Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-04-03 Planning Board Minutes PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF BANGOR MEETING OF APRIL 3, 2012 MINUTES Board Members Present: Miles Theeman, Chairman Charles Boothby, Alternate Member Doug Damon John Kenney John Miller Andy Sturgeon City Staff Present: David Gould Rodney McKay Rosie Vanadestine Peter Witham Lynn Johnson Chairman Theeman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. In the absence of Board Members Bolin and Williams, Alternate Member Boothby was asked to vote. PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No. 1: To amend the Land Development Code by changing a parcel of land located at 63 Sixth Street from Urban Residence 1 District and a parcel of land located at 76 Pier Street from Urban Residence 2 District to Contract Urban Residence 2 District. Said parcels containing approximately .8 acres. City of Bangor and Community Housing of Maine, applicants. C.O. # 12-127. Chairman Theeman opened the Public Hearing and asked for a presentation. Mr. Rodney G. McKay, Director of Economic and Community Development, indicated that the City had acquired the property under the Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 (NSP). The City previously requested a zone change from URD-1 to URD-2 in order to create four units in the building but that zone change request was not recommended by the Planning Board and did not receive City Council approval. Community Housing of Maine (CHOM) has expressed an interest in converting the property at 63 Sixth Street into four units, and by combining this with their Pier Street property and demolishing the old ice cream factory, one four-unit building could be created with a lower overall density. Mr. McKay explained that at present, four units are allowed at the 76 Pier Street property. The proposed contract zone change request would allow for a total of 4 units on the two combined lots thus a reduction in density in the area. Ms. Brenda Sylvester, with Community Housing of Maine (CHOM), explained that they are proposing to demolish the old ice cream plant and renovate 63 Sixth Street into four, one-bedroom apartments. They propose parking on the Pier Street side and additional green space. Mr. Gary Saunders, who resides at 12 William Street, which abuts 63 Sixth Street, told the Board that he did not feel that these kinds of units fit into this neighborhood. He said he felt that the City should do more code enforcement where buildings in URD-1 areas are converted into apartments. He has three girls and he is nervous about letting them walk to school as this is not good for the neighborhood. Mr. Aaron Barnes, who resides at 26 William Street, which abuts the Sixth Street property, spoke in opposition. He expressed his concern that if this were approved apartment buildings would creep up the street. He noted an apartment building on the corner of William and Seventh Streets that he felt should not be there. He said that he has had issues with noise and actions of tenants and he wished to prevent this from going up the street. He expressed his concern about the type of tenants that would reside there, and indicated that if this zone change passes he will sell their house. Mr. Larry Pare, 56 Sixth Street, indicated that he has lived at this residence for 42 years and raised four children there. Now many of the residents on Sixth Street are transients. With the school building on the corner, the addition of more units will add more traffic. He is definitely opposed to this and does not want to add any more problems in this area. Mr. Pare asked if the property has been sold to CHOM and what was it sold for, and if it had been offered to the public. Mr. Steven Sinclair, a resident of 4 William Street, also spoke in opposition. He asked if the footprint of the building at 63 Sixth Street would be expanded, what the number of parking spaces would be for vehicles, if this was a Maine State Housing Authority project, if it would be taken off the tax rolls, if the property went out for public sale, and if this would be housing for those in drug rehab. He said that when the request for a zone change came up before, the proposed tenants were those in transition, there was an income requirement for them to live there, and no one would be on site to look out for the property. He said that owners who do not owner-occupy do not take good care of their property. 