Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-01-03 Planning Board Minutes PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF BANGOR MEETING OF TUESDAY, JANUARY 3, 2006 MINUTES Board Members Present: Robert Guerette, Chairman David Clark Nathaniel Rosenblatt Hal Wheeler Ryan King Alice Brown Miles Theeman City Staff Present: David Gould Peter Witham James Ring News Media Present: None Chairman Guerette called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Guerette explained the regular format for holding Public Hearings whereby the applicant would be asked to make a presentation, proponents and opponents would be asked to speak, the Public Hearing would then be closed, and the Chairman would ask for Staff comments. Item No. 1: Conditional Use/Site Development Plan/Site Location of Development Modification to place an antenna on an existing water tank and construct a 230 square-foot equipment shelter on Cleveland Street in a Government and Institutional Service District. Portland Cellular Partnership, d/b/a Verizon Wireless, applicant. Chairman Guerette opened the Public Hearing and asked the applicant to make a presentation. Kelly Bodin, Esq., representing the applicant, explained that this was a request for Conditional Use/Site Development Plan/Site Location of Development Modification approvals. The applicant is proposing to construct a 20’ x 11’ telecommunications building and place a cellular transmission antenna on the Bangor Water District’s water tower located on Cleveland Street. The site is in a Government and Institutional Service District and requires conditional use approval. Because of the Site 2 Location of Development Permit issued to the Bangor International Airport in 1991 this proposal will require modification of that permit, as well. Ms. Bodin indicated that the small building would be built within the existing fence and will not require any public utilities. Mr. Rosenblatt indicated that it was pointed out to the Board that a copy of the Lease that was filed was not completely executed. Ms. Bodin indicated that a fully executed copy was faxed to the Planning Office. Mr. Rosenblatt noted concerns raised by Staff and asked if a revised plan had been submitted addressing those issues. Mr. Gould indicated that revised plans were submitted that addressed Staff concerns. The Board had questions regarding the appearance and profile of the additions, the type of antenna proposed on this site and the dimensions of the proposed antenna. Ms. Bodin indicated that the building was approximately 8 feet in height. Mr. Gould indicated that the actual antenna will be mounted on the water tank and will be identical to the existing antennas that are on the pitched portion of the water tank. The proposed antenna will be lower as it will be located on the side of the tank and there will be a band that wraps around the water tank. Mr. Rosenblatt indicated that he thought that the proposal appeared to be small and innocuous. Mr. King indicated that he thought there was an existing ice bridge attached from one of the existing shelters to the water tower and there is another ice bridge proposed. He asked Ms. Bodin to explain what an ice bridge is and if it would be consistent with the existing ice bridge. Ms. Bodin indicated that it would be consistent with what is presently there and its purpose is to get the electricity from the shelter to the actual antenna. This is another innocuous component and will be consistent with what exists there now. The only new construction will be the foundation and the proposed shelter will be a prefabricated unit. No one spoke either in favor of or in opposition to this request. Chairman Guerette closed the Public Hearing and asked for Staff comments. Planning Officer Gould explained that this application is from Portland Cellular Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless and they are requesting Conditional Use, Site Development Plan and Site Location of Development Act Modification approvals to construct a 20’ x 11.6’ telecommunications building and place a cellular transmission antenna on top of the Bangor Water District’s tower located off of Cleveland Street. In June 2004 there was a very similar application before the Board for a self-contained electronics building and with cellular antennas placed on top of the water tower. In the Government and Institutional Service District (G & ISD) this use is a conditional use which requires the Board to review it under those standards. It also requires a B Buffer yard be planted around that utility service installation. The conditional use language deals with the facilities in a location that does not create an extreme juxtaposition of architectural scale and style with existing buildings in the area. It needs to be at a location where there is actually a determined need for that service. There are conditional use standards as to parking and loading, traffic generation and with the cellular tower there isn’t a lot of traffic generation. The architecture of these things largely is a fairly small air conditioned building to keep the electronics equipment inside the building at a steady temperature. There is not a lot of coming and going. This proposal is the site of 3 an existing cellular antenna so there won’t be much of a visual difference at this location. Staff noted in the