Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-04-18 Planning Board Minutes PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF BANGOR MEETING OF APRIL 18, 2006 MINUTES Board Members Present: Robert Guerette, Chairman Harold Wheeler Nathaniel Rosenblatt David Clark Miles Theeman Alice Brown City Staff Present: James Ring Peter Witham Bud Knickerbocker Lynn Johnson News Media Present: Bangor Daily News Chairman Guerette opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA Item No. 1: Site Development Plan approval to expand the existing parking area located at 1365 Broadway in a Contract Shopping and Personal Service District. Dunmurry, LLC, applicant. Chairman Guerette noted that there were questions regarding this item and he requested it be taken off the Consent Agenda and considered under New Business. PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No. 2: Amending Chapter 165-108.1 – Penjajawoc Marsh Overlay Zone. City of Bangor, applicant. C.O. # 06-138 Chairman Guerette discussed the format the Board follows for Public Hearings. He opened the Public Hearing and asked for a presentation from the applicant. Mr. Jim Ring, Director of the Bureau of Infrastructure and Development Support, represented the applicant, City of Bangor. Mr. Ring indicated that the applicant is requesting a series of six zoning amendments to the Land Development Code. Mr. Ring explained that over a year 2 ago, the City Council appointed a Task Force to look at land use issues in the Bangor Mall/Penjajawoc Stream area. That Task Force developed a series of general recommendations. The City Council subsequently established the Penjajawoc Marsh/Bangor Mall Management Commission. This Commission is the successor to the Task Force and it has been given a number of tasks including working to develop actual amendments to the Land Development Code to reflect the recommendations of the Task Force Report. The first of these amendments is a request to amend Chapter 165-108.1 to create the main body of restrictions and regulations in the Penjajawoc Overlay Zone. Mr. Ring indicated that one of the drawbacks is that there was not enough direction as to the type of review that the Marsh Mall Commission was to do for pending development projects. One of the proposed changes is designed to address that issue and provide more direction. This amendment sets a specific residential setback of 250 feet from the edge of the Penjajawoc Marsh wetland for any structures, and it also sets a fixed standard for impervious areas which is based on the allowable impervious area for a standard sized lot in an underlying district. For example, if it is in a Rural Residence & Agricultural District the minimum lot size is 1.5 acres. This would limit the total amount of impervious, non-building area within 250 feet to what would be allowed on a single lot even though the parcel may be very large. Another important aspect of this amendment is to require that residential subdivisions be accomplished by cluster provisions. In the Overlay Zone, cluster development is the only option for residential subdivisions. Mr. Ring indicated that cluster developments will provide for more compact use of land and will make for a large degree of open space in a particular development. Chairman Guerette indicated that in the Staff Memorandum it was noted that one of the draw backs to the proposed Overlay Zone is the lack of guidance as to the scope of the review and the procedural process for the Commission. He asked Mr. Ring if he was indicating that there was further guidance provided by this amendment or if it was as the Board had reviewed in the past. Mr. Ring indicated that the original language did not provide much guidance for the Marsh Mall Commission as to its scope of review. It basically said that the Marsh Mall Commission is authorized to meet with developers but it did not say much more. In paragraph C of the proposed Zoning Amendment there is more specific language to provide more procedural guidelines. Chairman Guerette asked for comments from proponents. Mr. Shep Harris, 100 Linden Street and Chairperson of the Marsh Mall Commission, spoke in favor of this Zoning Amendment and in favor of the subsequent amendments that the City is putting forward. He indicated that he appreciated the work that the Board has done regarding this and also the work done by the City Engineer and City Planner. He said that he felt that this is a very good proposal and he thanked everyone for their efforts. Chairman Guerette commented that the Board was delighted to see this back before them in a revised manner and he appreciated the willingness and ability to compromise and to discuss this with the Board. 3 No one spoke in opposition and Chairman Guerette closed the Public Hearing. There being no further discussion, Chairman Guerette asked for a motion. Mr. Rosenblatt noted that the Board has reviewed this in a couple of workshop sessions and he felt that the language reflects the discussions that the Board has had and he supported this amendment along with the other ones. Mr. Rosenblatt moved to recommend that the City Council adopt the Zoning Amendment to Section 165-108.1 as contained in C.O. # 06-138. Mr. Theeman seconded the motion. The Board voted 5 to 0 in favor of the motion. Item No. 3: Amending Chapter 165-8 – Districts Established; Zoning Map – Penjajawoc Marsh Overlay Zone. City of Bangor, applicant – C.O. # 06-139. Chairman Guerette opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Ring, representing the City of Bangor, explained that this is an amendment to Chapter 165-8 which identifies various zoning districts within the Land Development Code and this will add overlay zones as a separate district. The language also adds the Shoreland Zoning Overlay. Although the Shoreland Zoning is referred to elsewhere in the Land Development Code, it seemed appropriate to mention it here as well while adding overlay zones. No one spoke either in favor of or in opposition to this proposed Zoning Amendment. Chairman Guerette closed the Public Hearing and asked if there was further discussion amongst the Board Members. There being none, he asked for a motion. Mr. Rosenblatt moved that the Board recommend to the City Council adoption of the Zoning Amendment to Section 165-8 of the Codes of the City of Bangor as set