Loading...
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