, Chairperson; Rene Ittenbach, Peter Scontras, Michael O Toole, Marty Devlin, Bob Hamblen, City Planner, Bill Mann, Economic Development Director, Kevin Sutherland, City Administrator. Absent: Don Girouard, Vangel Cotsis. Workshop 5:00 p.m. Sketch plan review of a proposed 11-lot residential subdivision off Grant Road. Applicant is Mezoian Development. Tax Map 124, Lot 6. Zoned C-1. Regular Meeting 5:30 p.m. 1. Minutes of July 19, 2016 No minutes were submitted. 2. Public Hearing: Review of a Plan for the Disposition of City-owned Real Estate known as Unit 91, Island Terrace condominium. Tax Map 37, Lot Item was tabled at the July 19 meeting. Hamblen: This item was tabled at the Board s July 19 meeting due to concerns about the lack of notification of abutters. In fact, the public hearing had been property noticed in the Journal Tribune. Evidently abutters were not notified due to a misunderstanding. So, the Board was right to table. All required notices have taken place in a timely manner prior to this meeting. As outlined in Chapter 81 of City Code, consideration of the sale of City-owned property is referred to the Planning Board for evaluation and a report to the City Council. The property in this case is a portion of Building 1 on Saco Island, known more specifically as Unit 91. It is roughly a 30,000 s.f. space, all commercial, and consists of 6-7 individual spaces, including the farmer s market, a martial arts studio, a photography studio, and a Department of Labor office. The City has come into ownership due to a lien maturing on Jan. 11, 2016, because of the nonpayment of property taxes from fiscal year The City now seeks to divest itself of the property, and a Planning Board recommendation is requested. Also attached, the letter that Sam Zaitlin, Director of Development for Saco Island West LLC, that was submitted at the 7/19 meeting. Bill Mann, Economic Development Director: The City of Saco is exploring the potential sale of real estate property owned by the City of Saco, known as Unit 91, in the Island Terrace Condominium Assoc. 110 Main Street. The building is a two-level condominium unit with an underground parking garage. The upper level consists of 30,000+/- sq.ft. of space that is Q:\0001-Legislative-City Council\Meeting and Workshop\2016\ \Agenda E. Shoreland Zoning\Minutes, August 2, 2016.doc 60

61 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 4 subdivided into several rental units, that are occupied by several commercial tenants. This building is located in the center of the Saco-Biddeford Mill District which is presently undergoing a significant development/redevelopment with new residential and commercial development presently underway in Saco Mill No. 4, just north of this property. The east is Mill Building #2, which was recently acquired by a new and experienced developer who is working to maximize the development opportunity related to this project. To the south there are several active development projects currently underway. Currently the Property is home to a Karate Academy, a farmers and artisans market, a photography studio, a marketing firm, and the Department of Labor. What the City is proposing, is making a Request For Qualified Proposal (RFQP), for the sale and Development/Redevelopment of said property located at 110 Main St on Saco Island aka as Unit 91 in the Island Terrace Condominium Assoc. The City is seeking proposals of viable prospects who have the ability to maximize the long-term economic development viability and potential of the property; the ability to complement/enhance the other development that has occurred within ITCA, on Saco Island, within the greater mill district and general vibrancy in the downtown neighborhood; the RFQP will require documentable go forward financial capacity to complete both a purchase and any proposed development or change of use of the real estate; responders to the RFQP shall have a documented financial history free of tax liens/foreclosures in the Sate of Maine for the last five years; responders to the RFQP shall have a documentable track record of financial capacity and technical capability to complete whatever the the responder to the RFQP is proposing. Peter: The City is responsible for stopping the deterioration, so they have been putting money into it, but now we are bleeding money into it. We have to stop it and get rid of it. Bill: We aren t bleeding it. We had to put some money into it. This building was not given to the City. Taxes were not paid, so the City acquired it. We expect to fully get all the money back in the sale of it. Kevin Sutherland: It will be sold as one part or it will be split up. Bill: There has already been interest in this property. Mike O: I move to open the public hearing, seconded by Marty. Motion passes 5-0. Don Horton, Unit 139, ITOA: He is okay with allowing any use, or to subdivide. It doesn t affect other owners. 90 owners were bled of hundreds of thousands of dollars, because the previous owner did not pay the taxes. If we end up with the same owner, this condominium will collapse. He encourages the sale of it. Bill, Unit 126, ITOA: He purchased his condo on the cheap, and fortunately it has maintained its value. ITOA is teetering on the edge of disaster. We need to fight to keep its value. There is a resurgence of these old mill buildings. Look what is going on in Biddeford. Larry Lopes, Unit 336 ITCA: We have struggled with the 25% payment because of costs to fix gutters and downspouts that the previous owner was supposed to do. We are the ones who put in the new drains. It s got to be sold to the right buyer. It s a gem of a property. Nobody wants to see dozens in foreclosure all at one time. It needs to be done right. Q:\0001-Legislative-City Council\Meeting and Workshop\2016\ \Agenda E. Shoreland Zoning\Minutes, August 2, 2016.doc 61

62 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 4 Paul Culloton, Unit 129, ITOA: There have been thousands of dollars that have been lost, because of the previous owner. Donna Heinstein, Unit 119, ITOA: Just as everyone has mentioned, we have been bled dry. If it happens again, she will lose everything, then where would she be. It should be sold, but it must be the right owner. Mr. Campbell, Unit 127, ITOA: She is encouraged by the new RFQP. She agrees with the City in how they are approaching this sale. Mike O: I move to close the public hearing, seconded by Peter. Motion passes, 5-0. Marty suggested the planning board members have a site walk of Unit 91. Rene asked the owners of Island Terrace what they would prefer; Commercial or Residential? All were in agreement that it did not matter, as long as who ever bought the building was financially responsible. It also didn t matter if the building was divided up. The Farmers Market is poorly attended and is mostly crafts. Peter: I move that the Board recommend to the City Council that the property known as Unit 91, identified as Tax Map 37, Lot be offered for sale through a Request for Qualified Proposals process, with details to be worked out by the City Administrator, Economic Development Director, and City Attorney, seconded by Marty. Motion passes Public Hearing: proposed amendments to Articles 3, 4 and 7 of the Zoning Ordinance related to medical marijuana caregivers. Hamblen: Following up on the July 19 workshop, this evening s public hearing is held with the goal, in addition to receiving public comment, of arriving at a recommendation for the City Council regarding amendments to certain sections of Articles 3, 4 and 7, with the goal of establishing a level of regulation for medical marijuana caregivers. Board members may be aware that medical marijuana has been allowed in Maine since The City responded at the time by defining three different types of dispensaries and determining where said uses would be allowed. Only eight dispensaries were allowed to operate in the state, and in this area, one is established in Biddeford. Another use was also defined by statute: Primary Caregiver, a person who is designated by a qualifying patient to assist the qualifying patient with the medical use of marijuana in accordance with these rules. Legal advice at the time was that municipalities may only regulate dispensaries and not caregivers Staff and the Council proceeded on that basis. Several, if not many, communities in Maine now host caregivers. In Saco that has meant buildings occupied, or interest shown in occupying, within the industrial park and off Lund Road. There is concern that these uses are occupying buildings that could be devoted to more beneficial uses, and employing a greater number of workers. Also, that the high energy use demanded by the grow operations is taxing CMP s distribution system in the City s industrial area. Q:\0001-Legislative-City Council\Meeting and Workshop\2016\ \Agenda E. Shoreland Zoning\Minutes, August 2, 2016.doc 62

63 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 4 Concern about the situation led to City staff asking that the Council consider a six month moratorium on new permits for medical marijuana caregiver facilities. The Council approved the moratorium on June 6. Staff believes that defining the use(s), determining where the use(s) should be allowed, and adding a performance standard that will provide specific requirements for two new proposed uses Caregivers, Growing and Caregivers, Growing Facility -- will address the situation to the extent necessary. The City Administrator, the PD, Code Office, Planning and a summer intern, Amanda Methot, a 3rd year law student have worked together to draft the language below, which is presented as draft amendments to the Zoning Ordinance: Article 3. Definitions Medical Marijuana Care givers, growing: Individual or business that has registered with the state pursuant to 22 M.R.S. 2422(8-A) as a caregiver. The individual or business has established patients and is engaged in growing medical marijuana outside of the caregiver s primary residence (see growing facility) pursuant to 22 M.R.S A (2)(B). Medical Marijuana Caregivers, Growing facility: Growing facility is a building where plants are stored and cultivated, and may have patient rooms on site separate from plant cultivation and processing. The facility must be locked and secured. The facility cannot contain more than 3 separate licensees. The facility is located separately from the caregiver s primary residence. Article 4. District Regulations I-2 INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (ed. note: includes I-2b district at former Maine Turnpike Exit 5) (Amended 8/1/88, 9/19/88, 3/2/92, 3/16/92, 4/1/91, 6/4/91, 7/6/93, 7/6/93, 2/28/94, 2/19/02, 5/21/12) PERMITTED USES 25. Medical Marijuana Caregivers, growing 26. Medical Marijuana Caregivers, growing facility Article 7. Standards of Performance Section 711. Home Occupations PROHIBITED HOME OCCUPATIONS A home occupation shall not be interpreted to include the following: 1) Facility for the repair of motor vehicles 2) The retailing of any item not produced on the premises (Amended 8/1/88) Q:\0001-Legislative-City Council\Meeting and Workshop\2016\ \Agenda E. Shoreland Zoning\Minutes, August 2, 2016.doc 63

