Buckfield planning board reverses itself on setback decision

BUCKFIELD — In a stunning reversal, the Buckfield planning board — after only two months ago declining to take action — has now decided that it will offer voters an amendment to town building codes after all.

That amendment will address specific wording in the town’s Building Permit, Lot Size and Setback Requirements Ordinance.  The proposed changes come as a result of issues which arose in October, when a mini hornet’s nest was touched off over three tiny words: “in no case.”

Because of these words — which had only just been inserted into the ordinance at the annual town meeting in June 2003 — the appeals board was unable to grant a variance to the Zadoc Long Free Public Library.

The library had been hoping to expand the rear of the building, constructing a 12-foot by 12-foot addition to improve handicapped accessibility.  Unfortunately, the proposed addition would have come within 10 and a half feet of a property line, and according to the ordinance, “in no case” was the appeals board allowed to let any structure, or expansion, encroach within 15-feet.

“To me, it’s clear that we don’t have the jurisdiction,” appeals board member Richard Clark said at the time.

Chairman Fred Greenwood was prone to even stronger words.

“To me, that shouldn’t be there in the first place,” he had said.  “I think we were doing a good job before it was there.  I think it’s just [that] somebody wants to run things, and they put that in there to stop us from doing what we do.  They actually put the appeals board out of business, is what they did.” 

Immediately upon refusing the library’s request for a variance, the appeals board drafted a letter to the planning board, requesting that it reassess wording of the ordinance.  Unfortunately, they were met with stiff opposition.

“I would be opposed to getting rid of the ‘in no case may the Board of Appeals allow,’” planning board member Wes Ackley had said.  “We put that in specifically for the reason that things would come back to the planning board for discussion and passage.”

That refusal to even consider amending the ordinance did not seem to sit well with appeals board members, who had chosen to attend a planning board meeting at which their letter was to be addressed.

“I’m confused,” challenged Clark.  “Is the appeals board the appeals board, or is the planning board the appeals board?”

And there matters sat.  With the planning board declining to recommend a change, it seemed that nothing short of a petition drive could bring the matter before voters.

However, planning board chairman Judy Berg felt that the issue should not be allowed to die quite so easily. 

“All we really did was respond in a meeting without really taking a look at it [the ordinance,]” she said.  “And I realized that people really wanted us to take a closer look.”

So, at the November meeting of the planning board, Berg set up a subcommittee consisting of board members Margot Siekman and Roberta Hill.  This subcommittee was charged with making a detailed examination of all relevant ordinances in question, and reporting back to the board with a recommendation.

That response came at the board’s regular December meeting.

“I’m inclined to say that the appeals board is there to do a job and maybe we should let them do that job,” advised Siekman, after having completed her work.

“It is not unique to Buckfield to place limits on its appeals board,” said planning board member Gerald Samson.

Siekman agreed, and enumerated her own reservations about opening up the possibility for additional variance requests.  Her primary concern was the potential for a loss of property rights for the neighbors of anyone granted such a variance.

“By virtue of the other person having taken more than his share, then this other person is really limited in what they can do,” she said.

“I’m not totally comfortable with it [an ordinance change,]” concluded Siekman, “but I’m not comfortable with it the way it stands now. I don’t see what else we can do.”

A good part of Ackley’s resistance, as a former fire chief for the town, had arisen out of a concern for fire safety.  However, Berg, having done some additional research of her own, was able to counter by noting that the National Fire Protection Agency only recommends a 10-foot setback between buildings.

Other forces also were at work, such that Ackley soon found himself championing a minority viewpoint. 

Recently, there has been a fair amount of turnover on Buckfield’s planning board, with three new members —  Hill, Samson, and Richard Piper — having been appointed in recent months.  This has significantly altered both the make-up and the mood of the seven-member board from what it was in 2003 — at which time Ackley had been chair — when the “in no case” clause was introduced.

