1 CALL TO ORDER

Called to order at 7:00pm by Chairman Mr. Gregg Varney. Mr. Varney then read the agenda. Those Members present were Mr. Varney, Mark Morris, Roy Nickerson, Raymond Lavoie, Shirley Twitchell, Margaret Imber and Mr. R. Edward Morris. Planner, John Maloney was present this evening. CEO, Roger Williams was also present this evening.

2 OLD BUSINESS:

A HANNAFORD SITE REVIEW-GENE UHUAD-MAINE DOT

Mr. Gene Uhuad from the Maine DOT is present this evening to review this project. Mr. Uhuad stated that an entrance permit at Snell Hill Road and Route 4 has been granted. It has been determined that a signal would need to be installed at this intersection. Mr. Uhuad then stated that an accident study has indicated that the accident rate at the intersection of Route 117 and Route 4 is going down. At this time no signal is proposed at the intersection of Route 117 and Route 4. Mr. Uhuad stated that the entrance on Snell Hill Road would have interrupted flow relieving the flow on Route 117. There will be finite time gaps for those trying to cross Route 117. Mr. Uhuad then stated that Route 117 would be watched for approximately six months to a year to see if the traffic flow could possibly warrant an additional signal. Mr. Uhuad stated that the accident pattern would be closely monitored. Mr. Uhuad referred to an accident rate study done in Norridgewock, which captured the accident patters. Mr. Uhuad stated that the current accident study in Turner at the intersection of Route 117 and Route 4 indicated that five out of eight accidents were angle collisions. There was then a discussion regarding how a high accident rate could require an additional signal. Mr. Varney stated that Mr. Uhuad had stated the accident rate was going down. Mr. Peter Hedrich from Gorrill-Palmer Consulting Engineers, Inc. stated that, yes; the accident rate has gone down. At the intersection of Route 117 and Route 4 there were four accidents in 2006, two accidents in 2007 and two accidents in 2008. The data for 2009 is not currently available. Ms. Imber made the point that this information may not be accurate do to the fact that Route 117 had been under construction for quite awhile. There was then some discussion regarding alternate routes being taken during the time of construction and upon completion of the construction and the inconvenience to the town. Ms. Imber asked if there were any models to project the traffic flow in and around this area. Mr. Hedrich stated that there were no models, but his prediction was that the volume on the side streets would be very little. Mr. Hedrick stated that there should only be a 16 second delay on a Saturday and a 12 second delay on a weekday. There was then some discussion regarding the fact that Turner is a rural farming community and that Hannaford should consider the measurement of effect that this project will have on the community. Mr. Varney then asked Mr. Uhuad what effect this traffic light would have on cars going in and out of B & A Variety. Mr. Uhuad stated that this traffic light should make it safer. It will constitute a right in and a right out with a dedicated left turn lane. There was some concern that B & A Variety would lose business because of this project. Owner of B & A Variety, Ms. Joan Bryant-Deschenes, is concerned that there will be no real way in or out of her business. Mr. Deschenes also stated that a confusing traffic pattern would lead to more accidents. Mr. Uhuad