64 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 4 3) Medical Marijuana Caregivers, growing Planner s Note: at the recommendation of the City Attorney, items f-i have been added to the draft Sec. 734, below. These are the only changes to the draft from the version viewed at the 7/19 workshop. Section 734. Medical Marijuana Where permitted by this Ordinance, uses engaged in the provision of Medical Marijuana including Caregiver (Growing) and Growing Facility, shall comply with the following standards: a. Neither of the referenced uses shall be permitted to generate offensive or harmful odors perceptible beyond their property lines, either at ground or habitable elevation. b. Neither of the referenced uses shall be allowed in a location less than five hundred (500) feet, measured in a straight line, to the nearest point on the boundary of any property which is occupied by a public or private school, Day Care Center, or Day Care Home. c. An enclosed outdoor area used for the cultivation of marijuana shall have a privacy fence at least six (6) feet high that obscures the view of the marijuana in order to discourage theft and unauthorized intrusion. d. There shall be no outside displays, window displays, or interior displays visible from the outside of the building intended to attract attention to or generate interest in either of the referenced uses. e. Adequate measures for security of the facility, which may include a security system, security fencing, security cameras and other measures, shall be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Code Enforcement Office prior to issuance of either a building permit or a certificate of occupancy. The Code Officer shall consult with the Police Department if the adequacy of proposed security measures is in question. f. The owner(s) of a building intended for lease to a Caregiver (Growing) or a Growing Facility shall apply for and receive a business license from the City Clerk s office. Each lessee within said building shall apply for and receive a business license from the City Clerk s office. Failure to secure a City of Saco business license shall disqualify either an owner or a lessee from operating as a Caregiver (Growing) or a Growing Facility in Saco. g. A Caregiver (Growing) or a Growing Facility shall receive an annual safety inspection by the Fire Department, Code Office, and Electrical Inspector. Q:\0001-Legislative-City Council\Meeting and Workshop\2016\ \Agenda E. Shoreland Zoning\Minutes, August 2, 2016.doc 64

65 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 4 h. Both a Caregiver (Growing) and a Growing Facility shall identify all principal officers/owners by name and address. i. Evidence of compliance with all applicable state laws shall be submitted to the Planning Office prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. There seems to be some misinformation after an article in the Portland Papers ran an article recently, so I wish to make it clear. This new zoning ordinance amendment does not prohibit existing caregivers from their current status. They are grandfathered. We also are not trying to change state statute. We are just recognizing a new use. Rene: He didn t realize that there would be patient rooms on site. Amanda Methot: It is more of a consultation room. Rene: I move to open the public hearing, seconded by Mike. Motion passes, 5-0. Joe Cooper, 89 Industrial Park Rd: Is this final to have it in just this district, or will it be allowed in other districts? Bob: Only in the I-2. Joe Cooper: It has caused severe financial consequences for him. He would like the planning board to reconsider having it in other districts. He is sitting on an empty building. Why identify just one district? Darrell Goodreau, Boothbay Harbor: you should be able to grow at home. Don t restrict to one zone. Justin Chamberlain: He is a caregiver, and has found it beneficial to grow in his home. It is very expensive to grow. This is a farming community. It should be allowed. Brent Messer: Working in a facility is better than out of a home. Is it possible to have in residential homes? Amanda Methot, Intern: She did a lot of research, starting with State Statutes, lawyers and has met with Caregivers. There were many definitions to choose from. Neil suspended the public hearing. Bob: City staff kicked the idea of allowing in the C-1 zone around, but the smell would be a problem being in a residential area. And it is a heavy power user. Geographically the I-2 zone made sense. Security was an issue, because operations are largely operating on a cash basis. Also, federal dollars were used to develop the industrial park, and with marijuana still illegal at the federal level, it s been stated that repayment of the federal money could be a consequence of allowing growers in the industrial park. Amanda: the moratorium was because Dick was being bombarded with applications. Mike: do individuals need anything other than a license from the state to become a caregiver? No. Don: the zone may be too small, patients can be easily identified, and there will be a flood of caregiver applications at the end of the moratorium. Personal services is not the right definition. Light manufacturing is closer to correct. Q:\0001-Legislative-City Council\Meeting and Workshop\2016\ \Agenda E. Shoreland Zoning\Minutes, August 2, 2016.doc 65

66 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 4 Rene: I move to close the public hearing, seconded by Marty, and so voted, 5-0. Peter: this is setting that area up for a lot of electricity use. Is that a concern given the lack of capacity? Has CMP said it will meet the demand? Rene: natural gas may help. The I-2 zone is near the fire station, and there are several public destinations in the I-2 zone, so I m not concerned. Rene: I move that the Board forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for the proposed amendments to Articles 3, 4 and 7 of the Zoning Ordinance, with the goal of regulating medical marijuana caregivers growing in a non-residential situation in the City of Saco, seconded by Michael, and so voted, Public Hearing: proposed amendments to Articles 5 and 7.1 of the Zoning Ordinance related to shoreland zoning. Hamblen: The Board is asked for its review and a recommendation to the City Council on proposed amendments to Articles 5 and 7.1, the City s Shoreland Zoning Ordinance. The last round of SZ amendments was in 2009, a significant one with several policy-oriented changes. The latest round of revisions put forth by the DEP, found in the attached, amended copies of Articles 7-1 and 5, are largely housekeeping in nature. The bigger issues that are proposed for amendment are as follows: Nonconforming structures Timber harvesting Revegetation Nonvegetated surfaces Disability variances Definitions Shoreline stabilization Structures and uses extending over, or located below, the shoreline A few of these items in a bit more detail: Nonconforming Structures -- The proposed amendments limit the expansions of nonconforming structures based on footprint (by square footage or percentage, whichever allows more expansion) and height, instead of floor area and volume. Timber Harvesting -- Any ordinance that is not consistent with the 2015 Guidelines is not considered consistent with the Statewide Standards for Timber Harvesting and Related Q:\0001-Legislative-City Council\Meeting and Workshop\2016\ \Agenda E. Shoreland Zoning\Minutes, August 2, 2016.doc 66

67 WORKSHOP ITEM: E Exhibit Item: 4 Activities in Shoreland Areas (SWS). Compliant SWS are needed for a municipality to receive assistance from the Maine Forestry Service (MFS) for the regulation of forestry activities. Municipalities that have not amended their ordinances to comply with SWS or have a state-imposed ordinance are responsible for enforcing these non-compliant ordinances without MFS assistance. As Mr. Morse from the DEP suggests, Make your (and Dick s) life easier and repeal timber harvesting in the slz! MFS can handle it just fine. The draft proposes to do just that language is suggested for deletion. Revegetation -- There are many changes related to clearing or removing vegetation. Among the most significant includes the 2006 shift from the 25 by 25 plot system to a 25 by 50 revegetation plot system. The old system required landowners to maintain vegetation points in any plot; while onerous on the landowner, it makes investigating violations easier on CEOs. With the new 25 by 50 system, the landowner must lay out plots in the area to be thinned adjacent to one another without overlap. Fewer plots are needed making it easier for the landowner, but when investigating violations this is more onerous on CEOs, who now have to match the plots that were laid out by the landowner. Regardless of which system is used locally, the provisions must preserve a certain number of saplings per plot. In addition to the plot system changes in the 2015 Guidelines require amended ordinances to include specific standards for the removal of hazardous, dead, and storm-damaged trees, including revegetation requirements. The exemptions provisions in the 2015 Guidelines have also been substantially modified. We ve forwarded the draft changes to Mike Morse, the southern Maine Shoreland Zoning coordinator for the DEP, and await his comments. The amendments have been provided to the Code Enforcement Office for review. We seek questions or comments from the Board. Mike: I move to open the public hearing. Seconded by Rene. No comments. Peter: I move to close the public hearing, seconded by Rene, and so voted, 5-0. Mike: I move that the Board forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for the proposed amendments to Articles 5 and 7.1 of the Zoning Ordinance, as related to Shoreland Zoning, as amended based on suggestions found in Don Girouard s of Aug. 1, seconded by Marty, and so voted, 5-0. The meeting adjourned at approx. 8:40 p.m. Submitted by, Maggie Edwards, Recording Secretary Q:\0001-Legislative-City Council\Meeting and Workshop\2016\ \Agenda E. Shoreland Zoning\Minutes, August 2, 2016.doc 67

68 CITY OF SACO, MAINE WORKSHOP ITEM: F Administration Kevin L. Sutherland, City Administrator Saco City Hall Telephone: (207) Main Street KSutherland@sacomaine.gov Saco, Maine Facebook: /sacomaine MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Michaud and City Council FROM: Kevin L. Sutherland, City Administrator DATE: September12, 2016 RE: Berry Road Extension Council discussed this item during its workshop on August 1 st. Council directed staff to investigate this issue further. If nothing happens (no action taken) no further permits will be issued for any lots fronting on the unapproved section of the Berry Road. This has been a confusing situation for quite some time and until and unless we have a definitive declaration of what this part of the Berry Road is (private, public or something in between) code enforcement will withhold any permits. Code enforcement issued permits for several lots in the past thinking the road was an unimproved public road and then a private road but are now maxed out at 4 lots. Under advisement of our attorney, the extension of Berry Road (that portion partially paved now with base coat) has not yet been finished to City standards, and has not yet been dedicated to the City following its abandonment years and years ago. As such, the strip of land is not a public road, but is a private way in which abutters own to the centerline, but over which many other property owners have easement rights to pass/access. As for going forward, there are a couple choices to satisfy Linda Valentino s request (see attached memo): 1) Improve enough of the current road bed to create sufficient frontage for lot(s) on a public street. Linda has rights to make these improvements, based on the 2005 agreement; 2) Improve a more limited stretch of the private way portion of Berry, and then build her own private way off the then improved portion of Berry to create the potential for 4 lots on her own private way; 3) Pay on her own, or secure assistance from one or more parties out there, to improve a greater length of Berry past its current terminus, bringing the existing base coat paved but not yet fully completed stretch up to City standard. With base coat paving in place, the cost to improve that segment of Berry to full public road standard is not so high as to be unattainable. This would create frontage for several lot owners. Linda would need to make her own legal arrangements for costs sharing if she chooses this third route. Under all of these scenarios, existing lot owners past the current terminus of the public portion who are content with the current condition can opt to do nothing, and not pay any costs. However, they will not be able to further develop land or sell off lots nor will they have access to City services.in addition, and perhaps of greater concern, base coat paving will eventually deteriorate, and at some point, the way will become a bit less user friendly and this will likely be back in front of Council. 68

