HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-06-07 Planning Board Minutes
PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF BANGOR
MEETING OF TUESDAY, JUNE 7, 2005
MINUTES
Board Members Present: Robert Guerette, Chairman
Hal Wheeler
David Clark
Ryan King
Nathaniel Rosenblatt
Laura Mitchell
City Staff Present: David Gould
James Ring
Peter Witham
Lynn Johnson
News Media Present: Bangor Daily News
Chairman Guerette called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
CONSENT AGENDA
Mr. Rosenblatt asked to recuse himself from voting on the Consent Agenda as his firm
represents one of the applicants. The Board unanimously endorsed Mr. Rosenblatt’s
request. Associate Member Mitchell was asked to vote on the Consent Agenda.
As no one wished to remove any of the items for discussion, Chairman Guerette asked
for a motion. Mr. Wheeler moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Mr. Clark seconded the
motion. The motion carried unanimously. The items approved are as follows:
Item No. 1: Site Development Plan approval to construct a 26’ x 26’
detached storage garage at 1162 Union Street in a General
Commercial and Service District. Earl Black, applicant.
Item No. 2: Site Development Plan approval to construct a 10,000 sq. ft.
building for warehouse and office use located on Dowd Road in
an Industry and Service District. M. D. Hardy, Inc., applicant.
2
Item No. 3: Final Subdivision Plan Revision approval to rename an approved
street within the Edgewood Subdivision located off of Essex
Street. Walden Parke, LLC, applicant.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Chairman Guerette went over the format for Public Hearings noting that the applicant
would be asked to make a presentation, followed by comments from proponents and
opponents, then the Public Hearing would be closed, and Staff would be asked to comment.
Item No. 4: Conditional Use/Site Development Plan approval to demolish
the existing building and replace it with a 3,455 sq. ft. building
and a 708 sq. ft. cooler unit for use as a drive-thru restaurant at
49 Bangor Mall Boulevard in a Shopping and Personal Service
District and a Stream Protection District. Capital Pizza Huts,
Inc., applicant.
Chairman Guerette opened the Public Hearing and asked the applicant to make a
presentation. Mr. Will Haskell of Gorrill Palmer Associates, represented the applicant, Capital
Pizza Huts, Inc. Mr. Haskell explained that the proposal before the Board is for the
redevelopment of an existing Pizza Hut facility located at 49 Bangor Mall Blvd. The applicant
proposes to demolish the existing building and replace it with a 3,500-sq. ft. Italian Bistro
restaurant with a 700-sq. ft. cooler off of one end of the building. The existing building is
located on the site, parallel to the connector road. The new building will be rotated 90
degrees (from where the existing building sits). The site is located in a Shopping and
Personal Service District with a portion of the site along the Penjajawoc Stream being zoned
Stream Protection District. The new restaurant will have 147 seats where the existing
building has 130 seats and 55 on-site parking spaces are proposed, which exceeds the
Ordinance requirements.
Mr. Haskell indicated that the proposed site plan enhances the existing landscaping to
meet the new buffer requirements in the current Land Development Code. A “B” type buffer
is proposed along the road frontage and “C” Buffers are proposed along each sideline. The
existing vegetation along the stream will be maintained. Mr. Haskell indicated that on the
northerly side, the 10-foot wide buffer also includes a stockade fence to meet buffer
requirements and a 3-foot berm is proposed along the frontage. Stormwater flows off of the
site will be the same as the existing flows that are directed to the back of the site towards
the stream. The applicant proposes to reduce the number of curb cuts from 2 to 1 to provide
better access to the site. Mr. Haskell indicated that there will be a pick-up window that
meets the Land Development Code’s definition of a drive-thru window and they have
provided for a stacking lane as well.
Mr. Wheeler asked Mr. Haskell to explain what is meant by the words “Italian Bistro.”
Ms. Terry Jake, District Manager of Capital Pizza Huts, indicated that the “Italian Bistro” will
3
allow them to increase their menu items to add more pasta dishes and a pasta line. Mr.
Wheeler asked if there would be entertainment. Ms. Jake indicated that there would be no
entertainment.
Mr. Rosenblatt asked if the Staff’s concerns regarding the buffers and the loading zone
have been remedied. Mr. Haskell indicated that revised plans were submitted to address
those concerns. Mr. Rosenblatt questioned whether adequate provision had been made for
queuing cars at the drive-thru window. Mr. Haskell explained that this is not a typical drive-
up window where the customer drives up to the menu board, orders the food, and then sits
in line to be served. People will more likely call in orders from their homes and then come in
and drive up to the window to pick up their orders. This will not be as intense as a typical
drive-thru facility.
Mr. King had questions regarding lot coverage, impervious surface and lighting. Mr.
Haskell said that the size is very close in terms of impervious surface and the proposal will
decrease the amount of pavement. He indicated that the applicant submitted a lighting plan
and that there will be several poles located in the front islands in front of the building and the
lighting is designed to minimize any impacts.
Chairman Guerette asked what plans the applicant has to prevent runoff from the new
construction into the Penjajawoc Stream. Mr. Haskell indicated that they are proposing to
have a line of silt fence at the top of the slope along this edge. The silt fence will act as a
sedimentation barrier during construction and if there is any source or concentrated flow
there would be stone check dams to keep it from running down over the slope.