stated that some of the traffic leaving B & A Variety would have to divert around the store to exit safely. Ms. Deschenes stated that customers would not follow this pattern. Mr. Varney stated that a solution must be found regarding the entrance and exit to this business. Mr. Warren Clark who lives on Snell Hill Road stated that he has narrowly missed being in a collision(s) with vehicles exiting the B & A Variety. Mr. Angelo Terreri stated that he had concerns with trucks driving down the hill on Route 4 going 60 miles an hour and then having to stop at a traffic light. There was then the discussion regarding the possibility of cross walks installed on Route 4. Mr. Uhuad stated that a crosswalk could only be installed if the speed limit was no greater then 35 MPH and would be installed only at the traffic signal. Mr. R. Edward Morris stated that the speed limit now on Route 4 in this area is 50 MPH. Ms. Twitchell stated that she feels that a crosswalk is a good idea, but wonders how to make it a safe intersection. Mr. Uhuad stated that a safe launching and landing must be installed and that a pedestrian button could be used. Mr. Hedrich stated that the average person walks 3 and ½ feet per second and that it should take a person 18 seconds to cross the intersection and that the pedestrian crossing time could be set to 21 seconds. Mr. Maloney asked what type of wires/cameras would be installed at this intersection. Mr. Uhuad stated he did not know at this time. Mr. Hedrich stated that he believed wires on a straight pole, detection micro waves, advanced detection, video detection and cameras or a combination of the above could be used at this intersection. Ms. Eva Leavitt, the Town Manager, stated that she is doing research regarding an LED flashing strobe light to possibly be installed. She will be talking to the city of Auburn regarding this type of light. Ms. Imber stated that she was under the impression that MDOT had stated that there would never be a traffic light installed between Auburn and Livermore. Is the MDOT now changing their policy? Mr. Uhuad stated that the installation of this traffic light meets the warrants and it has been determined that it is needed. Without this traffic light the level of service would be E, which is not good. There was then a discussion regarding development in the Town of Turner and MDOT’s involvement in this development. Mr Uhuad stated if a town allows for development the MDOT needs to incorporate a traffic movement process which allows for mobility and safety and that the MDOT tries to be conservative. Mr. Hedrich stated that the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Snell Hill Road and Route 4 does not necessarily mean a traffic signal being installed at the intersection of Route 117 and Route 4 in the future. There was then a discussion regarding the stacking of vehicles and painted safety arrows. Mr. Maloney asked about a maintenance agreement and the involvement of the MDOT. Mr. Uhuad stated the Town of Turner and Hannaford Brothers should negotiate this agreement. There was then a discussion regarding the maintenance of the video equipment. Ms. Leavitt quoted the fee of $68.00 for a private visit by a repairperson and a fee of $204.00 for a maintenance visit. The question then arose, who pays the light bill? Ms. Leavitt stated a contract would need to be worked out. Mr. Tyler Sterling stated that Hannaford Brothers would be responsible.