Memorandum that the application lacked the executed lease agreement and the applicant has provided this. The other details that Staff asked the applicant to address were the landscaping and some of the labels on the plan. What Staff found in going out and reviewing the 2004 approval was that while the installation was made, the driveway was not put in place and the landscaping was not planted on the site. Mr. Gould indicated that Staff wants to make sure that this application carries that buffer and those details and indicate the 2004 approval as well as this proposal on their plans. This plan shows the proposed buffer plantings, the proposed access driveway and the other small building that was supposed to be a Bangor Water District valve building that has not been constructed on this site. Planning Officer Gould indicated that Staff feels that all of the details are in order and recommended approval with three separate motions for the three different elements. Chairman Guerette asked if the 2004 approval was for an entirely different applicant. Mr. Gould indicated that is was and that the parcel is leased from the City to Bangor Water District and it is the Water District’s water tower. There was a lease agreement with a different cellular provider to do the first application. This applicant has a leasehold interest with Bangor Water District to provide for a secondary cellular provider. Ms. Brown asked what ensures the Board that both this applicant who is coming forward with another set of plans, and the prior applicant who has not completed those site plan requirements, will do what is supposed to be done. She asked what is the City’s recourse. Mr. Gould indicated that this approval isn’t any different from any other approval that the Board grants in terms of what happens after it is approved. What will ensure that the details of the prior approval are completed is that we have directed this applicant to show all of those outstanding details on this plan. When the Board approves this, it is part of the approval and it is expected to be built in accordance with the approved site development plan. Mr. Gould explained that the Board deals with; if the plan meets the standards, does it have the required setbacks, buffers, and other details. If someone builds something and is not in conformance with their plan, it is the job of the Code Enforcement Office to go out there and say you either need to bring this thing in line with the Codes, or you can come back to the Board and request an amended plan approval. The Board does not have the ability to make any applicant complete their site plans. It is generally Staff’s approach to go out and look at the site to see if they are coming along as they ought to. Mr. Rosenblatt asked what has been completed on that 2004 Plan and who is going to be responsible. Mr. Gould indicated that the antennas are on top of the water tower, the self-contained building is there, the ice bridge is there, and the fence around the facility is there. Lacking from that plan is the landscaping and the driveway. Mr. Gould noted that he was not sure who would be responsible for completing these outstanding issues as there are multi-parties involved. Hopefully, amongst the parties they will figure out who is responsible to get the site built according to the plans. Staff asked this applicant to submit a plan that would show all of the improvements of the prior plan, as well as their own, because Staff did not want to have this plan supersede the prior one without showing the 4 landscaping or the other improvements which Staff feels are important to the site and required by the Ordinance. Mr. Rosenblatt moved to grant Conditional Use approval to the project at Cleveland Street – Portland Cellular Partnership, d/b/a/, Verizon Wireless, applicant. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Rosenblatt moved to grant Site Development Plan approval to the proposed project at Cleveland Street – Portland Cellular Partnership, d/b/a/, Verizon Wireless, applicant. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Rosenblatt moved to grant Site Location of Development Act Modification approval to the proposed development on Cleveland Street – Portland Cellular Partnership, d/b/a/ Verizon Wireless, applicant. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion, which also passed unanimously. NEW BUSINESS Item No. 3: Site Development Plan/Site Location of Development Modification to construct a stormwater detention pond at 1 College Circle in a Government and Institutional Service District. Husson College, applicant. Chairman Guerette asked the applicant to make a presentation. Mr. Ray Bolduc of WBRC Architects-Engineers, represented the applicant. Also representing Husson College were President Beardsley and John Rubino. Mr. Bolduc explained that the applicant is requesting two approvals; one for Site Development Plan and the other for Site Location of Development Act Modification. The project is to construct a stormwater detention pond. The pond will be a wet pond and have water in it all the time and will be approximately 9 to 10 feet deep, and surrounded with a six foot high fence. Mr. Bolduc indicated that the original Site Location of Development Act Permit granted in March of 2000 proposed the construction of four detention ponds in various location around