Chairman Guerette asked for comments from opponents. There being none, he closed
the Public Hearing and asked for Staff comments. Acting Planning Officer Gould indicated
that this application is for Conditional Use and Site Development Plan approval for
construction of a 3,455-sq. ft., drive-thru restaurant located at 49 Bangor Mall Boulevard in a
Shopping and Personal Service District and a Stream Protection District. The applicant is
proposing to demolish the existing Pizza Hut and replace it with a new building. In reviewing
the Conditional Use Standards for additional setbacks and queuing space to facilitate those
uses in the Shopping and Personal Service District, Staff is comfortable that this application
meets those standards. This is a unique situation as it is not the typical drive-up use.
Mr. Gould indicated that Staff had two issues regarding the proposed front “B”
subtype “2” buffer and the south side “C” subtype “1” buffer. Staff felt that the “B-2” buffer
should be at least 20 feet wide, where 13 feet was proposed; and that the “C-1” buffer
should be at least 30 feet wide, where 17 feet was proposed. Mr. Gould noted that the
applicant’s agent submitted revised plans addressing these concerns.
Another standard for Conditional Use approval is whether or not the proposed building
is in keeping with the architectural style of other buildings in the area. Staff felt that this
proposed design is in keeping with the many fast food establishments in that area. Staff
4
also had concerns regarding the location of the proposed loading zone. The revised plans
removed it from the travel aisle. Staff recommended that the Planning Board grant
Conditional Use approval as the proposal meets the four standard conditions for the granting
of a Conditional Use as well as the two specific conditional use standards of the Shopping
and Personal Service District. Staff also recommended that the Board grant Site
Development Plan approval as the plan, as submitted, meets the requirements of the district
as well as the site plan submittal requirements.
Mr. Wheeler said that he saw an opportunity to make a contribution to the
Comprehensive Plan Update in terms of definitions. Mr. Wheeler added that it is important in
the Economic Development Phase of the Comprehensive Plan that there be established a
clear distinction between the term drive-thru, which is what this is, and a drive-up use which
is what a McDonald’s might be.
Mr. Gould noted that the Board needed to determine whether or not the proposed
building’s architecture conforms to the buildings in the area, and that separate motions
needed to be made for the conditional use and the site development plan applications.
Mr. Rosenblatt moved to approve the conditional use request as the proposed building
conforms to the architectural style of buildings in the area and meets the criteria for
conditional use approval. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion. The Board voted 5 in favor and
0 opposed to the motion. Mr. Rosenblatt then moved to approve the site development plan
at 49 Bangor Mall Boulevard for Capital Pizza Hut, Inc., applicant. Mr. Wheeler seconded the
motion, which also passed by a vote of 5 to 0.
Item No. 5: Preliminary Subdivision Plan approval of Phase II of the
Woodridge Subdivision consisting of 21 lots and being located
off of Bomarc Road in a Low Density Residential District.
Woods of Maine, Inc., applicant.
Chairman Guerette opened the Public Hearing and asked for a presentation from the
applicant. Mr. Don Becker, P.E. of CES, Inc. represented the applicant, Woods of Maine, Inc.
Mr. Becker explained that this is the second phase of the Woodridge Subdivision and consists
of 21 lots. The first phase received Planning Board approval last year. Mr. Becker indicated
that the only unique thing about this particular subdivision compared to the other phase is
that they are using the road as the drainage break. In this case, all of the runoff is overland
flow using existing travel paths with no storm drains, culverts, or catch basins proposed.
Mr. Rosenblatt asked who would own the open space areas and what type of
restrictions would be imposed on the open space in terms of what would be allowed. Mr.
Becker indicated the same Homeowners Association as was established in Phase I would be
the owner and would have jurisdiction over that space, and, for practical reasons, there
would be no restrictions imposed on this open space. Mr. Becker indicated that if the
applicant wished to put in a walking path or a playground they would need to obtain Site
5
Development Plan approval. Because they do not know what the future homeowners would
like, they chose not to restrict their options. Mr. Rosenblatt pointed out that people have
different perceptions of what open space is, and what it is supposed be and what restrictions
apply to the area, and in other projects developers have indicated on plans what is and is not
open space. Mr. Rosenblatt felt that that would potentially resolve issues down the road
when different people have different ideas about what can or cannot be done in the open
space area. Mr. Becker indicated that the applicant had left it open for active recreational
use as well as unused open space and felt that it should be left up to the homeowner.
Mr. King asked what types of houses would be built. Mr. Becker indicated that it
would be single-family housing similar to that constructed in Phase I.
Chairman Guerette asked where the runoff from this site was going to end up. Mr.
Becker indicated that there is a large wetland and most of the runoff will end up there. He
went on to explain that the Department of Environmental Protection prefer them to maintain
existing flows so as not to increase or decrease flows.
As no one spoke in favor, Chairman Guerette asked for opponents. Ms. Julie Esp, an
abutting property owner, indicated that she was not at the Planning Board meetings for the
First Phase of this subdivision. She told the Board that she had concerns. She noted that it
was wet all along most of the old road and that she has had the wetlands on her property
delineated. She questioned the location of the wetlands. Ms. Esp was concerned with the
drainage easements that propose to run back toward her property and that it not increase
runoff onto her property. Ms. Esp also noted a 50 foot drainage access and utility easement
that runs the entire length of her property and asked what this is for. She also had concerns
about the applicant’s treatment for drainage and access, the 30 foot wide sewer easement,
where the sewer is going to and whether or not it would go to the end of the proposed cul-
de-sac, across the wetland, to the pumping station.
