Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-01-02 Planning Board Minutes PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF BANGOR MEETING OF JANUARY 2, 2007 MINUTES Board Members Present: Hal Wheeler, Vice Chairman David Clark Miles Theeman Allie Brown Jeff Barnes City Staff Present: David Gould Jim Ring Bud Knickerbocker News Media Present: Bangor Daily News Vice Chairman Wheeler called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. In the absence of Chairman Guerette and Member Rosenblatt, Associate Members Brown and Barnes were asked to vote. CONSENT AGENDA Mr. Theeman asked that Item No. 1 be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Vice Chairman Wheeler asked for a motion on the remaining item. Mr. Theeman moved to approve Item No. 2 on the Consent Agenda. Ms. Brown seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. The item approved is as follows: Item No. 2: Site Development Plan approval to construct a 1,520 sq. ft. addition to the existing building located at 6 Dowd Road in an Industry & Service District. Maine Fire Protection Systems, Inc., applicant. PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No. 3: Preliminary Subdivision Plan approval of a 10-lot, cluster subdivision located off of Molly Lane (Molly Lane Extension) in a Low Density Residential District and a Resource Protection District. LTI, Inc., applicant. 2 Vice Chairman Wheeler opened the Public Hearing and asked for comments from the applicant. Mr. Don Becker, CES, Inc., representing the applicant, explained that this application is the seventh phase of what might be eight phases of the Stillwater Gardens Subdivision and consists of a 10-lot cluster subdivision located off of Molly Lane. This subdivision has evolved over the last 20 years. He indicated that the applicant had also been before the Marsh Mall Commission who has jurisdiction over this subdivision. Mr. Becker discussed the comments in the Staff Memorandum. He noted that the Engineering Department had encouraged the applicant to meet with them to discuss concerns regarding the proposed sewer. Originally they proposed individual pump stations because they were anticipating that anyone who wished to develop the large end lots may wish to keep a large number of the existing trees. Ms. Brown noted the City Engineer’s concerns about the proposed sewer connection. Mr. Becker indicated that he looked forward to meeting with City Engineer to discuss this. Vice Chairman Wheeler entertained questions from proponents. There being none, he asked for comments from opponents. Mr. Jeff Allen, 28 Molly Lane, indicated that the neighborhood is concerned about the proposed expansion. He said that he wasn’t necessarily opposed but wanted to ensure that it is done correctly. Mr. Allen indicated that when this plan was first brought before the Marsh Mall Commission, the applicant had an outdated wetlands map that was to be updated. Since that wetlands mapping was done, there have been several changes such as the construction of Molly Lane extension and the fact that storm water discharge from the Parkade project discharges into the marsh that is located behind this expansion. Mr. Allen also expressed his concern regarding the proposed sewer. Because the design is extremely flat it could cause a back up into his sewer pipes. Mr. Allen expressed concerns about maintaining the walking trail that goes around from Jennifer Lane down by the Interstate up a railroad easement to a path that connects on the corner of Jennifer Lane. Mr. Allen had concerns about the construction impacts if this is built. He explained that when the last expansion was built the contractors were hauling fill anywhere from 5:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. He noted that there are many children in the neighborhood. He asked that a the developer have a covenant with the contractor to control hours of operation, dust control, that the streets be keep wet or swept, and that a construction entrance be built to try to minimize the tracking of fill onto the existing streets. Mr. Allen said that he would like to see a silt fence but would prefer that bark mulch berms be installed because if they get undermined they will repair themselves. He also requested that no construction equipment be left on public ways unattended at any time because of the many children in the neighborhood. Mr. Allen indicated that he also had a list of concerns that he would like to leave with Mr. Ring for consideration. Mr. Jim Ring, City Engineer, indicated that storm water and drainage of a project is something that the Engineering Department looks at very closely. Mr. Ring said that when 3 he looks at a preliminary subdivision plan he looks at it from the standpoint if the project meets the basic concept of the utilities and if there are corrections, they are something that can be worked out prior to final plan approval. The City Engineering Staff has asked Mr. Becker to work with them to address concerns regarding the proposed sewer. With respect to dust control and the construction phase, those are issues that the City Engineer Department frequently deals with especially when it occurs in or near a neighborhood. The City requires public improvements guarantees when public improvements are proposed as a way for the City to have control over the contractor and the