forth in C.O. # 06-139. Mr. Theeman seconded the motion. The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion to recommend approval. Item No. 4: Amending Chapter 165-99 Low Density Residential District and Chapter 165-105 – Rural Residence and Agricultural District Cluster Subdivision Provisions. City of Bangor, applicant. C.O. # 06-140. The Public Hearing was opened by Chairman Guerette who asked Mr. Ring to comment. Mr. Ring indicated that this proposed amendment deals with cluster developments. The Land Development Code already has a cluster provision in the Low Density Residential (LDR) Section. In order to provide for cluster development in the Rural Residential and Agricultural District, which is a zone that is predominant in the Penjajawoc Marsh Overlay Zone, there was a need to create new language. In the Low Density Residential District cluster development is a conditional use and is only for detached structures. The basic concept of the proposed cluster provision is that lots are allowed to be smaller in exchange for a greater proportion of a lot being open space. The existing LDR language is different than what is proposing in the RR & A in that in the LDR, while allowing cluster development, it would also set a new requirement of 35% of permanent open space. This proposal does not propose to dictate the lot size but will allow the developer and the market to determine what the lot size should be. As proposed, detached cluster development would be an option as a permitted use in the LDR District and the attached 4 cluster as a conditional use. This amendment also proposes cluster development in the RR & A and allows the lots to shrink from 1.5 acres in size to 1 acre in size. The lot frontage would be reduced from 200 feet to 150 feet. That amounts to a 25 percent reduction in used footprint and also provides for a total of 30 percent of gross acreage to be provided as open space. The 30 percent comes from the 25 percent savings in land plus the 5 percent that was originally there. Chairman Guerette noted that these zoning amendments are the result of a process that began a couple of years ago to mitigate the conflict that arose when developments occurred or were proposed in the Penjajawoc Marsh Area. This Marsh Mall Commission proposed some very workable compromises found in the Overlay Zone and as well as amendments to the Land Development Code to make those changes work throughout the entire City where they may be appropriate. No one spoke either in favor of or in opposition to the proposed Zoning Amendment, and Chairman Guerette closed the Public Hearing and asked for a motion. Mr. Rosenblatt moved to recommend to the City Council that they adopt the amendment to Section 165-99 and Section 165-105 of the Land Development Code as set forth in C.O. #06-140. Mr. Theeman seconded the motion. The Board voted 5 to 0 in favor of recommending approval of the C.O. # 06-140. Item No. 5: Amending Chapter 165 – Schedule B – Cluster Subdivisions in Low Density Residential Districts. City of Bangor, applicant. C.O. # 06-141. The Public Hearing was opened by Chairman Guerette who asked for comments from Staff. Jim Ring, City Engineer, spoke in favor of the proposed amendment. Mr. Ring indicated that this particular amendment pertains to a change to Schedule B. Schedule B as it appears in this section of the Land Development Code is a table that summarizes the requirements for setbacks, etc. The specific amendment is to modify Section B to reflect the provisions of C.O. # 06-140 (as noted in the previous item) as they pertain to the Low Density Residential District. There were no proponents or opponents and Chairman Guerette closed the Public Hearing and asked for comments from the Board. There being none, he asked for a motion. Mr. Rosenblatt moved to recommend to the City Council adoption of the changes to Schedule B as contained in C.O. # 06-141. The motion was seconded by Mr. Theeman and passed unanimously. Item No. 6: Amending Chapter 165 – Schedule C – Cluster Subdivisions in Rural Residence and Agricultural Districts. City of Bangor, applicant. C.O. # 06-142. Chairman Guerette opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Jim Ring, representing the City of Bangor, indicated that this amendment is very similar to the previous one under Item No. 5, 5 above, and it consists of modifications to Schedule C to reflect the changes that would be made by C.O. # 06-140 for the Rural Residence and Agricultural District. Chairman Guerette asked for comments from proponents and opponents. There being none, he closed the Public Hearing and asked for a motion. Mr. Rosenblatt moved to recommend to the City Council adoption of zoning amendment to Schedule C as set forth in C.O. # 06-142. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion. The Board vote unanimously in favor of the motion. Item No. 7: Amending Chapter 165, Article XVII, Section 165-128C – Major Subdivision- Interconnection of Street and Pedestrian Systems and Article XVIII, Section 165-128H Major Subdivision Dedications. City of Bangor, applicant. C.O. # 06- 143. The Public Hearing was opened by Chairman Guerette who asked for comments from Staff. Mr. Jim Ring, City Engineer, explained that this amendment refers to two general sets of provisions. First, it would add language to require that the interconnection of street and pedestrian systems be provided for in subdivisions and trails, and add language for the reservation of easements for walking and biking trails when they are deemed appropriate. The second section deals with the conveyance or dedications of land (open space, rights-of- way, etc.) and a wider range of options for developers to meet the open space requirement. The language outlines the specific criteria that must be met for potential ways to deal with such properties by conveyance, conservation easements or reservations held by land trusts and homeowners associations, or held by the City. As no one spoke in favor of or in opposition to this proposed zoning amendment, Chairman Guerette closed the Public Hearing and asked for discussion from the Board. Mr. Theeman asked Mr. Ring to elaborate on the language of interconnection of street and pedestrian systems where deemed appropriate. Mr. Ring explained that the language provides that when a new subdivision project comes forward it provide for connectivity with other potential subdivisions and bordering parcels. That can be done with the establishment of reservations, street rights-of-way, trails systems, or paths. Mr. Ring pointed out that there may be occasions where an interconnection may not be the best thing if it encourages cut-thru traffic. Presently, there is no language that encourages this interconnectivity and it is a good planning approach to avoid excessive trips or length of trips when people are visiting from one subdivision to another. The objective of the language is to codify this where as it is absent now. Chairman Guerette asked for a motion. Mr. Rosenblatt moved to recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed amendment to Section 165-128C and Section 165-128H of the Land Development as set forth in C.O.