69 WORKSHOP ITEM: F Exhibit Item: 1 69

70 WORKSHOP ITEM: F Exhibit Item: 1 70

71 WORKSHOP ITEM: F Exhibit Item: 1 71

72 WORKSHOP ITEM: F Exhibit Item: 1 72

73 WORKSHOP ITEM: F Exhibit Item: 1 73

74 WORKSHOP ITEM: F Exhibit Item: 1 74

75 WORKSHOP ITEM: F Exhibit Item: 1 75

76 WORKSHOP ITEM: F Exhibit Item: 1 76

77 WORKSHOP ITEM: F Exhibit Item: 1 77

78 WORKSHOP ITEM: G MEMO for 9/12/16 Workshop Discussion TO: Council, Mayor FROM: Patrick Fox, Public Works Director DATE: September 8, 2016 AGENDA ITEM:York County Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement Background: Facilitated by Southern Maine Planning & Development Commission (SMPDC), and in conjunction with York County Emergency Management Agency, the Public Works Departments of York County have discussed creating a standard mutual aid format for years. Now the group has reached consensus on a document that can be utilized for emergency and non-emergency assistance requests for manpower and equipment to complete infrastructure repair and improvement projects. Each community is now seeking Council endorsement of the plan. Key Plan Components:This mutual aid agreement has the following stipulations that protect participating communities: The party requesting assistance must identify the project type, equipment needed, and duration of the work at the time of the request. No participating government shall be under any obligation to provide assistance to a requesting party. There are uniform terms and conditions outlining reimbursable expenses, insurance, and indemnification of member municipalities. Next Steps:Upon endorsement of the plan by many, or all, of the York County communities, SMPDC, County, and Local staff will compile the following: List of Participating Governments and Their Authorized Representatives Insurance Information from Participating Governments List of Available Equipment by Participating Community Staff Recommendation:Public Works staff recommends Saco participates in this agreement as a way to add a formal mechanism to deal with local emergency response, as well as a way to pool resources on unique or challenging infrastructure improvement projects. Saco Public Works has done this on an informal basis for years with our directly abutting communities, and this will only further foster those types of collaborative regional relationships. 78

79 WORKSHOP ITEM: G Date: September York County Maine Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement Mutual Aid and Assistance Agreement This public works mutual aid agreement is entered into on the day of 2016 ( Effective Date ), by and among the signatories hereto and the municipalities listed on Appendix D, all being bodies politic and corporate located in the County of York and State of Maine ( Agreement ). WHEREAS, 37-B M.R.S.A. 784 authorizes political subdivisions of the state to develop and enter into mutual aid agreements for reciprocal emergency aid and assistance in case of emergencies too extensive to be dealt with unassisted; WHEREAS, 37-B M.R.S.A. 701 et seq., 14 M.R.S.A et seq., and related state statutes set forth details concerning powers, duties, rights, privileges, immunities of political subdivisions of the state rendering outside aid; WHEREAS, 30-A M.R.S.A et seq. provides for interlocal cooperation between and among political subdivisions of the state; WHEREAS, the State of Maine is geographically vulnerable to hurricanes, tornadoes, blizzards, and other natural disasters that in the past have caused severe property damage to public roads, utilities, buildings, parks, and other governmentallyowned facilities; WHEREAS, the Parties to this Agreement recognize that additional public works manpower and equipment may be needed to mitigate further damage and restore vital services to the citizens of the affected community should such disasters occur and wish to work cooperatively in that regard; WHEREAS, the political subdivisions also wish to undertake non-emergency joint public works projects in order to collaboratively gain from the extensive resources available from participating subdivisions as a whole; WHEREAS, to provide the most effective mutual aid possible, the parties hereto intend to foster communications between their public works personnel and the public works personnel of other political subdivisions of the State by visits and exchange of information; and WHEREAS, the parties to this Agreement encourage their public works personnel to implement detailed administrative procedures to be used during emergencies and other non-emergency joint public works projects which foster partnering, NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual covenants and promises contained herein, the Parties hereto agree as follows: Page 1 79

80 WORKSHOP ITEM: G Date: September SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS A. "Agreement" means this document, the York County Maine Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement. B. "Requesting Party" means the political subdivision requesting aid in the event of an emergency or other non-emergency joint public works project. C. "Assisting Party" means the political subdivision furnishing equipment and/or manpower to the Requesting Party. D. "Authorized Representative" means an employee of a participating government authorized by that government to request, offer, or provide assistance under the terms of this Agreement (a list of the authorized representatives for the signing participating government is attached to this Agreement as Appendix A). E. "Emergency" means any occurrence, or threat thereof, whether accidental, natural, or caused by man, in war or in peace, which results or may result in substantial injury or harm to the population or substantial damage to or loss of public property and declared as such by the participating government. F. "Participating Government" means any political subdivision of the State of Maine which executes this Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement. G. "Period of Assistance" means the period of time beginning with the departure of any personnel of the Assisting Party from any point for the purpose of traveling to the location of the Requesting Party in order to provide assistance and ending upon the return of all personnel and equipment of the Assisting Party, after providing the assistance requested, to their residence or regular place of work, whichever occurs first. The Period of Assistance shall not include any portion of the trip to the Requesting Party or the return trip from the Requesting Party during which the personnel of the Assisting Party are engaged in a course of conduct not reasonably necessary for their safe arrival at or return from the location of the Requesting Party. H. "Political Subdivision means any county or municipality created pursuant to Maine law. I. "Work or Work-Related Period" means any period in which either the personnel or equipment of the Assisting Party are being used by the Requesting Party to provide assistance and for which the Requesting Party will reimburse the Assisting Party. Specifically included within such period of time are rest breaks when the personnel of the Assisting Party will return to active work within a reasonable time. Specifically excluded from such period of time are breakfast, lunch, and dinner breaks. Page 2 80

81 WORKSHOP ITEM: G Date: September SECTION 2. PROCEDURES When a Participating Government becomes affected by an Emergency, it shall invoke Emergency-related mutual aid assistance by declaring a state of local emergency. The following procedures shall then be followed to request public works mutual aid from another Participating Government. These same procedures should also be applied when requesting assistance for non-emergency joint public works projects. A. The Requesting Party shall contact the Authorized Representative of one or more of the Participating Governments and provide them with the following information. 1. A general description of the damage sustained; 2. Identification of the part of the infrastructure system for which assistance is needed (e.g., streets, sanitary sewer, potable water, or storm water systems) and the type of work assistance needed; 3. The amount and type of personnel, equipment, materials, and supplies needed and a reasonable estimate of the length of time they will be needed; 4. The present weather conditions and the forecast for the next twenty-four hours; 5. A specific time and place for a representative of the Requesting Party to meet the personnel and equipment of the Assisting Party; 6. The recommended route between the Requesting Party s and Assisting Parties' locations and the travel conditions along that route, based on the best information available. B. When contacted by a Requesting Party, the Authorized Representative of a Participating Government shall assess his government's situation to determine whether it is capable of providing assistance. No Participating Government shall be under any obligation to provide assistance to a Requesting Party. If the Authorized Representative determines that their Participating Government is capable of and willing to provide assistance, they shall so notify the Authorized Representative of the Requesting Party, and provide reasonable estimates of the following information: 1. A complete description of the personnel, equipment, and materials to be furnished to the Requesting Party; 2. The length of time the personnel, equipment, and materials will be available; 3. The areas of experience and abilities of the personnel and the capability of the equipment to be furnished; 4. The name of the person or persons to be designated as supervisory personnel; 5. The estimated time when the assistance provided will arrive at the location Page 3 81

82 WORKSHOP ITEM: G Date: September designated by the Authorized Representative of the Requesting Party. C. The personnel and equipment of the Assisting Party shall remain, at all times, under the direct supervision and control of the designated supervisory personnel of the Assisting Party. Representatives of the Requesting Party shall suggest work assignments and schedules for the personnel of the Assisting Party; however, the designated supervisory personnel of the Assisting Party shall have the exclusive responsibility and authority for assigning work and establishing work schedules for the personnel of the Assisting Party. The designated supervisory personnel of the Assisting Party shall maintain daily personnel time records, material records and a log of equipment hours; shall be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the equipment furnished by the Assisting Party; and shall report work progress to the Requesting Party. Notwithstanding, anything found elsewhere in this Agreement, the supervisory personnel of the Assisting Party shall have the exclusive right to refuse work deemed by them to be dangerous, unsafe or inappropriate for their crews, equipment, or supplies, given the circumstances. D. The Assisting Party may, in its sole discretion, withdraw its assistance (in whole or in part) at anytime after giving notice to that effect to the Requesting Party. E. The Requesting Party, during a declared emergency, shall, as necessary, provide food and housing for the personnel of the Assisting Party from the time of their arrival at the designated location to time of their departure. Such benefit shall be furnished when conditions are not suitable for travel or when extended hours of work will not permit sufficient rest period. F. The Requesting Party shall provide communications between the personnel of the Assisting Party and the Requesting Party. G. Whenever the employees of the Assisting Party are rendering outside aid pursuant to this Agreement, such employees shall have the powers, duties, rights, privileges, and immunities, and shall receive compensation, incidental to their employment. H. The Requesting Party shall complete a written agreement regarding the assistance to be rendered, setting forth the terms agreed upon in the telephone request to the Assisting Party, and shall transmit said agreement by the quickest practical means to the Assisting Party for approval. A sample form is attached as Appendix C. The Assisting Party shall acknowledge the written agreement by executing and returning a copy to the Requesting Party by the quickest practical means, maintaining a copy for its files. Page 4 82

