Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-11-01 Planning Board Minutes PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF BANGOR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 1, 2011 MINUTES Board Members Present: Miles Theeman, Chairman Paul Bolin Charles Boothby, Alternate Member Doug Damon John Kenney John Miller Andy Sturgeon Julie Williams City Staff Present: David Gould Paul Nicklas Peter Witham Lynn Johnson News Media Present: Bangor Daily News Chairman Theeman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No. 1: Conditional Use and Site Development Plan approvals for a quarry located at 1545 Union Street in a Rural Residence and Agricultural District. Harvey Sprague, applicant. Chairman Theeman, noting that this Public Hearing was continued from the Board’s October 18, 2011 meeting, reopened the Public Hearing and asked for comments from the applicant or his representative. Mr. Randy Gardiner, 505 Davis Road, indicated that Mr. Sprague is the owner of the property and he is the operator of the quarry. In 2006, the Board granted conditional use and site development plan 2 approvals for this use. The approval was good for five years with the option for a three year extension. However, the approval lapsed as they did not apply for the three year extension. In order to continue, it was determined that they needed to submit a new application and obtain re-approval. He indicated that they are actively mining the quarry, the operation and hours of operation remain unchanged from the original application, and they are requesting approval under the same conditions as the original permit. Mr. Gardiner offered three letters written by abutting property owners in support of this application. Chairman Theeman asked for comments from proponents. There being none, he asked for opponents. Mr. Martin Lloyd, who owns property at 124 Yankee Avenue, spoke in opposition. Mr. Lloyd asked what uses are permitted in the RR & A District. He questioned the hours of operation and limits, why they were allowed to dynamite, and why the neighboring property owners were not notified before they proposed to blast. Mr. Lloyd indicated that there was one instance when the quarry was operated during the night. However, Mr. Gardiner addressed this and took care of it immediately. He also noted that his foundation was showing signs of cracking. Planning Officer Gould discussed the permitted and conditional uses allowed in the Rural Residence and Agricultural District (RR & A). He noted that it is a somewhat unusual district as it encompasses a large portion of the outlying area of Bangor which is not served by sewer and water. The District was originally intended for agricultural farmlands and crops. There has been a huge demand to develop housing in the rural area and it is dispersed throughout the RR & A District. Being a rural area, there are a lot of other uses that the City has said are permitted such as farming, having animals and other things like quarries. He pointed out that the uses in the RR & A District are not the same as those in the Low Density Residential District for which Mr. Lloyd’s property is zoned. Mr. Gould indicated that quarries are a conditional use in the RR & A District. Mr. Theeman explained that in the City of Bangor blasting requires a separate permit that is issued by the City Engineer’s Office. The Planning Board’s purview is to determine whether the use is appropriate in a RR & A District. The issues and technicalities associated with blasting is an issue to be considered by the City Engineer’s office when issuing a permit. Mr. Gould followed-up by saying that the City Council has already made the determination that a quarry is a conditional use in the RR & A. It is up to the Planning Board to determine that the specific application meets the ordinance requirements for that use. Mrs. Jane Winship, 125 Yankee Avenue, spoke in opposition. She said that she felt that this area is more residential in nature than agricultural. She asked why the Board is considering a new application but using old data. She said she felt that things 3 have changed since the 2006 approval and she questioned how they could operate without benefit of a permit. She indicated that when they blast the dust is horrific, the dump trucks bang loudly, and only three on the street were given notice. She asked if this new permit, if granted, would be for three years. Planning Officer Gould indicated that the applicant received conditional use and site development plan approvals from the Planning Board in 2006. That approval was good for five years with the option that the applicant could ask the Planning Board to extend the permit for another three years. Because the five year permit expired and the applicant did not apply for a three year extension, they needed to come back to the Planning Board for re-approval in order to operate the quarry. A new approval would be for five years. Ms. Elaine Brown, 1434 Ohio Street (Sable Ridge) asked if there was a standard for decibels from the blasting, who is responsible for paying for any damage associated with any blasting, and if there had been a study conducted that would indicate the amount of radon that would be released into the air from the blasting. Mr. Gardner explained that the City Ordinance specifies a level of 129 decibels, the Maine Department of Environmental Protection has a level of 130 decibels. The Federal level is 133 decibels which is what they call an annoyance level. He indicated that on their most recent blasts they had a decibel reading of 131 at a distance of over 250 feet which is over the City of Bangor’s minimum guidelines and the MDEP guidelines. He indicated that they have blasted seven times in the quarry. The preliminary work leading up to the blasting and drilling typically lasts two or three days, it is loud, annoying and obnoxious. Mr. Gardner discussed the pre-blast survey process noting that it is done by an independent company who video graphs the inside and outside of the home, does a walk through and checks for existing damage. This is done to protect both the homeowner and the quarry owner. The seismology tests to date have indicated that they have not exceeded any maximum. Reverend Ted Evertsen, pastor of the Hope Lutheran Church on Union Street, asked if any radon issue should be taken up by an environmental department. Mr. Ken Smith with Maine Drilling and Blasting indicated that he has 37 years of experience in the industry. About a decade ago there was concern when radon was identified as a carcinogen and was found to be prevalent in people’s homes. At that time there was a concern that there may be some connection to blasting. Research by the Federal government and others to date indicates that there hasn’t been a connection found between radon and blasting. Ms. Debra Turcotte, 97 Sunny Hollow Place, said that it is shocking when there is blasting, the noise is unbelievable, and the trucks are noisy. They have only received one notice of blasting since they moved there 7 years ago. She said that the neighbors should not have to put up with this. This area is more of a residential area 4 not an industrial area. She said that she wants peace and quiet and does not want the value of her home destroyed because someone wants to expand a quarry right next door to a residential neighborhood. She said that the evidence presented indicated that the applicant’s operation has exceeded the noise levels, the