# 06-143. Mr. Theeman seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 6 Mr. Ring indicated that he wished to recognize the efforts of the Marsh Mall Commission and the Planning Board during this process. He felt that this was a very productive and collaborative effort and will make for better regulation in this area. Item No. 8: To amend the Land Development Code by changing two parcels of land located at 54 and 58 Court Street from Urban Residence Two District to Government and Institutional Service District. Said parcels containing approximately 10,000 square feet. Bangor YMCA, applicant. C.O. # 06-136. Chairman Guerette opened the Public Hearing and asked for a presentation by the applicant. Mr. Rob Reeves, CEO of the YMCA/YWCA noting that both Y’s began working together in 2004 under the name of the Bangor Y. He indicated that he was speaking on behalf of the YMCA who is seeking this zone change in order to provide additional on-site parking. There are 80-100 children who use the facilities during the afternoon hours and when their parents come to pick them up it is very congested in this area of Hammond Street. The Y wishes to construct a parking lot to the rear of the site (and next to their existing parking lot) on 54 Court Street which they own and on 58 Court Street which is under an option with the City of Bangor. The Y has been working with the City to purchase 58 Court Street with the intention of expanding their current parking lot. Mr. Reeves said that there are presently 3500 Memberships within the Y unit with 8,000 users as well as many non-members who use the facilities as well. There are 56 parking spots to the rear of the YMCA and they wish to construct an additional 14 spaces for Staff use. Mr. Reeves indicated that he took the effort to meet with Mr. Gould and was surprised that the Planning Staff did not recommend supporting this zone change request. Mr. Reeves, in looking at Mr. Gould’s comments regarding a contract zone change, indicated that this was an issue that they discussed as an option. Mr. Gould indicated that this would go through easier than a straight zone change but Mr. Reeves said that he was not lead to believe that a straight zone change would not be an acceptable opportunity to come before the Board. Mr. Reeves said that had he felt that this was something that the Planning Staff was not going to support, they might have done this differently. He noted that Staff also indicated in the Staff Memorandum that the Y is looking at facilities and opportunities both at Second Street and Hammond Street. Mr. Reeves indicated that they are just beginning a strategic planning process and they are in no means near to anything being decided than they were a year ago. One of the options would be to expand on existing parcels either on Second Street, Hammond Street or on a new facility. He indicated that the YMCA had no intention of wanting to leave downtown and it would be his inkling that they would stay on one of the existing lots. The cost of two buildings and three pools is excessive. Mr. Reeves explained that his recommendation to the Executive Committee in favor of a straight zone change was one of cost. A straight zone change is $780 versus $1,500 for a contract zone change. Mr. Reeves indicated that they had already spent money to identify asbestos in the building and they had a survey done in order to have a site plan prepared. He indicated that they were not against a contract zone change but it was a matter of cost as to why they applied for a straight zone change. He noted that if they 7 were going to do anything with neighboring lots they would have to come back before the Planning Board for other zoning changes. Mr. Rosenblatt indicated that one of the challenging dynamics that the Board faces is in those areas of the City where different uses come together. He said that he was sensitive to the concerns expressed by Mr. Gould in the Staff Memorandum and indicated that he would be more comfortable if this were a contract zone change request. He asked Mr. Reeves if in his discussions with Mr. Gould about possible contract zone changes if they discussed specifics as to the types of contract conditions that might be appropriate for this situation to try to balance the adjacent residential and institutional uses. Mr. Reeves said that Mr. Gould gave ideas as to what that might entail – buffers, shrubbery, plants, and all the things that they would be happy to do with a contract or without a contract. He said that he realized that it is not binding without a contract but there was no question in their minds that they weren’t against any of those suggestions. Mr. Reeves added that they have talked with the neighboring property owners. Chairman Guerette asked if there had been any discussions from the bordering neighbors if they were in favor of or against this. Mr. Reeves indicated that they have had discussions during the process of going before the City Council and they indicated that they were in favor of seeing a house on that. As they moved to the end of that process where the Council approving an option with the Y it was his understanding that the abutting property owner’s last comment was if you are going to allow the Y to do this please make sure that they have the restrictions and the buffers, etc. Mr. Reeves said that they were good neighbors and that they have had parking issues before and have dealt with them effectively. Mr. Theeman asked if there was still a building on the City lot under