Ms. Esp also questioned if there were plans to increase the runoff to the old 30 inch
concrete culvert located under the old woods road or if they planned to replace it; if there is
going to be any increase in flow across the back of Lots 12 thru 21; who will be responsible
for maintenance of the drainage structures in the subdivision; what is going to be done with
remaining land of Rebecca Wood; and, will this subdivision require DEP approval?
Chairman Guerette closed the Public Hearing and asked for comments from Staff.
Acting Planning Officer Gould indicated that the application before the Board is for
Preliminary Subdivision Plan approval to create 21 lots off of Bomarc Road in a Low Density
Residential District as Phase II of the Woodridge Subdivision. Mr. Gould provided the Board
with copies of Ms. Esp’s questions as well as a copy of Mr. Becker’s response. Phase I of this
subdivision created 29 lots and there were similar questions about stormwater and open
space that were worked through by providing for a private pumping station and a
Homeowners Association. This development is not much different in its approach to
developing this site. There are some lots that will have fill on them but they are clearly
6
indicated as such on the plan. Mr. Gould explained that the City, as a matter of policy, likes
to provide easements around lots to try to mitigate drainage impacts from one lot to another.
In an attempt to mitigate this, the applicant has provided the City with easements in
advance. The applicant is providing 10% of the subdivision of Phase II for open space which
is double what is required and, this open space area is an upland area. Staff feels that this
plan is in order for preliminary plan approval with the four items noted in the Staff
Memorandum, namely: 1) that the new lots need to be members of the Homeowner’s
Association; 2) that the applicant consider a new name for the roadway; 3) that the City
Engineer’s Office get to review and approve the roadway section details; and 4) that Lot 18
will be modified to meet the standards of the Land Development Code.
Mr. Wheeler read the definition of open space that describes it as a set aside for
“public park and open space.” Mr. Gould explained that historically the City has been very
flexible. The Planning Board is the entity that decides what is acceptable. Many times the
applicant has set aside a detention pond for open space and the Board has deemed that
acceptable and in other times it has been wetlands. It is not intended that it only be a
ballfield or a playground. It is merely land that has been set aside. In each instance it is a
decision that rests with the Board. If the applicant dedicates land to the City the Planning
Board can say that that is acceptable but it is the City Council who would actually say that
they would or not accept it.
Chairman Guerette called upon Mr. Becker to respond to Ms. Esp’s questions. Mr.
Becker noted that Ms. Esp. had forwarded to the City a list of questions that she did mention
at this meeting. Mr. Becker noted that Ms. Esp has concerns about two drainage easement
that appear to be directed towards her property. The first easement is between Lots 17 and
19 that covers road and front yards of five lots to drain specifically between these two lots
and would deliver the water to an existing flow. The easement between lots 12 and 13
drains less area and sends the water to a flat wetland area. That easement is provided to
the City to allow for flexibility for future mitigation, if necessary. The road is placed in an
area that is designed to reduce the amount of land that drains to her property. However, the
calculations will show that there is no increase in runoff. The sewer line will be located
within the existing road as it would be less disturbing to the wetlands. It will require a State
Permit in order to be built. The old culvert pipe is in good condition and no changes will be
made. Ms. Wood has no plans to develop the remaining land, but that he suspects that in
the long-term, that area could be added to the open space. Currently, State regulations
make this a very expensive option for the applicant prior to the year 2010. The project does
not need DEP approval for the subdivision but will need an NRPA Permit for the sewer and
State Stormwater Permit. The State will review their stormwater hydrology to see if it meets
with their rules.
Mr. Clark moved to approve the Preliminary Subdivision Plan for Phase II of the
Woodridge Subdivision located off of Bomarc Road for Woods of Maine, Inc. Mr. King
seconded the motion. Mr. Rosenblatt noted that the conditions as indicated by Staff should
be added to the motion, namely: 1) the new lots need to be members of the Homeowner’s
7
Association; 2) that the applicant consider a new name for the roadway; 3) that the City
Engineer’s Office get to review and approve the roadway section details; and 4) that Lot 18
will be modified to meet the standards of the Land Development Code. Mr. Clark agreed to
add those conditions to his motion. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion with the four added
conditions. The Board voted 5 in favor and 0 opposed to the motion with conditions.
Item No. 6: Conditional Use/Site Development Plan approval to re-approve
a 19-lot expansion of the Birch Hill Estates Mobile Home Park
located off of Judson Boulevard in a High Density Residential
District. Judson Grant, Jr., applicant.
Chairman Guerette opened the Public Hearing and asked for comments from the
applicant. Mr. Andy Sturgeon of Ames A/E represented the applicant, Judson Grant, Jr. Mr.
Mike Longo was also present to answer questions. Mr. Sturgeon explained that in October of
2002 the applicant had received Planning Board approval for this 19-lot expansion of the
existing Birch Hills Estates Mobilehome Park. As this project has not been completed and
the applicant failed to apply for an extension prior to the expiration of the completion date, it
was necessary to reapply to the Planning Board for approval.
No one spoke in opposition, and the Public Hearing was closed. Chairman Guerette
asked for comments from Staff. Acting Planning Officer Gould explained that this application
is a request for Conditional Use and Site Development Plan approval to expand the Birch Hill
Estates Mobilehome Park off of Judson Boulevard. In October 2002, the applicant received
Conditional Use approval as well as a Modification to their Site location of Development Act
permit. Fortunately, the Site Location Permit does not expire but the local approval, if not
acted upon, will expire. Mr. Gould noted that this is the identical project approved in 2002.
