Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-10-01 Planning Board Minutes PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF BANGOR MEETING OF OCTOBER 1, 2002 MINUTES Board Members Present: Richard Fournier, Chairman Fred Costlow Robert Gurette David Clark Harold Wheeler Bill Masters Ryan King John Hanson City Staff Present: Katherine Weber David Gould Peter Witham John Hamer James Ring Chairman Fournier called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA Chairman Fournier asked if any Member wished to remove any items from the Consent Agenda. There being none, Mr. Costlow moved to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion was seconded by Mr.Guerette, and it passed by a vote of 5 to 0. Those items approved are: Item No. 1: Site Location of Development Modification/Site Development Plan approval to construct a 720 square-foot greenhouse and a 1,200 square-foot greenhouse at 200 Hogan Road in a Government and Institutional District. United Technologies, applicant. Item No. 2: Site Location of Development Modification/Site Development Plan approval to construct an 1,800 square foot helicopter hanger at BIA in an Airport Development District. Down East Emergency Medical Institute and City of Bangor, applicants. PUBLIC HEARINGS Item No. 3: Preliminary Subdivision Plan approval for a sixteen-lot, 7.2-acre subdivision located at 33, 41, 51, and 57 New York Street in an Urban Residence District 1. Jon and Nancy Dawson, applicants. Chairman Fournier explained the Public Hearing process to everyone present. He then opened the Public Hearing, and asked for a brief overview by the applicant. Mr. Richard Day of Plisga and Day Land Surveyors explained that he represented Jon and Nancy Dawson in the development of a 16-lot residential subdivision in an Urban Residence-1 District on New York Street. The proposed subdivision will be known as Fairways, and is located adjacent to the municipal golf course and New York Street. Mr. Day noted that Mr. Dawson was present as well as his attorney Andrew Hamilton. Mr. Day told the Board that the proposed development totals 7.3 acres in size, 1.6 acres of which is land owned by the Dawsons, and 5.7 acres is the City of Bangor property for which the Dawsons have a Developer’s Agreement. Mr. Day indicated the proposed lots would meet the minimum lot standards of the URD-1 District. The subdivision would be served by public sewer and water utilities. The proposed horseshoe shaped roadway would be 25 feet in width. The development would control stormwater runoff via an enclosed drainage system, and a storm water detention pond. The storm water system would control the peak stormwater outflow in the developed state similar to that on the site in an undeveloped state. The stormwater pond and adjacent open space will be held and controlled by a Home Owners Association. The portions of the site which are freshwater wetlands that will filled are subject to a permit issued by the Department of Environmental Protection. The applicants have received a Tier I permit to fill 12,700 square feet of freshwater wetlands in the proposed development. Mr. Day indicated that approximately 33,625 square feet of open space are proposed, and that this amount is well in excess of 5% required by City Ordinance. Mr. Day indicated that one area labeled open space on the plan had been labeled in error. The existing lots along Silver road will be protected by a sixty-foot wide buffer that will protect and maintain the existing trees. Mr. Gurette inquired about the amount of open space that was mislabeled on the plan, and asked how much would remain. Mr. Day indicated that 33, 625 square feet of open space would remain. Mr. Costlow asked if the stormwater pond would be in the wetland area. Mr. Day indicated it would not be. Chairman Fournier called for any other proponents of the subdivision. There being none, he asked for any opponents to the proposed subdivision. There being none, Chairman Fournier asked for Staff Comments. Planning Officer Weber told the Board the application was to create 16 lots in the URD-1 District. She indicated that all of the lots meet the minimum standards of the District. The application included all of the required information for Preliminary Plan approval. Ms. Weber noted that the Engineering Office had also reviewed the plan, and had found that the engineering details were in acceptable. Ms. Weber indicated that the Staff would recommend that the Board grant Preliminary Plan approval. Ms. Weber noted that the Final Subdivision Plan will need to include the amendments noted in the applicant’s presentation. Mr. Wheeler asked how the proposal would meet the open space requirement given its largely wetlands. Ms. Weber indicated that the open space standard does not specify upland or other conditions. Mr. Wheeler asked how the development could have a Homeowners Association controlling land that is owned by the City of Bangor. Assistant City Solicitor John Hamer responded that, upon approval of the subdivision plan, the land will be deeded to the developer. Mr. Costlow asked if the loss of some of the land to be preserved as open space would alter the stormwater analysis. Mr. James Ring, City Engineer, responded that the stormwater