Planning Board members have also recently begun work on the town’s new comprehensive plan, and there has been near universal agreement that, perhaps, it would be a good idea to have varying setback requirements in different parts of town anyway, most specifically with shorter setbacks in the downtown village area.

Perhaps sensing that the tide was turning against him, Ackley noted that he would be willing to “give up the sanctity” of the 15-foot property line setback.  However, he declared that his concerns for fire safety were such that he still felt compelled to argue for the 30-foot setback between structures.

Ackley then introduced a compromise that, rather than completely shutting out the ability of the appeals board to act, would require that any variance “will not create a safety or fire hazard as determined by the Buckfield fire chief.”

“Depending on [the final wording of] it, I’m not sure that the fire chief will have veto power, versus input,” said Town Manager Glen Holmes.  “The appeals board is going to make their decision by gathering all the facts.  This is going to be one of those things where they will be required to at least consult with the fire chief as to what the situation might be.”

Regarding whatever increase this proposed change may create in his own workload, Buckfield’s current fire chief, Steve Bly, said in a separate interview, that he is happy to do anything that will “make things better and safer” for local residents.

In addition to easing restrictions on the appeals board, the planning board also will propose two additional amendments to the town’s building ordinance.   These changes will specify that a well is not to be considered a “structure” and will limit each building lot (20,000 square feet) to only one dwelling per parcel, with the exception of apartment buildings.

The text of the proposed amendments have now been sent to both the appeals board and the selectmen.  Once both bodies have had an opportunity to comment on the changes, the planning board will schedule a pubic hearing.

Berg does not expect any hearing date to be set “before February.”

Holmes stated that he does not foresee scheduling a special town meeting to vote on the changes.  Unless the library resubmits its building permit application, or some other issue arises which presents an immediate need, the changes will simply be included as a warrant at the annual town meeting in June, 2005.

Berg was able to sum up the complexities which have plagued the planning board over the last several months.

“It is hard to write an ordinance that applies across the board, because you have so many permutations,” she concluded.

Buckfield launches official website

BUCKFIELD — When Buckfield Town Manager Glen Holmes first took office on October 1, he reported that one of his first goals would be to bring that rural municipality into the digital age.  Holmes announced recently that this self-imposed mandate has been met, with the launch of the town’s first official website.

To visit Buckfield’s new home on the world wide web, simply point your computer’s web browser to www.townofbuckfield.com

Previously, Buckfield did have a page on the Internet, but that was a seldom used “personal web page” set up on web space made available by the town’s internet service provider, Oxford Networks.  It only contained the most spartan information and was, reportedly, seldom updated.

For anyone who may still have that page bookmarked, Holmes does plan to add a redirection link to the new official site.

The new website is hosted by GovOffice (www.govoffice.com), a division of Avenet, LLC.  Avenet is headquartered in St. Paul, Minnesota and maintains a customer service center in Mayville, North Dakota.

“It’s an organization that MMA (the Maine Municipal Authority) found that does towns,” said Holmes.  “That’s their prime directive, to do [web hosting for] towns [and] municipal governments.”

According to an Internet consulting firm, The McKenna Group, “Avenet has developed one of the most advanced online web page creation technologies available today.”

Holmes stated that he is quite happy with the pricing stucture quoted by GovOffice.  For $500 “up front” the town received a complete suite of templates that it can customize to meet Buckfield’s own unique needs.  Holmes described the recurring monthly hosting fees as “cheap for the year.”

“Right now, [the website has] got the basic government necessities that should be there,” Holmes said, although he stressed that he is adding more content every day.

Holmes plans to have separate sections for each town department and committee.  Minutes from all meetings, as well as advance meeting agendas, will be posted as soon as they become available.

In order to facilitate the best and most rapid communication between the town’s various boards and its citizens, Holmes plans to post minutes as soon after a meeting is held as possible, even before they are formally adopted at a boards subsequent meeting.