Because a Mobile home Park is a Conditional Use in a High Density Residential District, the
Board is required to hold a Public Hearing and review the proposal. Staff felt that this
reapproval still meets the Conditional Use standards and the specific standards of the High
Density Residential District and also recommended Site Development Plan approval as the
plans submitted meet the standards for Site Development Plan submission.
Mr. Rosenblatt asked if there have there been any changes in the Land Development
Code pertaining to mobilehome parks since 2002. Mr. Gould indicated that there had not
been any changes.
Chairman Guerette asked for a motion. Mr. Rosenblatt moved to grant Conditional
Use approval at 1305 Broadway, Judson M. Grant, applicant. Mr. Wheeler seconded the
motion. The Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. Mr. Rosenblatt moved to grant
Site Development Plan approval for the proposal at 1305 Broadway. Judson M. Grant,
applicant. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion, which also passed unanimously.
8
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Item No. 7: Planning Board Approval of Minutes.
This item was continued to the Board’s next meeting.
NEW BUSINESS
Item No. 8: Site Development Plan approval to construct a 930-sq. ft. first
floor addition to the existing building and a 1,070-sq. ft. second
story addition for two apartment units above the existing retail
portion of the building at 592 Hammond Street in a
Neighborhood Service District. Mid-Maine Builders, Inc., d/b/a
Karam’s, applicant.
Chairman Guerette asked for comments from the applicant. Mr. John Karam explained
that he is proposing to construct a 927-square foot first floor addition for retail use and a
l,067-square foot second story addition to add two apartments above the existing store at his
building at 592 Hammond Street in a Neighborhood Service District. Chairman Guerette
asked with the mixed use of this property if the applicant had heard any concern or
discussion from the neighbors about the impact of his business in the surround area. Mr.
Karam indicated that it is usually pretty quiet and that he had not heard of any concerns.
Mr. Wheeler asked if this is the same building that was previously occupied by the print shop.
Mr. Karam indicated that it is.
As no one spoke in opposition, Chairman Guerette asked for Staff comments. Acting
Planning Officer Gould indicated that this is an application for Site Development Plan approval
to construct a 937 sq. ft. addition to the first floor, and a 1,070 square foot addition to the
second floor at 592 Hammond St. in a Neighborhood Service District (NSD). The NSD zoned
property along Hammond Street and State Street are typically very difficult sites as they were
developed long ago when there weren’t current development standards. Buffer yards are
non-existent on many of these sites, any parking has to back out on the street, and there is
typically not enough on-site parking for an expansion such as this. Mr. Gould indicated that
the applicant has met with Staff numerous times to put this puzzle together, and Staff is
confident that the proposed site, as developed, will work better than the existing site. Mr.
Gould noted that a transition yard was created because this property abuts residential
property, the proposed layout for parking on the site will function better than the existing
layout of the site and the proposal meets the standards for Site Development Plan approval.
Staff recommended that the Planning Board grant Site Development Plan approval
Mr. Rosenblatt noted that there are 11 on-site parking spaces indicated on the plan
and asked how many spaces are required under the Ordinance. Mr. Gould indicated that 10
spaces are required and the applicant has provided 11 spaces, 10 on-site and 1 space within
the building where Mr. Karam parks his business vehicle.
9
Mr. Wheeler noted that when he was in the advertising business he was a frequent
customer of the print shop. While the parking was tight at times, he can never remember
having to back out onto Hammond Street or onto East Street to exit this lot.
Mr. King moved to approve the Site Development Plan at 492 Hammond Street for Mid
Maine Builders d/b/a Karam’s. Mr. Rosenblatt seconded the motion. The Board voted 5 in
favor and 0 opposed to the motion for approval.
Item No. 9: Final Subdivision Plan approval of a three lot subdivision
located at approximately 975 Kenduskeag Avenue in a Low
Density Residential District. Paige Investments, LLC, applicant.
Chairman Guerette asked for comments from the applicant. Mr. James Kiser, of Kiser
and Kiser represented the applicant, Paige Investments, LLC. Mr. Kiser indicated that the
applicant was before the Board on May 17, 2005 for a zone change request from Rural
Residence and Agricultural District to Low Density Residential District. The applicant is back
before the Planning Board requesting approval of a minor 3-lot subdivision to utilize the
existing frontage along Kenduskeag Avenue. The lots range in size from ½ acre to 16 acres.
The lots are all served by public utilities. The applicant is proposing an open space area that
contains an existing pond. This open space area will be included as part of the largest lot
and will be a part of the deed restrictions associated with that lot.
Mr. Rosenblatt asked what is planned for development on Lot 3. Jim Kiser indicated
that the applicant is looking at coming in with a larger condominium type project in the
future but right now it is just for the three-lot subdivision for single-family house lots. Mr.
Rosenblatt noted a letter from the Water District that indicated that this lot was being
proposed for a duplex. Mr. Kiser said that it may be on Lot 1, but the applicant was now
reducing it down to a single-family. Mr. Rosenblatt asked what would be permitted in the
open space. Mr. Kiser said that it would be left in its natural state with the exception that
any change to that approval would have to come back to the Board to have any amendments
approved to the open space.
