HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-09-23 Planning Board Minutes
PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF BANGOR
SPECIAL MEETING
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2003
MINUTES
Board Members Present Richard Fournier, Chairman
Frederick Costlow
David Clark
Robert Guerette
Hal Wheeler
John Hanson
William Masters
City Staff Present: Katherine Weber
James Ring
John Hamer
Peter Witham
David Gould
Lynn Johnson
News Media Present: Bangor Daily News
WZON Radio
WVII – Channel 7
WABI – Channel 5
Chairman Fournier called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Chairman
Fournier announced that a quorum was present. He said that while the two
items before the Board were not public hearings, he would ask for public
comment. The items under consideration are the following:
Item No. 1 Site Development Plan Approval to include
improvements constructed but not previously
permitted at Husson College in a Government and
Institutional Service District. Husson College,
applicant.
Item No. 2: Site Location of Development Act Modification
Approval to add additional seating to the existing
baseball field and to include improvements
constructed but not previously permitted at Husson
College in a Government and Institutional Service
District. Husson College, applicant.
Chairman Fournier opened the meeting and asked for comments from the
applicant. P. Andrew Hamilton, Esquire, represented the applicant, Husson
College. Mr. Hamilton noted that he was joined by Mr. Tim Woodcock, Esquire
and Ms. Heather Parent of Eaton Peabody, Mr. Andy Sturgeon, Ames A/E, noise
consultants Mr. Warren Brown and Mr. Neil Wetmore; Husson College President
Dr. William Beardsley, Dr. James Doughty, Dean of Education, Ms. Julie Green,
Director of Public Affairs, Board Members Mr. Leo Loiselle and Mr. Tom Sawyer,
Dr. Robert Smith, Dean of the Graduate School, Dr. John Winkin, Mr. Dave
Cassavas, Equire, and Mr.David Coune.
Mr. Hamilton explained that the issues before the Board were the Site
Development Plan for the additional parking spaces and improvements
constructed, but not previously permitted, and the Site Location of Development
Act (SLODA) Modification for the additional seating and improvements
constructed but not previously permitted. He noted that those items that were
not under consideration are the use that had been determined by the Zoning
Board of Appeals, the Site Development Plan for seating approved by the
Planning Board on July 15, 2003, and traffic associated with the stadium that
would be considered under the Maine Department of Transportation Traffic
Permit review. He called on Mr. Andy Sturgeon to address the applicant’s
compliance with the Site Law standards not related to sound and noise.
Mr. Andy Sturgeon of Ames A/E discussed the Site Development Plan
stating that this Plan addressed prior construction of parking areas, four small
detention ponds associated with the parking, and two new small dugouts for the
existing soccer field. The parking expansion consisted of a 78-space gravel
parking lot and 200 paved spaces along College Circle and in other existing lots.
Mr. Sturgeon told the Board that he felt that these improvements, along with the
dugouts, met all the standards of the Land Development Code for approval.
Mr. Sturgeon discussed with the Board the application for the Site
Location of Development Act Modification for the additional seating and site
improvements noted under the discussion of the Site Development Plan
submittal. Mr. Sturgeon went through some of the pertinent sections of the
SLODA application, and said that he felt that this application met the standards
2
for approval. Mr. Sturgeon indicated that a traffic permit from the Maine
Department of Transportation is required for this project.
Mr. Hamilton explained that it is the applicant’s intent to take measures
that will be responsible to the neighborhood, while at the same time, allow them
to live within enforceable measures. He explained that the original College
facilities were constructed in the 1960’s, and the ball field was constructed in
1969. Mr. Hamilton made reference to a letter from Judy Gates of the
Department of Environmental Protection. Ms. Gates, at the request of the City of
Bangor in seeking a determination on noise regulations, had written an opinion
regarding the noise issue. She wrote that because Husson College had
constructed the ball field in 1969 prior to 1970 (when the Site Law was enacted),
the noise regulations were not applicable. Mr. Hamilton said that he, too, felt
that Husson was not subject to the noise regulations because it was an existing
development. Mr. Hamilton asked that the Planning Board confirm the
Department of Environmental Protection’s decision regarding the noise
standards.
