East Elm Street Subdivision Preliminary Major Subdivision -- Open Space Residential Development 570/572 East Elm Street, Yarmouth, Maine Riverboat LLC

Transcription

1 East Elm Street Subdivision Preliminary Major Subdivision -- Open Space Residential Development 570/572 East Elm Street, Yarmouth, Maine Riverboat LLC October 16, 2017 This application seeks Preliminary Plan approval for a Major Subdivision using the Open Space Residential Development Ordinance. The project proposes 11 new single family house lots and a 7.1 acre open space parcel (Lot 12) with small 8-car parking lot and trailhead to be deeded to the Town of Yarmouth for residents to enjoy for generations to come. The deeded open space will also include public access rights for the Town of Yarmouth to establish a public crossing of the State of Maine DOT St. Lawrence and Atlantic railroad to access the Barker Preserve owned by the Town of Yarmouth and the River Lot owned by the applicant, should the Town exercise its option to purchase the River Lot for conservation and recreation purposes. The applicant is proposing to create a public street and transfer the street along with ownership of the open space parcel and proposed parking lot to the Town of Yarmouth. Two conceptual sketch plans have been reviewed by the Planning Board culminating in this Preliminary Plan application. The second, most recent Conceptual Sketch Plan was reviewed by the Planning Board on May 24th, 2017 and a site walk was held on June 28, Since conceptual sketch plan review, the applicant has continued to work with abutters and stakeholders, negotiating an option to sell land to abutters J. Good and J. Yoder and an option to sell the approximately 24-acre River Lot along with public access across the St. Lawrence and Atlantic Railroad to the Town of Yarmouth for conservation and recreation. The River Lot continues to be separate of this subdivision application. The most important pieces of information for you to know regarding this preliminary plan submission: The overall layout of the subdivision has not substantially changed since May 24 th, 2017 s conceptual plan review; 1

2 The site is located in the Medium Density Residential and Rural Residential Districts; A traffic study has been performed by Bill Bray, Traffic Engineer confirming suitability and safety of the road entrance (copy of report resubmitted); The applicant has collaborated with abutters J. Good/J. Yoder and their design consultant, Sarah Witte to accomplish the following: provide Good/Yoder with additional land between their existing house and the new proposed street, and provide additional open space at the rear of their lot including a memorial plot. The site plan submitted reflects this collaboration. This land has been subtracted from the Net Residential Density calculations and does not change the proposed density; The plan does not take advantage of density bonuses for the provision of open space; and, The plan requests a density bonus of 1 lot for the provision of public access. This packet includes the following information: Narrative documenting how the project satisfies the Open Space Residential Development Ordinance and Chapter 601 Subdivision Ordinance, including revised Net Residential Acreage Calculations; Traffic Analysis, prepared by Bill Bray, PE.; Copies of Property Deeds and Option Agreements to Good/Yoder and to the Town of Yarmouth Site context map showing how the project contributes to creation of a broader Royal River Greenway, protected river habitat, expanded trail networks and access to public lands; Complete set of Site Plan Drawings, prepared by Ross Cudlitz, P.E. Landscaping Plan, prepared by Tom S. Farmer, RLA Copy of NRPA Tier 1 Application to Maine DEP, prepared by Ross Cudlitz, PE; and, Stormwater Impact Analysis Report, prepared by Ross Cudlitz, PE; Kind regards, Vanessa L. Farr, Principal / Planner Tom S. Farmer, Landscape Architect Maine Design Workshop 42 Chets Way, Cumberland, Maine vanessa@mainedesignworkshop.com 2

3 Project Introduction The subject parcel is located at 570/572 East Elm Street, Map 19, Lot 17. The property is primarily located in the RR zone with the first 240 of the site parallel to East Elm Street zoned MDR. The parcel is acres and contains the existing residential home, herein referred to as the Field Lot. The subject parcel consists of open meadows that have been maintained through routine cutting and upland and forested wetlands to the rear of the property. Riverboat LLC also owns a second lot of approximately 24 acres located just south of the Field Lot, between the railroad tracks and the Royal River, herein referred to as the River lot. The Field Lot is the subject of this application. The River Lot is not part of the bounds of the proposed subdivision, and the applicant has an option with the Town of Yarmouth to sell the River Lot to the Town for conservation and recreation purposes. Open Space Residential Development Ordinance Standards The Open Space Residential Development Ordinance appears in Italics, with our responses to each item following in Bold. M. OPEN SPACE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 1. Purpose The purpose of this article is to provide a voluntary mechanism to encourage the preservation of open space, forests, wildlife habitat, contiguous protected areas, natural topography, and the rural character of the Town of Yarmouth through a flexible and economical alternative to conventional residential subdivisions. Response: The applicant is volunteering to use the Open Space Residential Development ordinance to preserve open space, upland forest and field, forested-wetland, wildlife habitat, natural topography and rural character of the Town of Yarmouth. Existing field meadows include natural wetlands and stream, and these areas along with associated buffers shall remain for wildlife habitat. Flexible standards provided in this ordinance provide a mechanism for an alternative lot layout that clusters houses together so as to accomplish the purposes of this ordinance. 2. Objectives a. To encourage an efficient use of land, which allows development yet reduces land consumption, and preserves rural character in harmony with surrounding environs. Response: The project concentrates development mostly in the center-portion of the site, reducing the extent of site disturbance and development. Less length and square footage of road and driveway is required to service a clustered development, reducing site disturbance and minimizing impervious surface and stormwater, as opposed to a conventional subdivision plan which would require bigger, wider lots, spreading out development and necessitating more road length and driveways to service lots. Rural character is preserved in the sense that 3

4 existing big views across the site from North Road are preserved to the greatest extent practical while also allowing development: the first house in the new development is tucked away from view from existing roads, located 400 from North Road, while the closest house in the center-portion cluster is located 800 from North Road and approximately 600 from East Elm Street. b. To encourage open space residential developments by providing developers with incentives such as reduced infrastructure costs due to a more compact subdivision design and Road design flexibility, as well as opportunities for receiving unit bonuses. Response: We are encouraged to use this ordinance. More compact subdivision design helps to reduce overall infrastructure and long term road maintenance costs. Less impervious surface from reduced roads and road length to serve the development reduces the quantity of stormwater runoff and the need for more formal stormwater management structures such as drainage catch-basins, pipes, and ponds. Stormwater will be managed using low impact development best practices including focal points. The road design satisfies the new Rural Residential Access Road standards of the Chapter 601 Subdivision Ordinance. The OSRD ordinance does not call out explicitly what kinds of road design flexibility are available to the applicant. In preliminary plan phase we explored with staff the potential for modification of the Rural Residential Access Road cross-section to allow reduced size of gravel shoulders and pavement width at crossings. Staff indicated that the Planning Board recently adopted new road standards, so a waiver of width did not feel appropriate. We are encouraged to have the opportunity to receive unit bonuses. c. To preserve plant and animal habitat, wildlife corridors, scenic views, water quality, undeveloped lengths of shorefront, and large contiguous open spaces and connected corridors. Response: The proposed plan preserves plant and animal habitat, most notably through the preservation of wetlands and associated buffers, and the inclusion of upland forest and field, and forested wetland in the open space parcel adjacent to the railroad. The open space parcel is 7.1 acres and represents one contiguous parcel of land. Other areas of the site with mapped wetlands and stream segments shall be preserved through no-cut, no-disturbance wetland buffers on private lots. In several areas of the site, mapped wetlands extend beyond the property line to adjacent private property. The proposed open space parcel sits adjacent to a railroad corridor and beyond the railroad is a large undeveloped block of riparian habitat including floodplains, upland forest, wetlands and forested wetlands. The Town s most recent grant application to the Land for Maine s Futures program indicates that this undeveloped riparian habitat block covers over 1000 acres. 4

5 d. To promote active and passive recreational opportunities accessible to both residents of a development as well as the citizens of Yarmouth at large. Response: The proposed plan accomplishes this objective promoting active recreation opportunities for both residents of the development, neighborhood and town by providing the Town with a deeded open space parcel with the following improvements and conditions: a small 8-car parking lot and trail head; DEP permit approval and rights to construct a trail for pedestrian connectivity to the Barker preserve over the railroad track; rights to establish a public crossing across the St. Lawrence and Atlantic Railroad. Access to the Barker preserve currently does not exist. Passive recreational opportunities include birding, picnicking and viewing of wildlife habitat. e. To encourage a more creatively designed development than would be possible through the strict application of other Sections of the Ordinance. Response: Strict application of Chapter 701 dimensional standards (lot width and minimum frontage on a road in the Rural Residential district), would result in houses being disbursed throughout the field, greater land disturbance, and reduced scenic views to and within the site. Allowing some houses to cluster in the mid-portion of the site creates areas with bigger, uninterrupted gaps and views and a small hamlet feel with this cluster sitting hundreds of feet back from North Road. 3. Applicability and Review Process of Open Space Residential Development a. A developer may propose an Open Space Residential Development on any size parcel provided that the parcel could be developed as a conventional (or regular) subdivision in the zoning District in which the parcel is located. Response: We are proposing an Open Space Residential Development on a parcel of land that can be developed as a conventional (regular) subdivision in the Rural Residential district. b. The Planning Board may require a developer to submit, at the conceptual stage of a proposed subdivision or multiplex development, an alternative development plan that incorporates open space by using the provisions set out in Article II.M, if the site under consideration exceeds 20 Acres. Response: This application is for preliminary subdivision plan review, having completed the conceptual plan stage including Planning Board presentation and public hearing, and site walk. Staff and Planning Board have provided constructive comments that have been incorporated into this application. Our application is supported by the purpose of the Open Space Development Ordinance which states, The purpose of this article is to provide a voluntary mechanism to encourage the preservation of open space, forests, wildlife habitat, contiguous protected areas, natural topography, and the rural character of the Town of 5

6 Yarmouth through a flexible and economical alternative to conventional residential subdivisions. c. The Planning Board may require a proposed residential development to use the provisions of Open Space Residential Development to accomplish the goal of preservation of open spaces if one or more of the following criteria apply: i. If, after review of conceptual plans and a site review of the proposed development, the Parks and Public Lands Management Committee recommends preservation of significant natural features; Response: The Parks and Lands Management Subcommittee reviewed the conceptual plan and application, and issued the following findings (in italics) in a memo dated February 4, 2017: 1. Land that provides access to water and the shore for a variety of recreational purposes, including access to mooring sites, parking, dinghy storage, small boat launching and scenic views. a. Access to the Royal River 2. Land, rights-of-way, or easements for sidewalks, walking trails, and bike paths that link pedestrian and bicycle pathways throughout the community, especially where linkages are possible between existing town lands or between neighborhoods and existing public open spaces. a. Access from East Elm St. and North Road neighborhoods to the expanded Barker Preserve area (sidewalks currently run along East Elm St.) 3. Land or easements that complete the protection of natural areas and improve public access along the Royal River, Cousins River, and the town s northwest border with Cumberland. a. This lot would greatly expand the protection of and access to the northeast shore of the Royal River b. This region of the Royal River currently contains a large, unfragmented forest, including active floodplain and forested riparian habitat 4. Land contiguous to existing town-owned properties in select locations, if these purchases significantly enhance the functional or aesthetic value of town lands. a. This lot shares a border with the Barker Preserve and sits directly across the river from the town s Sligo Road open space property b. This lot would essentially double the area of Barker Preserve We recommend that the Town work closely with the sellers and the Royal River Conservation Trust to negotiate a fair price and terms for acquiring this property and adding it to the town s open space system with public access and parking from East Elm St. (Land Acquisition Subcommittee Review and Recommendation, 2017) 6

