Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-08-15 Planning Board Minutes PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF BANGOR MEETING OF AUGUST 15, 2006 MINUTES Board Members Present: Robert Guerette, Chairman Hal Wheeler David Clark Miles Theeman Laura Mitchell Alice Brown Jeff Barnes City Staff Present: David Gould Jim Ring Peter Witham Bud Knickerbocker News Media Present: Bangor Daily News Chairman Guerette called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. In the absence of Board Member Rosenblatt, Associate Members Barnes, Mitchell, and Brown were asked to alternate voting beginning with Mr. Barnes. CONSENT AGENDA As no one wished to remove the item for discussion, Chairman Guerette asked for a motion. Mr. Theeman moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 5 to 0. The item approved is as follows: Item No. 1: Site Development Plan and Site Location of Development Modification approvals for construction of two new access driveways at Bangor International Airport in the Airport Development District. City of Bangor, applicant. 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No. 2: Conditional Use/Site Development Plan approval to fill and grade in the Resource Protection District located at 16V Skyline Drive. Jon Cota, applicant. Chairman Guerette opened the Public Hearing and asked for a presentation by the applicant or his designee. Ms. Shelly Lizotte and Mr. Vinal Applebee of Ames A/E along with Mr. Jon Cota, the applicant, were present in support of this application. Ms. Lizotte explained that the applicant is requesting conditional use approval to grade and fill on Lot 14 in the Church Woods Subdivision. The lot was developed during Phase I of this subdivision in 2003. This lot is almost 5 acres in size but due to its configuration near a large wetland and a Resource Protection District, it has limited building area. The lot has a few test pits on it for septic design and the applicant is asking for approval to extend the septic system into the Resource Protection (RP) District. Ms. Lizotte pointed out that the actual septic system itself will not be within the RP zone and none of the proposed improvements on the lot aside from the fill will be in the RP District. Ms. Lizotte indicated that the wetland was delineated by David Moyse during the first Phase of the development and the applicant has agreed to do some erosion control measures. There will be a silt fence down at the bottom of the slope and the regraded areas will be seeded and loamed. Ms. Lizotte noted that at the time Phase I of this subdivision was constructed, there was a permit issued to fill in the RP District in order to construct Skyline Drive. The impact from this application is minor and it will be a minimal impact to the RP District. No one spoke either in favor of or in opposition to this application. Chairman Guerette closed the Public Hearing and asked for comments from Staff. Planning Officer Gould explained that this is an application for Conditional Use and Site Development Plan approvals for filling and grading of approximately 3,000 sq. ft. of area within a Resource Protection Zone to help facilitate in the construction of a house on Lot 14. Mr. Gould indicated that this goes back to the original development of the Church Woods Subdivision in early 2003 where the wetland was designated on Lot 14 and encompassed more or less 75% of that lot. Due to site distances and other details it also appeared that the roadway would have to go through the RP District. Staff looked into whether that wetland really qualified under the terms of Shoreland Zoning and subsequently got a response from the DEP that it would not concern them if that was removed from Shoreland zoning. However, the subdividers were eager to proceed and decided not wait for that to get worked out and sought conditional use approval to build a roadway. In doing so, Lot 14 was left with a very small area that is buildable. The applicant is seeking approval to do a small amount of filling in the RP District. Mr. Gould explained that on unrated wetlands the Resource Protection District extends 75 feet into the upland around the wetland. In this case, as was the case in the roadway, the applicant isn’t really proposing to fill wetland but proposing to fill in the 75 foot buffer around the wetland. The Resource Protection District directs the Board to specific erosion control criteria within the Shoreland Zone and other precautions to make sure that any grading that would occur is not going to decrease water quality or impact wildlife habitat. Mr. Gould indicated that what the applicant has proposed in terms of a minimal area of filling and 3 erosion and sedimentation control measures Staff recommended to the Board that this is consistent with the guidelines in the Land Development Code. Staff recommended approval. Planning Officer Gould noted that in the future it would be good to have a discussion as to whether the Board had an interest in pursuing the rezoning of this somewhat questionable wetland. Ms. Brown