option. Mr. Ring explained that the second property is 58 Court Street and the City acquired it by taxes. The building is in a very dilapidated condition. The City went through the process of requesting proposals and the Y’s proposal was deemed the most responsive proposal for the property. Chairman Guerette asked for comments from proponents. Mr. Joe Pratt, Treasurer for the Bangor Y, indicated that it was their choice to come forward with a straight zone change. He said that he did not think that they fully appreciated the difference between the two applications and they chose this option as it was the least expensive. He said that $750 might not sound like a lot, but it is to a lot of the non-profits including the Y. Mr. Pratt added that as the potential owner of the property, a straight zone change would give them a little more flexibility, although they would be very respective of what their neighbors might want in terms of buffers, etc. He asked that the Board consider approval of this a straight forward zone change. Mrs. Ruth Shook, a resident and property of Bangor, told the Board that she and her husband have been members of the YMCA for over 20 years. She said that she has always been impressed by the Y’s philosophy and practice of provided services for all people within the City of Bangor and certainly those who are low-income and children. She and her husband go to the 5:30 fitness class and they are certainly aware of the limitations of 8 parking, not only for members who are coming for classes but for parents who are picking up their children. The safety factor is always something that they have watched especially in the wintertime when it is dark. The traffic at the time when people are getting out of work and going up Hammond Street is a heavy traffic time. Parents are crossing Hammond Street or they are coming through the parking lot to pick up their children and the additional parking spaces that could be provided by this request would make a difference in the safety factor. Mr. Paul Fuller, a member of the Bangor Y and a proponent for this zone change, indicated that for three years he has had five offices in the downtown area. Six months ago he moved out of the downtown area because of parking. He said that from a business point of view he would hate to see the Y move out of the downtown area for the sake of the downtown area. Mr. Rick Fournier also spoke in favor. He said that when he looked at the map he looked at Government and Institutional Service District zoning. He said that he felt that by changing these parcels it would not change the make-up of Court Street as far as the character of the street goes or the neighborhood. He also said that when he looked at the mission of the City and when he compared that to what the Y’s mission does within the City of Bangor it hits just about everyone of those points. Mr. Tom Higgins, an Essex Street resident, indicated that he was in support of the zone change. As a year-round user of the Y with his child he sees that there is a significant parking problem there. Even though this is a small change for 14 additional parking spaces he felt that this would be a big addition for the Y. This is important as the Y does a lot for the community, has a great track record, and does a lot for the future of this community in instilling values in our children and providing a place for them to go. He encouraged the Board to support this zone change. Chairman Guerette then asked for opponents. There being none, he closed the Public Hearing and asked for comments from Staff. Mr. Jim Ring, City Engineer, indicated that this is a request to rezone two parcels of land comprising a land area of approximately 10,000 sq. ft. from Urban Residence Two District to Government and Institutional Service District. The Court House and the Police Station are zoned G & ISD and the Y in its present footprint is zoned G & ISD. The City’s Land Use Concepts Map and Zoning Policy Map in the Comprehensive Plan indicate that this area should be residential. He did not think that anyone questions the need for some additional parking or the mission or the good services that the Y provides. However, the Planning Officer could not ignore the fact that the Comprehensive Plan’s Zoning Policy Map and the Land Use Concepts Map currently indicate that that area should be residential. That was one of the things that was taken into account in his recommendation. The Board certainly understands that a straight rezoning allows all potential uses whether the ownership changes or not. The Y may have no intentions of changing locations but once zoning is in place, if ownership should change, all uses allowed under the G & ISD would be permissible. Mr. Ring said that it was his understanding that there was conversation about a contract zone change which would allow an opportunity to make some additional protections or assurances for shielding or buffering 9 the adjacent residential uses. On the basis of those considerations, the Planning Staff feels that the straight zone change request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and may not be in the best interest of the Court Street neighborhood and recommended that the Board not support this zone change request. Mr. Clark noted that no one from Court Street or Bean Court was present in opposition to this request, noted his experiences in trying to find parking while using the Y, and noted that he has had several children dart out in front of him on Hammond Street on weekends. He said that parking is a problem but when he looks at the other options they have he could not see any sense in trying to find a space on Hammond Street as this would be more dangerous or possibly across Court Street after the Police Station moves. He felt it would make more sense to create parking on these lots. Mr. Clark indicated that he would not like to see the Y move out of downtown or cut programs because there is no room for people to park to use these programs. For these reasons, Mr. Clark said he was in support of this zone change request. Mr. Theeman asked Mr. Ring if when the City was entertaining options for the uses for the space, the Y had the best option available and if this option spoke to the fact that they would tear the building down and use it for parking. Mr. Ring indicated that the City