the campus. Recently the College has been exploring areas of the campus for future development and determined that a number of these ponds were in areas that are better suited for development. After further review, they looked at other areas to construct a pond. Mr. Bolduc explained that this proposed pond has been designed in accordance with the newly adopted DEP Rules and has been designed to handle 11 additional acres of new impervious areas for future development. The pond is located adjacent to a residential neighborhood on Glenwood Drive and adjacent to Newman Gym. Mr. Bolduc indicated that revised plans were submitted adding additional plantings along the property line to meet B Bufferyard requirements as requested by Staff. He also indicated that the applicant held a public informational meeting and invited abutting property owners for public comments and concerns about this project. No one attended that meeting. Mr. Rosenblatt asked if the capacity of the new pond is the same as the total capacity of the four previous ponds and if they proposed to reroute any of the existing drainage to the new pond? Mr. Bolduc indicated that this pond was a little larger than the 5 previous four ponds but could take care of the entire campus through one pond instead of four. The existing drainage already goes to that location and there will not be a need to reroute any drainage. Chairman Guerette asked what possible affect would this detention system may have on the abutting neighbors. Mr. Bolduc indicated that he did not see where there would be any impact as they will be improving the quality of the stream as this is a better treatment of runoff. Chairman Guerette asked for the Planning Office report. Planning Officer Gould indicated that what is before the Board is a request from Husson College for a Site Development Plan approval and a Site Location of Development Act Modification approval which is largely designed to create a stormwater detention pond for the College to meet, not only their current, but their future plans such that every time a new development comes along on campus they won’t have to rethink their stormwater methodology. Mr. Gould pointed out that this proposal does not eliminate any of the existing detention ponds on the campus. There were a number of detention ponds that were part of the approval that were never constructed. This proposal will replace those and will handle 11 additional acres of impervious area. There are some other smaller existing detention ponds that will remain on campus. Mr. Gould indicated that Staff was not comfortable that the existing vegetation in the area of the detention pond met the criteria of a B Buffer and requested that the applicant provide additional evergreen trees at that location. The applicant has submitted revised plans with the additional plantings. Staff finds that all of the Ordinance requirements have been met and recommended that the Board grant Site Development Plan Approval and Site Location of Development Act Modification approval. Chairman Guerette noted that there needed to be two motions for the two applications. Mr. Clark moved to grant approval of the Site Development Plan for 1 College Circle, Husson College, applicant. Mr. King seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Clark moved to grant approval the Site Location of Development Act Modification for 1 College Circle, Husson College, applicant. Mr. King seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Mr. Wheeler asked if the development at the College was proceeding at a faster pace than that envisioned at the time of the original Site Location of Development Act Permit approval. President William Beardsley indicated that they have gained 500 undergraduate students in the last four years but that the College has had excess capacity and have not had to expand, proportionately. In their long-range Campus Plans they have considered the possibility of a field house, and a performing arts center. In terms of housing. they are leaning toward students living off-campus and possibly creating an Office of Housing on campus rather than construct more housing. The field house is quite far off but the performing arts center and a student center are the two projects that they are looking at. The major issue that they need to deal with is parking. They have started looking into the possibility of starting the performing arts for the New England School of Communications. Also, the College has incorporated the Northern Conservatory of Music and they are now 6 looking at ways that this might fit into the field of music. The Seminary has expressed an interest in having their own building, some day, after they sell their present location. Mr. Wheeler asked what the total student enrollment is. Dr. Beardsley indicated that there were 1700 undergraduates and this Fall they will have a total of 2500 students plus the Seminary. Item No. 4: Site Development Plan/Site Location of Development Modification to construct a 68-foot tall radio tower at 1404 Broadway in a Government and Institutional Service District. Abundant Life Church, applicant. Chairman Guerette asked the applicant to make a presentation. Mr. Russ Hewitt, Vice President of Abundant Life Church, indicated that they are requesting Site Development Plan and Site Location of Development Modification