3 Ms. Marie Lopez, 56 Sixth Street, explained that she purchased this property from her father. She takes care of her elderly mother. There is also a neighboring elderly woman and they are both alone during the day. If this housing is proposed for transient, indigent men she has a problem with this because of her mother and neighbor. She told the Board that if this request passes, she has a six bedroom house and that she intends to ask that her house be rezoned for apartments. Mr. Josh Young, 52 Sixth Street, indicated that he purchased his property because of the neighborhood. He felt that if more apartments are allowed it will ruin the neighborhood and he, too, will be looking to move. Mr. Darian Higgins, 45 Sixth Street, indicated that he lives two parcels away. He said that he felt that this is a reactionary process and it did not seem to him that any comprehensive planning for this area has been done. He was also concerned about the lack of details for this parcel. He felt that there were many other locations in the City that were a better fit for this type of use. He indicated that he is surrounded by single- family homes and he is opposed to this contract zone change request. Chairman Theeman closed the Public Hearing and asked for Staff comments. Planning Officer David Gould noted that this is an application for a Contract Zone Change for 63 Sixth Street from Urban Residence One District and 76 Pier Street from Urban Residence 2 District to Contract Urban Residence 2 District. Mr. Gould discussed the proposed contract zone change conditions which would: 1) allow for only one building on the two lots; would limit access to the site from only Pier Street; and would limit the density on the entire site to four units. Planning Officer Gould outlined the standards within the URD-2 District noting that up to 14 units per acre could be allowed. The contract zone change conditions would significantly decrease the number of units. In response to questions, Mr. Gould indicated that CHOM has an interest in the 76 Pier Street property and the City of Bangor owns the 63 Sixth Street property. The existing zoning would allow up to four units at the 76 Pier Street property (URD-2) and 63 Sixth Street is zoned URD-1 and would allow one unit. Mr. Gould indicated that the Planning Office was in favor of rezoning the former ice cream plant as it was seen as an opportunity to remove the vacant building from the neighborhood. The contract rezoning essentially would allow the four-unit building for Pier Street to be relocated into the adjacent structure at Sixth Street, no more. Ms. Sylvester indicated that CHOM has done projects on Ohio Street, Charles Street, and Maine Hall at the former Bangor Seminary. They serve homeless veterans, victims of domestic violence and those who have lost their jobs. CHOM does a good job in taking care of their properties as evidenced by the projects that they have done. Mr. Damon noted that the City should be sensitive to the concerns of the neighbors and should not be rezoning properties from single-family to multi-family. 4 Mr. Sturgeon indicated that he felt that the contract zone change conditions would reduce the density of the area. By eliminating the driveway at 63 Sixth Street and moving traffic to Pier Street it would reduce traffic. He also noted that zoning runs with the land and not the owner. Other Board Members had concerns regarding adding additional multi-unit buildings into the single family neighborhood and the potential adverse impact on the area. Mr. Sturgeon moved that the Board recommend approval to the City Council of the contract zone change, as contained in C.O. # 12-127, located at 63 Sixth Street from Urban Residence 1 District and 76 Pier Street from Urban Residence 2 District to Contract Urban Residence 2 District for the City of Bangor and Community Housing of Maine, applicants. Mr. Boothby seconded the motion. The Board voted two in favor and four opposed. Therefore the motion failed. Mr. Gould indicated that this item will th be forwarded back to the City Council at its meeting on April 9 for its consideration. NEW BUSINESS Item No. 2: Site Development Plan approval to construct a 10’ x 10’ x 30’ tall addition to the existing building and a 15’ cupola for communications use located at 559 Union Street in an Urban Service District. U.S. Cellular (Bangor Cellular Telephone LP ), applicant. Mr. Bob Gashlin with U.S. Cellular represented the applicant who is requesting Site Development Plan approval to construct a 10’ x 10’ x 30’ tall addition to the existing building at 559 Union Street for cellular telephone equipment. Mr. Gashlin explained that there is a cellular telephone coverage problem in this area of Bangor and this site is a great site to address this problem. He said that they have also come up with a creative solution to solve this coverage problem. As part of the proposed addition they are planning to construct a 15 foot tall cupola on top of this addition to place the cellular antennas. Mr. Gashlin discussed the