hours of operation, and there was a fire that took three days to put out. She felt that this operation was unacceptable in this neighborhood. Ms. Jody MacGreagor, 1477 Union Street, indicated that she was present when the applicant was before the Board in 2006. At that time she had no issues with what they had proposed such that no blasting would be done within 300 feet of her property line and that no tree growth would be removed within 100 feet from her property line. This has not been the case. This last blast was 130 feet from her property line. Ms. MacGreagor indicated that 30’ of tree growth has been cut back from her property line. She said that they cut it and just left it. There also was a huge fire in the quarry last summer. She indicated that she does not have an issue with people doing business but didn’t feel that it was done the way they said it was going to be done. Mr. Gardner explained that State Law sets the limits for blasting within a distance from a property line. Nowhere in either of the applications (the first and this one) is the 300 foot delineation that was mentioned. The law allows them to blast within 100 feet of the property line. Mr. Gardner indicated that it was his understanding that the permit was in place up until June of this year and both permit applications follow State guidelines that say that blasting can be done within 100 feet of the property line. In addition to that there is to be a buffer. In response to the comment that the tree line was cut along Ms. MacGreagor’s property line, Mr. Gardner explained that one of the conditions of the previous Planning Board approval was that they install a fence above the quarry head. They did put up a fence and this is the reason for the tree clearing which was done with an excavator. Ms. MacGreagor called the Spragues and complained about the operation. They stopped clearing and the trees were left there. Mr. Dan Sprague finished cutting an area for the fence by hand to make the clearing smaller in response to her complaint. Regarding the fire, the stumps and debris from the clearing spontaneously combusted due to the very hot weather. They worked for three days containing the fire. Mr. Gardiner indicated that they have only received one damage complaint the entire time they have operated the quarry and that was from Mrs. Boody who resides on Union Street. There was some damage to her pool, and while they did not think it was from their operation they took care of it anyway. Ms. Elizabeth Bushnell of Doe Drive indicated that she felt that this area is not as rural as it was previously. She has lived there for the last 2.5 years and no one has approached her about a pre-blasting survey. She questioned whether it is appropriate to allow them another permit if they have not done it as it was approved before. Mr. Gardner indicated that the blasting permits are issued annually and pre-blast surveys can roll over. He indicated that he would discuss notifications with the blasting 5 company. He discussed the state guidelines for blasting and actions that he has taken to address complaints from neighbors during the five years that the quarry has been in operation. Reverend Ted Evertsen suggested that there needs to be a compromise between the operator and the property owners to mitigate impacts. He said that working together could make this an amenable operation for everyone. Mr. Martin agreed and suggested that the parties get together and agree on the hours of operation. Mr. Damon asked about the blasting process. Mr. Gardner indicated that blasting permits are acquired by the blasting company. He indicated that he intends to address the issue of notifications of neighboring properties with the blasting contractor. Mr. Gardner also noted that the City Engineer’s Office has started a call list for those who wished to be notified of the blasting schedule. Mrs. Winship asked about ordinances regarding hours of operation. Mr. Gould indicated that the City’s Ordinances do not have a provision for hours of operation. For example, plow trucks, garbage trucks, etc. The Board is not the policing entity for the City. Chairman Theeman closed the Public Hearing. Planning Officer Gould indicated that the quarry and its 50 plus acres are located in the Rural Residence and Agricultural District. The Sunny Hollow development and Yankee Avenue on the other side of Ohio Street is in a Low Density Residential District. They are in a different zoning district which is why they have sewer and water service and much smaller lots. The operation that is before the Board is the same as what was before the Board in 2006. Development activity has gone down dramatically such that their need and use for material is a fraction of what they thought it was going to be back in 2006. So, only a part of the area that they asked for in 2006 was actually removed from the site. What the applicant is asking the Board to approve is essentially the same application as that in 2006 to remove the remaining material. They have not increased the size of the area quarried. Staff wanted to make clear that the board has certain standards relative to what the applicant must do and meet in terms of approval. The operation of the facility on a day to day basis isn’t under the control of the Board. Mr. Damon asked how the number of trucks entering the site was regulated. Mr. Gould indicated that it is not regulated. It is an estimate as to how much material they feel that they can pull out of the quarry. Mr. Theeman asked what latitude the Board has in terms of applying conditions to the approval such as requiring the applicant to provide pre-blast notices to the residents, insuring that all of the residents of the area who are within the 250 foot corridor be given pre-blast surveys, and encouraging the applicant to get together with 6 the area residents regarding areas of hours of operation. Mr. Gould indicated that he was comfortable with the Board dealing with the hours of operation of the facility. Other elements are beyond the control of the Board. Mr. Sturgeon asked Mr. Gardner if there was any leeway on the hours of operation. Mr. Gardner indicated that he would be happy with a starting time of 6:30 a.m. and a closing time of 6:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. on Saturday. Theeman asked if there was a way to modify the warning signals so that the people on Ohio Street could hear them. Mr. Gardner indicated that due to the complaints raised from their last blasting, the City Engineer’s Office has started a call list for the people who would like to be on it. He also suggested that they add a second posting on the Ohio Street side. There being no further discussion, Chairman Theeman asked for a motion. Mr. Sturgeon moved that the Board approve the Conditional Use/Site Development Plan on the condition that the hours of operation are from 6:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and 6:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Mr. Damon seconded the motion which carried by a vote of 7 to 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Item No. 2: Planning Board Approval of Minutes. Chairman Theeman indicated that the Minutes of the October 18, 2011 Meeting were in order. Mr. Bolin moved to approve the Minutes of the October 18, 2011 as printed. Mr. Miller seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. There being no further items for discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 8:32 p.m.