Mr. Hamilton told the Board that the applicant had asked Mr. Warren
Brown, an acoustical consultant, and Mr. Neil Wetmore, a sound system
designer, to design a system to mitigate the noise from the ballfield. Mr. Warren
Brown told the Board that he had gone to Orono where the Lumberjacks
Baseball Team played ball, and also went to the ball field at Husson College. He
said that he had located the residences and sensitive places in the area. He told
the Board that he did some sound monitoring at the Husson Field that was
similar to that at Mahaney Diamond in Orono. The measurements used were
based on the Site Location of Development Act regulations. Mr. Brown indicated
that several monitors were placed to record noise levels.
Mr. Neil Wetmore, a sound system designer, made sound comparisons
between Mahaney Field and what is proposed at Husson College to determine
the best location for speakers. Mr. Wetmore said that the best location would be
directed towards the bleachers and away from the residential area using the
least amount of speakers. Three speakers are proposed at Husson College
where there are 10 located at Mahaney. The speakers proposed at Husson
College would be located on the bleachers and pointed toward the spectators
and not the neighbors. They chose electro voice speakers with excellent
directivity of sound.
The Board discussed with Mr. Wetmore and Mr. Brown the types of
speakers, the size, location, direction, wattage, and loudness of the speakers.
Attorney Andrew Hamilton told the Board that he lives on Plaisted Street
and hears airplanes all the time. He said that no matter where you live, there is
3
noise. He said that these residential uses have grown up around Husson. He
told the Board that the applicant can meet the daytime decibel limit of 60 dBa.
However, in his view, the noise issue is not applicable. He noted that Dr.
Beardsley will commit to lowering the proposed level if at all possible. The 57
decibels proposed is “half way.” The applicant does not want to be held to a
standard that they cannot meet. They have run out of available technologies,
and if they could meet the nighttime maximum of 50 decibels, they would not
have to have this discussion with the Board. Mr. Hamilton offered conditions on
Sound Control Measures including stadium seating material, installation of an
evergreen hedge, and planting ivy on the facing wall of the Newman
Gymnasium.
Mr. Hamilton also submitted into the record, a copy of the contract
between the City of Bangor and Husson College that imposes requirements
above and beyond the conditions proposed by the applicant. Mr. Hamilton
noted that a rock concert would be prohibited but that the applicant would not
like to prohibit the Bangor Symphony from using the facility.
Dr. William Beardsley introduced several people present in support of the
applications, including Mr. John Bragg, Ms. Betsy Beardsley and four Husson
Baseball players. He said that over 40 of Husson College’s employees live in
Bangor, and he and his wife live in the neighborhood. He noted that many of
the area residents walk within the campus and use the campus. He said that in
working with the audio consultant, he thought that they would be able to get the
decibels level down to 55dBa at night, but that they wanted a little leeway the
first year or two because they did not want to be committed to something that
they might not be able to achieve.
Dr. James Doughty, Dean of Education, told the Board that he was aware
that Husson College is in a neighborhood, that they need to be good neighbors.
He said that he felt that Husson College was good for Bangor and its young
people. Mr. Tom Sawyer, 544 Valley Avenue, also spoke in support of the
applications.
Chairman Fournier then asked for comments from opponents. Mr.
Nathanial Rosenblatt, 405 Valley Avenue, said that he resided 1,500 feet from
the proposed stadium. He told the Board that he did not feel that 24 hours was
enough notice to review the DEP ruling from Judy Gates. He said that he felt
that this was a way for Husson College to get out of the Noise exemption
contained in Chapter 375, Section 10, Subsection C (5)(g) – Exemptions because
it could not comply. Mr. Rosenblatt distributed an aerial photo taken in 2002 of
Husson College, and said that this, obviously, was a “lousy” place for a 3,000-
seat stadium. He made reference to the Exemption of 5G, and asked if this was
going anywhere. He said that 46 home games over a 90-day period is not
4
considered occasional, and added that he felt that the Board should consider the
proposed sound system as an expansion, and that the noise regulations should
be applicable to the expansion. He told the Board that he did not think that
Husson College could comply with the noise regulations, and he felt that they
would have to comply with the DEP regulations that require a 50 decibel limit at
night. After reviewing Husson College’s application, Mr. Rosenblatt said that he
did not feel that the Site Location of Development Act regulations had been met,
and he urged the Board to deny the Site Location of Development Act
application.