7 Furthermore, in regards to conservation of the River Lot (not part of this subdivision, but benefitted by improvements proposed as part of this subdivision), the Subcommittee stated, The river lot fits a profile that rates highly according to the Town s open space vision, and meets several of our priority land acquisition criteria. ii. If, after review of conceptual plans and a site review of the proposed development, the Sports and Recreation Committee recommends dedication of a portion of the development for a specific recreational need; Response: no comments were received from Sports and Recreation Committee. iii. If the Planning Board determines a need for a buffer area between the proposed development and adjacent land (developed or undeveloped) or between the proposed development and a major traveled way or visual access point; Response: As part of conceptual plan review, the Planning Board did not make any determinations regarding the need to buffer the proposed development from/to adjacent land or from major travel ways. iv. If a proposed development exceeds 20 Acres. Response: The development exceeds 20 Acres. d. Proposals for Open Space Residential Developments shall follow the review process and guidelines as outlined in Chapter 601 Yarmouth Subdivision regulations and Chapter 702 Yarmouth Site Plan Regulations. Response: Noted. 4. Development Standards Relative to Minimum Open Space a. A minimum of 25% of the original parcel must be preserved as open space. Open space shall be defined as land not developed for residential uses. Open space does not include common areas as defined below. Walking, hiking, and biking trails which have a pervious surface are not considered shared recreational facilities, and may be included within the required minimum percentage open space. The applicant shall provide a plan showing all common areas and open space. Response: The proposed plan provides a minimum of 25% of the original parcel for preservation of open space. A total of 7.1 acres is required for dedication to open space. We are providing 7.1 acres in one contiguous parcel, to be deeded to the Town of Yarmouth. We are not requesting a density bonus for the provision of this open space. b. Common Area(s) include: i. Accessory Structures and land primarily designed for residents uses, including, but not 7

8 limited to, roads, parking areas, rights of way, utilities, and septic fields. Response: An accessory structure has been provided by way of a 8 car parking lot at a trailhead. The footprint of the parking lot and driveway connecting the parking lot to the proposed new road has been accounted for in the calculation of the contiguous open space parcel. ii. Shared recreational facilities shall be defined in M.8.a. Shared recreational facilities shall be defined as Accessory Structures and improvements necessary and appropriate for educational, recreational, cultural, social, or other nonresidential uses permitted in the underlying zone. Shared recreational facilities shall be allowed on common land not designated as part of the minimum required open space, as long as the requirements of the Yarmouth Subdivision and Site Plan Regulations are met. Response: no additional accessory structures are proposed. c. The applicant must demonstrate that 75% of the minimum open space requirements are met by one contiguous parcel or no more than two separate parcels of land no less than 100 ft. wide. Response: One contiguous parcel contains 100% of the required minimum set-aside of open space. No portion of the open space is less than 100 feet wide. d. No more than 50% percent of the required minimum percentage open space which is used to calculate density bonus(es) shall include any of the following areas: steep slopes in excess of 20%, rock outcroppings, flood plains, utilities, and wetlands. Response: The open space includes some wetlands. The total amount of wetlands does not exceed 50% of the required minimum 7.1 acres (3.55 acres). The open space parcel contains 3 acres of wetland and 4.1 acres of upland land. The open space does not include >20% slopes, rock outcrops, flood plain or utilities. e. The applicant shall provide a plan showing all common areas and open space, and shall designate such areas as defined below: Response: The open space parcel has been identified on the site plan as Lot 12. i. Active Use Open Space: Designation of active use open space shall be for passive noncommercial amenities and recreational uses which, when developed, maintain the integrity of the natural landscape and provide use amenities. Unpaved walking, hiking, and biking trails which have a pervious surface are included. These open space areas are for the use and enjoyment of the development residents and Yarmouth residents if so designated. 8

9 Response: This open space is intended to be deeded to the Town of Yarmouth for use and enjoyment by people for generations to come. The open space parcel is intended for limited active use and passive noncommercial amenities such as walking and biking trails and a small parking lot and trailhead to provide access. Trails shall be sensitively located to avoid wetlands, and where wetland crossings are necessary, to cross at shortest distances possible to avoid wetland impacts. Some areas in the open space parcel will be required to remain in its natural state due to required protection of wetlands, stream segments and associated buffers, as required by Yarmouth s Wetland Ordinance. ii. Limited Use Open Space: Designation of limited use open space shall be for agricultural and managed forestlands. Response: not applicable. The plan does not contemplate agricultural uses or managed forest land. iii. Conservation Open Space: Designation of conservation open space is required for significant or unique environmentally sensitive areas, including but not limited to Wetlands, freshwater wetlands over two acres, wildlife habitat, endangered flora/ fauna, streambeds and Water Bodies, river frontage, significant stands of trees, scenic vistas, archeological sites and graveyards. Land area within conservation open space shall permanently remain in its natural state except for maintenance and access to archeological sites and graveyards. Response: A potential significant vernal pool is located on the River Lot. At the recommendation of the Army Corps of Engineers, the plan indicates buffering from this potential pool, and the trail has been located to impact the shortest segment of wetland. The plan detail set also calls for a segment of boardwalk to elevate the trail and preserve amphibian movement and natural hydrology between habitat areas, again at the recommendation of the Army Corps of Engineers. 5. Development Standards Relative to Open Space Plan Design and Access a. The applicant must demonstrate that the design of the open space, which results in density bonus units, is beneficial open space. Beneficial in this context means that the open space as planned clearly and substantially meets the purpose and applicable objectives of the Open Space Residential Development ordinance. Areas dedicated to onsite septic disposal systems, roadways, or similar infrastructure purposes may be included in the Open Space designated area, but shall be excluded from the acreage calculation for Open Space Designation. Response: Not applicable. The provision of the minimum 25% set aside of open space, and its design, is not resulting in density bonus units. However, if the project were to take a density bonus from the provision of open space, we have demonstrated above how the project meets each purpose and objective of the ordinance. 9

10 The project utilizes a bonus for public access only. This density bonus of 10% yields 1 additional house lot. No onsite infrastructure has been included in the open space parcel. The parking lot has been accounted for in the acreage calculation for Open Space Designation. b. The applicant must demonstrate that there is safe and convenient pedestrian access to open space from all the lots in the residential development that do not adjoin the open space. Response: Safe and convenient pedestrian access is provided to the open space for all lots in the residential development by way of a short gravel driveway leading to a parking lot, trailhead and trail system. c. The Planning Board shall consider the scale of development and proximity to existing designated open spaces and trails in evaluating the adequacy of the open space plan. Response: We feel the location of the open space and trails is appropriate to the scale of development proposed for the property, and that the parking lot and trail location is in the optimum location. This location was chosen with consideration of input received during Planning Board meetings and from several stakeholders expressing interest in seeing the parking lot and trailhead moved to the end of the road. Stakeholders expressed concerns about a trail wrapping along the entire northern boundary of the property behind the homes on Ryder Road. Further, the provision of public access across the St. Lawrence and Atlantic Railroad opens up approximately 25 acres of land at the Barker Preserve, an area owned by the Town but with no public access. The open space and improvements proposed by this project not only enables that connection, but provides a parking amenity creating unencumbered access to enjoy this land. d. The Planning Board may require a visual buffer or vegetative screen, upon finding that the unique characteristics of the development area and proposed design warrant such. This may be achieved through retention of significant trees or additional landscaping. Response: Existing homes on Ryder Road, E. Elm and Alderbrook have a mix of views with some natural vegetative screening provided by existing trees, meadows and wetlands. The majority of tree canopy is located in the designated open space, with specimen trees also located closer to the front of the site and existing home. Wetland systems are located along a majority of northern, eastern and southern perimeters of the parcel. These wetlands are subject to the Town s Wetland Ordinance, which requires protection and minimum 25 nocut, no disturbance buffer areas. No disturbance limits the addition of new screening and planting along the perimeter. House lots on Ryder Road and Alderbrook Lane, in particular, are generous in size, enabling private landowners to choose whether to add additional plantings on their respective lots. Both the Alderbrook Lane and Ryder Road developments 10

11 do not have any buffers or easements restricting clearing of rear property lines abutting the perimeter of this proposed subdivision. The illustrative plan shows how new house lots can accommodate reasonably sized building footprints and improvements such as garages and driveways, while respecting mandatory wetland and stream buffers. At the same time, the design has given consideration to preserving scenic views into the development and from within the development. The parking lot and trail have been tucked to the edge of a forested area, and several no-cut wetland and stream buffers exist between the parking lot and neighboring houses (McGrath and Kitchens). Natural vegetation will help to screen this area from all homes. We are proposing a hedgerow of 7 evergreen trees along the east edge of the parking lot to help screen the parked cars from the abutters on Ryder Road and the new homes within the subdivision. 6. Dimensional Standards Minimum Lot size, Perimeter Setbacks, Setbacks a. The Planning Board, in reviewing proposed Open Space Residential Developments, may modify said provisions related to minimum lot size, lot width and setback size, to permit innovative approaches to housing and environmental design. Response: During conceptual plan review, the following setback modification was requested to facilitate optimum placement of housing for scenic views and privacy for new and existing homes, and for enhanced environmental design: Front and side yard setback: 15 ft This Preliminary Plan continues to request the flexibility to allow houses to have a minimum 15 front and side yard setback. Houses will have generous setbacks on rear yards, with ample room for private lawns and landscaping and long scenic views. This flexibility of standards allows for the most innovative site design when taking into consideration environmental systems, preservation of scenic views into the site, orientation of houses for enhanced views and solar benefit, and neighborhood character surrounding this site. b. Structures are exempt from front, side and rear setbacks, provided that no Structure may be placed closer to the original perimeter side or rear property line than is allowed within the underlying zoning district. Response: The rear setback on all lots remain at 40, which is the required underlying LDR zoning district. c. Each dwelling unit shall have adjacent to it an exclusive use area of at least 300 square feet. The exclusive use area may contain patios, decks, fences, landscaping, gardens, and other outdoor facilities. Where fee simple ownership lots are established, said lots shall be deemed exclusive use area for the units thereon. 11

