►
From YouTube: October 7, 2015 Planning Board
Description
The October 7, 2015 Caribou Planning Board Meeting
Minutes and Agendas for the Planning Board can be found here: http://www.cariboumaine.org/index.php/government/boards-and-commissions/planning-board/planning-board-minutes-and-agendas/
A
D
A
A
I'd
like
to
go
through
this
one
page
at
a
time
just
asking:
if
anybody
I
I,
don't
know,
I,
don't
want
to
read.
I
just
want
to
do
and
I've
already
done
that
and
I'm
hoping
everybody
else
has
also
just
ask
if
they
have
any
questions
or
Corrections
on
on
any
of
the
items
I
had.
I
noticed
on
page
5
in
paragraph
1
introduction
the
strikeout
in
the
next
to
last
sentence.
I
thought
the
words
and
then
should
also
be
struck
out.
A
A
And
the
when
I
first
read
ee
on
page
six,
I
put
in
the
margin
elevation
changes,
?,
there's
no
mention
of
elevations
in
that,
and
I
would
hope
that
somebody
doesn't
interpret
ten-foot
intervals
to
be
distance
as
opposed
to
elevation
that
it
should
be.
You
know
the
cotton
to
contour
lines
typically
depict
elevation
and
the
word
elevation
does
show
up
on
page
nine
number
14.
It
does
not
show
up
on
page
10
item
26,
see
again
contour
lines
on
the
plan
shall
be
integral
no
less
than
10
feet.
A
E
E
F
G
D
A
E
E
A
C
B
B
E
A
Some
age,
because
elsewhere
I
further
in
there's
a
reference
to
the
euro-spec,
Republican
and
I
on
my
coffee
change
that
to
the
local
caribou
paper,
so
that
it's
generic
and
not
specific
because
someday
you
don't
know,
the
caribou
Republican
and
the
Prescott
are
held,
may
be
combined
into
one
paper.
If.
C
D
A
C
A
A
A
D
A
A
Only
concern
about
I
guess
my
issue
was
the
cost
of
full
size.
I
mean
when
again,
if
you've
hired
an
engineering
firm
than
they
have
water
or
printer,
that
spits
out
24
inch
paper.
But
if,
if
you
haven't
got
that
you
got
to
go,
find
someone
I
mean
they're
gonna
charge,
you
no
20
bucks
a
page
or
something
like
that.
You
know
I've
been
there
before,
but
I.
C
E
A
A
A
C
A
A
A
First
paragraph
under
well:
this
is
interesting.
I
just
noticed.
Okay,
we
go
3a,
3b
and
then
back
to
3a,
then
2
3
d,
so
we
don't
have
a
C
and
and
in
the
second,
a
the
end
of
that
paragraph
should
continue.
Planning
board
deems
necessary
that
space
in
between
there
should
not
be
there.
That's
a
continuation
of
the
same
sentence:
yeah.
A
A
H
A
B
F
A
A
E
A
C
E
A
A
A
E
A
E
E
C
Other
things
over
the
years,
the
owner
of
that
property
was
in
today
he's
converted
that
to
a
residential
type
use
or
a
motel
type
use
short
term
short
rental
leases,
which
is
not
allowable
in
the
c2
zone,
without
having
gone
through
the
site,
design
review
process
and
depending
on
what
they
actually
wanted
to
do
there.
If
it's
a
motel
that
would
be
allowable
in
that
zone,
but
the
building
location
on
a
lot
in
the
law
said
himself
doesn't
allow
for
that
at
that.
Doesn't
allow
for
a
motel
on
that
piece
of
land.
C
Single-Family
dwelling
is
not
allowed
in
the
c2
zone,
so
the
only
real
option
that
would
be
available
to
him
would
be
if
the
property
was
in
order
to
continue
to
use
it
as
a
residential
zone
or
residential
house
of
beef.
The
property
was
rezone
to
an
art
to
her
again
r2
or
r1,
bordering
it
on
the
back
side.
So
on
Park
Street,
it's
our
two
right
there,
so
he
does
touch
it.
C
D
C
A
A
C
C
So
I
told
him
I
would
broach
the
topic:
will
the
owner
stop
that
plane
boards
need
to
see?