“Probably, I will.  But it’s marked.  Any minutes that are up prior to the next meeting are in draft form,” he stressed.

Also posted on the site will be information on all of the town’s elected and appointed positions, including pictures and contact information, as well as the date each seat expires.  Although all town boards are currently fully staffed, any new vacancies will be posted “immediately.”

The website also has a form that visitors can fill out in order to be placed on the town’s informational e-mailing list.  Holmes, who touts himself as a proponent of keeping “strong open lines of communication,” believes that this e-mail list will help citizens to “stay in the loop.”

Holmes also hopes to eventually add broadband content, such as streaming video of municipal meetings.  This feature, he believes, will benefit those in the town who do not have cable television, and so cannot watch broadcasts on the town’s public access channel.

“Why ‘dot com’, instead of ‘dot net’, or ‘dot org’,” Holmes was asked by Judy Berg.  “We’re not [a] commercial [website.]”

“We could have gone out and got a ‘dot gov’ site,” Holmes answered, “the problem is that it [the domain name] would have been tremendously long.

“’Dot com’ is still the most commonly recognized [internet domain extension] in the world,” he continued.  “If you can be a ‘dot com’, you are going to get a lot more ‘hits’ that a ‘dot org’, a ‘dot net’, or anything.”

Holmes further noted that the GovOffice package comes with “some pretty good statistical tracking.”  He is hopeful that this information will help him to better manage the site to meet citizen needs as time progresses.

Holmes stressed that anyone with ideas for additional items that could be placed on the site should feel free to contact him, either at the town office or by using the website’s “feedback form.”

“If anyone has anything that they want to get out there, we would definitely like to have that,” he said.  “If there is someone who would like to do articles, or anything that has to do with the town, we would be happy to use it.”

Holmes stated that he is especially interested in posting historical and tourism information.

Holmes does hope that local residents will find the site useful, and make regular visits to it.  He is looking forward to the public’s reaction to the site, and wants to work with them to make the site the best that it can possibly be.  After all, he said, he is an adamant believer in the website’s motto: “Town of Buckfield — where good people live.”

Buckfield Fire tanker expected back in service soon

BUCKFIELD — For nearly one month, members of the Buckfield Volunteer Fire Department have gone about their duties short one critical piece of apparatus.  Now, Fire Chief Steve Bly reports that the department’s tanker “should be back in service by the end of next week.”

This is not the first time that the town’s tanker — a 1982 GMC truck rebuilt to carry an 1,800 gallon tank — has been out for repairs.

Not long ago, the tanker had also been out of service while a local garage, which Bly declined to name, put in a new motor.  That motor, a rebuilt model, “blew” soon after the tanker was put back on the road.

“We didn’t even have 50 miles on it,” said Bly, clearly exasperated.

However, Bly wished to make clear that, in his professional opinion, the lack of a tanker over the preceding month has presented no additional danger to local residents.

Buckfield Fire still has three engines that can respond.  These pumpers bring with them a total of 2,400 gallons of water and foam. 

“We strive to get water flowing to the attack lines within a minute of arriving on scene,” said Bly.

Bly was also quick to note how the addition of Buckfield’s brand-new apparatus, which arrived this past summer, helps to alleviate concerns he might have had, should the tanker have “gone down” before its delivery.

Prior to the purchase of the new pumper, now designated as Engine One, Buckfield’s fleet consisted of the 1,800 gallon tanker, plus two pumpers that could each transport 650 and 750 gallons of water respectively.  Engine One boasts a water capacity of 1,000 gallons.  

“So [now] we’re really only 800 gallons short,” he said.

Also of note is the fact that Buckfield Fire enjoys mutual aid agreements with fire departments from the towns of Hebron, Sumner, Turner, Minot, and Paris.

“And Minot has a new station on Death Valley Road,” said Bly, “so they’re just down the road now.”

Bly points out that the agreements with Hebron, Sumner and Turner are what is known as “automatic mutual aid.”  This means that the Oxford County Radio Control and Communications center dispatches, or “tones out,” those departments simultaneously with its alarm to Buckfield.