asked Mr. Gould to discuss a proposed rezoning of the wetland. Mr. Gould explained that this wetland, as it is on the map, covers 5 or 6 different properties. This means that any one individual property owner cannot request to change it on someone else’s property. The City has the latitude to propose a change on any property within the City such that the Bangor City Council, the Planning Board or the City Manager could make an application to rezone it. Chairman Guerette noting that the septic field would not be located directly in the fill and grade area asked if the proposed house would be located in fill and grade area. He also noted that some trees had been removed and it was recommended that trees be replanted using native species. He asked if the applicant was in agreement with this. Ms. Lizotte indicated that the house would not be located in the fill and grade area and that the applicant was in full agreement that the trees be replaced. Chairman Guerette then asked for a motion. Mr. Wheeler moved that the Board approve the conditional use for the fill and grade of approximately 3,000 sq. ft. in a Resource Protection District to accommodate a septic system and related home site needs located at 16V Skyline Drive on Lot 14 of the Church Woods Subdivision for Jon Cota, applicant. Mr. Clark seconded the motion. The Board voted 5 to 0 in favor. Mr. Wheeler moved approval of the Site Development Plan for Jon Cota at 16V Skyline Drive. The motion was seconded by Ms. Mitchell. The motion passed unanimously. Item No. 3: Preliminary Subdivision Plan for a 2-lot commercial subdivision located off Haskell Road in a General Commercial and Service District. Webber Oil Company, applicant. Chairman Guerette opened the Public Hearing and asked for a presentation by the applicant. Mr. Ray Cota, of Webber Oil Company, indicated that the applicant is proposing to add two lots to its existing subdivision located at the end of Haskell Road. One lot is proposed for a Cell Tower and the other for another purpose which has not yet been determined. Mr. Cota noted that the applicant has also submitted plans to the Department of Transportation and the Department of Environmental Protection for their approvals. Mr. John McCormack, CES Inc., explained that in 1998 the Planning Board approved the first extension of Haskell Road from the bottom of the Sam’s Club parking lot out to the Quirk Hyundai Building. The applicant is now seeking approval to expand that approved subdivision. The applicant is proposing a road that will be located in the field that can be seen from I-95 and will bisect that field and end with a cul-de-sac. The applicant proposes to extend water, sewer and communications utilities out to the new cul-de-sac. Mr. McCormack indicated that when the applicant has more specifics as to the development plans for the remaining area, they will be back before the Board to amend their subdivision. The road has been designed 4 according to City Standards and he indicated that this application meets all other Ordinance requirements for Preliminary Plan approval. Mr. Wheeler asked the City Engineer to explain the State Stormwater Regulations which this plan does not address. Jim Ring, City Engineer indicated that the preliminary submittal is complete in computing quantity impacts and management but is short on some details of the system and it does not address several specific standards that are part of the State's Chapter 500 Stormwater Regulations that were revised last fall and include the impaired stream standard. Mr. Ring indicated that the Final Plan submittals will need to address these. Mr. Ring explained that in the past the science of stormwater management has largely focused on controlling peaks. State-wide and nation-wide that works to a degree but it does not fully address some of the issues that development creates. The new regulations are more comprehensive and there are several specific standards that are called basic flooding standards to control the peak runoff rate. Mr. Ring indicated that there is an additional set of regulations in the stormwater regulations including the Impaired Stream Standard. Because this is part of the Penjajawoc watershed there is an additional set of requirements that must be met for any projects that seek a stormwater permit. Mr. Ring noted that even though the City reviews various projects, particularly stormwater calculations and analysis for them, ultimately a project, unless it is very small, needs to also secure a State Stormwater Permit. Chairman Guerette asked for comments from proponents. There being none, he asked for comments from opponents. No one spoke in opposition and the Chairman closed the Public Hearing and asked for Staff comments. Planning Officer Gould explained that this is an application for Preliminary Subdivision Plan approval of a two lot subdivision that will extend Haskell Road. The Land Development Code defines any subdivision that adds public improvements as a major subdivision. The General Commercial and Service District