A local tavern owner believes the planning board is making his request more confusing than it has to be. Watershed Tavern owner Win Mitchell made his second attempt on June 17 in convincing the planning board to lift a restriction against outdoor seating.

Mitchell told the planning board his request shouldn’t be considered an expansion, but rather an enhancement of his customers’ experience. Mitchell and his wife, Lori, operate The Watershed Tavern along with cabin rentals, and a brewery on the 301 Adams Pond Road property.

The location is zoned in a commercial district. But, amid complaints in 2012 about potential unruliness, the planning board placed restrictions on outdoor seating. The planning board approved the license by a 3-2 margin for a maximum 50 patrons, all seated indoors.

In May, Win Mitchell approached the planning board about lifting the restriction. The Watershed Tavern seats 42 patrons, according to Mitchell.  He believes his state license allows him to seat 29 patrons outside without triggering any additional parking and restroom requirements.

But the planning board disagreed. In May, Planning Board Vice Chairman Fran McBrearty described the request as increasing the seating capacity by 60 percent. When Mitchell returned on June 17, the board questioned whether it had the authority to eliminate a condition Mitchell agreed to in the approval.

“If you impose the condition, then you have the authority to remove it,” Mitchell said. “There was a lot of neighborhood opposition to the tavern, so I agreed to the conditions to show I could run an establishment without any problems.”

Mitchell believes the tavern could have been approved without any conditions. He recalled the board voted unanimously that his application met all the requirements. But his approval was contingent upon the no outdoor seating condition.

“It is zoned in a commercial district. I met all the requirements. I agreed to the no outdoor seating condition, and the vote was still 3-2,” Mitchell said.

McBrearty said the lifting of the restriction would require more parking and bathroom facilities.

“It doesn’t pass the straight-face test,” McBrearty said. “This would allow 30 outside and 45 inside seats. How do you police that?”

Mitchell said the tavern doesn’t have the kitchen facility to handle more than 50 patrons. And he would simply turn them away. 

“All I’m asking is to seat a few people outside on a sunny day. This is all we are talking about,” Mitchell said. “Every other dining establishment in Boothbay has outdoor seating and some don’t have the required parking.”

Mitchell reiterated his state license permitted up to 29 outdoor seats. He said if the planning board required him to “jump through all kinds of hoops” he’d ask for a lot more outdoor seating.

“If you make me add more parking and restrooms then I’m coming back for 100. This is ridiculous,” he said. “You are hanging me up and treating me different than others.”

Mitchell also complained that three of the five member planning board indicated they would abstain from voting on his request. Planning Board Chairman Allan Bellows and member Linda Wilcox didn’t participate in the May hearing due to a potential conflict. Member Michael Tomacelli wasn’t at the May meeting, but he was present on June 17. He also cited a potential conflict.

The three with potential conflicts leaves two remaining board members and an alternate to hear any future proposals made by Mitchell. He believes that all planning board members have a responsibility to vote unless they benefit financially.

“It (the vote) would have to be unanimous, because I’d need all three,” he said. “This puts me at a major disadvantage. This is a small town and everybody knows everybody. They all have an obligation to be objective, and if they can’t then they’re just taking up somebody else’s seat.”

On June 18, Mitchell wasn’t sure if he would amend his application for five outdoor seats or if he would seek a larger amount.

The planning board meets next at 6:30 p.m. on July 15 in the municipal room.