Council authorized the Y to enter into this agreement. Mr. Reeves indicated that right from the start there was no question that the Y wanted to tear the building down for parking. Mr. Wheeler indicated that this is a difficult issue primarily because of the high esteem and regard in which the institution holds in the community. Mr. Wheeler indicated that he is not disposed to going against a recommendation of the Planning Officer in view of the work that he has done for us and with us ever sense he has become the Planning Officer. Mr. Wheeler said that this presents a rather serious conflict of judgment in his mind. He said that he did not perceive that the question is whether or not the Y needs additional parking. However, Mr. Wheeler was concerned about the fact that the sum of $750 seemed to stand between achieving a solution that would provide the necessary parking and also maintaining the integrity of our Land use Policy and Zoning Maps for that area of the City. He indicated that he not only had an emotional attachment to the Y but also to Court Street because that is the first street that he resided on when he came to Bangor. He was also concerned about what he thought is probably and inevitable merger of facilities and that it does not make sense for two facilities to move this close together and not eventually wind up living together. He noted that Mrs. Shook commented on the services provided to low-income members and he asked for more information about the Y’s fees and services. Mr. Reeves indicated that their fee structure is such that those that feel they can afford to pay should pay. Mrs. Shook worked for the Y for many years and ran that program called an access program which is a program to make it accessible to people without the means. They are required to qualify themselves by filling out some paperwork and by sit down with a staff person to determine their needs, their ability to pay based on their expanses, etc. The Bangor Y gave away over $70,000 in subsidized memberships and programs in addition to what they do for camps and other things outside of that locale. 10 This is an increase of $23,000 over the last year so they are giving away more money but they are also serving more people. Mr. Wheeler asked Mr. Reeves to translate the $70,000 into how many people were served. Mr. Reeves indicated that 745 people received this benefit for memberships alone. Mr. Wheeler asked if there was any other reason, other than cost, that they would prefer not to go for a contract zone change. Mr. Reeves said that there was no other reason but for cost adding that they took the choice for a lower cost thinking it would give them the same outcome. For a contract zone change they would need the input from neighbors and others to gather what they would like for them to put into the contract. He indicated that the Y did not feel that they needed to do that because they are the Y and they stand up to what they say they will do. Mr. Reeves noted that the abutting property owner (Mr. Pillotte) requested that if the city allows the Y to do this, that they make sure they have the buffers and do everything that is required. Chairman Guerette indicated that he would have preferred not to see this application before the Board in this manner as he would really like to support the Y because he realizes that parking is a critical issue. He said that the Board has spent an exhaustive amount of time updating the Comprehensive Plan and part of that included some neighborhood meetings where neighbors told the Board in every quadrant of the City that one of the major concerns that they have is the infringement of development on their residential neighborhoods. While one might not foresee a small parking lot as a huge infringement, it is a permanent change and it does open up the use of that land for other uses in the future without having to come to the Planning Board for approval. Had this been a contract zone change, he felt that it would be a hands down approval and this is what he would like to see happen. As there was no further discussion, Mr. Rosenblatt moved to recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed zone change at 54 and 58 Court Street from URD-2 to G & ISD as set forth in C.O. # 06-136. The motion was seconded by Mr. Wheeler and the Board voted one in favor and four opposed, therefore, defeating the motion. Item No. 9: To amend the Land Development Code by changing a parcel of land located at 954 Finson Road from Rural Residence and Agricultural District to Low Density Residential District. Said parcel containing approximately 36,500 square feet. Stanley E. MacMillan, applicant. C.O. # 06-137. Chairman Guerette opened the Public Hearing and asked for comments from the applicant. Mr. Stan MacMillan explained that he was requesting this zone change from Rural Residence and Agricultural District to Low Density Residential District to put the zoning of this parcel into the same zoning category as the adjacent parcel. He indicated that he would like to build a road through this parcel to access the parcel behind this to build a subdivision/ planned unit development. 11 Mr. Rosenblatt asked if there was any particular reason why this parcel stayed as Rural Residence and Agricultural District when the surrounding parcel was zoned Low Density Residential District. Mr. MacMillan indicated that it was an oversight as he owned both of the parcels at that time and this parcel was not included in the request. Chairman Guerette then asked for comments from proponents. There being none, Chairman Guerette asked for opponents. Mr. Rick Curless, a resident at 944 Finson Road, said that he was told by Tricia Quirk that there were condos going in on this site and asked if the applicant was just proposing a road or was proposing buildings. Mr. MacMillian indicated that his future plan is to build a planned unit residential development on the back parcel that is adjacent to this parcel. No one else spoke and Chairman Guerette closed the Public Hearing and asked for the Planning Department Report. Jim Ring, City Engineer, explained that this a request for a zone change for a parcel of land that is just under an acre at 954 Finson Road from Rural Residence and Agricultural to Low Density Residential. The parcel does border other land that the applicant owns which was rezoned to Low Density Residential District. The request is consistent with both the Land Use Concepts Map and the Zoning Policy Map of the Comprehensive Plan and it is within the Primary Service Area. Mr. Ring indicated that this is important because an LDR zone allows for 12,000 sq. ft. lots as opposed to 1.5 acre lots required in the RR & A District. Staff recommended a positive recommendation to the City Council. Mr. Ring indicated that public sewer is currently available to the rear of the parcel but water is not out there as of yet but the applicant has made a request to the Bangor Water District to extend service to the area. Chairman Guerette then asked for a motion. Mr. Clark moved to recommend approval to the City Council for the zone change at 954 Finson Road for Stanley E. MacMillan, applicant under C.O. # 06-136 from Rural Residence and Agricultural District to Low Density Residential District. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion. The Board voted 5 to 0 in favor of the motion to recommend approval of C.O. # 06-136. Item No. 10: Preliminary Subdivision Plan approval for a 7-lot commercial subdivision located on Outer Broadway in a Shopping and Personal Service District. Judson M. Grant, Jr., applicant. The Public Hearing was opened by the Chairman who asked for a presentation by the applicant. Ms. Shelly Lizotte of Ames A/E and Project Engineer for the applicant spoke in favor. She noted that John Theriault, Traffic Engineer, Andy Sturgeon, President of Ames A/E and Michael Longo representing Mr. Grant were also present in support of this application. Ms. Lizotte explained that this project is for a 7 –lot commercial subdivision located on Broadway 1100 feet beyond Judson Boulevard directly across the street from the Abundant Life Church. A new 600 foot road is proposed that would include an 80-foot right-of-way as is required in the Land Development Code for a commercial subdivision. The lots within the subdivision will range in size from 1.8 acres to 2.6 acres which exceeds the minimum lot size for the Shopping and Personal Service District. She indicated that the 12 applicant envisions professional office space to be constructed on these lots with proposed building footprints ranging from 3,000 sq. ft. to 5,000 sq. ft. in size. Ms. Lizotte explained that in 2002, this area was rezoned for this particular use. The plan includes 2.36 acres of open space or about 16% in an area which is a low spot and has a fair amount of wetlands and a stream that divides this area from the residential uses and is a good buffer between the differing land uses. Ms. Lizotte discussed access noting that four of the lots will be accessed from Broadway only and the other three will have access from the new road. It is their intention to have two combined entrances for the four lots on Broadway to limit the number of curb cuts. Each lot will have public water and private sewer. Three lots will be sewered by gravity to an existing private pump station that is located behind the Broadway Veterinary Clinic. The sewer there is shallow and there is no option for gravity to get to the sewer main that exists in Judson Heights. The only option is to pump the sewer. The other three lots will have a new pump station which will be at the low spot of the new road up to the existing gravity sewer that is located in LaSalle Drive. Ms. Lizotte indicated that this subdivision will also require a modification to the entire subdivision from DEP, stormwater calculations have been done and submitted to the City, each one of the lots will have to come back to the Board for a Land Development Permit for the specific development on each lot. The applicant anticipates handling the stormwater on each lot individually as it is developed. Ms. Lizotte indicated that the concerns expressed by the City Engineer would be addressed prior to Final Subdivision Plan submission. Ms. Lizotte indicated that the applicant submitted an application for a grade and fill permit at an earlier date and at Staff’s recommendation they combined that application with this one to handle both at once. Mr. Clark asked if the applicant proposed individual buildings for office space as opposed to a shopping mall. Ms. Lizotte deferred this question to Mr. Longo. Mr. Michael Longo, representing Grant Trailer Sales and the developer, explained that they would envision this side of Broadway for professional office use with each lot being sold individually. However, there would be the option of putting up a larger building if someone bought two adjoining lots. He indicated that they had a commitment on one of the lots for a proposed 4,000 to 5,000 sq. ft. professional office building. Mr. Rosenblatt asked if it would be possible to pursue gravity sewer options to eliminate the two pump stations. Ms. Lizotte explained that they have looked at this and at this point there aren’t any options to pursue gravity sewer. The closest sewer main is in a low spot behind the Veterinary Clinic and the only way to get to that would be to disrupt a wetland area and they did not feel that that was the right way to go with this. Mr. Rosenblatt asked who would be maintaining this system. Ms. Lizotte indicated that the current one is owned by the Veterinary Clinic and that she believed that Mr. Longo was talking with them for some agreement to share that one and she was not sure about the additional pump station. Mr. Rosenblatt asked if they anticipated submitting additional stormwater information between preliminary plan and final plan submittals. Ms. Lizotte 13 indicated that she could estimate the size and location of stormwater treatment based on the estimated size of the proposed buildings. Mr. Rosenblatt raised the Staff’s concern about the need for a cul-de-sac as opposed to a hammerhead turn. Ms. Lizotte indicated that it was their intention to submit an expansion to Judson Heights for additional residential lots. At that time, they anticipate that the two roads would be connected. Mr. Longo indicated that they would certainly put in a cul-de-sac if the Judson Heights Phase II expansion is not built. However he indicated that contracts for road construction as proposed to be let at the same time ,will be built as one project at the same time. Ms. Brown asked about the existing sewer pump within the existing easement, if