Mr. Rosenblatt asked if the applicant had submitted any information regarding
stormwater management. Mr. Kiser indicated that everything flows down into the wetlands,
most of which are forested wetlands, and they have been mapped by Moyse Environment
Associates.
Mr. Wheeler indicated that the Land Development Code says that open space shall be
dedicated to the City of Bangor. Mr. Kiser noted that while the open space was a
requirement to have dedicated, it is not necessarily deeded over to the City.
Mr. King had concerns regarding the proposed subdivision in that there is no
stormwater plan in the application and no written plan for the open space. Mr. Kiser
10
indicated that no roads were being proposed and that all of the lots had frontage along
Kenduskeag Avenue.
Acting Planning Officer Gould explained that subdivisions are defined by State Statutes
as the creation of 3 or more parcels. To take a parcel and cut it into three pieces requires
approval by the Planning Board. The Bangor Land Development Code recognizes that there
is a significant difference between dividing a parcel into three house lots and taking a piece
of land and then building roadways, extending sewer service and water services. The Code
provides for different review paths. The Woodridge Subdivision and the Rolling Meadows
Subdivision are Major Subdivisions that require multiple meetings to gather details. The most
that can be built on these lots are single-family houses unless they come back before the
Board. To do a Minor Subdivision, an applicant needs to come to the Board one time. The
information that the Ordinance requires for this type of Minor Subdivision is significantly less
than that required of a Rolling Meadows Subdivision or a commercial or an industrial
subdivision. The application before the Board is pretty simple and straight forward, there are
no public improvements proposed, and that is why it is a minor subdivision. The process is
laid out and the applicant is following that process.
Mr. Rosenblatt had concerns that in Section 165-126E there is a provision which would
have the subdivider provide additional information that the Planning Board deems necessary
to adequately review the minor subdivision including data on soils, wetlands and drainage.
The Board has the ability to ask for this information and it has not been submitted thus far.
He indicated that he would like to see this information and noted that the State Subdivision
criteria apply to this subdivision as well as any other subdivision. One criterion indicates that
the applicant needs to provide for stormwater management. Mr. Kiser responded that the
impacts of three residential lots on 19 acres of land are negligible, and that the City did not
require that information as part of the submission materials. Mr. Kiser indicated that the
applicant could provide this if the Board has a concern.
Mr. Wheeler asked the City Engineer to address this issue and expand on his
Memorandum to the Planning Board dated June 2, 2005. City Engineer James Ring indicated
that this is fairly straight forward project with no proposed infrastructure or utility
improvements. All of the lots have minimum frontage or greater on Kenduskeag Avenue and
have full access to public utilities. Because this is a Minor Subdivision proposal, there is no
need to extend the utilities to make these lots buildable. Mr. Wheeler indicated that Mr. Ring
had specifically referred to Section 165-126G regarding the issues of health, sanitation and
engineering. Mr. Ring explained that this Minor Subdivision Plan meets the requirements of
Section 165-126G.
Mr. Rosenblatt asked what level of review would be required should there be a
residential development on Lot 3 that is larger than single-family. Mr. Gould explained that
one would need to look at the Low Density Residential District to see what permitted and
conditional uses are allowed. If something other than single family is constructed it may
require conditional use approval. If a project needs conditional use approval then the
11
application would need to meet the four standard conditional use criteria as well as the
specific conditional use standards of the Low Density Residential District. If one builds a
single duplex then you have to have a lot 5 acres in size and come before the Planning Board
to get conditional use approval. Mr. Rosenblatt asked if in that situation there would be
further subdivision review. Mr. Gould said that there may not.
Chairman Guerette asked for Staff comments. Acting Planning Officer Gould explained
that the application before the Board is for a Minor Subdivision Plan approval of a 19.3 acre
parcel located off of Kenduskeag Avenue to be divided into a 3-lot subdivision in a Low
Density Residential District. All three lots meet the minimum standards for the Low Density
Residential District (LDR) that is served with public sewer and water. The minimum lot size
in the LDR is 12,000 sq. ft. and all three lots are substantially larger. The applicant has
submitted topographic information as well as wetland information on the site. While there is
wetland on the property there clearly is evidence that there is upland buildable areas on
every lot which is a standard issue when there are wetlands on a lot. The applicant has
designated an acre of land for open space. The full details of that open space have not been
specifically provided but the area that has been designated is of great interest and concern to
other people as an area to be protected. The applicant could have proposed only 5% of
open space located in the back of the parcel. Under the Ordinance requirement for open
space, there are a number of options available to an applicant short of a straight dedication
to the City of Bangor which has been the rare exception in the last 20 years. More often, it is
an area that is designated and more often not usable. Some open space areas are controlled
by a Homeowners Association, some are controlled by easements and sometimes stormwater
detention ponds are designated as open space within the development.
Mr. Gould indicated that Staff is comfortable that the basic details of the Minor
Subdivision have been submitted. While there is a provision that if the Board wants to
request more information, they are certainly at liberty to do so. However, it is Staff’s position
that the applicant should be treated consistently with other applicants with similar projects.
Mr. Gould said that there may be issues with any future development on these lots but that is
not the application before the Planning Board. Staff recommended that the Planning Board
grant approval of the Minor Subdivision Plan as the submittal requirements have been
satisfied.
