FRYEBURG PLANNING BOARD
Minutes- February 9, 2010
Town Office

In Attendance: A.O. Lucy - Chairman, Ed Price - Vice Chairman, Michael Holtgrefe - Secretary, Bill Mosher, John Weston, Judy Redding, Alternate.

The meeting was called to order at 6:37 pm and a quorum was declared.

Ed Price made a motion to approve the January minutes. The motion was seconded by Bill Mosher and the vote was unanimous.

CEO Report

The Code Enforcement Officer has issued 2 building permits, 6 plumbing permits, and 3 violation notices since the January meeting. She has also attended training relating to Safety Officer duties and has begun working with the free GIS program recommended by Kent Pidgeon at the last meeting.

Public Forum:

No one was in attendance for the public forum.

Land Use Authorization Review - Bar/Restaurant 

A Land Use Authorization application was submitted by Leo Katsigiannis on 1/8/10 stating that he wished to open a restaurant at 2 Jockey Cap Lane . Katie Haley, CEO, had discussion with Mr. Katsigiannis in which he described that he was going to open bar, which would therefore trigger the Planning Board review.

Ed Price began discussion by attempting to clarify whether the application submitted intended to be for a restaurant or bar use, since the property has already been approved for a restaurant use. Mr. Katsigiannis stated that it would be a restaurant. Roger Brown, an abutter to the proposed use, asked if the use would be classified as a restaurant or bar by the town. Mr. Lucy asked Mrs. Haley what her thoughts and interpretation was. Mrs. Haley reported that she had discussed this issue with Peter Malia, the town attorney, as the definitions of a bar and a restaurant in the Land Use Ordinance are somewhat vague. Mr. Malia had suggested to Mrs. Haley that the Planning Board should make the final decision whether the use should be classified as a bar or restaurant based on the definitions provided in the Ordinance and based on Mr. Katsigiannis' project description.

Katie Haley stated that in conversation Mr. Katsigiannis had also said that he wished to expand seating beyond the permitted 64 seats which would require a revision to the initial approval for the restaurant use. Mr. Katsigiannis stated that he will eventually want to expand the seating capacity but that he wished to get the approval's from the required state agencies prior to requesting that amendment from the Planning Board.

Mike Holtgrefe asked if there was a state definition of a bar that the Planning Board could use as guidance. He had experience with the state definition which determines whether a use would be classified as a restaurant or bar based on a comparison of the percentage of food and alcohol served. Mrs. Haley pointed out that the Board is obligated to make decisions based on the current definitions in the Land Use Ordinance.

Mr. Brown asked if there will be dart boards and pool tables at the proposed site. Mr. Katsigiannis stated that there will be a full food menu and that there will be no pool tables or darts. Mr. Lucy asked Mr. Brown what his specific concerns are as an abutter. This led to some discussion about the problems that had arisen when there was a restaurant at this location previously. Mr. Brown had filed complaints with the town about the outdoor music and subsequent loud noises that affected his property. Mr. Brown stated to the Board that his concerns with having a bar located next door is the resulting noise and traffic, as well as the people who might trespass on his property. Mr. Brown declared that he has no problems having a restaurant located in that location and he hopes that it will be a successful business but that he doesn't support the location being used for a bar.

Bill Mosher asked if the bar will stay open after the restaurant. Mr. Katsigiannis responded by saying that the kitchen will be open as long as alcohol is being served and that he hasn't yet determined the hours of operation. He also stated multiple times that there will be no outdoor music or seating.

Mr. Holtgrefe relayed his past experience as a Board member when the Board reviewed the original application for the restaurant use and stated that Mr. Brown had had the same concerns at that point.

The Board reviewed and compared the definitions of a bar and a restaurant as listed in the Land Use Ordinance.

A determination was made by the Board that the use will not be classified as a bar therefore it does not require land use authorization. Mr. Katsigiannis stated that he did not wish to go through the process of expanding his seating capacity at this point. It was therefore determined that no further review of the project is needed and that Land Use Authorization isn't required. Mr. Katsigiannis will be refunded for his application fee.

Other Business:

Board of Appeals:

Mr. Lucy began a discussion about a recent action of the Board of Appeals. Mr. Lucy reported that recently the Appeals Board reviewed a variance request to reduce the property line setback so that a person could locate a shed within 6 feet of the property line. Mr. Lucy had seen the Appeals Board proceedings on TV and was concerned about the lack of discussion that was had regarding the application before it was approved and was unsure why the variance was granted. He stated that he believes that approvals, both by the Appeals Board and the Planning Board, need to be made based on the land use considerations rather than basing them on the current property owners situation because property owners change as time goes on but the land in question does not. Mr. Lucy will draft a letter to the Appeals Board of behalf of the Planning Board and will send it around to the members for approval before forwarding it to the Appeals Board.

Shoreland Zone Revisions:

The Planning Board received a letter from Robert and Amy Stern requesting that the Shoreland Zoning Map be amended by changing their property from Resource Protection to Shoreland Zone. Mrs. Haley stated that this request stemmed from a violation that had been discovered by the Town and the Department of Environmental Protection. Upon meeting with the DEP it was discovered that their property no longer was required to be zoned as Resource Protection, based on bird habitat changes. It was suggested by the DEP that the mapping be changed as the current zoning is overly restrictive to the property owners and the Town had erroneously issued permits for construction at that location in the past. The corrective action required by the DEP and the Town to fix the current violations will not be substantially affected by the zoning change. The change will require contacting Lakes Environmental Association to revise the map and having a public hearing.

Mr. Holtgrefe made a motion to make the requested revisions to the Shoreland Zoning Map. John Weston seconded the motion and it was passed unanimously.

Omitted Use and Land Use Table:

The Board decided to review the document sent by Mrs. Haley regarding some suggested revisions to Section 5.B - Land Use Table and Section 25 - Definitions of the Land Use Ordinance. The first issue discussed was home occupations. Mrs. Haley stated that this can be a confusing issue when people come to her asking about certain proposed home occupations. The Board reviewed the definitions of home occupations and the requirements outlined in Section 17 of the Land Use Ordinance. The Board discussed different scenarios when there could potentially be some issues resulting from home occupations. The Board discussed requiring Planning Board approval for all home occupations and also discussed the idea of spelling out each specific type of home occupation. The Board decided to continue this discussion at a later date.

The second issue discussed was regarding two-family dwellings and accessory apartments. The Board reviewed the definitions and performance standards for accessory apartments, two-family dwellings and multi-family dwellings. Mrs. Haley stated that the definition of accessory apartments is too vague based on the wording within the definition. The ordinance states that accessory apartments or a "small rental dwelling unit" is allowed in an "older, large home which existed prior to the adoption of this Ordinance". This issue was discussed at length and it was decided that accessory apartments should be defined based on an exact size which was determined to be 500 sq ft. Further discussion took place about whether the standards for two-family and multi-family dwellings should be revised, with no decisions being made.

Mr. Weston made a motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Price and passed with a unanimous vote .

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 8:45 pm .

The Planning Board will hold a workshop on March 2 nd and the next regular Planning Board meeting will be on March 23 rd at 6:30 at the Town Office

Respectfully submitted,
Katie Haley