12 Response: each dwelling unit has a generous area for landscaping improvement and use. 7. Lot Density Calculations and Density Bonuses i. Lot Density shall be calculated by using Net Residential Acreage as defined in Article II. The resultant acreage is then divided by the minimum lot size of the district to derive the maximum number of residential units permitted without density bonus units. In cases where the number of residential units permitted equals a decimal number, the number shall be rounded to the nearest whole number. Response: See below for detailed density calculations yielding 10 house lots. ii. Density Bonus Allowances: In addition, The Planning Board shall approve a density bonus that increases the maximum number of residential units allowed if the project meets any one or more of the five criteria outlined below. The maximum number of residential units is multiplied by the applicable density bonus percentage(s) to determine the total number of residential units permitted. In cases where the number of residential units permitted equals a decimal number, the number shall be rounded to the nearest whole number. Response: See below for density bonus allowance, yielding 1 additional house lot. i. Protection of additional open space through an easement or deed restriction: (a) Where the proposed Development protects the minimum 25% of the area as open space in perpetuity, the development will be awarded a density bonus of 5%, or (b) Greater than or equal to 40% of the parcel area as open space in perpetuity, the development will be awarded a density bonus of 15%, or (c) Greater than or equal to 65% of the parcel area as open space in perpetuity, the development will be awarded a density bonus of 25%, Response: Not applicable. We are not requesting use of density bonuses provided by items a c. ii. Protection of agricultural and forest land: - Where the development protects > 10 Acres of sustainably managed agricultural or forest land and provides a mechanism for the protection through an easement or deed restriction, the development will be awarded a density bonus of 5%. These restrictions shall be incorporated into the conservation easement of the grantee of the open space. In order to be considered sustainably managed forestland, a management plan must be developed by a licensed forester. Response: Not applicable. The plan does not include the protection of agricultural or forest land. 12

13 iii. Public access: - Where the public is granted access to the open space and use thereof, the development will be awarded a density bonus of 10%. Public access, which may be restricted to pedestrian traffic, qualifies for this density bonus. The instrument granting public access, acceptable to the Planning Board, may reasonably restrict the use of motorized vehicles. Response: The plan proposes public pedestrian access to the open space and to the adjacent Barker Preserve, a 25 acre parcel owned by the Town of Yarmouth, but that currently does not have public access. The Town of Yarmouth has already begun dialogue with MDOT, owner of the railroad, to establish a public crossing. See Density Bonus Allowances below for more information. iv. Protection of contiguous open space: - Where the development protects open space that is contiguous with other protected open spaces on adjacent parcels, such that the total contiguous protected open space is > 15 Acres, the development will be awarded a density bonus of 5%. If a proposed development abuts Town-owned property, the Planning Board shall consider the need for an access easement or right-of-way to such land and may require access. Response: We are not requesting use of a density bonus for protection of contiguous open space. However, the open space is separated from the Barker Preserve and the River Lot by the railroad, and the applicant has a pre-existing established crossing that effectively provides connection to the subdivision. v. Provision of affordable housing: - For every X percent of affordable housing units provided for a period not less than 30 years, the development will be awarded a density bonus of X/2. For the purposes of this subsection only, a resolution of endorsement by the Yarmouth Town Council as to affordability shall be the standard for determining both affordability and the proposed mechanism for such affordability. Response: We are not requesting use of a density bonus for provision of affordable housing. 8. Ownership, Protection, and Maintenance of Open Space a. Ownership: All common lands and improvements shall be described and identified as to location, site, use, and control in a covenant. Such covenant shall set forth the method of assessment for the maintenance of such land per best management practices. It shall provide voting and use rights for the open space when applicable and may charge dues to cover expenses, which may include tax liabilities of the open space. Articles of Association or Incorporation must be acceptable to the Town Council and Town Legal Counsel prior to issuance of a Building permit. The cost of such legal review shall be borne by the applicant. Any changes in such articles of Association or Incorporation which relate to said open space shall require the prior written approval of the 13

14 Town Council and Town Legal Counsel. The covenant shall be written to run with the land and become part of the deed to each lot or dwelling unit within the development. Open space land shall be held, managed, and maintained by the developer until owned and controlled by the homeowners' association or other approved entity. Open space shall be permanently protected by: i. Conveyance to a homeowners' association. A homeowners' association is a private nonprofit corporation, association, or other non-profit legal entity established by the developer. Membership in said homeowners' association shall be mandatory for property owners and made a required covenant in any deed issued or passed, or Response: The applicant will not be creating a Homeowner s association for the subdivision. ii. Private ownership protected by deed covenants and restrictions in perpetuity, and use limited to conservation, Agriculture, forest and other uses consistent with the purposes of this ordinance, or Response: Not applicable, the open space does not extend onto private lots. iii. Conveyance to the Town of Yarmouth or an acceptable alternative, which meets the spirit and intent of this ordinance and is approved by the Planning Board after review by Town Legal Counsel. Response: The applicant proposes conveying the open space parcel to the Town of Yarmouth, along with a parking lot and pedestrian access easement across the railroad tracks to connect the open space to the Barker Preserve. b. Protection: Conveyances of open space land to a homeowners' association shall be subject to a permanent conservation easement granted to the Town of Yarmouth. Conservation easements are tied to the title of the land and shall be recorded at the County Registry of Deeds. Provisions of such conservation easements are subject to the approval of the Planning Board with recommendations from the Parks and Public Lands Management Committee and may include provisions for no further subdivision; no residential or industrial development; no commercial uses except for Agriculture and forestry-related uses conducted according to Best Management Practices; no Roads; whether or not public access will be restricted or permitted; monitoring and easement oversight by the Town of Yarmouth or other agent assigned by the Town (such as a land trust or other conservation organization). Response: The applicant shall engage the Town Manager/Town Council in discussion about future use and use restrictions for the open space. 14

15 REVISED DENSITY CALCULATIONS ALLOWABLE DENSITY. Calculations of net residential acreage for the Field Lot only yield the following: Net Residential Acreage: The total acreage available for the subdivision or development and shown on the proposed plan, minus: The total gross acreage of the proposed subdivision is acres. Excluding Good/Yoder parcel sale of 0.76 Ac. (33,105.6 sf) = = Ac. (1,218, sf) 1. The land dedicated or in use for private or public roads, including all vehicular rights of way. 1, long x 50 wide ROW in RR Zone = 58,466 s.f. (includes hammerhead) 300 long x 50 wide ROW in MDR Zone = 15,000 s.f. 2. Multiplex developments parking areas. Not Applicable 3. Land which is cut off from the main parcel by a road, existing land uses, or where no means of access has been provided so that it is isolated and unavailable for building purposes or for common use. Not Applicable 4. Land not suitable for development as defined in this article See information below. Land Not Suitable For Development: The following lands shall not be included in the calculations of lot area for the purpose of meeting the requirements of the Minimum Lot Size or net residential acreage as an Open Space Residential Development: a. Land, which is situated below the normal high-water line of any fresh water body or the Upland Edge of a Coastal Wetland. Not Applicable b. Land which is located within the 100-year frequency flood plain as identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency or the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Flood Insurance Administration, unless the subdivider shows proof through the submittal of materials prepared by a Registered Land Surveyor which show that the property in question lies at least two (2) feet above the 100-year flood level. The elevation of filled or made land shall not be considered. Not Applicable c. Land that has been created by filling or draining a pond or Wetland. Not Applicable 15

16 d. Land within the Resource Protection District. Not Applicable Total Net Residential Density in RR: The total gross land area in the RR zone is Ac. or 1,169, sf Deductions: Sub-Total Lots: -58,466 sf for road ROW (1, lf in RR zone) (RR gross area less RR ROW area) / 3 Ac. min. lot size in RR zone [(1,169, sf 58,466 sf) / 3 x 43,560 sf = 8.50 lots [(26.86 Ac Ac.) / 3 Ac. min. lot size] = 8.50 lots Total Net Residential Density in MDR: The total gross land area in the MDR zone is Ac. or 81, sf Deductions: Sub- Total Lots: -15,000 sf for road ROW (300 lf in MDR zone) (MDR gross area less MDR ROW area) / 1 Ac. min. lot size in MDR zone [(81, sf 15,000 sf) / 1 x 43,560 sf = 1.53 lots [1.871 Ac Ac.) / 1 Ac. min. lot size] = 1.53 lots Total Combined Net Residential Density: 8.50 lots in RR Zone 1.53 lots in MDR Zone = Lots OSRD DENSITY BONUSES. The provisions of Open Space Residential Development Ordinance allow for density bonuses to accomplish the goal of preservation of open spaces. For this application, we are only requesting use of the public access density bonus. This density bonus, as documented below, grants a 10% density bonus, yielding a one-lot density bonus for this project. Text in italics has been taken directly from the Ordinance. Bold text summarizes our response: Density Bonus Allowances: In addition, The Planning Board shall approve a density bonus that increases the maximum number of residential units allowed if the project meets any one or more of the five criteria outlined below. The maximum number of residential units is multiplied by the applicable density bonus percentage(s) to determine the total number of residential units permitted. In cases 16

17 where the number of residential units permitted equals a decimal number, the number shall be rounded to the nearest whole number. iii. Public access: Where the public is granted access to the open space and use thereof, the development will be awarded a density bonus of 10%. Public access, which may be restricted to pedestrian traffic, qualifies for this density bonus. The instrument granting public access, acceptable to the Planning Board, may reasonably restrict the use of motorized vehicles. The proposed subdivision grants to the Town of Yarmouth ownership of an open space lot with the following benefits: unrestricted public access to the open space, an 8 car parking lot and trail head, rights to construct a trail network, and rights to establish a public crossing at the existing legal crossing of the St. Lawrence and Atlantic Railroad owned by Maine DOT. This public access provides the Town with access to both the Barker Preserve (which currently has no access), and the 24 acre River Lot which the Town of Yarmouth currently has an option to purchase for conservation and recreation open space. The NRPA application packet submitted to the Maine DEP incorporates the parking lot and trail impacts in the permit request. The applicant will construct the parking lot. A density bonus of 10% on 10.3 Net Residential Density = 1.03 additional units. The applicant requests 1.0 additional house unit, yielding a total of 11 house lots. 17

18 COMPLIANCE WITH CHAPTER 601 SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE This application packet has been prepared to satisfy the Preliminary Plan submission criteria outlined in Chapter 601. Review Standards are identified in BLUE. The applicant s response is identified in BOLD. Pollution. The proposed subdivision will not result in undue water or air pollution. In making this determination, it shall at least consider: 1. The elevation of the land above sea level and its relation to the flood plains; 2. The nature of soils and subsoils and their ability to adequately support waste disposal: 3. The slope of the land and its effect on effluents; 4. The availability of streams for disposal of effluents; and 5. The applicable state and local health and water resource rules and regulations; The proposed project will not result in undue water or air pollution. The site is not subject to flood plains. The applicant proposes servicing each house lot with town sewer, and water to be provided by the Yarmouth Water District. Soils can support residential development. The grading plan shall direct stormwater runoff to focal points for treatment before discharge in the direction of wetland buffers and private lawns. No effluent will be discharged to streams or directly to wetlands. Sufficient Water. Has sufficient water available for the reasonably foreseeable needs of the subdivision; The Yarmouth Water District reviewed the conceptual plan and submitted correspondence from B. MacKinnon to A. Jaegerman, dated February 10, 2017, stating that the development of this parcel appears to be well thought out and an appropriate use of the property, and, the district would require a water main extension, sized for and including fire protection for this proposed use on the Field Lot. The design team subsequently met with the Yarmouth Water District to discuss provision of water to serve the development. See site plan and detail sheets. Municipal water supply. The proposed subdivision will not cause an unreasonable burden on an existing water supply, if one is to be used; The proposed subdivision will not cause unreasonable burden to the existing water supply. The design team met with the Yarmouth Water District to discuss placement and size of infrastructure to serve the development, including location of fire suppression (hydrant). The site plan reflects information gathered from the District. 18