approvals to construct a 68-foot tall radio tower behind the existing building on Broadway. They are updating their site plans to reflect this. In 1997 when they got their original approval they had included a maintenance building behind the existing sanctuary that was never built. They have removed this from their current plan. Mr. Hewitt further explained that the proposed tower is for a translator for a station in Augusta that is called Worship 95.3. This tower is a 200 watt translator that will only rebroadcast the signal from the Augusta station for the Bangor area. Mr. Hewitt indicated that there would not be a building required with it because the only equipment is a small rack that will be housed within the tower. The tower is a 68-foot self-supporting, galvanized steel tower of triangular shape approximately 200 feet from Broadway. Mr. Clark asked if this tower will interfere with the neighboring church’s tower or with the residential development proposed at Broadway and Griffin Road. Mr. Hewitt indicated that they have had engineering studies done to ensure that this will not interfere with the neighboring tower and he has spoken with Bangor Baptist Church and they have no objections. The applicant originally considered putting the tower on top of their building and they inquired as to whether this would have any affect on their own televisions or computers in their building, and they were assured by their engineers that it would have no impact. Mr. Rosenblatt asked if there were any lights proposed or noises associated with the proposed tower. Mr. Hewitt indicated that there are no lights planned but they could put them on if required. He noted that the FCC does not require any lighting for any tower under 200 feet in height and that wouldn’t be any noises. Mr. Rosenblatt asked if the applicant had submitted revised plans addressing Staff concerns. Mr. Gould indicated that revised plans have been submitted. He noted that there was some confusion from the DEP who indicated to the applicant that they did not need to obtain Site Location of Development Modification approval when, in fact, what they meant was that they did not need to obtain approval from DEP but rather from the City under delegation authority. Planning Officer Gould noted that Staff went out to the site and found 7 some inconsistencies between the approved plan and the development. Staff asked the applicant’s engineer to make sure that the plans before the Board represents the current conditions of the facility. He indicated that the plans as submitted represent the facility as it is today on the site. Mr. Theeman asked if the site was not developed in accordance with the plans approved in 1997. Mr. Gould explained that the Board approved the plans in 1997 and they subsequently approved an amended plan in 2000. The plans that the applicant submitted to include the radio tower weren’t any plans that were ever built at the site. Staff indicated that those plans were not consistent with what the City had on file for approved plans. Subsequently, they submitted another set of plans and that still weren’t current. Staff asked that the applicant have their engineers revisit the site and make sure that what is on the submitted plans are what is on the ground. Staff is comfortable with the latest submission as they are now consistent with what the City approved and what is on the ground. Chairman Guerette then asked for the Planning Office report. Planning Officer Gould indicated that the applicant has applied for Site Development Plan and Site Location of Development Act Modification approvals to construct a 68 foot tall radio tower at 1404 Broadway in a Government and Institutional Service District. In 1997 the applicant received approvals to build their church for approximately 1,000 parishioners. Because of the size of the development, the applicant needed and obtained a Site Location of Development Act Permit. This Permit required the applicant to do some off-site traffic improvements on Broadway and this is what delayed completion their project into 2000 when an amended Plan was approved. But for the fact that this application is a Site Location of Development Act Modification this would have been a very straight forward and simple application. Staff recommended approval as the plans meet all requirements for approval. Mr. Wheeler asked at what frequency the translator will operate at and if the station in Augusta was commercial or noncommercial. Mr. Hewitt indicated that it would operate at approximately 100.3, which is close to that of the Zone radio frequency on Broadway but it is not the same. Also, the station in Augusta is a noncommercial station. As there were no further questions, Chairman Guerette asked for motions on the two applications. Mr. King moved to approve the Site Development Plan at 1404 Broadway for Abundant Life Church, applicant. Mr. Rosenblatt seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. King moved to approve the Site Location of Development Act Modification at 1404 Broadway for Abundant Life Church, applicant. Mr. Rosenblatt seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 5 to 0. 