in which this area falls has provisions for some different uses with different lot sizes. What the applicant has chosen to do in this instance is create one lot that will serve a public utility or public service use (a potential cell tower). The Ordinance has specific minimum lot standards for that use such that someone would not have to create a one acre parcel to put a small cell tower on it. This is why there is a smaller parcel and another larger parcel on this plan. The proposed street extension meets the City’s standards. Mr. Gould indicated that the applicant will also need to obtain permitting from the State of Maine for a Natural Resource Protection Act Permit for the stream crossing and a stormwater permit for the subdivision. Staff asked for the applicant for traffic information regarding the proposed larger commercial lot to insure that it will fit into the existing system along Haskell Road and Hogan Road. Mr. Gould indicated that there are some minor details that need to be added to the plan prior to Final Plan approval and Staff is confident that the applicant and their agent will provide information regarding property pins, ensuring that the lot lines are perpendicular or radial to street lines, and make it clear that everyone understands what is open space and who is responsible for it. Part of the area designated as open space is part of the detention pond for the Sam’s Club project. While Staff does not necessarily object to that being in the open space, it feels that it needs to be clear to everyone who is responsible for the open space. Mr. Gould indicated that as Mr. Ring noted, he would like to see more refinement of the details of the water quality issues and the Planning Staff would like to some evaluation of the potential impacts for this project. As all of the other details of the 5 preliminary plan meet the standards for approval, Staff recommended that the Board grant the applicant approval. Mr. Theeman asked if it would be shortsighted to approve a final subdivision plan for this only considering Lot 4 when the Board has no idea nor is it asking the applicant what is going to happen to the other 22.28 acres. Mr. Theeman indicated that he had a concern that the traffic on Lot 4 may be well within the requirements for Haskell Road but without knowing what is going to happen with the remaining acreage asked how the Board could deal with this. Mr. Gould explained that the Staff has asked that the applicant note on the plan that the remaining lands cannot be developed until they come back to the Board for approval. Mr. Theeman asked how wide the road is proposed to be and why the dirt road on the site that eventually goes to Severance Street was not on the map. Mr. Ray Cota indicated that the proposed road is an 80 foot right-of-way with a 24 foot road, plus shoulders and no sidewalks. The dirt road is not a road of record. Mr. Cota indicated that there are some dirt bikers and dirt trackers who have been in there over the years and have created a couple of stream crossings. Any roadway that would double back onto Severance Street or any other road including the new subdivision would have to come back before the Planning Board for approval. Mr. Cota indicated that the ultimate standard for traffic is set by the DOT and they will have to have permits. Chairman asked where the applicant is creating a new road and developable land but only identifying a small portion of the lot as part of this application, if the remaining land is going to be developed in the future but not subdivided, if the applicant would be required to present a Preliminary Subdivision Plan to the Planning Board. Mr. Gould indicated that he did not know if there was a way that they could develop more lots without it being a subdivision and the only process to do that is to come to the Board. It may be that it could be a minor subdivision if there are no public improvements involved but it still would be a subdivision review to create more parcels. Ms. Brown asked if an applicant could skip the Preliminary Plan approval process and go directly to Final Subdivision approval. Mr. Gould said a minor subdivision which is not creating any public streets and just a few lots is a one meeting process. In this case, if the applicant wishes to develop the remaining land they would need to come back before the Board. Mr. Theeman indicated that he finds the City policy that allows for the construction of a roadway which is not wide enough to accommodate pedestrian traffic and does not require the construction of a sidewalk appalling. He said that he would support this application but would encourage the Board to encourage the City Council to change that ordinance. Chairman Guerette asked for a motion. Mr. Clark moved to approve the Preliminary Subdivision Plan for a two-lot commercial subdivision located off of Haskell Road for Webber Oil Company, applicant. Mr. Theeman seconded the motion. The Board voted 5 to 0 in favor of the motion. 