HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-10-17 Planning Board Minutes
PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF BANGOR
OCTOBER 17, 2006
MINUTES
Board Members Present: Robert Guerette, Chairman
Hal Wheeler
David Clark
Nathaniel Rosenblatt
Miles Theeman
Alice Brown
Jeff Barnes
City Staff Present: David Gould
James Ring
Peter Witham
Bud Knickerbocker
News Media Present: Bangor Daily News
Chairman Guerette called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
CONSENT AGENDA
As no one wished to remove either item from the Consent Agenda, Chairman Guerette asked
for a motion. Mr. Rosenblatt moved to approve the items on the Consent Agenda. Mr. Wheeler
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. The items approved are as follows:
Item No. 1: Site Development Plan approval to change the size of the second
story addition and add a stairway for egress at 458 Main Street in an
Urban Service District. Sleeper & Thareja, LLC, applicant.
Item No. 2: Site Development Plan approval to construct a 6,000 sq. ft. building
for manufacturing and assembly use and 35,358 sq. ft. of parking and
loading area located at 100V Dowd Road in an Industry and Service
District. Brooks Holdings, LLC, applicant.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Item No. 3: To amend the Official Map per Section 271-9 of the Code of the City of
Bangor to remove a portion of the proposed Parallel Service Road
located between Gilman Road and Hogan Road. City of Bangor,
applicant. C.O. # 06-338.
2
Chairman Guerette opened the Public Hearing and asked the City’s designee to make a
presentation. Mr. Jim Ring, Director of Infrastructure and Development Support and City Engineer,
explained that this is a proposed amendment to the City’s Official Map. The City maintains an Official
City Map which depicts accepted public streets and proposed future streets. One of the reasons why
proposed future streets are included on the Official Map is to provide notice to landowners and
potential developers of setback requirements they will need to meet as they contemplate
development. It also provides for what type of roadway improvements that are planned by the City.
Mr. Ring explained that in 1998 there was an Official Map action that placed a proposed future street
on the Official Map which was called the Parallel Service Road. This was to anticipate a possible
circulation route for what was then identified in the City’s Comprehensive Plan as a future commercial
development area. The layout of this proposed street provided a future circulation route to Stillwater
Avenue going between Hogan Road and the I-95 Off-ramp. Since that time there has been a slight
adjustment in the alignment of that portion of parallel service road that runs through the Bangor
Parkade Project.
Since that time the City Council appointed a Task Force that looked at a number of issues in
the Bangor Mall/Penjajawoc Marsh Area and focused on conservation measures, land use issues
including potential future development, and transportation and circulation needs for the future. One
of the major focuses of that group was to look at what the future transportation needs would be
there and whether or not the parallel service road concept was still valid. In 2005 the Task Force
developed a document that reflected a number of recommendations relating to the parallel service
road, as well as, other possible transportation improvements. More specifically, the Task Force
recommended that the Parallel Service Road should be abandoned in favor of short connections with
a connection crossing in the Penjajawoc Watershed in the approximately location where there is
already currently a crossing. It further recommended that connections between the larger
development parcels be provided through subsequent development.
Mr. Rosenblatt asked if that portion of the Parallel Service Road from Gilman Road to the
Parkade Development currently existed. Mr. Ring indicated that the main entrance to Parkade
occupies the first few hundred feet of it but that it falls within the proposed future alignment. There
is a provision in the Parkade plan to provide the right-of-way for the rest of the segment that is within
their property if that should become necessary in the future. Mr. Rosenblatt asked about the existing
stream crossing. Mr. Ring indicated that currently there is a private road, which is a driveway that
accesses a residence, going in from Stillwater Avenue. When the Marsh Mall Task Force looked at
possible alternatives, one of the problematic issues with the original location is that it would represent
a fairly wide crossing and could have some real environmental challenges. However, the Task Force
felt that it was still important to at least plan or provide for an additional way for circulation if
development occurs and the idea was to try to identify a location closer to Stillwater Avenue further
from the Marsh.