Chairman Guerette noted that there could be some confusion because at the time of
the zone change request there was some talk about putting several multi-family, attached
type housing units in. Now the applicant is before the Board with a very simple three-lot
subdivision. Mr. Kiser responded that they may be back before the Board but at this time the
applicant wishes to create single-family homes to start development on the project to
generate some revenue. The single-family construction is doable to start development on
the project while a more comprehensive development is being developed. Chairman
Guerette asked if the ownership of any of the lots had changed. Mr. Kiser indicated that they
had not and went on to say that it is likely that Lot 3 would remain in the ownership of Paige
Investment, LLC.
12
Chairman Guerette asked questions regarding the issue of the open space and
indicated that he would be reluctant to approve open space that remained in the ownership
of an individual, however, if it remained in the ownership of the developer as an entity
where it is clear that it is open and accessible to all of the residents of that particular
development he felt it would meet the City’s standard. Mr. Kiser indicated that the applicant
could provide an easement to all three lots for that area and would be more than happy to
do so if the Board wishes. If this would be appropriate for a condition, the applicant would
be agreeable to incorporate it.
Mr. Wheeler was in agreement with Chairman Guerette and added that he thought
that this is the only issue that is really justifiable as a condition of approval because the
applicant has demonstrated in accordance with the requirements that he has submitted a
complete application and provided all of the information required. Mr. Wheeler
acknowledged that there is a provision that allows the Board to request additional
information. But, he indicated that he was more strongly persuaded by the concern on the
part of the Planning Office that the Board act consistently with other projects of a similar
nature. Mr. Wheeler indicated that he would support this application with the condition that
there be an easement provided for the open space by the developer, and, that it remain
under the control of the developer.
Mr. Guerette then asked for comments from the audience. Ms. Linda Hunter, 1025
Kenduskeag Avenue, indicated there were several issues that she would like to point out to
the Board. She wondered who was supposed to speak for the neighborhood and said that
she discovered it was the Planning Board who speaks for the neighborhood and she asked
the Board to please maintain the character of the neighborhood. She said that she did not
think that the only issue was three individual house lots but construction of a minimum of 60
condominium units. She asked that everyone be honest and up front. She thanked the
developer for designating the pond for open space as this is one of their major concerns and
she really appreciated the recognition of the pond and how important it is. She urged the
City to assume ownership of the pond as outlined in 165-129 because she felt that the
residents would maintain it and include it in their annual cleanup. Ms. Hunter asked the
Planning Board to look at the entire 150-acre parcel (which this 19-acre parcel is a part of)
before making decisions about smaller pieces. She noted that there were conversations
taking place about rezoning this entire acreage and, considering the vast amount of wetlands
across this property, it only makes sense to look at entire development. Ms. Hunter asked
who is responsible for protecting the wetlands. There needs to be careful and responsible
planning while preserving the neighborhood and the habitat for the deer, snowshoe hare,
turkey and birds. She asked the Board to slow down this process and look at the big picture
and big plans, first.
Mr. Dana Hunter, 1025 Kenduskeag Avenue, was concerned about the future
development of Lot 3 as he had heard that there would be 60 units of housing constructed.
Mr. Hunter indicated that this large type of development would require more than a small
13
drive-way. He said that the Planning Board has the right and the responsibility to request
additional information. He said that he did not feel that Lot 3 is going to be for only a single-
family resident nor would the road frontage for this lot be adequate for such a large
development
Ms. Lucy Quimby, 1230 Kenduskeag Avenue, told the Board that she drives by the
pond every day. Ms. Quimby noted earlier conversations where it was discussed that there
are freshwater wetlands on this lot and it is her understanding that the wetlands extend out
on both sides of that lot and that there are 10 acres of interconnected wetlands. This
means that any buildings will have to be set back 75 feet from edge of that wetland within a
lot and it cannot be counted towards the total acreage that is required to build on the lot.
Ms. Quimby expressed her concern about future development as to the closeness of roads,
width of roads, and closeness to wetlands and raised the issue that these issues be taken
into consideration. Ms. Quimby said that wetlands are a really important natural engine that
drives the ecological food chain and asked that the wetland area be turned over to the City.
While the City may not wish to maintain this pond, Ms. Quimby indicated that there was no
maintenance to the pond and that easements are difficult to enforce. She asked that the
wetland issue be reviewed before the subdivision is approved.
Ms. Tracy Allen, 1040 Kenduskeag Avenue, indicated that all of her neighbors had
received written notification and that she did not. She asked the Planning Board to consider
a larger area for written notifications. Ms. Allen said that she is concerned about the traffic
along Kenduskeag Avenue as it is extremely narrow. With the increased development in
Glenburn, Kenduskeag Avenue has become like a freeway. With 120 cars for the 60-unit
development, that that would have a negative impact upon the road. She asked if there
would be an opportunity to pause and do a traffic study. She shared the environmental
concerns but was concerned that there was a larger project proposed.
Chairman Guerette asked Mr. Gould to address some of the issues. Mr. Gould
explained that the application in front of the Board is just for the 19 acres for this applicant.
The applicant does not have control of the 100 acres surrounding this parcel and the Board
can only deal with the applications that come before them, when they come before them.
Regarding wetlands, the Department of Environmental Protection is responsible for wetlands.