“That cuts down on being short of water too,” said Bly. 

The Chief noted that with the automatic aid, other departments can often arrive on the incident scene, depending on the area of town they are being called to, within only five to 10 minutes of the Buckfield engines.

The availability of a hydrant system within the confines of the Buckfield Village Corporation also reduces the water shortage from what it might be in some other small rural communities of the area.

Bly also pointed with pride to that fact that eight members of his department are currently taking a Pump Operators Certification class provided by Maine State Fire Training and Education.

This 24-hour class, held over consecutive weekends, concludes Sunday, December 19.  Once finished, the certification will more than double the number of trained pump operators on Buckfield’s roster.

According to Bly, this increased level of training should also help to offset any future deficiency in available equipment.

“They’ll be able to get water faster, draft faster, supply their trucks and hook up to the hydrant system quicker,” he said, meaning that firefighters will be able to do more to battle a blaze, providing a higher level of service even when faced with fewer resources.

Bly did say that his department still intends to apply for a brand new tanker in this year’s round of Homeland Security grants for the fire service.  This would allow the department to completely decommission the 22-year old “homemade” tanker now on the blocks.  

Such grants are often, but not always, tied to the overall age of a department’s fleet.  Based on the success of other area towns, such as Greene and Livermore, in winning grants for apparatus, despite having recently purchased other new trucks, Bly is hopeful of meeting with success.

As with all volunteer fire departments in Oxford County, as well as across the state, Buckfield can always use more members.

Chief Bly invites anyone interested in joining Buckfield Fire to attend one of the departments’ monthly equipment check and business meetings, held the last Monday evening of each month at the Buckfield Fire Station.  Prospective members may also contact him through the town’s new website, www.townofbuckfield.com, or by calling 336-2941.

Progress on Buckfield comprehensive plan not fast enough for some

BUCKFIELD — Although Buckfield’s planning board has dedicated itself to updating that town’s comprehensive plan — originally written in 1985 — this work is not coming soon enough, or fast enough, for some people.

At a recent meeting of the town fathers, during that portion of the agenda dedicated to ‘other business,’ Selectman Oscar Gammon made his feelings known.

“We’ve been approximately 11 years getting a comprehensive plan made here,” he said. 

The “11 years” reference was to a 1993 update that had been shelved after meeting with voter disapproval at a public hearing.

“I feel that if we can’t have something for town meeting [in June, 2005] to put before the voters, then we ought to spend $7,000 and have AVCOG [the Androscoggin Valley Council of Governments] make us one,” declared Gammon.

Selectmen noted that, as long as the town does not have a current comprehensive plan, it would remain “significantly limited” in both the number and type of grants it could apply for.  The most expedient course of action, they said, would be to “dust off” that proposed 1993 update and resubmit it to voters.

“Would that not be easier than starting from scratch?” asked Chairman Joanne Bly.

“If you look at 11 years ago, and you look at today, is it the same direction, or the same place, that we want to go?” answered Town Manager Glen Holmes.  “There are people on the planning board who feel that it needs to be reworked.”

However, this logic was not sufficient for Gammon’s tastes.

“There’s a lot of changes been made in this town in 11 years,” he declared, “and I don’t believe that you are going to get the same feedback [to a comprehensive plan as in 1993.]

“Oh, You’re always going to get [some of] that feedback,” said Gammon.  “There are a certain amount of people in every town that don’t want any change, and they’ll vote against any change anyway.

“But the town has got to move into the future.  We can’t stay in the background forever. “

“I’d like to add one big important thing,” said planning board member Richard Piper, who occasionally attends selectmen’s meetings.  “I think people need to look at this again.  It’s not zoning.  It’s simply a guideline to go by.”

“The problem is,” agreed Gammon, “there is a good percentage of the people who think that, if you have a comprehensive plan, that it’s a kind of zoning.  And that’s not true.”