Chairman Guerette asked for comments from proponents. There being none, he closed the
Public Hearing and asked for comments from Staff. Planning Officer Gould indicated that the Official
Map Ordinance is a very powerful planning tool as it gives the ability to layout future roadways on
private property as if they really existed. This service road is a concept that has been around for
many years. The amendment in front of the Board stems from the work of the Marsh Mall Task
Force. The final report of the Penjajawoc Marsh/Bangor Mall Task Force in 2005 was adopted by the
City Council, and specifically called for the elimination of the majority of the Parallel Service Road in
lieu of the interconnection between two developments that were on the drawing board at the time of
that study. One being the W/S project that was at the Hogan Road end of Stillwater Avenue the
other was the Widewaters project on the Gilman Road side. The idea is that instead of laying out a
3
100 foot wide city highway, to have a connection between the two developments. This concept is
similar to what exists by the new Pizza Hut where there is a private roadway that connects Stillwater
Avenue to Bangor Mall Boulevard so that people don’t have to go out on the major roadway to go
from location to location. The Task Force was interested in lessening the impact upon the
Penjajawoc Marsh. Mr. Gould explained that there was a lot of review by traffic consultants to see if
they could get the same effect in terms of traffic through other means. There were also some other
improvements such as widening Stillwater Avenue. With all of these factors put together, there was a
level of comfort that the traffic on Stillwater Avenue could be managed without the parallel service
road as it was originally conceived.
Planning Officer Gould indicated that the test for this amendment is it’s consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan and noted that there probably couldn’t be a proposal that would be more
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, than the Marsh Mall Report which initiated this concept of
eliminating this leg of the parallel service road for a less formal interconnection of commercial
developments. Mr. Gould indicated that Staff recommended that the Planning Board make a positive
recommendation for adoption to the City Council.
Mr. Theeman asked in the absence of site development plans for the two interconnecting
developments, what assurance there was that this is a viable alternative to the existing road if
eliminated. Mr. Gould said that the road would not likely be built unless the development occurred.
If those large commercial properties don’t get developed the need for the parallel service road is
significantly less. Mr. Theeman added that there are people who currently drive on Stillwater Avenue
who would suggest that there is a need for a parallel service road now. He was concerned that the
Board was being asked to eliminate one option with no guarantee that the second option will be
available.
Mr. Ring indicated that there are busy times on Stillwater Avenue and there are physical needs
in terms of infrastructure. One of the conditions of the Widewaters Project is that they make off-site
traffic improvements. Likewise, if the proposed Super Wal-Mart project or other projects occur out
there they will also need to make improvements. He noted that the recommendation that was made
by the Task Force was to improve existing infrastructure. When the Task Force was doing its work
they had a traffic consultant look at potential build-out situations and then tested that build out
scenario which is based on the land use recommendations in the current Comprehensive Plan. Mr.
Ring indicated that there is additional capacity on Stillwater Avenue now.
Mr. Theeman asked Mr. Ring if he was confident that when projects come along that these
guidelines will be in place and the interconnecting will occur. Mr. Ring indicated that an official map
action is a powerful tool as it clearly identifies what the City’s priorities and goals are and sets forth
requirements for future development in a particular area. Ultimately, the Planning Board will approve
any future developments.
There being no further discussion, Chairman Guerette asked for a motion. Mr. Rosenblatt
moved that the Board recommend that the Council approve the proposed amendment to the Official
City Map pertaining to the Parallel Service Road as set forth in Council Order 06-338. Mr. Theeman
seconded the motion. The Board voted five in favor and none opposed.
NEW BUSINESS
4
Item No. 5: Site Development Plan approval to construct a 1,008 sq. ft. pool
house and a 120 sq. ft. mechanical room at 8 Stillwater Avenue
(Dakin Pool) in a Government and Institutional Service District.
Chairman Guerette indicated that while this is not a public hearing he would ask the City’s
designee to make a presentation. Mr. Jim Ring, City Engineer, noted that representatives of the
Friend’s of Dakin Pool were also present. Mr. Ring indicated that this project is to replace the Dakin
Pool bathhouse and pump house. The facility was built a number of decades ago and although work
has been done on the pool over the years to keep it in good condition the existing building which is
very close to Pine Street is in very poor condition. The City Council had considered shutting down the
facility. Because of that and because of strong interest in the community particularly on the east side
of the City, the Friend’s of Dakin Pool was formed to try to work with the City and do private funding
to replace the bath house and pump house. A plan has been developed to eliminate the existing
pump house and pool house and construct a new 1,000 sq. ft. bath house and a 120 sq. ft. pump
house on the southerly side of the existing pool rather than on the east side which is adjacent to Pine
Street. There will be some additional paving, fencing, re-piping and utility connections to make this a
very useful and serviceable facility. This is a very much needed project and it meets all applicable
ordinance requirements. He applauded the Friend’s of Dakin Pool for their efforts.