6 Item No. 4: To amend the Land Development Code by changing parts of parcels of land located at 400 Stillwater Avenue from Contract Shopping and Personal Service District and Low Density Residential District to Contract Shopping and Personal Service District. Said parts of parcels containing approximately 2.23 acres. Global Rand, LLC applicant. Chairman Guerette opened the Public Hearing and asked for a presentation from the applicant. Mr. Vinal Applebee, Vice President of Ames A/E, represented the applicant, Global Rand LLC and noted that the applicant Randy Rand, was also present. Mr. Applebee indicated that the request before the Board is for a Contract Zone Change on a parcel of land located at 400 Stillwater Avenue. The parcel abuts I-95, there is a small amount of frontage on Stillwater Avenue, to the west there is vacant land, and the immediate abutter is a commercial establishment, Little Angels Day Care. Access to the site is by an easement on the abutting property through a shared common driveway which now exists for Little Angels Day Care. There is a current contract zone on the majority of this parcel of land and is zoned Contract Shopping and Personal Service District. In addition, on approximately .43 acres of the land they are seeking a change from Low Density Residential District to Contract Shopping and Personal Service District. Mr. Applebee indicated that there is also Resource Protection District zoning but the exact limits of the Resource Protection is being discussed between City Staff and the Department of Environmental Protection. He noted that should this zoning change be approved, the applicant will also need to come back before the Planning Board for Site Development Plan approval. The limits of the site plan will be dependent upon where the shoreland zone line falls. The existing contract zone for this parcel was approved on April 26, 1993. The applicant has added some additional items to the contract conditions to increase the buffer space on the north side to allow for a 30 foot “C” buffer and to add mini warehouse to the list of uses. Mr. Applebee noted that the mini warehouse use is a conditional use and would need to meet the conditional use standards in that it would need to be consistent with the character of the surrounding buildings. He added that they might propose a building that would be more consistent with the buildings in the area and did not envision a metal strip building with large orange doors which is a typical design. Mr. Applebee said that he believed that the proposal before the Board is consistent with the land use ordinances, consistent with the current contract zone change and would not be a detriment to any of the abutters. The Ames A/E in-staff Traffic Engineer looked at the mini warehouse use according to the National Standards for traffic generation as well as some of the current allowed uses (dental office, doctors office, professional offices) and found that traffic generation at a peak hour for a mini warehouse use is about one-third to one-quarter the number of trips generated by the other uses. Mr. Clark indicated that he had a concern about a shared drive-way with the day care center. Mr. Applebee indicated that he understood Mr. Clark’s concerns but noted that there is a document on record that shows that the driveway will be shared with access to this property with an immediate 90 degree turn to the left. 7 Mr. Clark envisioned a mini warehouse use with trucks loading up and asked how close this would be from Garden Way. Mr. Applebee indicated that one of the conditions of approval in the previous contract zone change is that there be no access from Garden Way. Mr. Randy Rand, of Global LLC, indicated that there will be no exterior storage unit doors. All individual unit doors will be indoors. There will be a delivery entrance or a place where a pickup truck can pull up and open a single overhead door compared to 20 units on one side having individual exterior doors. Ms. Brown commented that if this is built as warehouses she didn’t feel that this would be compatible with the neighboring day care center. She could envision an office building but did not feel that a mini warehouse use would be compatible. Chairman Guerette indicated that this is a request for a zone change which would allow the applicant to come back for site plan approval. At that time, the Board could examine these issues more closely. Ms. Brown asked if the reason for the contract zone change was to allow for the addition of the mini warehouse use that is not available right now on that lot. Chairman Guerette indicated that it would only be available on a conditional use basis. Ms Mitchell asked if there was 2.23 acres overall but only .4 acres are allowed to be developed with the 20% maximum lot coverage. Mr. Gould indicated that there is a very small portion of the lot that is proposed from LDR to Contract S & PS the rest of it is already S & PS contract and it would also adopt the new conditions. Ms. Mitchell asked what the total developable area will be if this is adopted and how much of the Resource Protection Zone could