Mr. Paul Debaser, 18 Nicole Court, indicated that he lived 700 feet away
from the proposed ball field. He said that he felt that this location is an “awful
spot” and it would be like putting a ball park at Fairmount Park or Broadway
Park. He said that while he did not have a problem with baseball, he did have
concerns about the noise from the people in the stands that would be clapping,
cheering, and booing. He also wondered if the foul balls would be “shelling the
old people” who lived in the complex next to the ball field. Chairman Fournier
pointed out that noise from people was not an issue that the Board could
consider in its deliberations.
Ms. Donna Larson, who lives about a five-minute walk away, told the
Board that she had several issues with the proposed ball field. She said that
professional level games would be louder. She asked if they planned to serve
th
beer until the 7 inning, and wondered if the people would be leaving the ball
field “tipsy.” She said that she was concerned about runoff from the site, and
concerned that there were several blind drives along Husson Avenue that could
create a traffic hazard.
Mr. Sam Wiemer, 42 Husson Avenue (Northwood Apartments) expressed
his concerns for the residents who live there who are in their 70’s, 80’s, and 90’s
who cannot tolerate the noise. At a recent event held the previous Saturday at
the field, he said that he could not hear his television because the noise was
terrible. He added that he has two broken windows from baseballs.
Ms. Sara Suyama, 141 Husson Avenue, presented the Planning Board with
a list of 120 citizens and neighbors bordering the proposed stadium who oppose
the proposal.
Mr. Mike Solomon, a Valley Avenue resident, asked if the stadium is built,
would other sporting events and other events that would produce noise, and
crowds be allowed. Ms. Janet Brown, who resides on Cynthia Circle, said that
she could sympathize with Mr. Weimer. She said that she loved Husson College,
and respected the Board for looking into this problem, but that she felt that the
intent of the College is certainly different now than what it was in 1969. She
5
said that she did not think that when it started, the College had planned for a
3,000-seat stadium for a professional team. Ms. Donna Larson then asked about
traffic and whether Husson College planned to make an access road off of
Burleigh Road into campus. Chairman Fournier indicated that traffic was not
within the realm of the Planning Board’s review.
Ms. Virginia Suyama, 141 Husson Avenue, discussed with the Board
existing noise in the area, and her concern with traffic issues. Mr. Steve
Thomas, who owns two rental properties on Glenwood Drive, told the Board that
he was concerned that, if this noise is excessive, his tenants might move out and
that would have an economic impact on him and his family.
Mr. Clark had questions about whether there would be sensors within the
stadium to monitor noise at the Northwoods Apartments and to monitor where
sound is escaping from the stadium. Mr. Clark also noted that the Lumberjack
games in Orono start at 7:15 p.m. and are done by 10 p.m. He suggested that
maybe the games at Husson College could be start earlier than those at Orono.
Mr. Chip Hutchins, owner of the Bangor Lumberjacks, indicated that he
would prefer to move the starting time of the games to 6:30 p.m. He had
thought that there might be a problem with the League by making this change,
but has since found out that there would be no problem in starting the games
earlier. Mr. Hutchins also indicated that they had a noise machine, and that they
can add and delete sounds. He indicated that he was open to addressing any of
those sounds that may carry more than other sounds. Mr. Hutchins said that he
grew up on Bruce Road and had watched Husson grow, and that he was glad to
be a small part of that growth.