19 Erosion. The proposed subdivision will not cause unreasonable soil erosion or a reduction in the land's capacity to hold water so that a dangerous or unhealthy condition results; The proposed project will not cause unreasonable soil erosion or a reduction in the land s capacity to hold water. A detailed Stormwater Management report has been submitted with this application, documenting how stormwater will be managed. The application and plan set includes an erosion and sedimentation control plan that satisfies requirements of Chapter 500 Stormwater requirements and MDEP Erosion and Sedimentation Control (ESC) measures. The site plan includes notation stating that all ESC Best Management Practices (BMP s) shall be installed prior to the commencement of construction activities, maintained by the contractor throughout construction until such time as permanent vegetation is in place. All ESC BMP s shall conform to the MDEP latest requirements. Traffic. The proposed subdivision will not cause unreasonable highway or public road congestion or unsafe conditions with respect to the use of the highways or public roads existing or proposed and shall adhere to the street connectivity requirements of IV.D herein. If the proposed subdivision requires driveways or entrances onto a state or state aid highway located outside the urban compact area of an urban compact municipality as defined by Title 23, section 754, the Department of Transportation has provided documentation indicating that the driveways or entrances conform to Title 23, section 704 and any rules adopted under that section; During Conceptual Plan review, stakeholders expressed concerns about sight distances at the intersection of the new proposed street and E. Elm Street. Staff cited the town ordinance requirement of 250 of clear sight line, and provided comments suggesting that, with vegetation management (some tree trimming or removal), 250 of clear sight line may be accomplished if traffic from North Road were traveling at 25 mph or less coming off North Road to E. Elm Street. The applicant initiated a traffic study by Bill Bray, PE. to look at the new street entrance location, and recommended the street entrance be shifted away from North Road and towards the property line of J. Good and J. Yoder. The site plan submitted reflects Bray s recommendation to shift the new street entrance south and to remove some vegetation to accomplish 250 of clear sight lines (see Landscaping Plan). Furthermore, the site plan currently includes installation of a new proposed street light at the E. Elm/new street intersection. A copy of Bray s report has been resubmitted with this packet. Sewage disposal. The proposed subdivision will provide for adequate sewage waste disposal and will not cause an unreasonable burden on municipal services if they are utilized; The proposed subdivision will provide for adequate seweage waste disposal and will not cause an unreasonable burden on municipal services. In a memo by S. Johnson, Town Engineer, dated Febrary 9, 2017, Johnson states there is adequate capacity in the Town sewer system for the project, and as town sewer exists in the project vicinity, the subdivision is required to connect to the Town sewer system. The proposed site plan shows how the applicant meets Chapter 304 Sewerage Ordinance requirements and town technical 19

20 standards for sewer infrastructure. Each home will have a private sewer pump stations to convey sewage to existing public gravity main in E. Elm Street. Municipal solid waste disposal. The proposed subdivision will not cause an unreasonable burden on the municipality's ability to dispose of solid waste, if municipal services are to be utilized; The proposed subdivision will not cause an unreasonable burden on the municipality s ability to dispose of solid waste. Solid waste will be disposed of at the Transfer Station on East Main Street. Aesthetic, cultural and natural values. The proposed subdivision will not have an undue adverse effect on the scenic or natural beauty of the area, aesthetics, historic sites, significant wildlife habitat identified by the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife or the municipality, or rare and irreplaceable natural areas or any public rights for physical or visual access to the shoreline; The proposal balances development with the preservation of village edge/rural suburban character as much as possible by minimizing site disturbance to the extent allowable by the town s street standards, efficiently using land by clustering some houses close together over 400 from North Road, reducing land consumption by providing smaller private lots in exchange for preserving 7.1 acres of mixed open field and forested wetland. Potential wildlife habitat has been preserved as part of the dedicated open space, and Town ordinances ensure that wetlands and streams will be buffered with natural, existing vegetation. The existing vegetation is currently mowed hayfield. Over time wetlands and buffers will experience natural succession. For additional discussion, please refer to the Open Space Residential Development Review Standards section of this narrative. The road has been laid out as strategically as possible to balance development with preservation of as many existing mature canopy trees as possible. The landscaping plan includes over 3 dozen new street trees placed along the street right of way to meet the Town s ordinances. The landscaping plan calls for a mix of broad canopy street trees including maples and oak. An NRPA Tier 1 permit has been submitted to the Maine DEP. This submission yields review and response by IFW. Copies of findings and any memos shall be submitted as part of the Final Plan submission. Conformity with local ordinances and plans. The proposed subdivision conforms with a duly adopted subdivision regulation or ordinance, comprehensive plan, development plan or land use plan, if any. In making this determination, the municipal reviewing authority may interpret these ordinances and plans; This project has been prepared to comply with Chapter 602 (Subdivision) and Chapter 701, Article II.M (Zoning), Open Space Residential Development. Furthermore, the Town s 20

21 comprehensive plan suggests that the Open Space Residential Development ordinance continue to be used as a tool to protect open spaces and rural character. Financial and technical capacity. The subdivider has adequate financial and technical capacity to meet the standards of this section; The applicants own a successful excavation company that has been operating in the Town of Yarmouth for over 20 years, with demonstrated technical expertise constructing projects across the state of Maine at all scales of development. Surface Waters: Whenever situated entirely or partially within the watershed of any pond or lake or within 250 feet of any wetland, great pond, or river as defined in Title 38, chapter 3, subchapter I, article 2-B, the proposed subdivision will not adversely affect the quality of that body of water or unreasonably affect the shoreline of that body of water; This standard is not applicable, as the project is not located within the watershed of any pond or lake or within 250 ft. of any wetland, great pond, or river as defined in Title 38, chapter 3, subchapter I, article 2-B. Ground water. The proposed subdivision will not, alone or in conjunction with existing activities, adversely affect the quality or quantity of ground water; The proposed subdivision will not adversely affect the quality or quantity of ground water, as the subdivision will be served by Town water and sewer. Any stormwater runoff will be captured and treated prior to discharge to lawns and natural vegetated buffers. Flood areas. Based on the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps and Flood Insurance Rate Maps, and information presented by the applicant whether the subdivision is in a flood-prone area. If the subdivision, or any part of it, is in such an area, the subdivider shall determine the 100-year flood elevation and flood hazard boundaries within the subdivision. The proposed subdivision plan must include a condition of plan approval requiring that principal structures in the subdivision will be constructed with their lowest floor, including the basement, at least one foot above the 100-year flood elevation; This standard is not applicable. The project site is not located within the 100 year flood plain. Freshwater wetlands. All freshwater wetlands within the proposed subdivision have been identified on any maps submitted as part of the application, regardless of the size of these wetlands. Any mapping of freshwater wetlands may be done with the help of the local soil and water conservation district; 21

22 Wetlands were delineated by Frick and Associates and a copy of the report has been submitted as part of this packet. Wetlands and associated buffers are delineated on the site plan. Farmland. All farmland within the proposed subdivision has been identified on maps submitted as part of the application. Any mapping of farmland may be done with the help of the local soil and water conservation district; Not applicable. The proposed subdivision is not identified as farmland. River, stream or brook. Any river, stream or brook within or abutting the proposed subdivision has been identified on any maps submitted as part of the application. For purposes of this section, river, stream or brook has the same meaning as in 38 M.R.S. 480-B (9) The site has two stream segments, as identified by Frick and Associates, and indicated on the site plan. Storm water. The proposed subdivision will provide for adequate stormwater management, as per Chapter 601(IV) (L), and Chapters 320 and 330 of the Town Code. A pre-and post-development stormwater flow analysis was performed and report generated by R. Cudlitz. Two (2) copies of the report have been submitted to the Town as part of this packet. The project has been designed to manage stormwater using Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices (BMP s) to capture runoff from building roofs, driveways, lawns, and roadways. Any lot with an LID BMP located on it will have a deed restriction to ensure that the landowner will operate and maintain the LID BMP in perpetuity. Spaghetti-lots prohibited. If any lots in the proposed subdivision have shore frontage on a river, stream, brook, great pond or coastal wetland as these features are defined in Title 38, section 480- B, none of the lots created within the subdivision have a lot depth to shore frontage ratio greater than 5 to 1; Not applicable. The proposed project is not located along shore frontage on a river, stream, brook, great pond or coastal wetland, therefore is not subject to this standard. Lake phosphorus concentration. The long-term cumulative effects of the proposed subdivision will not unreasonably increase a great pond's phosphorus concentration during the construction phase and life of the proposed subdivision; Not applicable. The proposed project is not located near a great pond, therefore is not subject to this standard. 22

23 Impact on adjoining municipality. For any proposed subdivision that crosses municipal boundaries, the proposed subdivision will not cause unreasonable traffic congestion or unsafe conditions with respect to the use of existing public ways in an adjoining municipality in which part of the subdivision is located; Maine State requirement, 30A Municipal review and regulation states, If any portion of a subdivision crosses municipal boundaries, all meetings and hearings to review the application must be held jointly by the reviewing authorities from each municipality. All meetings and hearings to review an application under section 4407 for a revision or amendment to a subdivision that crosses municipal boundaries must be held jointly by the reviewing authorities from each municipality. In addition to other review criteria, the reviewing authorities shall consider and make a finding of fact regarding the criteria described in section 4404, subsection 19.The reviewing authorities in each municipality, upon written agreement, may waive the requirement under this subsection for any joint meeting or hearing. Not applicable. The proposed project does not cross municipal boundaries. Lands subject to liquidation harvesting. Timber on the parcel being subdivided has not been harvested in violation of rules adopted pursuant to Title 12, section 8869, subsection 14. If a violation of rules adopted by the Maine Forest Service to substantially eliminate liquidation harvesting has occurred, the municipal reviewing authority must determine prior to granting approval for the subdivision that 5 years have elapsed from the date the landowner under whose ownership the harvest occurred acquired the parcel. A municipal reviewing authority may request technical assistance from the Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry, Bureau of Forestry to determine whether a rule violation has occurred, or the municipal reviewing authority may accept a determination certified by a forester licensed pursuant to Title 32, chapter 76. If a municipal reviewing authority requests technical assistance from the bureau, the bureau shall respond within 5 working days regarding its ability to provide assistance. If the bureau agrees to provide assistance, it shall make a finding and determination as to whether a rule violation has occurred. The bureau shall provide a written copy of its finding and determination to the municipal reviewing authority within 30 days of receipt of the municipal reviewing authority's request. If the bureau notifies a municipal reviewing authority that the bureau will not provide assistance, the municipal reviewing authority may require a subdivision applicant to provide a determination certified by a licensed forester. Not applicable. The land is not subject to liquidation harvesting. WAIVER REQUESTS We request the Planning Board to consider the following waiver: 1) Extend the road length from the maximum 1,000 for a public street to 1,400, with the provision of a fire hydrant for fire suppression. 23

