Planning Board advances Stetson Farm concept B toward preliminary review, asks for road assessment

Chairman Todd Mellin and members of the Town of Pownal Planning Board on March 18 reviewed a revised conservation-design plan for the Stetson Farm subdivision, proposed by applicant James Cram and presented by Peter Biegel of Land Design Solutions.

Biegel said the revised submission eliminates one parcel that contained a vernal pool and reduced the project from a 22-lot yield to a 21-lot yield under Concept A; the applicant’s preferred alternative, Concept B, would use a single dead-end subdivision road about 1,175 feet long (requiring a waiver from the town’s 1,000-foot road-length standard), enlarge several lots and preserve roughly 91 acres of open space and a separate, restricted 20-acre lot. He said the plan would preserve wetlands and steep slopes, set primary building windows at about 200 feet from Poland Range Road and that the Royal River Conservation Trust has expressed interest in receiving dedicated open space from the project.

Board members praised the applicant’s responsiveness to public input and the reduction in lot count. ‘‘I like the reduction in the number of houses. I like the larger lot sizes,’’ Chairman Mellin said. Co-Chair Orion Breen and other members said they were inclined to support Concept B while reserving final judgment pending technical studies.

The board focused much of its discussion on Poland Range Road, a roughly 2.3-mile gravel road that will serve as the primary access for many of the proposed lots. Consultant Natasha Kypfer (NorthStar) told the board that the town can require a traffic study (trip generation, peak-hour trips, crash data and sight-distance analysis) and that the board could also use a performance guarantee or development exaction to ensure the road is returned to its pre-construction condition after heavy construction activity. Road Commissioner Dan Libby said he is new to the position and will seek guidance from Maine DOT and other local resources to help assess the roadbed and recommend testing; he said seasonal conditions (spring thaw) complicate any single assessment.

Residents who offered public comment urged a road safety assessment and described several narrow or muddy stretches where passing is unsafe. Deputy CEO Bill Schmidt said the road ‘‘has some gravel and then clay’’ and identified four particularly hazardous sections; another resident thanked the applicant for listening to neighbors’ concerns.

The board and applicant agreed to proceed to a Preliminary Plan submission with Concept B as the working alternative, contingent on further data about road condition and sight-distance. The Planning Board did not take a formal vote to approve the subdivision at this meeting; rather, members recorded a consensus in favor of moving forward while asking the Road Commissioner to report back and the applicant to supply a traffic study and related hydrology, soils and septic information with the Preliminary Plan.

Next steps: the applicant was told to deliver a traffic analysis and other technical studies with the Preliminary Plan; the Road Commissioner will consult DOT and report to the board on road condition and testing options. If testing or improvement requirements expand beyond the applicant’s current assumptions, the board and applicant said they would revisit lot yield and design decisions.

This discussion centered on options to balance conserving open land with potential wear to local infrastructure and does not constitute final approval of any subdivision, waiver or permit.