Chairman Fournier then asked for Staff comments. Planning Officer
Weber explained that there are two applications to be acted on. The first
application is for Site Development Plan approval. She indicated that this
application includes all campus-wide improvements not previously permitted,
including two small dugouts for the soccer field, drainage improvements
including four detention ponds, and approval for miscellaneous improvements
already constructed, specifically: expansion and pavement of an approximately
78-space gravel parking lot, and 200 +/- additional paved parking spaces along
College Circle and in other lots.
Ms. Weber indicated that the other application is for Site Location of
Development Act (SLODA) Modification approval for a 1,700-seat bleacher
addition at the John Winkin Baseball Complex, two small dugouts for the soccer
field, drainage improvements including four detention ponds, and approval for
miscellaneous improvements already constructed, specifically: expansion and
pavement of an approximately 78-space gravel parking lot, and 200 +/-
6
additional paved parking spaces along College Circle and in other lots. Ms.
Weber explained that the Board needed to take three votes. First, a vote was
needed on the application for Site Development Plan approval. Secondly, the
Board needed to make a determination as to whether it feels that the Site
Location of Development Act Noise Standards apply; and thirdly, a vote was
needed on the Site Location of Development Act Modification application.
Ms. Weber indicated that the Planning Staff recommended Site
Development Plan approval because they determined that the application is
complete in that the additional parking areas are designed in general
conformance with the Land Development Code guidelines, the pre- and post-
stormwater analysis is consistent with standard engineering practices, and the
erosion and sedimentation control plans are consistent with the State’s Best
Management practices.
In regard to the issue of the noise standards, Planning Officer Weber
indicated that Staff requested guidance from the Department of Environmental
Protection staff on the applicability of the noise standards to Husson College’s
application. The DEP Staff, through a letter from Judy Gates, determined that
the ball field is not subject to the Site Location of Development Act Noise
Regulations because the ball field existed prior to 1970. City staff recommended
that the Board follow the DEP Guidelines. Planning Officer Weber then indicated
that Staff determined that the Site Location of Development Act Modification
application is complete and consistent with the SLODA Standards. Ms. Weber
noted that, since Husson College is awaiting approval of its Wetlands Alteration
Permit application from the Department of Environmental Protection, Staff also
recommended that the Planning Board make that a condition of approval.
After some discussion, Mr. Guerette moved to approve the Site
Development Plan for Husson College at 1 College Circle. Mr. Costlow seconded
the motion. The Board voted five in favor and none opposed to the motion
approving the Site Development Plan.
Mr. Costlow said that he respected both Mr. Hamilton’s and Mr.
Rosenblatt’s positions, and said that he felt that he owed it to both the
opponents and proponents to have a better analysis as to whether the noise
issues apply or not. He said that he did not feel that he had a good enough
understanding of the issue with this limited information and time to review, and
felt that he needed more time.
Assistant City Solicitor Hamer noted that in terms of applicable evidence,
the field itself is grandfathered, and the bleachers are not. If the Board finds
that the noise regulations are not applicable, the Board can accept the
applicant’s proposed conditions that will be attached to the Site Location of
7
Development Act approval, and all future owners and users will have to abide by
them. Mr. Hamer explained that, if the Board finds that the noise regulations are
applicable, the applicable standards would be 60 decibels daytime and 50
decibels nighttime. If the Board is agreeable, it can issue a variance to these
standards. Mr. Hamer also noted that natural voices are not regulated and are
outside of the Board’s jurisdiction.
Mr. Costlow asked what the applicant was offering for nighttime decibels.
Ms. Weber indicated that the applicant is proposing 55 decibels.
Mr. Wheeler said that he felt that this had been a highly instructive
hearing. He said that he felt that Mr. Rosenblatt's point that the installation of a
new system is part of a modification. Mr. Wheeler felt that the involvement that
the sound consultants who gave their expertise as to what is achievable and the
objectives to mitigate and minimize the effect of noise on the abutting
neighborhood is extremely reassuring. He told the Board that he knew of the
work of Mr. Wetmore’s firm that did a wonderful job at St. John’s Episcopal
Church.