site noting that in 2002 Bangor Photo, the current owner of the site, received Site Development Plan approval to expand this building. However, not all of the details approved at that time were done at this site. The applicant, as part of this Site Development Plan is proposing to bring the site in compliance with the 2002 approval, as well. Mr. Gashlin indicated that the proposed plan meets the lot coverage and building envelope standards, and they propose to provide ample parking. Planning Officer David Gould indicated that since the time that the Staff Memo was written the applicant submitted revised plans addressing staff concerns regarding number of parking spaces. The plans are now in order and Staff recommended approval. Mr. Gould noted that had the plans been submitted sooner this item would have been on the Consent Agenda as they met the requirements of the Ordinance and for submittal. 5 Mr. Sturgeon moved that the Board grant Site Development Plan approval to construct 10’ x 10’ x 30’ tall addition to the existing building and a 15’ cupola for communications use located at 559 Union Street in an Urban Service District for U.S. Cellular (Bangor Cellular Telephone LP), applicant. Mr. Miller seconded the motion. The Board voted 6 to 0 in favor. Item No. 3: Final Subdivision Plan approval of a 5-lot subdivision located at 1321 Essex Street in a Rural Residence and Agriculture District. Jean Strom Benson and John Andrew Benson, applicants. Mr. Richard Day, with Plisga & Day, represented the applicants who are requesting Final Subdivision Plan approval of a 5-lot subdivision located at 1321 Essex Street. Mr. Day gave a history of the applicants’ land noting a previously approved subdivision for 3 lots. This request is to re-lot the remaining 23 acres into 5 lots. This property is located within the Penjajawoc Marsh Mall Overlay District and as such any subdivision of land in this district is required to be a cluster subdivision. Mr. Sturgeon had questions regarding the location of the proposed driveways and if the applicant would be required to place the driveways in those locations. Mr. Gould explained that the subdivision plan was reviewed and changes were made to address safety concerns of the Engineering Department. Any requests for a driveway permit are handled by the Engineering Department. Mr. Day indicated that the driveway locations indicated on the plan were at the request of the Engineering Department. Mr. Boothby asked if information was provided by the applicant regarding soils and subsurface waste disposal. Staff provided him with a copy and Mr. Boothby indicated that after review he was satisfied with the report. Mr. Damon asked what the required distance of separation between a well and a septic system is. Mr. Damon also had questions out the location of some of the wells and septic system sites. Mr. Day indicated that in most instances the required separation is 100 feet. However, on any given lot there are many suitable sites where wells and septic systems can be placed. Mr. Gould indicated that the City’s subdivision regulations require that an applicant have each lot tested to insure that the soils are suitable for at least one location. The Board opened up the discussion to two neighboring property owners. Mr. Gary Shaneberger indicated that he owns a two acre parcel in the middle of this subdivision. He asked if the proposed lot could be subdivided again. Planning Officer Gould indicated that a lot can be re-subdivided provided it meets the requirements of the Ordinance and for subdivision approval. 6 Mr. Matthew Harvey asked how far away from his house would the houses in the subdivision be. He showed a photograph of his house noting that one side of his house is mostly windows and he didn’t want the neighboring properties to be so close that they could see in the windows. There were no further comments. Chairman Theeman asked for a motion. Mr. Damon moved that the Board grant Final Subdivision Plan approval for a five–lot subdivision located at 1321 Essex Street in a Rural Residence and Agricultural District for John and Jean Benson, applicants. The motion was seconded and it passed by a vote of 6 to 0. APROVAL OF MINUTES Item No. 4: Planning Board Approval of Minutes. Chairman Theeman indicated that the March 6, 2012 and March 20, 2012 Meeting minutes were ready for consideration. Mr. Miller moved to approve the Minutes of the March 6, 2012 Meeting. Mr. Kenney seconded the motion. The Board voted 6 to 0 in favor. Mr. Boothby moved to approve the Minutes of the March 20, 2012 Meeting. Mr. Miller seconded the motion which also passed by a vote of 6 to 0. There being no further items for consideration, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.