8 Item No. 5: Site Development Plan/Site Location of Development Modification to construct an 832 square-foot hazardous waste storage building at 530 Maine Avenue in a Government and Institutional Service District. City of Bangor, applicant. Chairman Guerette asked for a presentation. Mr. Jim Ring, City Engineer and Director of Infrastructure and Development Support, indicated that this is a small project to construct a 26’ x 32’ metal sided building at the City’s Public Works compound at 530 Maine Avenue for use as a hazardous waste storage building for waste generated from the Public Works facility and the Motor Pool facility. Both of these facilities are defined by DEP as waste generators. A few examples of the type of waste generated would be paint solvents, automotive fluids that cannot be recycled, and automotive batteries. Because theses items are regulated as hazardous waste by regulation, they need a separate location for them to be securely and safety stored. The past two years the City has been using a type of dumpster to provide containment but that was far from an ideal situation. The proposed building will provide a secure, dedicated facility to store these materials. The materials are brought to the facility in sealed containers and they are held until such time as enough waste is generated to have a licensed hauler come and take them and properly dispose of them. This will come in handy in the fall when the City conducts it’s annual regional household hazardous waste disposal program to get things out of the waste stream that really shouldn’t be there. Also, the City is planning to do a program in the spring for CRT’s which are residential CRT tubes for computer monitors, TV’s, etc. The only utility to the building is for electrical service. Mr. Ring explained that the main Public Works Building is located on this site along with a large salt storage building, some truck shelters, and a round salt shed to the rear of the building. Dana Wardwell, Public Works Director was also present to answer questions of the Board. Mr. Guerette asked if this facility would be open to the public on a regular basis. Mr. Ring indicated that because the City generates a sufficient amount of hazardous material to qualify, by definition, as large waste generator it is necessary to have such a facility for City use. This is not for use by the general public but the City does hold a household hazardous waste day and this facility will give the City a secure place to hold the overflow from this event until such time as another truck can come back and collect the materials. Mr. Rosenblatt asked how the building would be constructed to deal with potential leakage from the stored materials. Mr. Ring said that it will have a sealed concrete foundation. Mr. Clark asked on what side of this site do people drop off recyclables. Mr. Ring indicated that that would be on the side facing the street. Planning Officer Gould indicated this is the fourth Site Location of Development Modification at this site. Once a site has received Site Location of Development approval every time there is a change it also needs Site Location of Development Act Modification approval, no matter how large. Mr. Gould indicated that both applications are in order for approval. 9 Chairman Guerette asked why the Board needs to go through this process when in effect this is replacing an existing use, at the same location, with the same application. Mr. Ring explained that this is a continuing activity. However, it does represent new construction as it is a building that has permanence to it. What the City has used for this activity is a 50 yard roll off container, which is a glorified dumpster, and the City did not have a facility there, only an activity. The City wants to make sure that it is in compliance in dealing with this waste. Mr. Clark asked if this building was prefabricated or designed locally. Mr. Ring indicated that there are standards for proper enclosures for this type of use. It is not prefabricated and was designed by engineers in his office. Mr. King made a motion to approve the Site Development Plan for 530 Maine Avenue, City of Bangor, applicant. Mr. Rosenblatt seconded the motion. The Board voted 5 to 0 in favor of the motion. Mr. King made a motion to approve the Site Location of Development Act Modification at 530 Maine Avenue, City of Bangor, applicant. Mr. Rosenblatt seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Item No. 2: Planning Board Approval of Minutes. There were no Minutes for Board consideration. Other Business Chairman Guerette indicated that the Board needed to resume the 2005 Comprehensive Plan Update project. In keeping with the past, the Board will meet on every alternate Tuesday at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Mr. Rosenblatt asked what would be on the Workshop Agenda. Planning Officer Gould indicated that the Board needed to discuss the Land Use Policy and the Zoning Policy Maps. There are a few other little pieces that need to be discussed. There aren’t any new sections to be discussed and Staff is fine tuning the old ones adding the comments of the Board. Chairman Guerette asked when the Sections that the Board has not reviewed would be ready for discussion. Mr. Gould noted that the Transportation and Fiscal Policy sections have not been reviewed. He suggested that if these sections are not discussed that the Board wrap up the Comprehensive Plan Update as there is much more work to be done. The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m.