Mr. Wheeler said that he had no issues with Husson College improving
Winkin Field. A great deal of his reservations and concerns about the issues of
protection of the neighborhood had been alleviated. He said that he was
impressed with the applicant’s self-imposed restrictions to further minimize
negative effects on abutting neighbors. He said that he agreed with Mr. Clark
that random monitoring should be done, and he suggested that, over a 44-game
season, that these monitorings be done no less than 3 times by an independent
consultant; and that the findings be forwarded to the City Council, the Code
Enforcement Officer, and the Planning Board. He said that he was willing to give
Husson College and the Lumberjacks a year to “work out the kinks.”
Mr. Masters said that, while he is an avid baseball fan, he needed to look
at this issue carefully because he felt that there was no question that there will
be noise generated by the games. His concern was how to lessen the noise. Mr.
Masters said that this kind of noise was a good noise, and certainly better than
rock crushers or bombs and guns going off. Mr. Masters said that 30 to 40
percent of the people in this area were involved in baseball in someway or
another this past summer, either through t-ball, little league or as a spectator.
Mr. Masters said that he was convinced that after having listened to Mr. Brown
and Mr. Wetmore that a great deal will be done to mitigate the impact upon the
neighborhood, and added that he felt that from an economic standpoint, this is a
community enhancement project.
Mr. Guerette said that this issue is not based on emotions or Husson
College, or whether or not the Board likes baseball, but whether or not this
8
project meets the letter of the law to the best that the Board can determine. He
said that he felt that if Husson College was to plan this project all over again, the
ball field would probably be best located in another quadrant of the campus. He
noted that the location of the ball field is not the issue that needs to be
addressed at this time, but rather the issues before the Board. He said that he
was in support of the project.
Mr. Costlow said that, after hearing Mr. Hamer’s opinion, he was still “on
the fence” on both arguments. He indicated that he would support a variance
for a nighttime decibel level of 55 dBa as a threshold with the knowledge that
the applicant will make every effort to lower the level even further.
Mr. Hamer suggested that the Board either find that the Rules are
applicable, or to adopt the variance on the decibels. After considerable
discussion, Mr. Costlow moved for a finding by the Board that the SLODA noise
standard is applicable to the project. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion. The
Board voted 3 in favor and 2 opposed to the motion.
Planning Officer Weber recommended that the Planning Board determine
that the applicant is entitled to a variance, and grant a variance premised on the
proposed conditions for approval offered by the applicant (See attached
conditions). Mr. Hamer reminded the Board that it needed to make a motion to
limit the decibels only, and then make a subsequent motion on the remaining
issues.
Mr. Wheeler moved that the applicant be granted a variance based upon
the proposed conditions for approval of the Site Location of Development Act
application as submitted by the applicant that included the sound decibel levels
as well as the additional sound absorbing measures as outlined by the applicant.
Mr. Hamer suggested that the Board vote on a variance, first. Mr.
Wheeler withdrew his original motion, and then moved to grant the applicant a
variance from the applicable regulations of the Site Location of Development Act
for noise for decibel levels of 60 daytime and 55 nighttime. Mr. Clark seconded
the motion. The Board voted 5 in favor and 0 opposed to the motion for the
noise variance.
Mr. Costlow then moved to approve the conditions presented by the
applicant, and to include them as part of the record as Exhibit A and Exhibit B.
Mr. Guerette seconded the motion. The Board voted 5 in favor and 0 opposed to
the motion to include the applicant’s conditions.
9
Planning Officer Weber indicated that Staff has determined that Husson
College’s SLODA application is complete and consistent with the standards for
approval, and recommends approval of its Site Location of Development Act
Modification application with the condition that the sound control measures
provided in Exhibits A and B be conditions of approval.
Mr. Guerette asked if Staff was still awaiting word from DEP on the
approval on the Wetlands Alteration Permit, and asked if this should be made a
part of the motion. Planning Officer Weber indicated that it should be made a
part of the motion. Mr. Guerette then moved to grant Site Location of
Development Act Modification approval subject to the submission of a Wetlands
Alteration Permit and conditioned on the sound control measures as outlined in
Exhibits A and B. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion. The Board voted five in
favor and none opposed to the motion with conditions.
10