Recess taken from 8:12pm until 8:17pm.

B IMBER PUBLIC HEARING REVIEW

Ms. Imber was not present at the Public Hearing and Planning Board meeting, which took place on July 8, 2009. Ms. Imber stated that she has reviewed the Minutes from the Public Hearing and the Planning Board meeting. Ms. Imber also stated that she has listened to the audiotape from the July 8, 2009 Public Hearing and Planning Board meeting.

C EXTENSION OF PROJECT REVIEW PROCESS

Mr. Varney stated that the Planning Board has granted an extension of the project review process for Hannaford Bros.

D DEP COMMENTS

Mr. Maloney stated the Town of Turner could submit the DEP notification if so moved for the Hannaford Bros. Project.

E LEGAL OPINIONS

Mr. Maloney stated that two provisions have been presented by Norman J. Rattey, Esq., the Town of Turner’s attorney regarding the Hannaford Bros. Project. These provisions will be attached to this evening’s Minutes.

F SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING-HANNAFORD PROJECT

The Planning Board agreed to hold a Public Hearing on Wednesday, October 7, 2009 at 7:00pm with regards to the Hannaford Bros. project. A regular Planning Board meeting will be held after the Public Hearing.

G REVIEW OF STANDARDS

Mr. Maloney stated that Mr. Tyler Sterling of Hannaford Bros. Co. was present at the Planning Board Workshop held on September 2, 2009. Mr. Maloney stated that he had prepared a Site Plan Review, Preliminary Review of Site Plan Standards. This review is in a draft format. Mr. Maloney stated that the Standards reviewed on pages 1 through 22 would be deferred until further notice. Mr. Maloney referred to page 22 of this draft referring to Pedestrian and Trail Access Standard. The following discussion took place regarding this Standard. Ms. Imber referred to Section 5.E.4 and stated that this Section states pedestrian access shall be provided. Mr. Maloney added the words “safe access”. There was then some discussion regarding walking trail access as well as sidewalk access. Mr. Varney stated there should be a crosswalk on Route 4 as well as a walkway to the store. Mr. Sterling stated that it was not clear if a crosswalk is even allowed. Mr. Sterling stated that he would provide additional information at the next meeting regarding this issue. Ms. Imber suggested a cross walk/sidewalk plan. The Board Members agreed. Mr. Varney stated that he wants to see a proposal that connects all of the dots. Mr. Doug Boyce of Hannaford Brothers stated that a safe landing and receiving piece of sidewalk to ground level where no cars go could be considered. Mr. Varney suggested that the applicant get creative. This Standard will be further discussed. Mr. Maloney then reviewed the Off-Street Parking Standard. Seeing no discussion Ms. Twitchell made a motion to accept the Off-Street Parking Standard. Mr. Lavoie seconded the motion. The Board Members voted unanimously to accept the Off-Street Parking Standard. The review of the Surface Water Standard will be deferred until further notice. Mr. Maloney then reviewed the Conservation, Erosion and Sediment Control Standard. Mr. Maloney stated that he had received a report form his co-worker, Ferg Lea regarding this standard. After review of this report Mr. Maloney stated that he believes this standard has been met. Ms. Twitchell made a motion to accept the Conservation, Erosion and Sediment Control Standard. Mr. Lavoie seconded the motion. The Board Members voted unanimously to accept the Conservation, Erosion and Sediment Control Standard. Mr. Maloney stated that input from the public at the next Public Hearing could have bearing on this Standard. Mr. Varney stated that if need be, the Planning Board could make a motion to reconsider this Standard. Mr. Maloney then reviewed the Standard for Phosphorous Export. Mr. Maloney believes that this Standard should be found not applicable. The Board Members agreed. Ms. Twitchell made a motion to find Standard for Phosphorous Export not applicable. Mr. Lavoie seconded the motion. The Board Members voted unanimously to find the Standard for Phosphorous Export not applicable. Mr. Maloney reviewed the Standards for Site Conditions. Mr. Maloney referred to Section C.1.1 and stated that there were 2 Conditions associated with this Standard. These Conditions basically regarded stump and earth removal. Ms. Twitchell made a motion to accept the Site Conditions Standard with 2 Conditions. Mr. Lavoie seconded the motion. The Board Members voted unanimously to accept the Site Conditions Standards with 2 Conditions. Mr. Maloney then reviewed the Signs Standard. Mr. Maloney stated that there would be 1 freestanding sign and 1 structural sign. The CEO would issue the sign permit. Ms. Twitchell made a motion to accept the Sign Standard. Mr. Lavoie seconded the motion. The Board Members voted unanimously to accept the Sign Standard. The Standard for Special Features has been deferred until further notice. Mr. Maloney then reviewed the Exterior Lighting Standard. There was a short discussion regarding foot-candles. Mr. Boyce stated that a foot-candle is a method of calibrating light in an area, especially in the parking lot. It was stated that if any of the neighbors have a problem with the lighting that there would be a violation to this Standard. Ms. Twitchell made a motion to accept the Exterior Lighting Standard. Mr. Lavoie seconded the motion. The Board Members voted unanimously