There have been numerous inventories of wetlands within the City. Wetland areas
considered for shoreland zone protection are sent to the DEP and are approved by the State
of Maine. The Board may recall in the last 5 years the City had to make specific amendments
to the Shoreland Zoning to include areas the DEP found that weren’t covered and that
needed to be. Staff reviewed the mapping for this area and found that this particular
wetland area, at present, is not indicated as a shoreland zone protected area by the State.
In regard to notification standards, Mr. Gould cited the standards within the Land
Development Code that require that abutters within 100 feet of a project be notified. Mrs.
Allen’s property is over 300 feet away.
14
Mr. Rosenblatt was concerned about a potential loophole that an applicant could come
forward with a minor subdivision for a division of land, and afterwards when further
development comes along there is no application of the subdivision criteria to that
development. If the applicant were agreeing that this needed to come back before the
Board for subdivision review if anything other than a single-family home were being built on
Lot 3, he may feel differently but he did not feel that this is the case. He felt that while
review of projects under other permitting processes can be somewhat anemic they do not
cover the landscape that the subdivision criteria does.
Mr. King asked what information was supplied in the application for wetlands. Mr.
Kiser indicated that the wetlands were indicated on the plan.
Mr. Guerette indicated that he would support this application conditioned upon
clarifying that the open space would be available to all residents in this development. Mr.
Wheeler indicated that he too would support this condition of approval. Mr. Wheeler said
while there has been a lot of speculation that 60 units will be constructed on Lot 3, the
applicant would need to come back before the Board for approval to make sure that the type
of development fits. Mr. Wheeler said that he felt that the Planning Board speaks for all
neighborhoods at all times and out of concern for public input, the Board has increased the
opportunity for new interests to be represented even when the Board is not required to do
so. To suggest that the Planning Board be an advocate for any party is off the mark. The
Board cannot act on speculation, hearsay, or personal interpretation. The Staff has gone
through this process in accordance with all requirements.
Mr. Wheeler moved to approve the Final Subdivision Plan for the area known as
Golden Pond for Paige Investments, LLC, on Kenduskeag Avenue with the condition that
provision be made for access to the open space area by all property owners and that there
be assurance given that it will not be rescinded to any single-property owner in this
subdivision. Mr. Clark seconded the motion. The Board voted 3 in favor and 2 opposed to
approve the Final Subdivision Plan with conditions.
Item No. 10: Site Development Plan Approval to construct 142,053-sq. ft. of
retail space consisting of 11 buildings located on Stillwater
Avenue in a Shopping and Personal Service District and a
Resource Protection District. Widewaters Stillwater Co., LLC,
applicant.
Mr. Kevin Kane representing Widewaters, LLC, thanked the Planning Board for the
opportunity to appear before them again. Also present were Jeff Allen, P.E. of the James W.
Sewall Company and Rob Krieg from Sam Coplon Associates. Mr. Kane explained that the
applicant is now proposing a downsized version of their 2002 plan. The new proposal calls
15
for 142,000 square feet of retail development within 11 buildings (7 contiguous in a structure
and 4 free standing buildings along the eastern side) with 720 parking spaces on a 27 acre
parcel. This proposal contains no variances from the Land Development or any relief of
perform standards, and no intrusion onto the recommended 250 buffer zone located next to
the Penjajawoc Marsh. Since the Department of Environmental Protection denied the 2003
permit, the applicant has been working with the Maine Department of Transportation and has
obtained a Traffic Movement Permit and a Highway Construction Permit. Mr. Kane noted
that he was pleased to receive an appointment to become a Member of the Penjajawoc Task
Force to study the Penjajawoc area and land around it to develop a more comprehensive
approach to development while protecting a valuable resource. This application was done in
complete harmony with the Task Force’s recommendations.
Mr. Jeff Allen, P.E. of the J. W. Sewall Company, noted that the applicant had taken
some lessens learned from prior experience in developing a new plan that would be
harmonious with the environment, as well as, innovative. The highlight of the proposal is the
incorporation of storm bio retention cells that have small depressions in the parking lot and
provide a filter in addition to having the capability to treat a larger detention pond system.
These bio retention cells are the first proposed in the State.
Mr. Rob Krieg, a Landscape Architect with Coplon Associates, explained the
landscaping plan, noting that their basic goals are to make the development as beautiful and
they can, and screen the development from the recreational users of wetlands. The
applicant is proposing to downsize the wet pond, and construct a berm with a fence that will
prevent light from trespassing back on to the marsh area. They are proposing to utilize
native plant materials with evergreens and deciduous trees for a good mix. Native grasses
will be woven and planted in the bio retention cells as well as along the edge of the marsh
for the wildlife.
Mr. Rosenblatt asked how long it will take for the vegetation to grow. Mr. Krieg
indicated that the applicant wants to give an instant impact upon the area and within 2 years
the plant materials will be established.
Chairman Guerette told Mr. Kane that this was a delightful presentation anticipating
the issues though modernistic and environmentally sensitive planning. He noted that this
plan was something to be proud of. Mr. Kane indicated that Mr. Krieg was brought into the
project at the suggestion of BACORD (Bangor Area Citizens for Responsible Development)
and integrated with any future parallel service road construction.
Mr. Clark asked if Stillwater Avenue would be widened and if there would be another
entrance onto Gilman Road. Mr. Kane indicated that the connection to Gilman Road is not a
full connection.