83 WORKSHOP ITEM: G Date: September SECTION 3. REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The terms and conditions governing reimbursement for any assistance provided under this Agreement shall be in accordance with the following provisions, unless otherwise agreed upon by the involved Parties and specified in the written agreement executed in accordance with paragraph 2.H. of this Agreement. A. Personnel: During the Period of Assistance, the Assisting Party shall continue to pay its employees according to its then prevailing ordinances, rules, regulations, and contracts. The employees of the Assisting Party participating in any services provided to the Requesting Party shall at all times and for all purposes remain employees of the Assisting Party. However, the Requesting Party shall reimburse the Assisting Party for all direct and indirect payroll costs and expenses incurred during the Period of Assistance, including, but not limited to, employee wages and payroll taxes as provided by Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). The Assisting Party shall be responsible to provide coverage of its employees as required by the Maine Workers Compensation Act of 1992 (39-A Sections ). The Requesting Party may be liable for damages sustained by an employee of the Assisting Party during the Period of Assistance as set forth in the Act. The injured employee and the Assisting Party shall be entitled to seek and/or recover compensation, benefits and/or damages as provided under the Act. B. Equipment: The Assisting Party shall be reimbursed for the use of its equipment during the Period of Assistance according to the latest FEMA Schedule of Equipment Rates. Each rate covers all costs eligible under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121, et seq., for ownership and operation of equipment, including depreciation, overhead, all maintenance, field repairs, fuel, lubricants, tires, OSHA equipment and other costs incidental to operation. The Assisting Party shall pay for all repairs to its equipment as determined necessary by its on-site supervisor(s) to maintain such equipment in safe and operational condition. At the request of the Assisting Party, fuels, miscellaneous supplies, and minor repairs for the Assisting Party's equipment during the period of assistance may be provided by the Requesting Party, if practical. The total equipment charges to the Requesting Party shall be reduced by the total value of the fuels, supplies, and repairs furnished by the Requesting Party. C. Materials and Supplies: The Assisting Party shall be reimbursed for all materials and supplies furnished by it and used or damaged during the period of assistance, unless such damage is caused by gross negligence, willful or wanton misconduct, intentional misuse, or recklessness of the Assisting Party's personnel. The Assisting Party's personnel shall use reasonable care under the circumstances of a declared emergency in the operation and control of all materials and supplies used by them during the period of assistance. The measure of reimbursement shall be the replacement cost of the materials and supplies used or damaged plus ten (10) percent of such cost. In the Page 5 83

84 WORKSHOP ITEM: G Date: September alternative, the involved Parties may agree that the Requesting Party will replace, with like kind and quality as determined by the Assisting Party, the materials and supplies used or damaged. D. Record Keeping: The Assisting Party shall maintain records and submit invoices for reimbursement by the Requesting Party using formats recommended by FEMA publication DR&R 7 (Disaster Response and Recovery). Requesting Party finance personnel shall provide information, directions, and assistance for record keeping to Assisting Party personnel. For non-emergency mutual aid programs, the prepared mutual aid record keeping system invoice form will be use. E. Payment: Unless otherwise mutually agreed in the written agreement executed, in accordance with paragraph 2.H. or a subsequent written addendum to the agreement, the Assisting Party shall bill the Requesting Party's department for all reimbursable expenses with an itemized invoice not later than sixty (60) days following the Period of Assistance; and the Requesting Party shall pay the bill in full not later than thirty (30) days following the billing date. Unpaid bills shall become delinquent upon the 31 st day following the billing date and once delinquent shall accrue interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent per annum. SECTION 4. INSURANCE Each Participating Government shall bear the risk of its own actions, as it does with its day-to day operations, and determine for itself what kinds of insurance, and in what amounts, it will carry. Each Participating Government will have a letter on file from its insurance carrier authorizing it to provide and receive assistance under this Agreement, and indicating that there will be no lapse in its insurance coverage on employees, vehicles, or liability. If a Participating Government is self-insured, its file shall contain copy of a resolution authorizing its self-insurance program. A copy of the insurance carrier's letter or the resolution of self-insurance shall be attached as Appendix B to the executed copy of this Agreement, which is filed with the York County Emergency Management Agency, SMPDC, and each Participating Government. Each Assisting Party shall be solely responsible for determining that its insurance is current and adequate prior to providing assistance under this Agreement. SECTION 5. INDEMNIFICATION Each Member Municipality shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the other Member Municipalities to this Agreement and its and their officers, agents and employees from all claims, causes of actions, judgments, damages, losses and expenses, including attorney fees, arising out of or resulting from negligent acts or omissions of the indemnifying Member Municipality and its officers, agents or employees in connection Page 6 84

85 WORKSHOP ITEM: G Date: September with this agreement. This section shall not be interpreted to waive the monetary limits or substantive areas of immunity under the Maine Tort Claims Act (14 M.R.S.A et, seq.) or the Maine Emergency Management Act (37-B M.R.S.A. 822), as may be amended from time to time, or any other immunities or defenses under other applicable law. SECTION 6. LENGTH OF TIME FOR EMERGENCY AND NON-EMERGENCY SERVICES The duration of such state of emergency declared by the Requesting Party is limited to seven (7) calendar days. It may be extended, if necessary, in 72-hour increments Nonemergency assistance will be rendered to the limits satisfactory to partnering effort as mutually agreed by Participating Governments. SECTION 7. TERM This Agreement shall be in effect for one (1) year from the date hereof and shall automatically renew in successive one (1) year terms when approved under Section 12. The Agreement can be terminated but must be in writing by the participating government. Written notice of such termination shall be made in writing and shall be served personally or by registered mail upon the York County Emergency Management Agency. SECTION 8. EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS AGREEMENT This Agreement shall be in full force and effect upon approval by the participating government and upon proper execution hereof. Each participating government shall file an executed copy of this Agreement with the York County Emergency Management Agency and SMPDC. SECTION 9. ROLE OF YORK COUNTY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY The only responsibilities the York County Emergency Management Agency shall have under this Agreement is to serve as a central depository for executed Agreements, to maintain a current listing of Participating Government and their Authorized Representatives which is set forth herein as Appendix D, and to provide an updated copy of the listing to each of the Participating Governments on an annual basis during the second quarter of the calendar year. SECTION 10. AGREEMENT FILING PROVISIONS Counterparts of the Agreement with original signatures and copies of insurance letters shall be filed and maintained at the York County Emergency Management Agency in Page 7 85

86 WORKSHOP ITEM: G Date: September Alfred, Maine including all Participating Governments. This agreement must be filed with the Secretary of State as well. SECTION 11. SEVERABILITY Should any portion, section, or subsection of this Agreement be held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, that fact shall not affect or invalidate any other portion, section or subsection; and the remaining portions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and affect without regard to the section, portion, or subsection or power invalidated so long as the primary goals of the Parties can still be effectuated. SECTION 12. APPROVAL APPROVE ONLY ONE BELOW: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been duly approved in regular session of this governing body the day of, IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been duly approved in regular session of this governing body the day of, 2016 and further reserve the privilege of an automatic annual renewal by same governing body understanding that any lapse to this agreement will result in loss of service from neighboring communities as could be necessary. PARTICIPATING GOVERNMENT: CITY/TOWN: BY: (Typed or Printed Name and Title) ATTEST: (AFFIX SEAL) (Typed or Printed Name and Title) ATTACH INSURANCE LETTER OR RESOLUTION and MAIL AN EXECUTED COPY OF THE AGREEMENT TO: Southern Maine Planning and Development Commission 110 Main Street Suite 1400 Saco, ME Page 8 86

87 WORKSHOP ITEM: G Date: September Appendix A Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement Authorized Representative Contact Information This document shall be updated and distributed by the York County Emergency Management Agency and SMPDC as set forth in the Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement. DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (the emergency contact for the mutual aid program) Name: Title: Municipality: Address: City-Town/State/Zip: Work Phone: Cell/Emergency Phone: Fax: Pager: Radio Frequency: Page 9 87

88 WORKSHOP ITEM: G Date: September Appendix B Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement Insurance Information from Participating Government [To be inserted] Page 10 88

89 WORKSHOP ITEM: G Date: September Appendix C Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement Sample Request Letter and Provide Letter Sample Letter for Requesting Aid Requesting Party «Date» «Name of Provider» «Address of Provider» Dear «Provider Contact»; This letter is to request aid under the York County Public Works Mutual Aid Program, pursuant to the Mutual Aid and Assistance Agreement adopted by your governing board. The «Town/City of» requests mutual aid for a disaster that «Is Imminent/Is In Progress/Has Occurred». «Description of Disaster» (try to limit to three sentences). The services requested are «Specify Equipment, Personnel, Materials, and Supplies». The services will be required for «Length of Time», beginning «Date When Assistance Should Arrive». Please have your designated personnel meet «Your Contact Person» at «Specify Location» at «Specify Time» on «Specify Date». Sincerely, Name of Authorized Recipient Representative Title of Authorized Recipient Representative Page 11 89

90 WORKSHOP ITEM: G Date: September Sample Letter for Providing Aid Assisting Party «Date» «Name of Recipient» «Address of Recipient» Dear «Authorized Recipient Contact»; This letter is in response to your request for mutual aid dated «Specify Date» under the York County Public Works Mutual Aid Program, pursuant to the Mutual Aid and Assistance Agreement adopted by our governing board. The «Town/City of» will send the following «Specify Equipment, Personnel, Materials, and Supplies» for a period of «Specify Number» days, and will attempt when possible to provide twenty-four (24) hours notice of our intent to terminate assistance. Our team will arrive at «Specify Location» at «Specify Time» on «Specify Date». «Specify Name» will be responsible for the supervision of our team during its duration in your community. Sincerely, Name of Authorized Provider Representative Title of Authorized Provider Representative Page 12 90