Mr. David Merritt indicated that he was involved with the architecture portion of the project
and that Mr. Paul Brody of WBRC Architects-Engineers did the site development plan.
Mr. Mike Robinson, President of the Friend’s of Dakin Pool, indicated that a year ago the City
Council recommended closing the pool. A group in the neighborhood got together and formed this
nonprofit corporation in order to keep the pool open. He noted that the Pancoe Pool located on the
west side of Bangor is at capacity and there is a need for Dakin Pool on the east side of the City. He
explained that they undertook a capital campaign to raise $100,000 to rebuild the bath house, the
pool shed and to extend the fence beyond the existing pool onto the grassy area for a picnic area. At
this point they are nearing the end of their campaign. He noted all of the community support that
they had received and that they have worked very hard with the City to make this happen.
Mr. Wheeler said that wished to tell Mr. Robinson how much he admired the work that he and
his group have done. In his opinion this is going to have to be the way money is raised for projects
that are outside the ability of the City to fund for the foreseeable future. He asked if Mr. Robinson
could give the Board an idea of how many people use Dakin Pool over the course of the summer
season and whether or not he would anticipate that in the foreseeable future a similar effort to raise
private funding for perhaps a reconstruction of the pool itself may be done to make it larger so that it
accommodates even more people.
Mr. Robinson indicated that the City had made some studies several years ago before they got
involved with this project and found that the attendance was down to 15 people a day. His group,
with the help of the City, put a sign up and put it on the City’s website advertising the pool and
attendance increased from 15 people a day to almost 80 people a day. Tracy Williette,
Superintendent of Recreation, indicated that through the efforts of the group the visibility of the
facility grew. With that enthusiasm the attendance has gone up considerably. Mr. Robinson added
th
that they have had several ice cream socials to highlight the pool. This year was the 50 anniversary
of the pool and they held a celebration. The Pancoe Pool has been a great success and it is at
capacity and there is a need for another pool and Dakin Pool can be a compliment to the Pancoe
Pool. As far as future expansion, he didn’t know but added that they would like to finish this project
5
first before going further. The Friends of Dakin Pool Corporation will continue to thrive after this
mission is accomplished.
Chairman Guerette asked for the Staff report. Planning Officer Gould indicated that this Site
Development Plan is to demolish the existing bath house and mechanical room and construct new
ones. Staff would like to see more improvements at the Dakin Pool such as landscaping, parking lots
and other amenities. Certainly this will take more time and money to do this. All that is in front of
the Board is the construction of the new bathhouse and the new building to handle the pumps and
other mechanical facilities. This proposal has a negligible impact in terms of stormwater impact and
there is no demand for additional buffers or landscaping at the park. Staff would have put this on the
Consent Agenda but wanted to give the Friends of Dakin Pool the opportunity to speak. Staff
recommended that the Board grant Site Development Plan Approval.
Mr. Wheeler indicated that he would with great pleasure move that the Planning Board grant
the site development plan approval for the construction of a 1,008 sq. ft. pool house and a 120 sq. ft.
mechanical room for the Dakin Pool facility located at 8 Stillwater Avenue – City of Bangor applicant,
Mr. Theeman seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairman Guerette indicated that there was a request made for consideration of a special
meeting of the Planning Board to entertain an item that did not make the deadline for this evening’s
meeting. He indicated that he had invited the applicants, Paul and Elizabeth Leonard, to come to the
meeting to state their case before the Board.