Mr. Jim Ring, City Engineer, indicated that the Final Task Force Report recommended
that Gilman Road could become restricted access in the future. This development doesn’t
16
trigger that decision now but will in the future. Mr. Kane noted that the State issued traffic
movement permit was based on a large unnamed retail store. Based on his discussion with
the State, the very first building constructed will require that the improvements be in place
long before the development is finished.
Chairman Guerette then asked for Staff comments. Acting Planning Officer Gould
indicated that the plans as submitted are consistent with the Land Development Code’s
Shopping and Personal Service District and also meet all submittal requirements. The
proposal will utilize the existing access between Circuit City and Chili’s and will provide 727
parking spaces, of which 27 will be handicap spaces that are in excess of City’s standard.
Loading zones for all the attached buildings have been provided as well as designated
loading zones for the satellite buildings out front. Existing utilities are at the site. The
applicant is proposing a bio retention cell stormwater management system and all details are
outside of the 250 foot setback of the upland edge of the wetland. As submitted, the plans
meet all District and submittal requirements, and Staff recommended Site Development Plan
approval.
Chairman Guerette noting that while not a Public Hearing but a significant issue, he
asked if anyone else wished to speak. Ms. Hope Brogunier, a Member of the Penjajawoc
Area Task Force, indicated that this has been a cooperative effort. She said that she is very
excited by and pleased about the innovations of the bio retention cells and explained how
these cells would make it possible for water to move faster and, therefore, control the
temperature. Salt will also be filtered in this system. Ms. Brogunier indicated the snow
removal people would be required to pile the snow in designated areas.
Ms. Brogunier felt that Coplon Associates had done an excellent job in its landscaping
design in mitigating effects of invasive plants while the earth is being disturbed through
evasive free soil. Ms. Brogunier also discussed with the Board her concern about invasive
plants and asked if it would be possible to incorporate this into the Comprehensive Plan
Update. She also asked the Board to review the possibility of prohibiting the sale of invasive
plant materials in the City of Bangor. She also said that the area of land that the City owns
in this area needs attention in terms of planting and would like to see either a cover or
something similar to what the Coplon plan is proposing to do.
Mr. Bob Spencer, representing Three Rivers Development Corp an abutting property
owner, indicated that he was present at the meeting representing his four children. He
indicated that he has had an excellent working relationship with Widewaters but wanted on
go on record that there is an agreement recorded in the Registry of Deeds regarding
easements, covenants, and restrictions when dealing with Wal-Mart. That particular
agreement imposed restrictions on all of the parties owning some of the Rudnicki lands.
Because Three Rivers Development Corporation feels that they are now the only ones that
are still bound by these agreements, they are requesting that Widewaters end the agreement
with Wal-Mart. Mr. Spencer indicated that he wished to raise the issue at the Planning Board
17
meeting so that if it becomes an issue in the future, it is on record that he formally requested
that this agreement be cancelled.
Mr. Clark moved to approve the Site Development Plan for Widewaters, LLC located on
Stillwater Avenue. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 5 in
favor and 0 opposed.
Item No. 11: Site Development Plan approval to construct a 6,458-sq. ft.
addition to the existing church building located at 10 Broadway
in a Downtown Development District. All Souls Congregational
Church, applicant.
Mr. Robert Frank, WBRC represented the applicant, All Souls Congregational Church.
Mr. Frank explained that the applicant is proposing to construct a three-story 6,458 square
foot addition to replace the existing connection between the existing church building and the
adjacent 1 story Baille Building. The new connecting addition will be accessed from French
Street.
Mr. Rosenblatt asked if provision was made for storm water management. Mr. Frank
indicated that any stormwater would be negligible as there is a net change and would be
minimal at best.
Mr. King asked if the Church building is on the National Register for Historic Buildings.
Mr. Frank indicated that it was not.
As no one spoke in opposition, Chairman Guerette asked for comments from Staff.
Acting Planning Officer Gould explained that this application is to construct a three-story
5,468 square foot addition to the existing church building located at 10 Broadway in a
Downtown Development District. The new addition will be served by an existing sewer
service, water service will be extended from York Street, and electrical service will be aerial
from State Street to a pad-mounted transformer on-site. The existing site does not have any
off-street parking. The Land Development Code exempts the Downtown Development District
from providing off-street parking. The plan that was originally submitted had some work
going on out in the French Street right-of-way and barring some easement or special
permission from the City Council, Staff was going to recommend that the Board review the
plan and adopt it with a condition. By working with the City Engineer, they were able to
make some design changes that made the improvements in the right-of-way unnecessary.
At that time it was too late to place this item on the Consent Agenda. The Planning Staff
finds that the plans as submitted are complete and consistent with the requirements of the
Land Development Code Section 165-114 A- J, and Staff would recommend that the Planning
Board grant the applicant Site Development Plan approval.
18
Mr. Rosenblatt moved to approve the Site Development Plan for All Souls
Congregational Church at 10 Broadway, All Souls Congregational Church, applicant. Mr.
Wheeler seconded the motion. The Board voted 5 to 0 in favor of the motion.
Mr. Ring said that he would like to recognize the Planning Staff for their hard work in
getting the information together for the meetings and for being as helpful as possible.
Secondly, he thanked the Board for their work on some very hard issues. Thirdly, Mr. Ring
noted that the City Clerk has received a letter from Associate Member Masters indicating his
intention to resign from the Board.
Chairman Guerette reminded the Board of the Comprehensive Plan Update Workshop
meeting on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 at 6:30 p.m.
As there were no further items for discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 10:30
p.m.