91 WORKSHOP ITEM: G Date: September Appendix D Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement List of Participating Governments and Their Authorized Representatives [To Be Inserted] Page 13 91

92 City of Saco Finance Office Cheryl Fournier, Finance Director Saco City Hall 300 Main Street, Saco, ME WORKSHOP ITEM: H Tel: (207) Fax: (207) cheryl.fournier@sacomaine.org September 8, 2016 To: Honorable Mayor and City Councilors From: Cheryl Fournier, Finance Director Attached is the FY2016 City budget-to-actual comparison. The significant variances as of June 30, 2016 PRELIMINARY are as follows (100% of the year is complete): A. Capital Program is running at 87.7% of budget or $430,098 below budget. The primary reason is that many capital projects don t get completed during one fiscal year. There is $75,000 in purchase orders entered with no invoice posted to date. B. Contingency is running at 191.9% of budget or $130,718 over budget. The primary reason is that Tax Abatements are running at 198.7% of budget or $49,355 above budget. The second reason is Unit 91 costs of $86,490, which were not budgeted. C. Fringe Benefits is at 103.8% of budget or $128,350 above budget. The primary reason is that Health Insurance is at 107.8% of year-to-date budget or $127,175 above budget. D. Funds Transfers is at 111.7% of budget or $128,534 above budget. E. Information Technology is running at 86.6% of budget or $85,319 below budget. The primary reason is salary and wages. F. Parks and Recreation is at 106.2% of budget or $93,844 above budget. The primary reason is that program expenses are running at 134.2% of budget or $31,925 above budget. The secondary reason is that contracts are running at 150.0% of budget or $25,869 above budget. Municipal Grounds & Recreation revenue is finished at 100.9% of budget or $7,809 above budget. G. Police Department is at 97.0% of budget or $109,634 below budget. The primary reason is that salary and wages is running at 92.5 % of budget or $214,636 below budget; however, over time is running at 134.3% of budget or $123,415 above budget. That means a net of $91,221 below budget for wages and overtime. H. Public Works is at 88.7% of budget or $674,842 below budget. The primary reason is that capital and debt service (paving) is $293,952 below budget; however, there is $224,500 in purchase orders with no invoices paid to date. The secondary reason is that personnel costs are $158,135 below budget due to turnover and the light winter season. I. Solicitor is at 144.4% of budget or $66,620 above budget. Union negotiations are over budget by $22,574, and legal expense is $44,046 above budget. J. Unallocated is at 74.0% of budget or $71,564 below budget. The primary reason is that the overlay is budget, but not actually posted during the year. K. Non-Property Taxes (Excise, Taxes in Lieu, Interest/Fees) is running at 120.1% of budget or $662,794 above budget. One reason is that EAN (Enterprise) is at $273,357 for FY2016. L. Licenses and Permits is running at 138.2% of budget or $286,190 above budget. The primary reason is that the permits is running at 171.5% of budget or $228,885 above budget. Page 1 of 2 92

93 WORKSHOP ITEM: H CITY OF SACO FY2016 Budget-to-actual comparison through 06/30/2016 Preliminary continued M. Charges for Services is running at 105.5% of budget or $58,178 above budget. N. Use of Reserves is a budget balancing estimate of the use of fund balance, and nothing will be posted during the year. The City staff has continued to maintain a high quality of service for our citizens, and look forward to continuing this high quality in the future. Page 2 of 2 93

94 General Fund As of June 30, 2016 PRELIMINARY WORKSHOP ITEM: H FY2014 Year-to-Date Actual FY2015 Year-to-Date Actual FY2016 Year-to-Date Budget FY2016 Year-to-Date Actual FY2016 Under/ (Over) Budget to Actual Percentage Expenditures Administration 335, , , ,182 28, % Assessment 179, , , ,427 15, % Building Inspection 221, , , ,867-2, % Building Maintenance 103, , ,352 96,269 10, % Capital Program 3,227,729 3,506,638 3,505,941 3,075, ,098 A 87.7% City Clerk 284, , , ,187 13, % Contingency 493, , , , ,718 B 191.9% Council 22,905 17,116 17,600 14,593 3, % County Budget 1,229,217 1,231,018 1,243,927 1,243, % Economic Development , ,207 41, % Emergency Management 4,969 6,970 6,077 5, % Finance 349, , , ,935 15, % Fire 2,858,002 3,004,222 3,013,154 3,000,237 12, % Fringe Benefits 3,023,232 3,401,689 3,380,827 3,509, ,350 C 103.8% Fund Transfers 997,318 1,059,520 1,100,000 1,228, ,534 D 111.7% Information Technology 421, , , ,046 85,319 E 86.6% Parks and Recreation 1,523,888 1,555,900 1,510,211 1,604,055-93,844 F 106.2% Planning 307, , , ,927-44, % Police 3,510,787 3,628,177 3,697,967 3,588, ,634 G 97.0% Public Works 5,072,133 5,365,005 5,976,735 5,301, ,842 H 88.7% School Budget 20,162,776 20,722,537 21,764,771 21,764, % Solicitor 174, , , ,620-66,620 I 144.4% Supported Agencies 701, , , ,684 32, % Unallocated 164, , , ,436 71,564 J 74.0% Total Expenditures 45,371,532 47,253,763 49,052,679 48,102, , % Revenues Property Taxes -36,929,594-37,733,758-39,188,802-39,386, ,985 K 100.5% Non-Property Taxes -3,598,476-3,771,960-3,299,500-3,962, ,794 L 120.1% Intergovernmental -1,951,082-2,118,540-2,129,176-2,262, ,708 M 106.3% Licenses and Permits -695, , ,754-1,034, ,190 N 138.2% Charges for Services -1,418,170-1,100,496-1,051,000-1,109,178 58,178 O 105.5% Other Revenues -563, , , ,534-34, % Interfund Transfer -526,000-1,324,434-1,407,782-1,361,020-46, % Use of Reserves , ,000 P 0.0% Total Revenues -45,682,239-47,321,823-48,718,014-49,618, , % General Fund Total -310,707-68, ,665-1,516,068 1,850, % 94

95 CITY OF SACO, MAINE Economic Development Saco City Hall 300 Main Street Saco, Maine WORKSHOP ITEM: I The Economic Development Department is currently working on several specific development opportunities with individual prospects/developers ( clients ) at various stages of development. Until those discussions have progressed to the point where there is either: (a) an authorization from the client authorizing public disclosure; (b) a permit application filed, or (c) a proposal prepared for consideration by the City s Planning Board, then specific details of these conversations will not be made public 1. The following is a list of development matters, opportunities, and projects that the Economic Development Department is working on Cutts Avenue- Notre Dame Church: redevelopment into Market Rate Housing Inquires for Industrial land: there have been several inquiries about Mill Brook Business Park and there is activity relating to the sale of private lots. Retail Development: what we have gotten, what the zoning is, what we are doing. Unit 91 - Island Terrace Condominium: RFQP Status Update 32 Market Street: 10 units of affordable ( 115% of median income) housing units. Saco Mill Building Number 4: Status Update The Ecology School: Status Update Comprehensive Plan Update: SMPDC Process Zoning Ordinance Update: Recommended Changes Analysis of Available Industrial land and Wetlands Analysis Utility Capacity and Planning: Central Maine Power/Unitil/Broadband/Solar Marketing / Marketing RFQP Saco River Dye House Municipal TIF for gas line expansion TIF Review Restructure Project Upcoming Events September 14 th: Chamber Job Fair 10:00 AM-1:00 PM, Chamber Business to Business Trade Show 4:30 PM-7:00 PM September 16 th: Mayoral Ball 8:00 PM-11:00 PM September 17 th: RiverJam Festival Schedule of Events at RiverJamFest.com October 22 nd : Harvest Festival William J. Mann, Director Telephone: (207) WMann@sacomaine.org Website: Facebook: /sacomaine TO: FROM: DATE: RE: MEMORANDUM Mayor Michaud and City Council William J. Mann, Economic Development Directorr September 12, 2016 Economicc Development Updates 1 Economic Development discussions that are protected from public disclosure. 1 The ability of the Economic Development Department, in this, the most public of arenas, to maintain a reputation in the development community for being responsive, easy to work with, and of keeping client discussions, which have been shared in confidence, from being disclosed, without the client s consent or in a manner that might adversely impact either the client or the City of Saco is, necessary and appropriate to avoid prejudicing the bargaining position of the City of Saco. 11 M.R.S.A. 405(6)(C). 95

96 CITY OF SACO, MAINE WORKSHOP ITEM: J Administration Kevin L. Sutherland, City Administrator Saco City Hall Telephone: (207) Main Street KSutherland@sacomaine.gov Saco, Maine Facebook: /sacomaine MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Michaud and City Council FROM: Kevin L. Sutherland, City Administrator DATE: September 12, 2016 RE: Additional Requirements for Future Contract Zones/TIFs The current process for a developer to bring a Contract Zone or Tax Increment Financing to the Planning Board and Council is to simply ask city staff. We re looking to establish an added layer to this process in order to better understand the businesses and developers that are looking for government support or variants to zoning. We d like to make sure the project is a viable option by asking for specific disclosures. An example of what we d ask for is below. NOTE: This process would not be necessary for a developer working within our zoning requirements and/or is not asking for government assistance through a TIF agreement. CZ/TIF Submittal requirements: Applicants should be prepared to provide full financial disclosure for evaluation by the City. Providing the information below will assist the City in evaluating the likely success of a proposed project, the public benefits, and the financial necessity for assistance in consideration of entering into a Contract Zone or Tax Increment Financing agreement. Project Details a. Full contact information for Applicant, Agent(s), and/or Attorney(s) b. Complete list of investors identifying individual ownership interest c. Proof of ownership d. Summary description of proposed development e. Benefits to the City, including how the project specifically addresses the objectives and review criteria f. Area of property g. Square footage of use by type h. Purchase price of property i. Current equalized assessed value of the property j. Current property appraisal k. Estimated construction cost l. Proposed construction timeframe m. Estimated number of permanent employees 96