infringe on that. Mr. Gould explained that the applicant is not proposing to change anything that is currently zoned Resource Protection. What they are proposing to do is change the current land that is zoned Contract S & PS for a professional therapeutic care, medical rehabilitation use and then there is small piece on the back of the parcel that is presently Low Density Residential that they would also rezone to Contract S & PS. This would facilitate more of a buffer between them and the houses in Stillwater Gardens. Mr. Theeman indicated that it did not look like there would be 500 feet between this development and the neighboring residences. Mr. Applebee noted that the projected distance would be between 400 and 500 feet. Mr. Theeman asked if the Low Density Residential area was the area that they were proposing for a buffer. Mr. Applebee indicated that it was. Ms. Mitchell asked if the applicant anticipated developing that area. Mr. Applebee indicated that they proposed for it to be a buffer. Ms. Mitchell asked how large the area will be that they propose to develop. Mr. Applebee indicated that that will be dependent upon where the Resource Protection lines fall. Mr. Wheeler asked if the applicant could give the Board an example of other facilities in the community that would be termed “mini warehouses.” 8 Mr. Applebee said that the term mini warehouse is in their proposed contract zone wording because that is a use that is a labeled use in the Land Development Code. He would prefer not to call it mini warehouse but rather call it enclosed warehousing. Mr. Rand noted that U-haul is an example of one which is a large in-door warehouse that has individual spaces. Mr. Wheeler said that he felt that they were talking about a storage facility. Chairman Guerette then asked for comments from proponents. Mr. Mo Fer, an abutting landowner, indicated that this is a use that is a little different than what he expected back when he sold the right-of-way for use of this property. He gave a brief history noting that the owners at the time didn’t have enough frontage on this lot to have both a drive-way and meet the frontage requirements for a legal lot. They approached him about sharing the access to take an immediate left turn into their property. Mr. Fer said that it seemed benign at the time and probably still could be. He indicated that he was concerned about his tenant. He said that he realized that something could be built on this lot that could have more traffic going in and out of it than the use that they are contemplating but one of the difficulties is to try and get a handle on what exactly what this is and what kind of traffic it will generate, the size of the vehicles, and how the configuration of this driveway will work given the fact that they have a fairly substantial amount traffic that goes in and out of there at certain times of the day. He indicated that he was not opposed to the zone change but suggested that what would make it work could be addressed at the time of site development plan review. Mr. Brian Duprey, owner of Little Angels Day Care and Pre-School which is the abutting property, noted that there is a fence on site and there are speed bumps to control the speed of traffic. Because of this he did not see traffic entering and exiting the site as an issue. The only issue that he could see and he is willing to work with the property owner on, is that sometimes they have two and three cars trying to get out of there at one time. Traffic is heavy between 7 and 9 in the morning and 3 to 6 in the afternoon and it could create an unsafe situation on Stillwater Water with three cars trying to come out and one car trying to get in and turn left to access this site. He suggested that at the time of site plan review that his parking lot could be pushed back to make more room or the curb cut could be made wider to allow for a left turning lane. He indicated that he did not see any issue with child safety but felt it could create a traffic nightmare if not done right especially if there are large trucks turning onto the site. Chairman Guerette closed the Public Hearing and asked the Planning Officer for the Staff report. Planning Officer Gould indicated that the applicant, Global Rand, LLC is requesting a Contract Zone Change from Contract Shopping and Personal Service District and Low Density Residential District to Contract Shopping and Personal Service District. Staff indicated in the Memo the existing Contract Conditions deal with setbacks, lot coverage, impervious surface ratio, buffer yard C and a total maximum gross floor area of 18,000 sq. ft. Mr. Gould explained that the existing Contract limits the use solely to professional therapeutic care and medical rehabilitation. It also provides that there will be no vehicular access to the property from Garden Way and that access shall be from Stillwater Avenue using a shared driveway with the abutting property. Prior to the 1993 Contract, there was a proposed contract in 1991 that did seek access to Garden Way. The residents