24 We have designed access to create the shortest total length of road to serve the number of house lots the site can yield under the Town s ordinances. Creating additional road segments would cause further development impacts to the land, yield greater quantity of stormwater runoff and associated infrastructure to treat stormwater, and create additional long term maintenance costs to the Town. Furthermore, through the conceptual plan review process many stakeholders including Planning Board members requested the parking lot be located at the rear of the site and placed in a manner that provides the least visual impact. This parking lot will provide an amenity to potentially reach upwards of 50 acres of connected riverfront land for recreation purposes. Considering input and balancing development with site conditions, the best location for the parking lot is tucked in to the edge of an existing forested area (see site plan) at the rear of the site. We have consulted with the Fire Chief to identify a location for a fire hydrant on the new proposed street. The hydrant will ensure that each house will have fire suppression. 24

25 L Proposed Riverfront Woods Preserve 1041 ac ac KEY TO FEATURES 231 OLD TOWN HOUSE PARK North Road Hand-carry Boat Access Parking Proposed Preserve 827 ac 1 ac 3 ac 13 ac Memorial Highway P r a t t s B r o o k 792 ac # 0 Parks & Preserves Other Conserved Land Unfragmented Habitat (2015 data, shrinking acreage) New or pending housing units Contour interval: 20 ft R O Y Miles ac SAM RISTICH TRAILS Yarmouth Reservoir T o d d y i n g B B r o r k o o o k A L R I V E R St. Lawrence & Atlantic (owned by State of Maine) GRANITE FALLS PRESERVE Sweetser Road r 49 ac L o 981 ac 9 The Lane SKYLINE FARM 70 ac ac Unfragmented Habitat & Regional Habitat Context: Sligo Road 1 ac NORTH YARMOUTH YARMOUTH The Dugas property is part of a nearly 1000 acre multi-town unfragmented block (2015 data), one of the two largest remaining habitat areas connected to Yarmouth. The habitat is quickly eroding due to more than 23 units of residential development built, approved, or proposed-pending in recent years in Yarmouth alone, within this habitat block. The riparian habitat of this stretch of river is crucial because it connects Casco Bay s significant habitat upriver to some of southern Maine s most resilient riparian zones, especially New Gloucester s Intervale and the cool forested stretches of the Middle Branch of the Royal River (Chandler Brook) in Pownal and Durham. Amtrak/Pan Am SWEETSIR FARM PRESERVE SLIGO ROAD PRESERVE 3 Water District Road DUGAS RIVER LOT R O 26 Y A R I BARKER PRESERVE V E 3 R 3 13 ac Main Street Main Street 5 North Road Ryder Road New Dugas Street Lane Alderbrook Depot Road East Elm Street 759 ac PRATT S BROOK PARK ROYAL RIVER PARK

26

27

28

29 PROJECT REPORT And STORMWATER ANALYSIS FOR East Elm Street Subdivision 570 East Elm Street Yarmouth, Maine (Map 19 / Lot 17) APPLICANT: RIVERBOAT, LLC 69 Field Drive Yarmouth, Maine OCTOBER 2017 Prepared by: Ross A. Cudlitz, PE Engineering Assistance & Design, Inc. 10 North Road Yarmouth, Maine Ph/Fax: Tom Farmer, LA 352 Memorial Highway North Yarmouth, Maine Ph Vanessa Farr, Planner Maine Design Workshop PO Box 6179 Falmouth, Maine 04105

30 ENCLOSED MATERIAL COVER TABLE OF ENCLOSED MATERIAL STORMWATER PERMIT APPLICATION / FEE WORKSHEET / CERTIFICATION TIER 1 NRPA APPLICATION LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION NOI / PUBLIC NOTICE / NOTICE TO ABUTTERS TITLES RIGHTS & INTEREST USGS TOPOGRAHIC QUAD MAP LOCATION / GOOGLE AERIAL REPRSENTATIVE SITE PHOTOS ENGINEER S PROJECT AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT LONG-TERM INSPECTION TABLES AND SAMPLE LOG SHEETS HYDROCAD PRE CONDITION 2, 10, & 25 YEAR STORMWATER ANALYSIS HYDROCAD POST CONDITION 2, 10, & 25 YEAR STORMWATER ANALYSIS HYDROCAD FOR FOCAL POINT 0.95 & 1-YR EVENT EXTREME PRECIPITATION TABLES FOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY SUPPLEMENTAL HYDROCAD ANALYSIS TOWN OF YAMOUTH STUDY WSS USDA MEDIUM INTENSITY CUMBERLAND COUNTY& HISS SOIL TEST BORING LOGS (LOCATIONS ON PLANS) FOCAL POINT BROCHURE CUT SHEET 1. DESIGN WORKSHEETS / REVIEW LETTER / MAINTENANCE CONTRACT STREET LIGHT LAMP POLE CUT SHEET LETTERS; THPO / SHPO / IF&W / US FISH & WILDLIFE DEP APPENDIX C: MEADOW BUFFER DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS PLAN SET DRAWINGS CO - COVER SHEET S1 BOUNDARY / PROPOSED SUBDIVISION PLAN EP1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN C1 STE PLAN 100 SCALE C2 SITE PLAN /EROSION CONTROL STA ; 50 SCALE C3 SITE PLAN /EROSION CONTROL STA ; 50 SCALE PP1 ROAD PLAN & PROFILE L1 - LANDSCAPE PLAN / ROAD CENTERLINE GEOMETRY D1 MISC. DETAILS D2 TRENCH DETAILS D3 EROSION CONTROL NARRATIVE D4 MISC. EROSION CONTROL DETAILS D5 WATER DETAILS D6 FORCE MAIN DETAILS D7 INFILTRATION BASIN DETAILS D8 / D9 FOCAL POINT TREATMENT DETAILS D10 THREE SIDED COCRETE BOX CULVERT DETAILS PRE-SWM - PRE-CONDITION STORMWATER MODEL 100 SCALE POST-SWM - POST-CONDITION STORMWATER MODEL 100 SCALE POST-SWM - POST-CONDITION STORMWATER MODEL 50 SCALE WQ1 WATER QUALITY WORKSHEET

31 Project Background Project Report for East Elm Street Subdivision 570 East Elm Street, Yarmouth, Maine Engineers Report / Stormwater Report / Erosion Control The Applicant proposes to develop /- acres of mixed growth forested/brush/meadow and wetland into 12- residential lots ranging in size from 0.81 to 2.37 acres. The applicant will retain 7.11 acres at the western end of the site as open space (Lot 6). The Town of Yarmouth has expressed interest in purchasing the Open Space Lot 6 for access to the Royal River Conservation parcel located west of the rail road tracks and the subject parcel. The parcel west of the railroad tracks is in the ownership of the applicants at this time, however, that parcel is not contiguous with the parcel being developed and there is no activity proposed or planned for on the western parcel directly or indirectly related to this submittal. The Applicant will maintain ownership of the private road until the Towns accept it. Each lot will have a single-family residence, individual driveway, and modest lawn area. Building windows are bound by resource and lot setbacks. All lots will be served by public water, public force main sewer and underground electrical/utilities. No gas connection is proposed as part of this submittal. Due to the acreage of the disturbance (~2.5 acres), proposed impervious area (46,901SF), and impacts to resources (14,809 SF of streams crossings, wetland impacts) the project must also receive the endorsement of the Maine DEP for a Stormwater Permit as well as an ACOE and DEP NRPA Tier 1 Wetland Alteration to include two stream crossings. General and Basic Standards for stormwater runoff must be addressed at the town and state level. Existing Site Conditions Refer to the USGS Topo Quad enclosed for site location. The site is located on a gently rolling meadows bisected by two streams meadow wetlands extend up the gentle slopes on both sides of both streams, and the perimeter is wooded (refer to enclosed photos). There is an existing residence shown on Lot 1 which is the original ownership of the 28+/- Ac. The parcel is bound by Ryder Road to north (residential subdivision), the Atlantic St. Lawrence Rail Road to the west, East Elm Street to the east and single family residences to the south. The greater watershed to the north passes through the site via streams and wetlands. There are no areas of existing erosion on site and the natural swales are stable. The stream has a define cut mineralized channel that is approximately 2 feet x 1 foot. The gentle slopes on the sides are vegetated meadow wetlands.

32 Proposed Use The applicants propose to construct a 12-lot single family open space residential subdivision; the twelfth lot is the open space lot. Access to the subdivision onto East Elm Street is along the southern property line at the eastern end of the property. The proposed 1,400 foot road (including hammerhead) has two 10 foot paved lanes, 4 foot gravel shoulders with the outer two feet of the shoulders having a skim coat of top soil to promote grass growth. Stormwater runs off the non-curbed road as sheet flow into meadow buffers, meadow wetlands, filter media infiltration basins and grass ditches that discharge into Focal Point treatment systems (see attachments). All road grades and ditches are 5% or less. Concrete box culverts have been used I the two stream crossings in order to reduce wet impacts. Each of the 11 lots is anticipated to have approximately 0.08 acre (3,400 SF) of impervious for the driveway, house, garage, etc... Minimal clearing of trees (~0.5 acres total) is proposed on Lots 6 and 8. The building windows are as defined by the setbacks from wetlands, streams, and the property lines. Watershed This site is not in the direct watershed of a great pond or any other water body identified as sensitive, threatened or impaired, as mapped and defined by the ME DEP Southern Office. This project does propose new use impervious of 46,901 SF, and land disturbance greater than 1 acres and less than 5 acres, hence, the project triggers the state permitting threshold for a Stormwater Permit. This parcel is situated in the middle of a larger watershed which begins approximately 1,500 feet to the north (Concord Circle), bound by the railroad to the west and extends south to the railroad near Leighton Road. This watershed has been studied by the Town Engineer for Stormwater flows. The Yarmouth Town Engineer has requested that his HydroCAD results be used in the project model for discharges coming from the detention pond located on the north side of Ryder Road This is discussed in more detail in the Stormwater modeling section below. Stormwater from the site flows into the on-site wetlands connects to the unnamed on-site stream then flows to Cousins River via Pratts Brook, and then out to Casco Bay. Streams Streams and wetlands were mapped by Albert Frick Associates, Inc. There are two mapped streams bisecting the parcel from north to south.