construction process. Ms. Brown asked if at preliminary plan stage the Board was reviewing the basic schematic approach and at the final plan phase if the Board would be specifically talking about some of the problems that Mr. Allen has suggested. Planning Officer Gould indicated that the preliminary plan stage is clearly an opportunity for the Board, City Staff and neighbors to bring up issues. It is important to get the issues on the record so that the applicant can going back and redesign the project based on the feedback that they get. Mr. Theeman asked about the walking trail easement. Mr. Becker indicated that the walking trail would connect with Jennifer Lane thru the cul-de-sac over to the former railroad bed. Mr. Barnes indicated that he felt that the sewer should be extended to cul-de-sac and asked if the applicant proposed any on-site waste disposal. Planning Officer Gould indicated that the cluster subdivision provisions require that the lots have access to public water and sewer. Ms. Jennifer Larlee, 43 Jennifer Lane, indicated that she had concerns regarding safety and the aesthetics of the neighborhood. During the last extension, the builders drove too fast through the neighborhood. There are many children who play on Molly Lane as it is dead end. Ms. Larley also said that the builder was rude when calls were made to express their concerns. She asked what recourse the neighbors have. Ms. Larlee indicated that there was never any sweeping or cleaning of the street done, the aesthetics of the houses that were built do not fit in with the other houses in the neighborhood, many homeowners are not happy with the quality of the construction that was done, and this was not a positive experience for the neighbors. She said that she would like to see more diversity of floor plans, better quality of construction, and more response from the builders to the concerns of the neighbors. Mr. Jim Ring, City Engineer, indicated that if there are problems with the subdivision layout and utilities, the neighbors should call the Engineering Department who can help to get the right people there to address the concerns. Mr. Jeff Allen, noting a couple of other concerns, indicated that he would like for the walking path located west of the cul-de-sac and adjacent to a drainage easement and part of the proposed grading for the easement to be a full walkway that would be unencumbered 4 by any ditch. He suggested that the drainage easement could be moved further to the south. Mr. Allen also indicated that he would like to see a difference in housing types, that the homes be the same size as the adjacent ones and suggested that there be a requirement that there be a deed restriction or covenant that the livable square footage needed to be 95% of the median square footage of all homes within 300 feet. Ms. Brown indicated that she did not believe that there was anything in Land Development Code that could legislate this and added that it is the market that drives what is built. Don Becker in response to Mr. Allen’s concerns indicated that the proposed sewer is at the same slope as the others in that development. If they extend it further it would make it possible to make a gravity sewer for the last lot. However, in order to do this there will need to be some flexibility on the part of the City in allowing the cover of the pipe to be less than five feet. Mr. Becker indicated that there are more wetlands in the area than there were 10 years ago. The ponded area is six feet higher partially due to some changes that may or may not be permanent. The land within this subdivision is high and dry and the lots are the largest ones within the subdivision and are in an area that does not need a wetlands permit. He said that he thought that with the larger lots, the houses will be priced high enough to exceed those of the neighbors. Regarding infrastructure construction, the City charges a fee for inspection. Mr. Becker thanked those who spoke for being so prepared, organized, and courteous. He noted that Mr. Allen’s suggestion for a construction entrance is something that they should have on their drawings. Mr. Becker indicated that he will try to address Mr. Allen’s list that will be presented to the City. Vice Chairman Wheeler closed the Public Hearing and asked for the Planning Officer’s recommendation. Mr. David Gould indicated that this application is for Preliminary Subdivision Plan approval of a 10-lot cluster subdivision located off of Molly Lane in a Low Density Residential District. Part of the open space for this proposal lies within the Resource Protection District and this subdivision falls within the Penjajawoc Marsh Overlay District. Any residential development that occurs within the Overlay District must be a cluster subdivision. This means that the lot size is not significantly different but does require that the applicant set aside 35 % of the area for open space. The plan proposes to meet the open space in a number of different ways. There is a large piece on back side of the parcel that is intended as a permanent reservation and it’s the applicant’s intention to deed that to the City of Bangor. In addition, there is open space that encompasses an easement via a storm water or pedestrian easement that would connect this to the existing trail from Jennifer Lane and Shannon Lane to a cul-de-sac to land that is held as more permanent open space. This subdivision has a long history dating back to 1985 and was done ion phases. It was always intended that more would be developed. Lot C approved in 1988 had some frontage on the corner with the idea that a roadway might be able to be extended for a different roadway pattern that what is proposed today. The owner on Lot 3 preferred not to see the roadway extended and hence, the extension of Molly Lane. Planning Officer Gould indicated that the Board needed to be comfortable with the open spaces as proposed, the location and arrangement of lots, the roadway arrangement, and the ownership of the open space. 