of Stillwater Gardens 9 were in opposition to that and it was never approved. Since 1993, the Land Development Code has been amended to refine medical facilities such that the S & PS District provides for medical and dental clinics and does not provide for professional therapeutic care or medical rehabilitation uses. Staff felt that while the applicant was going through the process that this language should be updated. The small piece of land currently zoned Low Density Residential District and located on the back of this property was left as LDR zoning as it was the policy of the City at that time to have vacant land sit as a buffer. However, Staff found that vacant land by itself does not provide a good buffer. In order to get more than a minimum 10 foot buffer Staff asked that the applicant address this in the contract by providing for a 30 foot buffer there. Mr. Gould explained that another condition proposed is for a “Mini Warehouse” use which is a use that is provided for in the Shopping and Personal Service District and the General Commercial and Service District. There are some guidelines about the amount of square footage that someone can have in any one rental unit, standards about hazardous products and no sales activity. The typical mini warehouse self storage unit is a large metal building with many little doors. Mr. Gould also noted that the three lots along the frontage of Stillwater Avenue in this location that are all Contract Shopping and Personal Service District zones in some form or another. The decision for the use of these properties was made in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s. At that time the Planning Board and City Council thought that with contract zone change conditions were suitable uses for those locations. Had the Board, during the Comprehensive Plan Update process, changed the zoning to straight commercial zoning it would not be unlikely that the applicant would then come back and say that they wanted straight Shopping and Personal Service zoning to be able to have convenience stores and gas stations. The City is much better protected leaving the Land Use Policy as it is and leaving the scope and the details of the contracts in place as everybody is aware of what the general parameters are. This is similar to Mr. Fer’s property which was originally an office operation. Subsequently, they had a party that was interested in a day care which necessitated changing a contract to allow that use. Everyone that reviewed it said that they did not see any adverse impact from that use being allowed in that zone. This is a very similar situation where this applicant has a use that is not provided for within the original contract and they think it is one that would reasonably fit within the general guidelines. It isn’t going to be a problem for the neighborhood and it is not going to be a large traffic generator. Regarding the “mini warehouse” use, Staff directed the applicant to that use because it is a known use in the Ordinance. Mr. Gould indicated that if the contract zone change passes and the applicant brings forward an application for a mini warehouse use because it is a conditional use in the district, they will have to meet those provisions relative to impacts and consistency with adjacent structures, traffic review, etc. Mr. Gould indicated that Staff is comfortable that this proposed change because it is not problematic, it seems to fit, it may have some benefits relative to the buffer, and it brings the language into consistency with the Land Development Code. Staff recommended that the Board make a positive recommendation to the City Council. In regard to the issue of the Resource Protection Zone which is something that Staff continually struggles with, Mr. Gould explained that the Shoreland zoning wetlands are given to the City by the State on large city-wide maps which are very inaccurate relative to where 10 the actual wetland is. Staff does their best to recreate where the edge of that wetland is on the City’s maps. When someone actually goes to develop a site they will send out a professional (in this case the applicant has sent out David Moyse) who will actually map the wetlands on the ground. What can happen in that process is that the geographic location where the wetlands were thought to be can change. They can grow or they can shrink depending on where it gets delineated on the ground. The nature of the Ordinance is that the 75 foot buffer zone runs 75 feet from the edge of where the wetland actually is and Staff has been discussing this with the State where Shoreland zoning begins and ends relative to the larger wetland that sits back into the corner. This issue has not been resolved. Mr. Wheeler thanked the Planning Officer for putting things in a clear perspective. He indicated that one of the elements of wisdom of governing and growing a City is that there is a separation of powers or delineation of responsibility. The Board is not a legislative body nor are they a micro management body. The Board has the advantage of