97 WORKSHOP ITEM: J To protect the developer to some extent, much of this information can likely remain confidential according to M.R.S.A. Title 5, Part 18-A, Chapter 383, Subchapter A. Records confidential. I haven t yet run this by our attorney but we can look into including a section in the application that outlines our commitment to protect specific financial / proprietary information for the developer/business the details collected above simply assure the elected body and city staff that the developer has a feasible project. 97

98 WORKSHOP ITEM: K WORKSHOP ITEM COMMENTARY AGENDA ITEM: City Property Disposition 90 Temple Street COUNCIL RESOURCE: Councilor Nathan Johnston STAFF RESOURCE: Bob Hamblen, City Planner BACKGROUND: The City took over ownership of the property at 90 Temple Street due to the non-payment of property taxes in fiscal year The City now seeks to divest itself of the property, and/or to identify a preferred course of action. A fire occurred in the attic in 2012, and the house has not been lived in since. The former owner no longer lives in Saco, and the bank lost interest. If this were many other houses, demolition could be the proper route, with the sale of the real estate as a buildable lot to follow. However, this house stands out in both a historic and architectural sense. Built in 1890, it is an example of the Queen Anne style of architecture, and listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Historic Preservation Commission met on Aug. 31, and recommended to the Council that the property be offered for sale through a Request for Qualified Proposals process, with details to be developed by the City Administrator and City Attorney. The Planning Board reviewed the property and held a public hearing at its meeting of Sept. 6. Given comments from staff, input from residents and procedures outlined in City Code, the Board recommended that the property be offered for sale, through a Request For Qualified Proposals process, for the restoration of the building and the retention of its National Register status, with details to be worked out by the City Administrator and City Attorney. EXHIBIT: 1. Report on 90 Temple Street, by Richard Lambert 2. Staff comments 3. National Register Nomination Form, 1977 and attachments 4. Chapter 81. City Property 5. Location map 6. Planning Board minutes, 9/6/16 SUGGESTED MOTION: Be it ordered that the City Council hereby authorizes the City Administrator to initiate a Request For Qualified Proposals for the disposition of the city owned property at 90 Temple Street. I move to approve the Order. 98

99 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 1 Report on 90 Temple Street 90 Temple was, at one time, the nicest house on Temple, and would have ranked as one of Saco s most attractive and well preserved historic homes, and that s in a place that has dozens of great old homes. However, on April 1, 2012, it suffered a severe fire and was badly damaged. The Fire Department saved the structure, and its impressive barn to the rear, but to do so they had to cut large holes into the roof, break windows, etc. It is not clear if the owner had fire insurance, but in any case, the owner never took steps after the fire to secure the premises. It was evident she was or had been under financial distress, and upon the fire she walked away from the premises in all senses of the term. The owner at the time had expressed no intention to ever return to the parcel, and it had been under mortgage foreclosure proceedings for a time but for whatever reasons, the process was never followed through by the mortgage holders. After April 2012, the structure remained exposed to the elements. Although the lower windows could be boarded, due to fire damage it was too unsafe for City staff to board over the upper windows and of more concern the holes cut into the roof. As a result, rain and snow have continually entered the structure via the holes in the attic. In addition, wind and water have entered the lower floors via uncovered windows. Mold is evident. The fire has also compromised the buildings electrical wiring to the point where likely it all needs to be re-done. The building s structural support on the upper floors has been severely fire damaged and compromised to the point where it is not safe to be in those upper spaces. Finally, animals have been able to enter into the structure in multiple places, and are likely nesting there given the owner never cleaned out food stuffs after the fire. On September 30, 2013 the City filed a dangerous building action in the York County Superior Court as allowed under 17 MRS Section The owner and the Bank failed to appear to the court hearings despite being notified of these hearings and the nature of them. The Biddeford District Court issued a demolition order to the City on March 17, 2015 allowing it to remove the structure and assessing all costs to the real estate on which the building is located. On June 1, 2015 the Council considered issuing an order to have the building removed. At that time, local resident Beth Johnston appeared before the council to ask that they stay any demolition of this building due to its historical significance. The building is listed on the National Registry of Historic Places. The City Council tabled this item and requested that the Code Enforcement Office perform more research into the possible restoration of the building. In January 2016 the building went into automatic foreclosure due to unpaid tax liens. The property is now owned by the City of Saco. In February 2016 we requested the assistance of a company called Paul Davis Restoration, a company the specializes in fire damage restoration, to estimate what it would take to gut the building to the frame, remove all abandoned personal property and demolition waste and to reframe the roof to make it weather tight. The demolition and clean up alone came to $96,401 with an additional $40-$50,000 to reframe the damaged roof. 99

100 The building was last used as a two family residence with an apartment located above the barn. It is unknown by the Code Office what condition the apartment is in since we do not have access to the unit presently. There was no damage caused to the barn or apartment from the fire. From areas we were able to access, it appears there may be some major code violations within the space including a non-fire rated garage space below the unit and non-compliant egress windows. You also have to duck under the roof to enter the unit. The property contains approximately 10,000 square feet and would be zoned for no more than 2 units under standard minimum lot size requirements. There is a possibility to have a third unit on the lot provided that two of the units contain no more than one bedroom and no more than 600 square feet of living space. Here are the options the City should consider: WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 1 1. Demolition of the building and sell for the value of the land. Not recommended since the City will need to front the money to pay for demolition and disposal and we will lose a significant historical structure. 2. Declare the building and land as surplus property and place it out to bid by qualified developers/contractors. The key provision would be that the building be preserved and restored to its original condition within a specified period of time. The City could set a minimum bid that would recoup the taxes and fees owed on the property, approximately $5,600. The RFQP should be drafted along the same lines as the one put out for Unit 91 on Saco Island. 100

101 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 1 101

102 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 1 102

103 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 1 103

104 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 1 104

105 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 2 Staff Comments regarding the Disposition of Property at 90 Temple Street Howard Carter, Water Resource Recovery Department Director: The WRRD has no interest in the property at 90 Temple St. Fire Chief John Duross: The FD encourages sale by way of City Surplus Property. Tim Murphy, City Attorney: There is no evident legal reason/basis to hold onto this parcel. Brad Paul, Police Chief: The Police Department s view of 90 Temple Street is that in its current state the property represents a hazard to the adjacent properties, as well as a moderate public safety issue. Homes that are left vacant for an extended period of time at some point become an attraction to neighborhood children and teens, due to natural curiosity; as well as a location that homeless persons may be more apt to view as a potential living area. Either of these two situations increases the likelihood that eventually someone will initiate a fire that could have disastrous consequences to nearby homes or the persons themselves. I d love to see the structure rehabbed (personal note, admittedly) as it is a splendid old building and unique in many ways. If there aren t any takers, then demolition would resolve the safety concerns. Cheryl Fournier, Finance Director: Finance does not have a need for this property. My vote is to get the property on as surplus property, try that route first to sell it for a starting bid of outstanding taxes. If it doesn t sell, then demolish the building, but the starting cost would go up as we would then need to include the demolition costs. Patrick Fox, Public Works Director: The Public Works sees no benefit to City infrastructure, including roads, sidewalks, sewer and drain lines that would warrant retaining the property at 90 Temple Street. It appears, given the character and use of the surrounding properties that it s best use is to remain a private residential property. Q:\0001-Legislative-City Council\Meeting and Workshop\2016\ \Agenda K. 90 Temple Street\Staff Comments 90 Temple St.doc 105

106 vo-' UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERfOR NATIONAL PARK SERVICE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES INVENTORY -- NOMINATION FORM WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 NAME SEE INSTRUCTIONS IN HOW TO COMPLETE NATIONAL REGISTER FORMS TYPE ALL ENTRIES -- COMPLETE APPLICABLE SECTIONS HISTORIC AND/OR COMMON.B.) Seavey House LOCATION STREET & NUMBER 90 Temple Street CITY. TOWN STATE Saco Maine CLASSIFICATION VICINITY OF DE 1st Hon _NOT FOR PUBLICATION AL DISTRICT NTY CATEGORY DISTRICT _3gUILDING(S) STRUCTURE SITE OBJECT OWNERSHIP PUBLIC JCPRIVATE _BOTH PUBLIC ACQUISITION IN PROCESS BEING CONSIDERED OWNER OF PROPERTY STATUS _X)CCUPIED UNOCCUPIED WORK IN PROGRESS ACCESSIBLE YES: RESTRICTED X.YES: UNRESTRICTED NO PRESENT USE AGRICULTURE MUSEUM COMMERCIAL PARK EDUCATIONAL ^PRIVATE RESIDENCE _ENTERTAINMENT _RELIGIOUS GOVERNMENT SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIAL TRANSPORTATION MILITARY OTHER: NAME STREET & NUMBER CITY. TOWN Mr. & Mrs. Robert P. Ouellette 159 Pleasant Street Saco VICINITY OF LOCATION OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION COURTHOUSE. REGISTRY OF DEEDS, ETC. York County Registry of Deeds. STREET & NUMBER STATE Maine CITY. TOWN Alfred, 1 REPRESENTATION IN EXISTING SURVEYS TITLE STATE Maine DATE FEDERAL STATE COUNTY LOCAL CITY. TOWN STATE 106