You
know
a
song
and
change
for
that
parcel
this
something
that
even
entertained
or
that's
wanting
to
keep
bennett
drive
the
main
commercial
district
other
community
in
a
commercial
zone
there
are
other
uses
he
could
put
that
building
duty
study
could
use
it
as
office
space
or
that
type
of
thing
this
doesn't
have
to
be
residential.
C
A
It's
at
I
feel
the
same
I
mean
granted,
I
mean
head
if
it
had
been
residential
previously
and
continued
to
be.
You
know
if
you
had
gone
from
a
private
home
to
maybe
an
apartment
rent
but
he's
gone
to
commercial
use
and
now
he's
trying
to
revert
back
well,
you
can't
go
back
as
my
understanding,
which
is
wrong.
Rosie.
B
D
B
F
E
A
D
F
B
F
D
C
A
H
Something
changes
from
commercial
to
residential,
though
doesn't
that
require
code
enforcement
I
mean
cuz.
I've
seen
some
apartments
around
here
that
probably
our
grandfather
then,
but
there's
no
egress
to
escape.
If
there's
a
fire
in
the
stairwell,
so
I
mean
I
would
think
that
turning
something
residential
would
require.
There's
something.
C
A
C
F
F
What
we
have
on
the
books
right
now
says
it
requires
a
fence,
and
then,
during
our
discussion,
we've
mentioned
that
you
know
we're
going
to
look
at
changing
that
as
well,
but
we
approved
a
daycare
that
doesn't
necessarily
meet
what's
on
the
books
right
now,
so
I
don't
think
it's
necessarily
fair
to
others
who
have
come
before
us
with
an
application
for
something
that
we
may
be
changing.
As
far
as
zoning
that
we
denied
on
the
principle
that
the
way
it's
in
our
ordinance
right
now
doesn't
doesn't
necessarily
meet.
F
F
To
that,
because
I
mean
what
we've
done
is
approved,
something
in
violation
of
what
our
ordinances
already
are,
even
though,
that
down
the
road
we
may
be
changing
those
I
mean
the
victim.
The
the
one
on
Russ
treatise
is
a
prime
example.
You
know
we
may
have
zone
that
differently
when
we
redo
the
zoning,
but
based
on
where
it's
at
they're
not
able
to
they
weren't
able
to
put
that
apartment
in
there.
Because
of
the
way
the
zoning
read.
A
Getting
back
to
the
my
recollection
is
we
opted
not
to
require
a
fence
because
of
the
significant
distance
between
the
the
daycare
and
the
play
area
and
the
highway
to
say
that
I
guess
I'm
questioning.
If
what
you're
asking
is
an
apples-to-apples
comparison,
I,
don't
think
it
is
because
I
think
that
you
have
to
look
at
each
the
merits
of
each
case
and
I.
Think
that
this
place
was.
You
know.
F
H
A
F
F
C
D
A
Home
occupation
is
typically,
you
know,
beauty,
shop
or
right
or
an
attorney,
or
you
know
something
a
dentist.
You
know
something
like
that.
I
think.
The
fact
that
you
have
rules
that
are
specific
to
just
daycare
is
raising
the
bar
more
than
you
would
for
home
occupation.
It's
it's
additional
because
now
you're
bringing
a
whole
litany
of
things
and
right
into
review
above
and
beyond
a
home
occupation.
So
I,
don't
think
you
have
to
subject
them
to
both
standards.
G
D
H
A
F
I,
don't
I,
don't
necessarily
see
anything
wrong
with
us
being
the
same,
if
not
maybe
a
little
bit
more
stringent.
Just
you
know,
given
the
area
that
we're
in
you
know,
if
you
have
tree
line,
I
mean
like
we
voted
on
this
the
last
time.
The
only
reason
why
I
voted
against
it
was
based
on
you
know
that
aspect
of
it
I
mean
I,
have
no
problems
with
somebody
coming
and
trying
to
do
that.
C
A
F
A
A
It
well
in
both
of
those
involved
in
on-site
inspection,
whereas
ours
does
not
I
mean
we
have
the
option
to
go
out
if
we
want,
but
typically
we
don't
and
the
fact
that
that
DHS
or
the
fire
marshal
is
looking
at
the
physical
property.
Assessing
you
know
the
individual
characteristics
of
this
particular
application
and
saying
yes,
this
is
good.
Well,
then,
you
know
I
agree
with
what
their
eyes
are
telling
them.