33 The scoured channels are very narrows (~2 feet wide x 1 foot deep). The eastern stream flows when there is discharge from the pond north of Ryder Road. The western stream flows when there is saturation of the contributing wetlands. Streams are flanked by meadow wetlands. There are temporary stream impacts for installation of underground utilities. Since these will be deep trenches open cut is not an option, therefore, a trench box will be used (approximate width 6 feet. The stream channels are on a couple feet wide, the rest of the temporary impact is wetland. Wetlands a.] Avoidance and Minimization: The following are considerations incorporated into the design to minimize and avoid wetland impacts and stay in a Tier 1 Category: Final road grade intentionally elevated above existing ground wherever practical in order that road fore slopes would be created and not cuts, since cut ditches take up more area than 3:1 slopes. The narrowest public road cross section allowed by the town is used in the design. No surface ponds proposed for stormwater management that would have required graded in wetlands. The road layout is the narrowest path though the meadow wetlands considering all parameters which impacted the design. The boardwalk in the Open Space Lot 12 is raised off the wetlands and the crossing are at the narrowest locations. Three sided concrete open box culverts used for stream crossings to reduce impacts at the two road crossings b.] As previously stated, meadow wetlands flank both streams and extend from north to south throughout the parcel. The project application requires a Tier 1 Wetlands Alteration Permit for disturbance or filling up to 14,999 SF. The project proposes 14,809 SF as follows (see Site Plan sheet C1): Right -of-way: 3,235 SF of disturbance within 25 feet of both streams and 10,657 SF of disturbance outside of the 25 foot PBR setback. Other: 643 SF of wetland will be shadowed by the proposed raised boardwalk in the Open Space Lot 12. Other: 264 SF of a non-contiguous wetland proposed for fill on Lot 7 in order to situate the house for solar installation due to shadowing from the tall trees to the south of the lot. The Town of Yarmouth imposed setbacks of 25 and 50 feet from the wetland edge make siting the house difficult for this purpose. There are also incidental wetland impacts crossing the streams for utility installation under the open box culvert. Restoration of these crossings is addressed on the erosion control narrative plan sheet as follows:

34 SPECIFIC TO EXCAVATING IN WETLANDS AND STREAMS WETLANDS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PARCEL ARE NOT STANDING WATER OR EMERGENT VEGETATION WETLANDS. ALL OPEN CUTS IN WETLANDS AND STREAMS WHERE WETLANDS ARE TO BE RESTORED SHALL BE DONE IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER. 1. VEGETATION SHALL BE SAVED OFF TO THE SIDE IN PALLETTIZED MANNER AND PLACED ON A BARRIER. 2. TOP 12 INCHES OF SUBSIOIL SHALL BE SAVED OFF TO THE SIDE ON A BARRIER. 3. TRENCH BACKFILL SHALL STOP 12 INCHES BELOW SURFACE THEN TOPPED OFF WITH WETLAND SOILS. 4. SALVAGED VEGETATION SHALL BE LAID BACK TO ORIGINAL GRADE. 5. NO FUEL CANS MAY BE PLACED ON GROUNFD WITHIN 100 FT OF STREAM OR WETLANDS. 6. PUMPS USE FOR STREAM DAM AND PUMP MUST BE IA A SECONDARY CONTAINMENT; E.G., KIDDIE POOL OR POLY WARP OVER HAY BALES. c.] General Standards Section 5, (e); Wetland road crossing not required to meet the General Standards: For the majority of the parcel the wetland contours, where the road crosses are perpendicular to the road layout and therefore flow downhill towards the streams, hence there is no lateral movement of the surface and subsurface free water that would be impeded by the road cross section. For that portion of the wetland contours which are skewed to the road cross section (stations 3+00 to 5+00 RT.) a cross culvert has been provided in order to provide continuity of the flows. d.] Of particular interest is the PSVP (Potential Significant Vernal Pool) off property located west of the railroad tracks. When Frick Associates was investigating the western parcel, also owned by the applicants (non-contiguous to the subject parcel), for resources they noted (without trespassing) SVP characteristics in a wetland adjacent to on the west side of the railroad tracks. Since we missed the seasonal deadline for identifying the habitat by only 5 days it was indeterminate as to whether this is a Vernal Pool or Significant Vernal Pool. In order to not have the question raised in the future by a subsequent study, the area of the wetland is shown on the plans as a Potential Significant Vernal Pool, and all appropriate associated setbacks for such have been identified. In our conversations with Jay Clements of ACOE (Army Corps of Engineers) and Christine Woodruff, Me DEP, we requested an opinion on whether the ACOE 750 foot buffer setback (which extends well into proposed house lots) and Me DEP 250 foot buffer setback (which extends into the woods), apply across our proposed development since the railroad tracks present a physical barrier to migration of vegetation and habitants, the wetlands are not contiguous across the tracks and that there is no continuity of the water via cross culverts. DEP stated that their 250 foot setback would still be applicable for wetland alterations and structures (part of the Tier 1). The 250 foot setback from the SVP easterly across the railroad tracks falls well within forested areas not slated for disturbance (no tree cutting) with the exception of the narrow trail boardwalk proposed as part of the Tier 1 Wetlands Alteration Permit. Jay s initial response to our proposed interpretation that the 750 foot setback should not pertain as it applies to structures or wetland disturbance was favorable, however, he reserves his judgment until he can review the project submittal in full.

35 Additionally, he requested we copy paste the content of our correspondences to this report. See thread directly below: I think you've captured our conversation accurately Ross. But of course that conversation was had in the absence of any project plans or supporting information about the pool or the wetlands so I still reserve final judgement until I see an application package. Jay Clement Senior Project Manager US Army Corps of Engineers Maine Project Office -----Original Message----- From: Ross A Cudlitz, PE [mailto:ztilduc@maine.rr.com] Sent: Thursday, June 08, :18 AM To: Clement, Jay L CIV USARMY CENAE (US) <Jay.L.Clement@usace.army.mil> Subject: [Non-DoD Source] East Elm Street Yarmouth Jay I would like to recap our non-binding conversation for my clients (Greg and Steve Dugas) regarding the ACOE opinion pertaining to the significance (lack thereof) of the 750 foot terrestrial habitat buffer of the Potential SVP located on the west side of the rail road tracks form our proposed project, see attachment. Per our conversation, you stated that you would be in general agreement with me that it would be highly unlikely and improbable that the inhabitants of the PSVP would cross the railroad bed from west to east considering that there is substantial wetland and upland habitats on the west side of the tracks that are not proposed for development providing that there is no connectivity of the wetlands on both sides of the tracks via any cross culverts (which is the case). Furthermore when this project comes to your office for review of our Tier 1 and stream crossings permit review you would likely support my position and not enforce the jurisdictional 750 foot buffer which extends across the rail road into our proposed developable area. Though this is non-binding my client would like to have our casual conversation in writing in order that as we move forward with the design phase showing portions of developed house lots between the 250 setback (DEP jurisdiction) and the 750 foot setback we have some reasonable belief it will be acceptable. I say Potential SVP because we missed the creatures by only a few days and Chris Coppi has good reason to believe it may be significant regardless based on other data he collected. We do not want to risk getting blind-sided by a challenge a year from now should another party perform an evaluation at a later date. Please correct any misunderstanding I may have or restate it in your own words. Thank you Ross END of thread.

36 Critical Habitats & Other Species Lists The US Department of the Interior Fish & Wildlife Service has identified the Northern Longeared Bat as a threatened species which could be impacted by the clearing of the forest. This project proposes approximately 1/2 acre of clearing associated with the NE edge of Lot 6 and the southern border of Lot 8. (See Site Plan Sheet C1). There is no critical habitat designated for this species. Inland Fish & Game has also been notified per the requirements of the IPaC resource list website. A set of plans and map locations has been provide to them to comment on any other potential resources, migrant animals/birds or other critical habitats. Letters and responses are attached to this report. Traffic Analysis William Bray, PE of Traffic Solutions performed a traffic analysis for this project. In short, he noted 375+ feet site distance to the south on East Elm Street and 320 feet to the north. The removal of a couple small birch trees on Lot 1 is necessary to assure safe visibility, these are shown on the Landscaping Plan. His full report is in the submission package. Soils The USDA Medium Intensity Soils mapping was extracted from the WSS (Web Soil Survey) and used for planning and stormwater modeling: BgB - Belgrade very fine sandy loam 0 to 8% slopes, HSG B BgC2 Belgrade very fine sandy loam 8 to15% slopes, HSG B BuB - Lamoine/Buxton silty loam 3 to 8% slopes, HSG D EmB - Elmwood silty loam 3 to 8% slopes, HSG C HfC2 - Hartland very fine sandy loam 8 to 15% slopes, HSG B MeC - Melrose very fine sandy loam 8 to 15% slopes, HSG C Sn - Scantic silt loam 0 to 3% slopes, HSG D SuC2 - Suffield silt loam 8 to 15% slopes, HSG C Sz - Swanton fine sandy loam HSG C The erosion index ranges from 0.17 (low) to 0.34 (highly erodible). These soils fall in upper the erodibility index of the very fine soils is higher than that of coarser particles. Because the disturbed area is rolling hills, unprotected soils leaving the work area is possible and could be difficult to control without proper adherence to the erosion control plan narrative and details. The erosion control measures presented on the plans and in the narrative are properly tailored to the site conditions to protect the wetlands and resources. In locations where Focal Point treatment systems and filter media infiltration basins are proposed Chris Coppi, CSS, of Albert Frick Associates, mapped the high intensity test pits soils; his log sheets are provided as an attachment to this report.

37 Refer to the High Intensity soils information, and the test pit logs provided showing characteristics and locations. Silt fence, stone check dams, stump grinding berms and the use of erosion control blankets in the finished ditches are adequate in these soils. Stormwater Modeling The site has been modeled in the pre and post conditions using the HydroCAD model version HydroCAD is a TR-20 based model that utilizes TR-55 watershed description input data. For this region of Cumberland County the rain events for the TYPE - III, 24 hour 2, 10 and 25-year storms are 3.15, 4.67 and 5.84 inches respectively, as provided by the State of Maine DEP BMP s most recent high intensity data for Stormwater modeling. Additionally, the 0.95 inch event and the 1-year 2.44 inch event have been modeled for the General Standards of the DEP Stormwater Application. A] Important Note In 2009, the Town of Yarmouth hired Oak Engineers to perform a stormwater study of the watershed contributing to an apparently undersized pipe on North Road. This watershed extended northerly to Concord Circle some 1500 feet north of the East Elm Street property. As a result of that study several culverts in the stream system from Ryder Road (just north of the project) to North Road were upgraded. The Town Engineer has requested that this engineer use his stormwater study output from the Ryder Road pond as direct entry for stream reach that flows out of the Ryder Road pond. In the models this will be represented as POND 5 RYDER ROAD. Based on his study, which I believe to be more conservative than mine, the Pre and Post development modeling for that portion of this project uses direct entry onto our property of 3.46 CFS, CFS, and CFS for the 2, 10, and 25-year events respectively. His work sheets are attached. These inflows do not have any bearing on any of the Focal Point or infiltration treatment systems on site for those systems have isolated sub-watersheds and are based on the appropriate storms for their functions and storage. B] Pre Condition Model A 100 scale plan with field verified LIDAR topography background has been provided in the Pre Condition in order to show all the boundary limits of the parcel and relationship to the off site watersheds considered in the study. Refer to the plans for the sub area labeling, time of concentration flow path selection, flow path segments, soils and topographical information. Time of concentration flow path specific such as; sheet flow, percent grade, distance are shown on the plans. Manning s number and ground cover can be located in the model data input and sub area summary sheets. There are 4 study point at the base (south) of the site. Study Point 1 represents flows that discharge easterly under East Elm Street through an existing culver. Study Point 2 is the southern exit of one of the streams that bisects the site and Study Pont 3 is the next stream to