there is a field location, and if it is within the easement and if not this would be the time to change this easement. Ms. Lizotte indicated that this is a field location, it was surveyed and they would certainly make sure that it fits within the easement. Ms. Brown then asked about the access easements for the lots that front on Broadway and why the shared easements are not on the property lines. Ms. Lizottte indicated that that was more of a conceptual choice and seemed to make more sense to only have one lot having to worry about having an easement on it as opposed to two lots. Ms. Brown asked about the access for Lots and 6 and 7 as Lot 7 appears to require a tremendous amount of fill. She was concerned that with this amount of fill it would spill out onto Lot 4 thus necessitating an easement for fill on that lot. Ms. Lizotte noted that the previous application submitted for a fill and grade permit did include some grading in that area. Ms. Lizotte indicated that she would have no problem showing grades as long as Mr. Longo and Mr. Grant were in agreement. Chairman Guerette noting that this proposal would create 3 curb cuts onto Broadway and this section of Broadway is posed for future potential commercial development with more curb cuts created on the other side of the street. He said that the City, in the last several years, has paid a lot of attention to where curb cuts are and where traffic enters and exits onto major roadways to mitigate traffic hazards from increased flow of traffic. He asked if any thought had been given to reconfiguring this proposal in a way to eliminate or reduce these curb cuts and how did they arrive at three curb cuts. Ms. Lizotte indicated that the new road is an existing entrance to the back of the property and the other two curb cuts were spaced so that each segment between the entrances could be as far apart as they could make them and still serve two lots. A parallel road to Broadway was considered but due to the fact that the wetland area would require a fair amount of fill to cross it the applicant did not feel that this area should be impacted any further. Also, the proposed entrances meet the requirements of the Land Development Code. Mr. John Theriault, Traffic Engineer at Ames Corporation, discussed the three access points along Broadway noting that their siting distances are well over 425 feet which is recommended by the Maine Department of Transportation for the existing posted 45 mph 14 speed limit. He used the conceptual plan in order to come up with projected traffic volumes. They estimated 9600 sq. ft. of medical office space use, and 31,000 sq. ft. of general office space use. Using the ITE Trip Generation Manual the site will generate approximately 83 vehicle trips during the morning peak hour and 89 vehicle trips during the evening peak hour which is distributed amongst the three entrances. The Phase II Judson Heights expansion roadway has already been permitted by MDOT for a Traffic Movement Permit. At this entrance, with a full build out of Judson Heights for that new roadway, they expect 62 vehicle trips during the morning peak hour and 62 during the evening peak hour. The levels of service at that new driveway under the Phase II expansion as projected at a Level of Service D during the morning peak hour and Level of Service C during evening peak hour. Mr. Theriault indicated that this would not be a significant. He noted that when the driveway was constructed part of the condition of the MDOT permit was that they were required to provide a single-travel lane along Broadway in each direction and provide a two-way center turn lane. This will have some mitigation value as far as the increase in traffic along this roadway. Mr. Rosenblatt asked for more information on the current Permit regarding the center turning lane and how long it is. Mr. Theriault explained that when the driveway opens it will be from Judson Heights Boulevard to about 200 feet past that entrance. The City of Bangor is doing improvements to the intersection of Burleigh Road and Broadway and that is going to become an exclusive left turn lane, through lane in each direction and then a small right-turn lane at that location. Mr. Rosenblatt noted that in the Comprehensive Plan discussions they had talked about the cumulative traffic impacts of projects that come under the MDOT and how to deal with those problems. He asked Mr. Theriault what would happen if those counts turn out to be higher than what they have described. Mr. Theriault explained that if they go over 100 vehicle trips then they will be required to do a Traffic Movement Permit. Every lot will need to go before the Planning Board and at that time he will be asked to write a summary based on what is actually being developed. Those volumes will accumulate and if they go over 100 they will have to address the Movement Permit. No one spoke either in favor of or in opposition to this application and Chairman Guerette closed the Public Hearing and asked for comments from Staff. Mr. Jim Ring, City Engineer, indicated that this is an application for preliminary subdivision plan approval for a 7-lot subdivision. The applicant has discussed how he plans to deal with traffic and utilities. Staff has a number of issues that they have raised that they would like to see pursued further between preliminary plan approval and final subdivision plan approval. For example, Staff had concerns about the length of the main road and the cul-de-sac vs. a hammer head turnaround. The Land Development Code under Section 165-128 provides that a hammer head turnaround may be allowed if approved by the City Engineer. That option is only for residential access of 500 feet or less and that is not the case here. Staff had concerns about the manner in which these lots would be sewered. Presently, they are proposing two pumps stations and Staff is suggesting that they ought to be looked at because there may be a possibility to eliminate one of the pump stations which may result in a potential savings both in terms of installation and operating costs to the applicant. A separate turn lane will be necessary at the time the project is developed which will help on 15 driveway alignment issues and turning count issues. Mr. Ring did not have any issues with the information submitted regarding stormwater but