to accept the Exterior Lighting Standard. Mr. Maloney then reviewed the Emergency Vehicle Access Standard. Ms. Twitchell made a motion to accept the Emergency Vehicle Access Standard. Mr. Lavoie seconded the motion. The Board Members voted unanimously to accept the Emergency Vehicle Access Standard. Mr. Maloney reviewed the Municipal Services Standard with 1 Condition. This Condition stated that the applicant would be responsible to pay the cost for operation, maintenance and repair of the traffic signal at the Route 4/Snell Hill Road intersection. There was then a discussion regarding public safety. Ms. Eva Leavitt stated that since Turner has no police force the Sheriff’s Department responds to Turner’s needs on odd months and the State Police responds to Turner’s needs on even months. Ms. Leavitt also stated that both departments are very visible on Route 4 and the response time is short. The funding for this coverage for the Sheriff’s Department comes out of the Androscoggin County tax bill. There is no financial involvement with the State Police Department. Ms. Imber was concerned about future response times. There was then a discussion regarding response times in other towns that had recently opened Hannaford stores. It was stated that it was too early to have any answers to response times. Mr. Sterling then stated that the tax revenue to the town of Turner would be approximately $60,000.00. There was then some discussion regarding the cost of the maintenance to the light camera. There was then a discussion regarding the possibility of $35,000.00 donation being put in an escrow account for the possible addition of a traffic signal at the intersections of Route 117 and Route 4. Mr. Sterling stated that Hannaford Bros. is not responsible for funding any future signal at the intersections of Route 117 and Route 4. Ms. Helen Edmonds, an attorney with Pierce Atwood then addressed the Planning Board. Ms. Edmonds stated that contributions for future improvements at this intersection are not required because the MDOT has not specifically requested a traffic signal at the intersections of Route 117 and Route 4. Mr. Varney suggested that this not be called a donation but be classified as an impact fee. The discussion turned to the possibility of making this signal a strobe type. Ms. Leavitt stated that the current ordinance really does not address traffic signals. There was additional discussion regarding the adverse impact resulting from this project. Ms. Twitchell made a motion to accept Municipal Services Standard. Mr. Lavoie seconded the motion. Ms. Twitchell then withdrew her motion, as did Mr. Lavoie. Ms. Twitchell made a new motion to accept the Municipal Services Standard with 1 Condition. Mr. Lavoie seconded the motion. The Board Members voted unanimously to accept the Municipal Services Standard with 1 Condition. Standards for Water Supply and Ground Water will be deferred until further notice. Mr. Maloney then reviewed the Standard for Air Emission. Ms. Twitchell made a motion to accept the Standard for Air Emission. Mr. Lavoie seconded the motion. The Board Members voted unanimously to accept the Air Emission Standard. Mr. Maloney reviewed the Standard for Odor Control with 1 Condition. This Condition basically stated that the CEO would enforce this Standard if there were any complaints. Ms. Twitchell made a motion to accept the Standard for Odor Control with 1 Condition. Mr. Lavoie seconded the motion. The Board Members voted unanimously to accept the Standard for Odor Control with 1 Condition. Mr. Maloney then reviewed the Standard for Noise with 1 Condition. This Condition basically stated that within six months from the date of opening the applicant shall conduct an environmental sound evaluation. There was then a discussion regarding increased traffic noise, trucks running while unloading and snow plowing noise. Mr. Maloney then referred to page 5-25 and determined that another Condition could be added if this Standard were exceeded. It was then stated that safety signals on equipment are exempt. There was continued discussion regarding noise. It was stated that trees and the building itself would help to deaden sound. It was suggested that there be a “no idling” policy implemented. There was then a discussion regarding refrigerated trucks running while unloading. The Hannaford Bros. Representatives were not aware of the refrigerated trucks not being turned off. This issue will have to be looked into by Hannaford Bros. Ms. Twitchell suggested the possibility of an additional Condition with regards to noise.

Mr. Varney then stated that the Turner Town Ordinance states the Planning Board Meeting shall not go beyond 10:00pm. The Board Members agreed that this meeting would continue on October 7, 2009 at 7:00pm.

3 NEW BUSINESS:

None.

4 OTHER BUSINESS

None.

5 CEO REPORT

No action required.

6 REVIEW OF THE MINUTES FROM AUGUST 12, 2009

Ms. Twitchell made a motion to accept the Minutes from the August 12, 2009 Planning Board meeting. Mr. Lavoie seconded the motion. The Board Members voted unanimously to accept the August 12, 2009 Planning Board Minutes.

7 REVIEW OF PLANNER ESCROW

No action required.

8 OTHER ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA

None.

9 ADJOURNMENT

Motion made by Ms. Twitchell for adjournment, unanimously accepted. The meeting adjourned at 9:57pm.

Respectfully submitted by

Karen Wilcox

Recording Secretary