38 the west that also flows out the southern property line. Study Point 4 is the farthest west and represents the outflow from a wetland complex. The pre-condition watershed is broken down into a total of 17 on and off-site sub areas and the 4 aforementioned study points. All sub areas are a matrix of mixed woods, meadow wetland, perimeter woods, and meadow upland. There is nothing unique about any of them therefore it does not seem necessary to explain each one in detail, it is simply mixed ground cover and soil type emulated in the model. There is no inflow to the site from the Railroad bed. Good woods and dense under brush have been used throughout the model based on TR-55 definitions for input where the ground litter is undisturbed below 0.10 foot. Most of the site has been thinned by logging previously however the ground, litter has not been cleared. Light under brush or woodland is only used for Tc segments where the ground liter has been burned, picked or grazed. C] Post Condition Model In the post-condition onsite areas are broken down into 28; the study points did not change from the pre-condition. A 100 scale plan showing overall study areas is provided as is a more detailed 50 scale plan of the primary site. Refer to the plans for the subarea labeling, Tc s flow path selection, flow path segments, soils and topographical information. Modeling specifics such as: slopes, cover type, lengths of paths, etc can be found in the stormwater model data input sheets in the report. Aside from minimal tree clearing on Lots 6 and 8 (~1/2 acre total) there is no further clearing proposed. The impervious area for each house and associated driveway is taken off the final site plan. The ROW is fully disturbed and the respective impervious and grassed areas accounted for. The specific areas of interest are the individual subcatchments that feed the six Focal Point bio-filter treatment systems located in the roadside ditches. The ditches are contoured so as to provide a permanent grassed earthen check dam that overflows and cascades to the next ditch in the greater storms. There are two detailed plan sheets in the plan set. The Focal Points are pass-through filters, whereas each system daylights downhill and the outflow are accounted for in the models. There are three under drained grass lined filter media basins. The two under drained infiltration basins right and left of station 9+50 hold up to the 100-year event without overboard discharge. The basin at the Elm Street entrance has a horizontal overflow orifice set at the 25-year event elevation which discharges into the existing cross culvert; additionally, the basin can hold the 100-year event without threatening the subdivision road or East Elm Street.

39 Outflow from the Focal Points and basins are accounted for in the aggregate summation of the reaches. The following chart summarizes the overall model results as measured at the four points of study (CFS rate of discharge). Stormwater Model Summary Results in CFS (Cubic Feet per Second = Rate) at Study Points Study Points are represented by reaches without any descriptions. 2 Year Event 10 Year Event 25 Year Event Study Point Pre Post Change Pre Post Change Pre Post Change SP neg neg neg SP SP neg neg neg SP Evaluation of Stormwater Model Results Given that the offsite parameters remained constant, the end result of the stormwater study is that due to the road network bisecting the watersheds, the vast size of the study area and expansive wetlands; most events show a decrease at the property line Study Points or an insignificant increase such as in the 2-year event. The only other increases greater than 1 CFS is for the 10-year and 25-year event at SP2 (larger stream channel), these increases are 2 and 2.3 percent respectively. At these flow rates the water depth is well outside of the ~4 SF cut channel and would result in no impacts to the stream or down gradient structures. All rates shown are well within the parameters and margins of plus or minus for modeling and have been controlled to the greatest extent practicable. Runoff Water Quality and Quantity Considerations Quantity: Based on the stormwater models, there are no anticipated impacts on the abutter s properties. All flows stay within the existing stream course. All infiltration basins hold and infiltrate the entire 25 year storm event and present no flooding (over topping) in the 100 year event. All Focal Point Modular Bio-Retention Cells hold and treat the 0.95 inch and 1 year events. Quality: The runoff water quality has been addressed by the design and planned installation of multiple dry swales and designated buffer areas for treatment of the lower frequency runoff as required by the Me DEP General and Basic Standards.

40 Specific design parameters of each dry swale may be found below in the report and specific design details may be found in the plan set. A) Water Quality Calculations per the current DEP Chapter 500 Standards as follows: The linear portion (road and ROW, excluding the satellite parking area of Lot 12) of the project is designed to meet the General Standards, Section 5 (c), whereas the 75% of the impervious area is treated and 50% of the developed area is treated. This is accomplished by the installation of six individual Focal Point Bio-treatment cells situated in the grass lined roadside ditches. These low maintenance high-flow through devices treat the small volumes of the 0.95 inch and 1 year events as required. There are three under drained filter media basins meeting the same criteria. The Site Plan and Water Quality Plan show the locations and contributing subareas for each system. The Water Quality Treatment Spread Sheet breaks down the treatment areas by station and square foot of contribution. The non-linear portion of the project consists of the parking area on Lot 12 which intended to serve as access to the Open Space and other conservation lands located on the west side of the railroad tracks. The Town of Yarmouth is in negotiations to eventually purchase the Open Space Lot 12 and the Royal River Conservation Commission is in negotiations to purchase a separate parcel on the west side of the tracks. Both these acquisitions are a major part of the Planning Boards consideration for approval of the open space subdivision. The parking lot is isolated from the house lot developed area and will sheet flow to an existing upland meadow that will be dedicated as an undisturbed meadow buffer per Chap 500 Appendix F, Section 3 (b), Table 6 (Soil Group B, Meadow Buffer Berm Length 150 feet). The area is located on the Open Space Lot 12, will be unmaintained by the Town and will be delineated by two signs at opposite ends of the up-gradient edge. The sign language is on the detail sheet 1. Water Quality Treatment Spread Sheets to follow this page: Conclusion: The project meets the Chap 500 General Standards Section C 4, 5 (c), whereas the treated percentages for the linear portions of the project are greater than 70% and greater than 50% of the impervious and developed areas respectively. Additionally, treatment of the non-linear impervious portion of the project is 100% (Open Space Lot 12 parking). Water Quality Treatment Worksheets follow this page:

41

42

43 Chapter 500 Standards The project is considered a linear project as outlined in Chapter 500 stormwater rules. The project is not within an urban impaired stream or a severely blooming lake. As a result, the Basic Standards, and General Standards apply to this project. Basic Standards 1. Erosion and sedimentation control plan See Appendix A of Chapter 500 Rules 2. Inspection and Maintenance Plan See Appendix A and B of Chapter 500 Rules 3. Housekeeping See Appendix C of the Chapter 500 Rules General Standards 1. Narrative 2. Drainage Plans 3. Calculations 4. Details, designs, and specifications for under drained filters, buffers, systems. Surface water on or abutting the site: Stormwater from the site flows into on-site wetlands and southerly through an existing stream system. All culverts maintained by the town on public roads. Alterations to Land Cover: Residential Lots will be developed by individuals. The Town of Yarmouth may require individual lots to install runoff water quality measures such as rain gardens. Downstream ponds and Lakes: Stormwater from the site flows into the wetland and connects to an unnamed stream. The unnamed stream flows to Pratts Brook then to Cousins River, and then out to Casco Bay. Historic Flooding: Portions of the lower wetland areas may be subject to periodic flooding. Alterations to natural drainage ways: Open bottom three sided concrete box culverts are being used for the two on-site stream crossings, therefore, natural drainage ways will not be altered as a result of the proposed development. Proposed BMP s: Stabilized construction entrance is required; silt fence is shown at the bottom of all slopes and in intermediate locations, stone check dams in temporary ditches, and erosion control blanket in all ditches and on all slopes. Other BMP s proposed for this project are described below. There are no fill or cut slopes requiring rip rap. Under Drained Filter Media Treatment Ponds: There are three under drained grass lined filter media basins. The two under drained infiltration basins right and left of station 9+50 hold up to the 100-year event without overboard discharge.

44 The basin at the Elm Street entrance has a horizontal overflow orifice set at the 25-year event elevation which discharges into the existing cross culvert; additionally, the basin can hold the 100-year event without threatening the subdivision road or East Elm Street. Therefore all three basins meet the requirements of 1 times the contributing impervious area and 0.4 times the contributing disturbed area. Soil Test pits have been provided for the underdrain filter and Focal Point locations. Due to high seasonal water tables the filter media basins (Ponds 1, 3, 4) have a perimeter under drain. The Focal Points have a 30 mil PVC membrane wrapped around them up to the SHWT or higher. See detail sheets for specifics. Focal Point Bio-Filtration System Treatment Cells: A unique stormwater model for the 0.95 inch and 1-year event is presented for the Focal Points which demonstrates impoundment. The ditches are contoured so as to provide a permanent check dam that overflows and cascades to the next ditch in the greater storms (see detail sheets). Cuts sheets and manufacturer information for the Focal Point is attached at the end of this report. There are two detailed plan sheets in the plan set. The Focal Points are pass-through filters, whereas each system daylights downhill and the outflow are accounted for in the models. All six systems meet the requirements of 1 times the contributing impervious area and 0.4 times the contributing disturbed area. The Focal Point Chapter 500 Design Worksheets are attached to this report. Wooded Buffers: There are no wooded buffers proposed on the project. Non-Wooded Buffers: There is dedicated meadow buffer proposed for the treatment of the runoff from the parking lot on the Open Space Lot 12. Maintenance Plan for Ponds & Best Management Practices Site Inspection & Maintenance During Construction: Weekly inspections, as well as routine inspections following rainfalls, shall be conducted by the General Contractor of all temporary and permanent erosion control devices until final acceptance of the project (85% grass catch). Necessary repairs shall be made to correct undermining or deterioration. Final acceptance shall include a site inspection to verify the stability of all disturbed areas and slopes. Until final inspection, all erosion and sedimentation control measures shall immediately be cleaned, and repaired by the General Contractor as required. Disposal of all temporary erosion control devices shall be the responsibility of the General Contractor. It is recommended that the Owner hire the services of the design engineer, or other qualified individual, to provide compliance inspections (during active construction) relative to implementation of the Stormwater and Erosion Control Plans. Such inspections should be limited to once a week or as necessary and be reportable to the Owner, Town and ME DEP.