would like to see more details on how it will be handled prior to final subdivision plan submittal. Staff also pointed out that there might be a potential for shortening the road to be constructed. Mr. Theeman asked who would be requiring the fifth lane, turning lane and if this was a cost that would be assumed by the applicant. Mr. Ring indicated that the cost will be borne by the applicant. What is proposed with the overall development of this area is to extend a center turn land out to and beyond the new driveway location. Mr. Clark noted that it is very difficult to exit out of the shopping center along Broadway in this area. With the potential of development on the other side of Broadway, he asked if there would be a provision for the applicant or the City to install a traffic light for safety. Mr. Ring indicated that it would be virtually impossible to develop the opposite side without running up against the traffic movement permit threshold. That may then suggest a light would be appropriate but that would require a more extensive traffic study. Mr. Ring noted that it would not be required as part of this project but if the other side of Broadway is developed, it would be very likely that there might be additional signalization or roadway improvements to support this. Mr. Rosenblatt asked if the roadway parallel to Broadway was considered a driveway as opposed to a street. Mr. Ring indicated that that is what the applicant is proposing. Mr. Theeman asked if there was going to be a sidewalk. Mr. Longo indicated that they did not propose one. There being no further comments, Chairman Guerette asked for a motion. Mr. Wheeler moved that the Board grant approval for the preliminary subdivision plan for a 7- lot, 14.9 acre commercial subdivision at 1397 to 1495 Broadway which is located in a Shopping and Personal Service District for Judson M. Grant, Jr., applicant. Mr. Clark seconded the motion. The Board voted four in favor and one opposed to the motion. NEW BUSINESS Item No. 12: Final Subdivision Plan approval of a four-lot subdivision located on Davis Road in a Rural Residence and Agricultural District. Apostolic Lighthouse Church, applicant. Mr. Richard Perry, representing the applicant, explained that the applicant is proposing to create four new house lots on this 33 acre parcel. Mr. Perry indicated that the plan, as submitted, meets the requirements for lot size and road frontage. The applicant needs to subdivide this in order to recoup some of the money that they paid for the initial parcel. They feel this is a very important part of their plans for the remaining property. He noted the front portion of this parcel is a freshwater wetland by the rules of the DEP but it is only an agricultural field that has been mowed and farmed for many many years. The applicant went to additional expense to hire S.W. Cole to examine this wetland who determined that it was not a wetland of special significance. He indicated that several 16 people looked at this area and they do have permitting from DEP in order to construct the driveways for the lots. Ms. Brown noted that she had reviewed the information submitted and indicated that the applicant had the necessary permitting from DEP. Mr. Perry indicated that there is protection from the setbacks, there is open space around the edges of each lot, the man made ditch has an easement in place that will be maintained, and there will be covenants in the deed and on the plans. There will be restrictions in the deeds and on the plan that the driveways have to be built in the area that they were approved and they have been staked out on the ground. No one spoke in opposition. Chairman Guerette asked for the Staff Report. Mr. Jim Ring, City Engineer, indicated that this is a Final Subdivision Plan of a four-lot minor subdivision meaning that there is no public infrastructure involved. There is a lot of wetland on the front of the property and the rear of the property is upland. Since this memo was written, he had reviewed the calculations for the design of the driveways. The application is consistent with the subdivision law, the City’s Land Development Code and it is Staff’s recommendation for approval of this subdivision plan. Mr. Rosenblatt asked if because the Tier I Permit from DEP for the construction of the three driveways is under one permit, if the developer of the first driveway were to use up all of the allowed square footage what would happen if there wasn’t any left over for the remaining two driveways. Mr. Ring indicated that he calculated that each driveway area was in the order of 4,000 square feet and through the inspection process that would be monitored. He said that it would be unlikely that one driveway would use up the total square footage. Chairman Guerette asked for a motion. Mr. Rosenblatt moved to grant Final Subdivision Plan approval for the proposed minor subdivision located on Davis Road for the Apostolic Lighthouse Church, applicant. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion. The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion for approval. Item No. 1: Site Development Plan approval to expand the existing parking area located at 1365 Broadway in a Contract Shopping and Personal Service District. Dunmurry, LLC, applicant. Chairman Guerette indicated that the Planning Office was advised earlier this afternoon that the developer was reluctant to agree to the construction of a fence that would be required as part of the “C” Buffer on the rear of the property. Staff has requested that this item be continued. Mr. Theeman moved to continue this item to the Board’s next meeting. Mr. Rosenblatt seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. 17 Mr. Theeman asked if the applicant had indicated why they needed the additional parking. Mr. Ring indicated that the applicant currently meets the Ordinance requirements and had made a request for approval of additional parking. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Item No. 11: Planning Board Approval of Minutes. Chairman Guerette indicated that the Minutes of the February 7, 2006 were in order for approval. Mr. Wheeler moved approval of the Minutes of the February 7, 2006 Meeting. Mr. Theeman seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. There being no further comments, the meeting was adjourned at 9.25 p.m.