5 Mr. Gould indicated that the City does has oversight of public utilities and gets improvement guarantees and collects an inspection fee of those improvements. If a contractor is speeding through residential subdivision there are appropriate offices in the City to contract. The same is true regarding hours of operation. The Land Development Code does not have provisions that regulate when someone can operate but with the basic theory of peaceful use and enjoyment of one’s property an owner has the right to complain and have a peaceable neighborhood but with understanding that people also need time to build houses. Mr. Gould indicated that Mr. Allen’s comments will be documented and Mr. Becker will give Staff feedback at the Final Subdivision Plan approval stage. Planning Officer Gould indicated that Staff finds the preliminary subdivision plan consistent with the submittal requirements for preliminary plan approval and recommended that the Planning Board grant approval. Vice Chairman Wheeler then asked for a motion. Mr. Theeman asked if there were any conditions that should be incorporated. Mr. Gould indicated the Board could condition approval upon the applicant satisfactorily addressing the City Engineer’s concerns relative to public utilities. Ms. Brown moved approval of the Preliminary Subdivision Plan for a 10-lot subdivision located off of Molly Lane Extension in a Low Density Residential District and a Resource Protection District for LTI, Inc. subject to the condition that the applicants satisfactorily address the City Engineer’s concerns relative to public utilities. Mr. Theeman seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 5 to 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Item No. 4: Planning Board Approval of Minutes There were no minutes for consideration. Item No. 1: Site Development Plan approval to create two flag lots at 1380 Essex Street in a Rural Residence and Agricultural District. Julie Esp, applicant. Vice Chairman Wheeler asked for a presentation by the applicant. Mr. Jon Stewart of Plisga & Day, explained that the application before the Board is to create two flag lots on outer Essex Street. He noted that there have been various proposals for this site most of which were to create more than two lots. However, due to environmental conditions the applicant felt that it wasn’t possible. Mr. Stewart indicated that this is a way to create two useable lots. Mr. Theeman had questions regarding the proposed lots, whether or not they could be further subdivided, and whether or not the proposed lot width would allow for sufficient area for a road. Planning Officer Gould indicated that the flag lot gives the applicant the ability to construct a single-family house on each of the two lots. Without the Board’s approval they 6 could still do a subdivision and could build a public street. The fact that they split the parcel in two does not mean that some future owner could not build a roadway. Mr. Gould explained that a flag lot has to have a minimum of 50 feet. A Rural Roadway is 66 feet but there are some that are 50 or 60 feet wide depending upon the number of lots served. A single-family house can be built on this lot without Planning Board approval. With Board approval, two houses can be built or it can be subdivided. Mr. Theeman asked what the owner’s intent was for these lots. Mr. Stewart indicated that he did not know what their intent is at this time. Mr. Clark asked where the entrances would be to both properties. Mr. Gould indicated that they would be on the “pole” part of the flag lot. Vice Chairman Wheeler asked for Staff comments. Planning Officer Gould indicated that this is fortunate for the applicant as it fits their circumstances. Overtime, the parcel has sold most of its frontage to out lots. The flag lot provision bails out this parcel and makes it possible to build on two lots. Mr. Gould discussed the flag lot provisions indicating that the proposal before the Board meets those standards. Mr. Gould noted that should a subsequent owner propose to do some other development, it would be reviewed at that time. Staff recommended approval of the applicants’ request for flag lot approval. Vice Chairman Wheeler asked for a motion. Mr. Theeman moved to approve the Site Development Plan to create two flag lots 1380 Essex in a Rural Residence and Agricultural District for Julie Esp, applicant. Ms. Brown seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 5 to 0. Other Business Vice Chairman Wheeler noted that City Council would be appointing members to the various Boards by the first of February. There being no further items for discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 8:24 p.m.