107 DESCRIPTION CONDITION CHECK ONE WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 EXCELLENT DETERIORATED ^UNALTERED -GOOD _RUINS FALTERED _MOVED FAIR _UNEXPOSED DATE. DESCRIBE THE PRESENT AND ORIGINAL (IF KNOWN) PHYSICAL APPEARANCE Designed by J.M. Littlefield of Haverhill, Massachusetts, the A.B. Seavey House of 1890 is an excellent example of the Queen Anne Style. It is in a very good state of preservation, and a complete set of the architect's plans- and specifications survives. The Seavey House is a detached dwelling with an attached stable. While the stable is a simple rectangle in plan, the house, typical of the Queen Anne style, has an irregular plan based loosely on a rectangle. The house is two and a half stories tall. The principal facade, which, faces norths-east, is two bays wide with a corner tower in addition. The building is of frame construction with a clapboarded first story and ornately shingled upper stories, capped by a hipped roof. The tower, which protrudes from the east corner of the house, is three stories high, with an octagonal plan and a pyramidal roof. The rear portion of the house, extending to the south^-west, is covered by an extent Ion off the main roof, which, is also hipped in form. A one-story facade porch, extends across the front wall to the point where the wall and tower join. The fenestration of the house, again typical of its style, is varied. The tower f s first story has tall one-overdone double hung windows; the second story has two-overone double hung windows and a square single sash, window; with, stained glass border; the third story features double hung windows, one^over-one, the upper light bordered in stained glass. Elsewhere in the house this variety is equivalent. Most of the windows are equipped with, external louvered shutters. There are two entrances to the house, the main door being to the right side of the north-east facade, and a secondary entrance leading to the kitchen near the south corner where the house attaches to the stable. The main door Is single leaf panelled, and is partly glazed. The rear door Is single leaf with: three panels. The architect's plans originally called for two chimneys, one near the front of the house and one near the rear. Only the latter was built, and consists of a single stack rising out of the south-west slope of the principal hipped roof. The main facade half story carries a single gabled dormer with pediment. dormer contains a rectangular single sash window of forty small square panes, This The north-west and south-east sides of the house are dominated by pedimented extensions which, provide three-sided bay windows for the first and second stories. The stable is far more restrained stylistically than the house. roof topped by a square louvered ventilator. It has a hipped Internally, the A.B. Seavey House is elaborate without being pretentious, A parlor; and sitting room, divided from each other by sliding doors, are entered from the front hall. Across the house to the north-west is a dining room with kitchen, pantry, and shed beyond. The carved oak woodwork typical of the period is all intact, though the house has. Otherwise been modernized to a degree (new; wallpaper and lighting 107

108 Form No a (Hev ) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR NATIONAL PARK SERVICE WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES INVENTORY -- NOMINATION FORM CONTI NUATION SHEET ITEM NUMBER PAGE tures). The rooms have interesting shapes, reflected by the external features described above. For its style, period, and location, the A.B. Seavey House is a fine example. Its Musically fine condition and well-documented construction and use over the past century make it an excellent nomination. 108

109 01 SIGNIFICANCE WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 PERIOD PREHISTORIC X _ARCHEOLOGY-PREHISTORIC ARCHEOLOGY-HISTORIC -AGRICULTURE.XARCHITECTURE ART COMMERCE COMMUNICATIONS AREAS OF SIGNIFICANCE--CHECK AND JUSTIFY BELOW COMMUNITY PLANNING CONSERVATION ECONOMICS EDUCATION ENGINEERING EXPLORATION/SETTLEMENT INDUSTRY INVENTION LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LAW LITERATURE MILITARY MUSIC PHILOSOPHY POLITICS/GOVERNMENT RELIGION SCIENCE SCULPTURE SOCIAL/HUMANITARIAN THEATER TRANSPORTATION OTHER (SPECIFY) SPECIFIC DATES 1890 BUILDER/ARCHITECT j, M, L1ttlefield STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The A.B. Seavey House derives its primary importance from its well*-preserved condition and classic Queen Anne architecture. The existence of the architect's plans and specifications make it a, Kell documented example of Queen Anne stylins which should be recognized. Its original owner, Mr. Alton B. Seavey was a Saco businessman interested in the artistic side of everyday life, he sold musical instruments, and was the sponsor of a domestic arts exhibition. His home was built in 189Q. 109

110 WORKSHOP ITEM: K [jjmajor BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES ,.,,, Exhibit j Item: 3 Fair field, Roy P.» S^ndsl. ^pigdles ^and itteeplea. Eortland? 1956 E0GEOGRAPHICAL DATA A 1 g b to I 14.8 jl, ZONE EASTING NORTHING Cl i I I I, I., I 1,1.1.. VERBAL BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION _J j_l I. I. i.. I ZONE EASTING NORTHING D!. I I I. I.. 1 I. I. I.. I STATE CODE COUNTY CODE FORM PREPARED BY stred, Student Assistant NAME/TITLE Robert L. Bradley, Architectural Historian "Frank A. Beard. Historian ORGANIZATION DATE Maine Historic Preservation Commission 6/77 STREET & NUMBER 242 State Street CITY OR TOWN Augusta, STATE Maine STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER CERTIFICATION THE EVALUATED SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS PROPERTY WITHIN THE STACE IS: NATIONAL STATE LOCAL\L_ As the designated State Historic Preservation Officer for the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Law ), I hereby nominate this property for inclusion in the National Register and certify that it has been evaluated according to the criteria and procedures set forth by the National Park Service. STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER SIGNATURE 110 GPO

111 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 111

112 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 Seavey House OCT 3 1 Saco, Maine 3 Frank A. Beard' 9/77! Maine Historic Preservation Comm. View from the northeast 112

113 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 113

114 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 eavey House OCT Saco, Maine «-// MAR Frank A. Beard 9/77 Maine Historic Preservation Cotnm. from the north (2)^. 114

115 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 An article which appears in the piano trade magazine - "Presto" dated March 29,1924 A. B. Seaver & Son, Saco, Commemorates Golden Jubilee of Founding in 1874 On Monday of this week A. B. Seavey & Son, Saco Me., celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the house. On March 24, 1874, the late A. B. Seavey established the business in the promising town in York County. The town has grown in importance since that time, but even then it was a thriving place with cotton mills, machinery manufacturing and considerable shipping. In 1911, when the founder died, he was succeeded by his son, A. M. Seavey, who has made the business keep ahead of the growth of the thriving Maine City. He has built up a large piano business and a continuously expanding business in musical merchandise and talking machines give a general music store character to the business. A. M. Seavey, the proprietor and manager of A. B. Seavey & Son, is of course a firm believer of the Portland Ad Club and is of course a firm believer in the effectiveness of the well-framed ad in evoking interest in his own music store. Mr. Seavey has just returned from a transcontinental trip organized by Portland Ad Club. Mr. Seavey, who was accompanied by Mrs. Seavey, had a most enjoyable trip, which included visits to all the principle cities on the Pacific Coast. 115

116 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 116

117 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 117

118 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 118

119 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 119

120 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 120

121 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 3 121

122 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 4 Chapter 81. City Property [HISTORY: Adopted by the City Council of the City of Saco: Art. I, Amendments noted where applicable.] GENERAL REFERENCES Streets and sidewalks See Ch Article I. Sale of City-Owned Real Property [Adopted ] Definitions. As used in this article, the following terms shall have the meanings indicated: CITY-OWNED PROPERTY Includes land or buildings in which the City possesses the fee interest, including any land or buildings which the City legally acquires by foreclosure of tax or sewer liens Procedure. A. Initiation. All requests for the City to consider selling any City-owned property, whether initiated by any City official or by a member of the general public, shall be submitted to the City Administrator in writing and shall specify the parcel by reference to its Tax Map and lot number. If from the general public, the application shall include the name, postal address and telephone number of the applicant and shall state the purpose for which the land is proposed to be used (if the applicant is a prospective purchaser). B. Evaluation. The City Administrator shall refer such requests to the Planning Board for evaluation and a report to the City Council. (1) All City-owned property shall be evaluated with regard to its present or potential usefulness to the City for streets, sewers and drains, for public buildings, for economic development purposes, for parks and natural areas or for other municipal and community uses. Factors to be examined shall include land area, overall shape, minimum dimensions, soil characteristics, slope, drainage, potential for flooding, the presence of wetlands, its potential for correcting neighborhood problems such as failing septic systems, road frontage, character of surrounding properties, economic development possibility, whether it is contiguous to other City land, future usefulness to the overall traffic circulation needs of the City and other features, as well as whether any easements should be retained across the property if it is to be sold. (2) The Planning Board shall seek written comments on each parcel by the City Administrator, City Planner, Treatment Plant Superintendent, Code Enforcement Officer, Assessor, Finance Director, Public Works Director, Parks and Recreation Director, City Solicitor, Economic Development Director, the Conservation Commission and, if the property has commercial potential, the Economic Development Commission. 122

123 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 4 (3) The Planning Board shall integrate all of the comments submitted by the above-named City officials and shall prepare a written report to the Mayor and Council with its own recommendations. (4) The Council shall review the report submitted by the Planning Board and any recommendation by the City Administrator and, at that point, may decide to retain the property. If the Council decides to retain a property, it may wish to consult with the City Attorney about title. If the Council has an interest in selling a City-owned property, it shall conduct a public hearing on the request to sell before any decision is taken to sell City-owned property. Written notification of the hearing shall be mailed, at least 10 days in advance, to all property owners within 200 feet of the perimeter of the subject parcel, and an advertisement shall be placed in a newspaper of general circulation at least seven days before the hearing. C. Decision and offer for sale. If the Council decides to offer any City-owned property for sale, after following the above procedures the Council shall determine the method of sale, whether by sealed bid, sealed request for proposals, auction, by negotiation with the previous owner or by contract with a real estate broker at predetermined prices for such real estate and real estate interests. The City Council may make a determination that City-owned business and industrial property shall be sold by alternative means, such as by contract with a commercial real estate broker, negotiated sale or the procedure outlined for industrial park sales in Chapter 4, Administrative Code, 4-35F(6). Regardless of the method of sale, notice shall be sent to all abutters. [Amended ] (1) In evaluating the proposals to purchase, regardless of the method of sale, the City Council may consider factors such as annual property tax generation, job creation, economic benefit, price, environmental benefit or detriment, proposed land use, community need or neighborhood benefits when awarding the sale. The Council may set any reasonable conditions on future use of the land, through deed restrictions, to ensure that the property will be used in the best interests of the City. (2) The City Council may also contribute City-owned property for nonprofit community use or for economic development projects. D. Proceeds. Proceeds from the sale of tax-acquired properties shall be applied to the balance of the unpaid taxes and sewer user fees, interest and lien fees for the property. Any additional funds received will be deposited as directed by the Council. For properties not acquired through foreclosure, the proceeds shall be directed to a capital project account, the Economic Development Fund or the general fund, as directed by the Council. 123