Mr. Rod McKay, the City’s Director of Community and Economic Development, indicated that
on behalf of the City of Bangor (which is also a co-applicant for the development of the former
Chancellor’s Office complex on 107 Maine Avenue) and Liz and Paul Leonard that they were
requesting that the Board hold a special meeting to consider their proposal for a day-care/children’s
learning facility at this site. He explained how complex this issue is and the reason for the request for
a special Planning Board meeting. The City’s Community and Economic Development Staff has
envisioned a day-care center in the Maine Business Enterprise Park both to service businesses that
are located at the Airport and in the park and to also attract new businesses to the park by offering
this amenity. Mr. McKay indicated that the City has been working with the Leonard’s for almost a
year. Initially they were going to build a new building in the park but when the Trustees building
became available to the City through the exchange of property with the University of Maine system
(whereby they moved into the old Grant’s building downtown and the City acquired their properties
on Maine Avenue) this building was a logical location for this use. Mr. McKay explained that the City
is trying to develop each of these properties. Because this site consists of three buildings, the City
has encountered problems in trying to split off the Trustees Building while retaining the other two
buildings. There has been a problem in establishing a property line between the Trustees Building
and Building 26 in such a way that the lot would meet all of the City’s Land Development Code
setback requirements. Staff recommended that they form a planned group development and develop
this site jointly with the Leonard’s that would allow shared use of some of the access ways and
parking. The Leonard’s tried very diligently to get this project together to meet the submission
deadline. Another problem that they are facing is that they need to close on the property by October
25, 2006 in order to avoid paying capital gains taxes which would have a significant financial impact
not only on them but on the financing of this project. This co-application was submitted early in
October. Be because they have been fine tuning the Planned Group Development Agreement since
that time it did not reach the Planning Office until last Thursday and they did not make it on the
6
agenda. For these reasons they are requesting a special meeting of the Planning Board to consider
the site development plan for this project.
Mr. Wheeler noted that the sign said pre-school and day care and he asked if there was a
difference. Ms. Liz Leonard indicated that they would be providing care of infants and children up to
5 years of age. She added that there is a huge need for this in the community, the facility is
accredited (NAEYC – National Association for the Education of Young Children) and it will also be a
learning center. Ms. Leonard indicated that part of the Agreement with the City is to offer priority
access to the employees in the Maine Business Enterprise Park.
Mr. Wheeler asked that if the Board could meet at 6:00 or 6:30 rather than at 7:00 p.m. as it
would be a one item agenda. Mr. Rosenblatt asked Mr. Gould how many abutters needed to be
notified, would the notices go to the occupants, and how much lead time did Staff need to post an
agenda. Mr. Gould indicated that it is likely that the only abutters to this project are the City of
Bangor owned properties and the notices go to the owners of record. Mr. Gould explained that
information is mailed to the Board on Thursday for the next Tuesday meeting. The Board discussed
potential dates for holding a meeting and Staff suggested Monday, October 23, 2006. It was the
consensus of the Board to hold a special meeting on Monday, October 23, 2006. Chairman Guerette
indicated that he would call a Special Meeting of the Planning Board at 6:30 p.m. in the Third Floor
Council Chambers of City Hall.
Item No. 4: Planning Board Approval of Minutes.
Chairman Guerette indicated that the Minutes of the September 19, 2006 were in order for
approval. Mr. Rosenblatt indicated that the word “reprehensive” on Page 5 needed to be amended.
Mr. Rosenblatt moved to approve the Minutes of the September 19, 2006 meeting subject to
correcting the word reprehensive. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion. The minutes were approved
unanimously as amended.
Other Business
Chairman Guerette referred to the draft Planning Board By-Laws that were mailed with the
Board Packets and indicated that if anyone had any suggestions, comments, input or recommended
changes that they make them by noon, the next day.
Ms. Brown had a question regarding the process of stating reasons for denying a request. Mr.
Gould indicated that that is part of basic findings of facts and conclusions. There needs to be some
standard in the Code that a Board Member does not think it meets for a denial. If it is denied an
applicant is due a written finding. Mr. Brown indicated that there have been times when Board
Members have voted against something and have not said the reason why. Mr. Gould said that Board
does not get into a formal finding of fact and conclusions for every single application. However,
when the last Wal-Mart project was being considered there was a lengthy process after the
application was approved, denied, and then approved again and a lengthy document was prepared
indicating the votes and outcomes and the reasons for the decision. The State of Maine Supreme
Law Court wanted to see very specifically what the findings of the Board were and how they came to
their conclusions.
Chairman Guerette indicated that this is more important when a motion is denied to have
statements on the record from each voting member why they are denying it. In the past, Members
7
have expressed either their support or nonsupport while not necessarily in writing but it was clear
why those members were voting the way they were.
There being no further items for discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m.