At the behest of selectmen, Holmes drafted a letter to the planning board requesting their detailed timetable for rewriting the town’s comprehensive plan.

“There’s no way we can make the [June] town meeting,” said Planning Board Chairman Judy Berg, upon submitting the desired information.  “We have to go to public hearing and, by law, people have to have a draft in hand for so long before the hearing.”

Berg also made note of the planning board’s strategy for garnering voter approval in 2005 that had been denied in 1993.

“What happened in ‘93 is that the planning committee labored for two years, and then had a finished plan written,” she said.  “They brought it to a public hearing and people didn’t like it.  So what we would like to do is have a sort of hearing first, or an open information and comment period.”

These “visioning meetings,” as they have also been called, are scheduled to take place in January.  In hopes of maximizing citizen turnout, two separate meetings will be held.  One meeting will occur on a weekday evening — 7:00 to 10:00 p.m. on Thursday, January 13 — while the other will take place on a weekend day — from 9:00 a.m. until noon on Saturday, January 15.

Both meetings will be held in the cafeteria of the Buckfield Junior/ Senior High School on Route 140.

Prior to these meetings, statistical information will be gathered and collated so that charts, graphs, maps, and even a power point demonstration, can be made available for attendees.

From among those who attend and provide their input, planners hope to solicit at least two to three volunteers willing to work on each of the major portions in any comprehensive plan, as recommended by the Maine Municipal Authority.  These sections include:  affordable housing; capitol investment planning; economic development; hazard mitigation; historic and archeological resources; land use planning; natural resources; outdoor recreation; production agriculture; public services and facilities; rare, endangered and significant natural features; regional coordination; scenic resources; transportation and roadway systems.

Berg advised selectmen that, with the volume of work that is required, the best that can be hoped for at the annual town meeting in June is a first draft for review purposes.

“We’ll work as expeditiously as we can, but we are not going to promise something on which we may not be able to deliver,” she said, resolutely.

“Having an outside consultant help us is not going to make a difference,” Berg noted, in reference to Gammon’s thought of farming out the work to AVCOG.  “What we would like to do is have a consultant look it over and make sure that we have covered all the bases.”

According to the timeline prepared by the planning board, a final draft of the comprehensive plan should be completed by September.  A public hearing would then be scheduled for that same month.  If, based on feedback, any revisions are required, a second public hearing could then take place in October.

It was expected that a special town meeting for final acceptance of the plan would be held, at the soonest, sometime in November 2005.

Berg stated that, for all of this work, the planning board is only anticipating expenditures of between $3,000 and $5,000.  A warrant for some of that amount may need to be included in the annual town meeting. 

However, Berg did believe that no additional funds would be required before that time, despite the requisite costs involved in the preliminary work.  She noted that planning board secretary Margot Siekman routinely declines all enumeration for her work.  Likewise, planning board members have unanimously voted to refuse the $10 per meeting stipend approved for them at the 2004 town meeting.  This money will instead be applied to the comprehensive plan.

Also, Piper, having risen to become a major champion of the comprehensive plan, has volunteered to foot all postage costs associated with alerting the public to the January visioning meetings.

Berg did state that certain computer software, for map work, would still need to be purchased, but she was hopeful that any such programs could then be put to additional later use by the town.  She also left open the possibility of sharing the cost of software with Sumner, which is also in the process of updating its own comprehensive plan.

“If the two boards need something, let’s share it,” agreed Sumner Selectman Thomas Standard.  “We’re good friends.”

Berg concluded her presentation by inviting the selectmen to also take an active part in the planning process.  Perhaps, she recommended, they might even include themselves in helping to research and draft those sections of the plan applicable to their office.

And while all three selectmen nodded in agreement to the importance of the comprehensive plan, and it’s convergence with their own duties, they each remained silent.  Not one, even Gammon, raised an immediate hand to volunteer.