124 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhibit Item: 5 124

125 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhbit Item: 6 Minutes, Planning Board (excerpt) September 6, 2016 Members Present: Neil Schuster, Chairperson; Don Girouard, Michael O Toole, Vangel Cotsis, Rene Ittenbach. Bob Hamblen, City Planner, Bill Mann, Economic Development Director, City Engineer Joe Laverriere. Absent: Marty Devlin, Peter Scontras. 4. Public Hearing: review of the property at 90 Temple Street, under Chap. 81 of City Code pertaining to the disposition of City-owned real estate. Tax Map 38, Lot 168. Zoned R-3. Hamblen: as outlined in Chapter 81 of City Code, consideration of the sale of City-owned property is referred to the Planning Board for evaluation and a report to the City Council. See Dick Lambert s attached report on the building at 90 Temple Street, built in 1890, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and now threatened due to a 2012 fire and in a state of neglect. The City has come into ownership due to a lien maturing on Jan. 11, 2016, because of the non-payment of property taxes from fiscal year The City now seeks to divest itself of the property, and/or to arrive at a recommendation that the majority agree is the best way to move forward. Staff visited the property a few months ago with Christopher Closs and Greg Paxton of Maine Preservation. They suggested a clean-up of the inside and possible repairing the roof prior to listing it for sale. The interior is as though it was evacuated at a moment s notice, with furnishings, clothing, all manner of belongings still in place and strewn about. The roof was opened up in fighting the fire that broke out due to electrical problems, and was never closed back up or covered over three years open to the elements at this point. My personal opinion was that Chris and Greg could have gone either way it s a teardown, or it can be rehabbed neither would have surprised me. They sided with rehab it can be saved. The question is, who and how? In that the property in question is listed on the National Register, the Historic Preservation Commission met on Aug. 31 to review and offer its own thoughts. After discussion, the HPC recommended to the Council that the property be offered for sale through a Request For Qualified Proposals process, with details to be decided by the City Administrator and City Attorney. Per Chapter 81, several departments have provided comments, attached. The Council may decide to retain the property, or may have an interest in selling a City-owned property. Again, Chapter 81: If the Council decides to offer any City-owned property for sale the Council shall determine the method of sale, whether by sealed bid, sealed request for proposals, auction, by negotiation with the previous owner, or by contract with a real estate broker at predetermined prices for such real estate and real estate interests. Don: a buyer may need a break, from property taxes, or a TIF. Mike: if the City is owed $5,600 in taxes and that s forgiven, that s an incentive. Would a potential homeowner be most interested, or a developer? We don t know, but that latitude should be provided in an RFQP. Neil: who has the best idea? Don: the HPC should have a say in any RFQP; I would defer to the HPC. Rene: I move to open the public hearing, seconded by Vangel, and so voted, 5-0. Johanna Hoffman, Pepperell Square: I m chair of the Historic Preservation Commission. We hope to see it remain on the National Register. We uphold the Ordinance, and what it says about guidance on the replacement of historic features. Ninety percent of the needs for this house are inside. The carriage house is intact. The cellar is dry. It is a 126 year old house with a brilliant history, as was shared wit me by Jim Pate recently. Alyssa Bouthot, Q:\0001-Legislative-City Council\Meeting and Workshop\2016\ \Agenda K. 90 Temple Street\Excerpt PB Minutes re 90 TempleSt..doc 125

126 WORKSHOP ITEM: K Exhbit Item: 6 HPC member: we should consider the highest and best use for the property, and whether any zoning changes could be helpful. Dick Lambert has said it could be a three-unit, so rental income could be a help for the owner. There are tax credits available for an income producing property. Johanna: this is a stable neighborhood, with well maintained properties. The location is good, and near the shopping center. Beth Johnston: I also live on Pleasant Street. The redevelopment of this house could be a catalyst for the neighborhood and the City. It is a beautiful house that should be preserved. Johanna: the old Saco firehouse is a good example of the restoration of a historic building. Richard Plamondon, Pleasant St.: I would like to see the building restored, my property backs up to it. Don: I don t want to detail too much, as we shouldn t bind the hands of potential buyers. Vangel: this is an opportunity to encourage improvements in the area. The Board reached a consensus that the property should be offered as is, with no clean-up or restoration costs to be borne by the City. Johanna: the HPC would like to see it retain its National Register status, as that could be helpful with tax credits. Don: I move that the Board recommend to the City Council that the property identified as 90 Temple Street be offered for sale through a Request for Qualified Proposals process for the restoration of the building, and the retention of the National Register status, with details to be worked out by the City Administrator and City Attorney, seconded by Rene, and so voted, 5-0. Q:\0001-Legislative-City Council\Meeting and Workshop\2016\ \Agenda K. 90 Temple Street\Excerpt PB Minutes re 90 TempleSt..doc 126

127 CITY OF SACO, MAINE WORKSHOP ITEM: L Administration Kevin L. Sutherland, City Administrator Saco City Hall Telephone: (207) Main Street KSutherland@sacomaine.gov Saco, Maine Facebook: /sacomaine MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Michaud and City Council FROM: Kevin L. Sutherland, City Administrator DATE: September 12, 2016 RE: Process for hiring the next Police Chief With the pending retirement of Chief Paul in December of 2016, I d like to suggest a process and timeline for the hiring of the next Police Chief. According to City Code, the appointment of the Police Chief is a responsibility of the City Administrator and is confirmed by City Council (see Administrative Code 4-16 A. (1)). I believe we owe it to the community to find the most qualified candidate who is also the best fit for Saco. As a newer resident to Saco, I do not believe I should make a recommendation to Council all on my own. I am proposing a three-step process Outreach, Screening Committee, and an Interview Team Outreach (September 15 th through September 30th) Prior to the creation of a Screening Committee to review resumes, interview a pool of candidates, and move forward the top 3-5 candidates to an Interview Team, I d like to meet with community and employee stakeholders to share their opinion on the qualities that our next Police Chief should possess. The action items to solicit these opinions would include: 1. Meeting with law enforcement union leadership 2. Meeting with the command staff of the police department 3. Ask Council to hold one public meeting that would could provide community and Council member input. 4. Have a form on the City website for individuals to submit opinions 5. Promote items 3 and 4 through social media and conversations with our media outlets. Post Vacancy (week of October 2 nd ) After we ve gathered opinions from the community, we ll post the vacancy both internally and externally with language that reflects the needs and opinions gathered during the outreach period. These opinions will also be incorporated into the interview questions asked by the Screening Committee and Interview Team. Applications/Resumes are Due (November 4 th ) 127

128 WORKSHOP ITEM: L Screening Committee (November 7 th November 18 th ) The applications will be reviewed by the Screening Committee and this group will interview the top candidates from that pool and pass along the top 3 to 5 candidates to the Interview Team. The Screening Committee will consist of: 1. Deputy Human Resources Director 2. Fire Chief 3. Public Works Director 4. A Representative from one of the three unions associated with the department, selected by them 5. Council Member, selected by the Council 6. Community Resident, selected by the Mayor Interview Team (November 21 st December 2 nd ) The candidates chosen by the Screening Committee will have a second interview with the Interview Team. The interview team will make a recommendation for appointment and the City Administrator will bring that name forward for Council confirmation. The Interview Team will consist of: 1. Mayor 2. City Administrator 3. Human Resources Director 4. Council Member, selected by the Council (different from Screening Committee) 5. Police Chief from another municipality 6. Community Resident, selected by the Mayor (different from Screening Committee) Council Confirmation (December 5 th ) The City Administrator will bring his appointment of the new Police Chief forward to Council for confirmation on December 5 th, Start Date (January 1 st, 2017) 128

129 CITY OF SACO, MAINE WORKSHOP ITEM: M Administration Kevin L. Sutherland, City Administrator Saco City Hall Telephone: (207) Main Street KSutherland@sacomaine.gov Saco, Maine Facebook: /sacomaine MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Michaud and City Council FROM: Kevin L. Sutherland, City Administrator DATE: September 12, 2016 RE: Round Table Discussions Councilor Minthorn requested having a round table discussion for minutes at every monthly Workshop. Investigating potential changes to streamline and or improve our city government, property, and anything else within council s purview. Further, sessions may include long term "improvements" in process, procedure, departments, Charter, Zoning, and other timely or relevant topics currently burdening our city. At current staffing levels, I do not support the additional workload this will likely cause. The community is buzzing; development is strong; Council has goals in place (which we are still working to achieve); and, asking all department heads to attend a Council meeting when it s unclear what will be discussed is not a good use of their time. I can assure you, we do a good job with the resources we have available to us but adding this level of uncertainty and oversight will have a negative effect on staff morale and productivity. I would, however, be comfortable with having a specific topic, identified by council a month before, presented and discussed at Workshop. This would give the relevant staff time to put together a presentation and / or proposal for Council to discuss further. These monthly or bi-monthly discussions would help educate Council and the public on the programs and protocols departments use, help identify areas where we could make improvements, and generates ideas for the Council goal setting meeting in January. The Mayor had suggested back when we developed our rules and order of business last December having two council meetings and two workshops. This could be explored again and provide an additional time each month to really explore topics. 129