processes and steps within those processes which provide more than superficial or minimal protection for all parties concerned in areas that are in transition or under consideration for some change be it minor or major. The fact that when a mini warehouse does come into the picture it will be subject to further review, questioning, and consideration by this Board. Mr. Wheeler indicated that this is enough of a safety factor to satisfy him both with regard to the applicant’s proposal and the Planning Office’s recommendation. Mr. Theeman asked if this is approved if the Board is essentially approving the expansion of a private driveway into a larger private driveway that will accommodate a greater flow of traffic based upon the use, and if the Planning Office is suggesting that the Board support the lesser of the two amounts of traffic flow for a warehouse use as opposed to a medical office building use. Mr. Gould explained that the contract will allow them to do either of those two uses. Chairman Guerette then asked for a motion. Mr. Wheeler moved that the Planning Board recommend to the City Council approval of the amendment to the Land Development to accommodate a contract zone change at 400 Stillwater Avenue from Low Density Residential District and Contract Shopping and Personal Service District to Contract Shopping and Personal Service District pursuant to C.O. # 06-293. Mr. Barnes seconded the motion. The Board voted four in favor and one opposed to the motion to recommend approval. NEW BUSINESS Item No. 6: Final Subdivision Plan Revision approval of a 7-lot, commercial subdivision located at 1387-1495 Broadway in a Shopping and Personal Service District to move a lot line between two lots. Judson M. Grant, Jr., applicant. Chairman Guerette asked the applicant or his designee to make a presentation. Mr. Vinal Applebee, Vice President of Ames A/E, represented the applicant, Judson M. Grant who is requesting a change to a 7-lot subdivision that recently received approval by the Planning Board. Mr. Applebee explained that since the time of approval there has been discussion with an interested party who wishes to purchase Lot 2. However, Lot 2 was not of adequate size. 11 What they are proposing is to take one-half of Lot 3 and combine it with Lot 2 such that there is 300 feet of frontage on Broadway for Lot 2A and 100 feet of frontage for Lot 3A. Both lots meet the requirements for area and lot frontage. The applicant does not intend to change the proposed access management for the 7-lot subdivision. This is essentially a move or a shift of a property line between Lots 2 and 3 by 100 feet. Mr. Theeman asked how Lot 3A is going to be accessed from Broadway. Mr. Applebee indicated that Lot 3A would gain access to Broadway across Lot 4 as was originally proposed. Chairman Guerette then asked for comments from Staff. Planning Officer Gould indicated that this is straight forward. This is a request to revise the recently approved final subdivision plan as the applicant has found a potential buyer for one of the lots who wanted a larger lot than what was originally created. The applicant is requesting a change to slide the lot line down to increase one lot and decrease another and renumber the lots as Lot 2A and Lot 3A. There is very limited change relative to how that impacts the subdivision overall. The total area stays the same and the open space stays the same. Mr. Gould indicated that the applicant needs to provide sewer service to this lot because it moved off of the old one and they will also need to do a little work with DEP who is reviewing the overall stormwater issues relative to this subdivision. Everything else is basically the same. Staff would note that since the prior approval the applicant has satisfied the condition of approval as to an improvement guarantee. Staff would like to continue the other condition that deeds to the proposed lots include specific language as to the responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the private pump station and force main sewer system. Staff feels that that condition should be carried forward with this new approval. Ms. Mitchell moved that the Board grant Final Subdivision Plan Revision approval for a modification of the lot lines between 2 and 3 at 1287-1495 Broadway in a Shopping and Personal Service District for Judson M. Grant, Jr., applicant, with the condition that the deeds for the proposed lots include specific language as to their responsibility towards the operation and maintenance of the private pump station and force main sewer system. The motion was seconded and it passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Item No. 5: Planning Board Approval of Minutes. Chairman Guerette noted that the Minutes of the July 18, 2006 Meeting and August 1, 2006 Meeting were ready for approval. Mr. Theeman moved to approve the Minutes of both meetings. Mr. Clark seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Other Business There being no further items for discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.