Zoning Petition ZP 719

1
Zoning Petition ZP 719

• May 7, 2008

2
Petitioners

• FFB LLC.
• James W.Foye, Mark C. Foye, and, Andrew L.
  Broaddus

3
Location

• Coplin Plantation, Franklin County
• Lot 8-01 and 8-02 on Plan 07 of Coplin
  Plantation Property Records

4
Location Map
5
Property Map
6
MGS Aquifer Map (Stratton Quadrangle)
7
Proposal

• Rezone 4.14 acres of two contiguous parcels
  containing 7.63 acres in total from (P-AR)
  Aquifer Protection Subdistrict to (D-RS)
  Residential Development Subdistrict.

8
Background

• 1977 permanent zoning for Coplin Plt. classified
  the petitioners parcels as D-RS
• Petitioners property surrounded by 100 lot
  subdivision (partially SP355)
• At least 35 of 70 lots within 1000 are developed
  with seasonal and year-round dwellings

9
Background cont.

• ZP 220 (October 1982) rezoned 4.14 acres of the
  Petitioners lot and much of the surrounding
  areas to P-AR.
• ZP 220 initiated based on interpretations of
  qualified professionals who had determined at the
  time that the area constituted a significant
  groundwater aquifer.

10
Site Conditions and Analysis

• Petitioners Class B High Intensity soil survey
  identified no soils with high permeability
  ratings and identified no hydrologic connectivity
  through highly fractured bedrock units to an
  existing ground water supply. Additionally, land
  form and surface features were most indicative of
  till soils which are not normally associated with
  groundwater aquifers.

11
Site Conditions and Analysis cont.

• After review of the Petitioners soil survey,
  Daniel B. Locke of MGS agreed the parcel is not
  located over a sand and gravel aquifer.
• Mr. Locke also indicates that according to the
  most recent sand and gravel aquifer map for the
  Stratton Quadrangle, the Petitioners parcel in
  not located in an aquifer.

12
Review Criteria

• In accordance with 12 MRSA, Section 685-A,
  Subsection 8-A the Commissions Statutes, and
  under the provisions of Section 10.08,A of the
  Commissions Land Use Districts and Standards, a
  land use district boundary may not be amended
  unless there is substantial evidence that
• The proposed land use district is consistent with
  the standards for district boundaries in effect
  at the time, the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and
  the purpose, intent and provisions of this
  chapter and
• The proposed land use district satisfies a
  demonstrated need in the community or area and
  has no undue adverse impact on existing uses or
  resources or a new district designation is more
  appropriate for the protection and management of
  existing uses and resources within the affected
  area.

13
Review Criteria cont.

• Under provisions of Section 10.21,H,2 of the
  Commission's Land Use Districts and Standards,
  (D-RS) Residential Development Subdistrict shall
  include
• Areas with the following existing patterns of
  intensive residential development
• Areas where four or more single family dwelling
  units exist within a 500 foot radius or
• Recorded and legally existing single family
  residential subdivisions, including mobile home
  parks, having four or more lots or
• Areas surrounding those described in Section
  10.21,H,2,a, (1) or (2) above which contain
  neighborhood or associated uses that primarily
  serve such residences. Such areas may included,
  without limitation, residential accessory
  building, neighborhood parks and public open
  spaces, school, day nurseries, places of worship,
  cemeteries, but shall not include industrial
  uses.
• Areas which the Commission determines both meet
  the criteria for redistricting to this
  Subdistrict, pursuant to Section 10.08 hereof,
  are proposed for development which is consistent
  with the purposes of this Subdistrict, and are
  suitable for the development activities proposed
  when measured against the standards of 12
  M.R.S.A. 685-B(4) and the Commissions Rules and
  Regulations relating thereto.

14
Review Criteria cont.

• Under provisions of Section 10.23,B,2 of the
  Commission's Land Use Districts and Standards,
  areas defined as (P-AR) Aquifer Protection
  Subdistrict must be identified by the Commission
  as having soil rated as highly permeable and/or
  surficial geologic units that are highly
  permeable and are hydrologically connected
  through highly fractured bedrock units to a
  ground water supply which is currently, or
  anticipated to be, used for public, industrial or
  agricultural purposes, or areas identified by the
  Commission as aquifer recharge areas based on
  studies by appropriate qualified persons or
  agencies where the Commission determines that
  such areas warrant water quality protection.

15
Review Comments

• The Maine Geological Survey has reviewed the
  petition and has commented in favor of the
  proposed rezoning.
• The Maine State Soil Scientist has reviewed the
  petition and expressed no objections to the
  proposed rezoning.
• The Eustis Water District has reviewed the
  petition and made no comment.
• The First Assessor for Coplin Plantation has
  reviewed the petition and made no comment.

16
Conclusions

• Rezoning consistent with standards for districts
  and boundaries as set forth in Section 10.21,H.
• Property does not meet criteria for P-AR
  designation based on soils and mapping
  information
• D-RS is more appropriate for management of
  resources due to
• Existence of large subdivision
• Existence of residential development
• Previous inclusion as D-RS

17
Recommendation

• Staff recommends approval of Zoning Petition ZP
  719 of FFB LLC., James W. Foye, Mark C. Foye,
  and, Andrew L. Broaddus to rezone 4.14 acres from
  (P-AR) Aquifer Protection Subdistrict to (D-RS)
  Residential Development Subdistrict.