45 Maintenance Agreement: Short-term sedimentation maintenance shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to clean out all swales, structures and ponds prior to turning project over to the Owners. After project turnover, the Owner shall be the responsible party for inspecting and maintaining the proper function of all stormwater conveyance practices and measures. The Owner may assign an environmental manager to carry out specific tasks identified below or the Town may take on aspects as a public infrastructure. Under Drain Filter Ponds Clearing Inlets and Outlets of Ponds (where applicable): The inlets of a pond/basin shall be checked periodically to ensure that inflow is not blocked by debris. Any surfaces, ditches and pipes (culverts) leading to or connecting ponds shall be checked for debris that may obstruct piped or sheet flow. Inspections shall be conducted monthly during wet weather conditions from March to November. Pond/Basin Inspections: Ponds shall be inspected on an annual basis for erosion, destabilization of side slopes, embankment settling, and other signs of structural failure, such as; impoundment lasting greater than 48 hours due to surfaces clogging from fines. Brief inspections shall be conducted following major storms. Corrective action shall be taken immediately upon identification of problem area. Records shall be kept of all maintenance operations at jobsite to help plan future work and identify problem areas. Drainage Area Inspections: The owners environmental manager shall inspect the basin s drainage area semi-annually for eroding soil and other sediment sources. Repair eroding areas using appropriate erosion control BMP s immediately. Control sediment sources, such as stockpiles of winter sand, by removing them from the basin s drainage area or surrounding them with sediment control BMP s. Mowing: A basin with a turf lining shall have its side-slopes and top of berm mowed at least twice a year to prevent woody growth. Clippings shall be removed to minimize the amount of organic material accumulating in the basin. Dedicated Vegetated Stormwater Buffers: A meadow buffer intended for non-disturbance may be mowed at not more than twice a year to prevent woody growth. Mower height is limited to 3 inches or higher. Clippings need not be removed in this buffer. Sediment Removal: Remove accumulated debris and sediments from the sediment basins, inlet plunge pools of pipes, and pre-treatment BMP s at least annually. Snow Storage: The infiltration basins ponds are not to be used for snow storage. Snow storage shall be sited so that snowmelt (full of road sands) flows away from such structures before reaching the infiltration basin.

46 Pedestrian Access: Infiltration basins are not intended for passive recreational use such as playing ball (ruts and compacts surface) or damming structure in any way to promote impoundment for ice skating. Vehicle Access: Prohibit vehicle access to all basins, except that authorized for maintenance. Access to the basins should be from a stable area (not via the emergency spillway). Equipment can enter, reach, and work the ponds from the road. Ditches/Swales: Open swales and ditches need to be inspected on a monthly basis or after a major rainfall event to assure that debris or sediments do not reduce the effectiveness of the system. Debris needs to be removed at that time. Any sign of erosion or blockage shall be immediately repaired to assure a vigorous growth to vegetation for the stability of the structure and proper functioning. Vegetated Ditches: Vegetation should be mowed at least monthly during the growing season to a height of not less than 3 inches. Larger brush or trees must not be allowed to become established in the channel. Unless finely mulched, clippings should be removed to minimize the amount of organic material accumulating in the swales. Any areas where the vegetation fails will be subject to erosion and should be repaired and revegetated. Stone Lined Channels (where applicable): Where stone is displaced from constructed riprap areas it should be replaced and chinked to assure stability. With time, riprap may need to be added. Vegetation growing through riprap should be removed on a yearly schedule. Culverts: If sediment in culverts or piped drainage systems exceeds 20% of the diameter of the pipe, it should be removed. This may be accomplished by mechanical means or hydraulic flushing. Care should be taken to prevent the release of the sediments into the downstream receiving areas. All pipes should be inspected on an annual basis. Level Spreaders & Ditch Turnout Sediment Traps (where applicable): Inspect and remove debris. Inspect for bypass or undermining. Repair as needed, any channelization as it is occurring and remove sediment build-up to assure potential storage volume and sheet flow characteristics of the discharge lip. Perform inspection on a semi-annual basis at a minimum. All work should be performed from the up gradient side, do not disturb the down gradient receiving area or discharge edge.

47 Erosion and Sedimentation Control If properly adhered to, the E & S plan as submitted is adequate and sufficient for this level of activity. A stabilized construction entrance is shown on the plans. The soils should result in no problems during construction providing the measures recommended are installed. An individual house erosion detail is included on the plans. Silt fence, stone check dams and erosion control blanket locations have been shown on the plan and profile sheets. The erosion control narrative is located directly on the plans to assure it is in the Contractors hands daily. Though every effort has been made to identify BMPs that will help contain migrant soils, it is the contractor s primary responsibility to protect the waters of the State of Maine form undue turbidity and sediment load by whatever means are necessary above and beyond those identified on the plans. The best methods known to control such incidences are limiting exposed surfaces, proper timing with seasonal weather, and vigorous and frequent use of temporary mulch. Conclusion Every effort has been made to keep post development flows and impacts to the resources at an absolute minimum or less through the use of land grading, reductions in allowable disturbed area, erosion control practices and land use. We believe this project will not have any adverse impacts on abutters, down gradient systems or adjacent resources. Sincerely, Ross A. Cudlitz Ross A. Cudlitz, PE EA&D, Inc. Me PE #5865 CPESC, CESSWI CPSWQ, CPMSM October 12, 2017, 2017 Ross A. Cudlitz, PE Engineering Assistance & Design (EA&D), Inc. 10 North Road Phone/Fax: Yarmouth, Maine Cell / Voice Mail:

48 Long-Term Inspection & Maintenance Plan Where Applicable Spring Fall or Yearly After a Major Storm Every 2 to 5 Years Vegetated Areas Inspect all slopes and embankments X X Replant bare areas or areas with sparse growth X X Armor areas with rill erosion with an appropriate lining or divert the erosive flows to on-site areas able to withstand concentrated X X flows. Stormwater Channels. Inspect ditches, swales and other open stormwater channels X X X Remove any obstructions and accumulated sediments or debris X X Control vegetated growth and woody vegetation Repair any erosion of the ditch lining Mow vegetated ditches Remove woody vegetation growing through riprap Repair any slumping side slopes Replace riprap where underlying filter fabric or under drain gravel X is showing or where stones have dislodged Culverts... Remove accumulated sediments and debris at the inlet, at the X X X outlet, and within the conduit Repair any erosion damage at the culvert's inlet and outlet X X X Catch Basin Systems Remove and legally dispose of accumulated sediments and debris from the bottom of the basin, inlet grates, inflow channels X X to the basin, and pipes between basins. Remove floating debris and floating oils (using oil absorptive X X pads) from any trap designed for such Roadways and Parking Surfaces..., Clear accumulated winter sand in parking lots and along roadways Sweep pavement to remove sediment Grade road shoulders and remove excess sand either manually or by a front-end loader Grade gravel roads and gravel shoulders Clean-out the sediment within water bars or open-top culverts Ensure that stormwater is not impeded by accumulations of material or false ditches in the shoulder X X X X X X X X X X X

49 Table 2 Long-Term Inspection & Maintenance Plan Where Applicable Spring Fall or Yearly After a Major Storm Every 2 to 5 Years Buffers Inspect treatment buffers for evidence of erosion, concentrated X flow, or encroachment by development Manage the buffer's vegetation with the requirements in any X deed restrictions Mow vegetation in non-wooded buffers no shorter than six inches X and less than three times per year Repair any sign of erosion within a buffer X Inspect and repair down-slope of all spreaders and turn-outs for X erosion Install more level spreaders, or ditch turn-outs if needed for a X better distribution of flow Clean-out any accumulation of sediment within the spreader X bars or turnout pools Stormwater Detention and Retention Facilities Inspect the embankments for settlement, slope erosion, internal piping, and downstream swamping. A professional engineer X X must review these immediately. Mow the embankment to control woody vegetation X Inspect the outlet control structure for broken seals, obstructed X X orifices, and plugged trash racks Remove and dispose of sediments and debris within the control X structure Repair any damage to trash racks or debris guards X Mow vegetated spillways to control woody vegetation and X replace any dislodged stone in riprap spillways Remove and dispose of accumulated sediments within the impoundment and forebay and/or grass filter strips Runoff Infiltration Facilities Inspect and clean-out any pre-treatment measures that collect X X sediment and hydrocarbons entering an infiltration measure Provide for the removal and disposal of accumulated sediments within the infiltration area Renew the infiltration measure if it fails to drain within 72 hours after a rainfall of one-half inch or more Till and replant the soil of vegetated infiltration basins Reconstruct rock-lined basins or stone-filled trenches by removing the stones, replacing new underlying filter fabric, and tilling or removing the underlying soil Proprietary Treatment Devices Contract with a third-party for the removal of accumulated sediments, oils, and debris within the device and replacement of any media. The frequency of maintenance is established by the unit s storage capacity, the pollutant load and the manufacturer s recommendations. X X X X X

50 Sample Log Sheet East Elm Street Subdivision, Yarmouth, ME BMP's Date Inspected Repair Needed Y or N Date Repaired Example 09/01/08 y 09/15/08 1. Vegetated Areas 2. Stormwater Channels 3. Culverts 4. Catch Basin Systems 5. Roadways and Parking Surfaces 6. Buffers 7. Stormwater Detention and Retention Facilities 8. Runoff Infiltration Facilities 9. Proprietary Treatment Devices. Detailed Repair Notes: BMP Type Date. Description of Repairs Made..

51 APPENDIX A: DEED PAGE ONE ONLY

52 APPENDIX B: CMP EASEMENT DEED

53 APPENDIX B: CMP EASEMENT DEED

54 APPENDIX C: Option Agreement

55 APPENDIX C: Option Agreement

56 APPENDIX C: Option Agreement

57 APPENDIX C: Option Agreement

58 APPENDIX C: Option Agreement

59 APPENDIX C: Option Agreement

60 APPENDIX C: Option Agreement

61 APPENDIX C: Option Agreement

62 APPENDIX C: Option Agreement

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92 Yarmouth s Riverfront Woods Preserve, Dugas parcel: LMF Application (a) Summary Project Description A Unique Opportunity: In Yarmouth the Royal River s undeveloped shoreline and habitat is rapidly disappearing as our community grows. The Royal River s shoreline from East Elm street upriver to North Yarmouth still remains mostly undeveloped and naturally supports beavers, otters, deer, and a variety of bird species and distinct flora. This environment creates a surprisingly remote experience for paddling in the summer and skating, snowshoeing and skiing in the winter. The Town of Yarmouth and the Royal River Conservation Trust are working in close partnership to raise the necessary funds to purchase 24 acres of riverfront land that is owned by Steve and Greg Dugas, Yarmouth residents. The Dugas riverfront property abuts the 22 acre Town-owned Hilda Barker Preserve and the 35 acre Town-owned Sligo Road Preserve directly across the Royal River. The connection of these preserves will create a corridor for trails and will protect one half mile of shoreline. This new Riverfront Woods Preserve creates a lush sanctuary that is also accessible from growing neighborhoods. These lands are part of a nearly 1,000 acre multi-town unfragmented habitat. Maps A and B show the location and context of the project. A Community Priority : According to the Town s Parks and Lands Committee, the Dugas riverfront property rates highly according to the Town s adopted open space vision, and fits squarely with the Town s land acquisition priorities. The property aligns fully with the Royal River Conservation Trust s vision and goals. In the spring of 2017, both the Yarmouth Town Council and the Royal River Conservation Trust s board unanimously voted to work together to conserve the property. Page 6 of 21