analysis took into account all of the areas that would receive stormwater whether they were included in the development or not, so that the disposition of the wetland area initially indicated as open space does not change the storm water analysis. Mr. Ryan King asked where the areas of wetland to be filled will be located, and what the anticipated value of the housing to be constructed will be. Mr. Day reviewed each of the areas to be filled on the Subdivision Plan. Mr. Dawson explained that they anticipated that the average retail value of the homes to be constructed will be approximately $190,000. Mr. Guerette moved to approve the Preliminary Subdivision Plan for Jon and Nancy Dawson. Mr. Costlow seconded the motion. The Board voted 5 to 0 to approve the Preliminary Subdivision Plan. Item No. 4: Amending Chapter 165, Land Development Code, by deleting and repealing Section 165-114 – Land development approval standards, and replacing it with a new Section 165-114 - Land development approval standards. City of Bangor, applicant. C.O. # 02-357. Planning Officer Weber explained that this section of the Ordinance contains the specific standards that the Board uses to evaluate projects in the Site Development Review process. The Planning Board, City Council and staff should be familiar with this amendment by now since it has been discussed for several months. Ms. Weber noted that the approval standards of the Ordinance section are only a small part of the total body of regulations that govern the site planning process, although these are important standards that need to be clear and concise. She indicated that Staff recommends that the Planning Board recommend that the City Council adopt this amendment. Member Costlow inquired why is standard “I” included because it appears to be unenforceable. He felt that a standard that indicates “encourage” is not a measurable standard. Ms. Weber indicated that it is a reasonable standard to include, and she concurred that is a difficult standard to apply. Assistant City Solicitor John Hamer concluded it is not an enforceable standard, but it would serve to keep people thinking about the preservation of views. Mr. Masters indicated that he felt this amendment was “too gray” and that the standards should be more definitive. Mr. Wheeler agreed with Mr. Costlow, and indicated that this amendment opens the door to long needless debates; and that he is in favor of striking standard “I.” Mr. Hamer reminded the Board members that their review is limited to a recommendation on the amendment as presented in the Council Ordinance or not. Mr. Gurette noted that standard “H” includes information about surveys of significant wildlife habitat, and asked if there are such surveys available. He then noted that this standard also includes rare and irreplaceable natural areas, and asked if this is intended to be also refer to wildlife areas that are not included in any surveys. Ms. Weber indicated it is the applicant’s burden to demonstrate whether such areas are present on the project site. She indicated that information may come from State data or from field work done by the applicant. She noted that the Planning Office’s database continues to grow as new information becomes available. Mr. Gurette asked if the Board can make decisions concerning sensitive areas that have not been previously identified. Mr. Hamer indicated there are three ways in which an area can be designated as a sensitive area: 1. Inland Fisheries &Wildlife can designate them. 2. The City’s Comprehensive Plan can designate them, and 3. The applicant can bring evidence to the Board. Mr. Costlow indicated that he was concerned about the timing issue of identification of sensitive areas, and at what point are Inland Fisheries and Wildlife designations included in the review process. Mr. Costlow also inquired about what studies the City has undertaken to review such areas. Planning Officer Weber indicated that the Comprehensive Plan 2000 includes a study by Dominie, Inc. and Gerber, Inc. of all natural areas in the City. The natural areas identified in the study include wetlands, aquifer areas, unique features, critical areas, and wildlife habitat. Mr. Costlow noted that if new areas, rare and irreplaceable not defined or described then we are no further ahead than we were before. The situation is vastly improved, but still problematic. Mr. Masters noted that, if a hotel is built on the waterfront, it will block someone’s view. Ms. Weber indicated that the standard cannot be viewed in isolation because other standards of the Ordinance would come into play and provide additional guidance in reviewing specific development projects. Mr. Masters asked what the process would be should the Planning Board not recommend the proposed amendment, and asked if it would it be rewritten. Ms. Weber indicated that the amendment will go back to the City Council regardless of what the Board recommends. The City Council will decide, taking the Board’s recommendation into account, whether to adopt or not adopt the amendment as written, or recommend that it be further reviewed and rewritten. Chairman Fournier asked other Board members for input. Mr. Hanson indicated to the group that the amendment is not perfect but a great improvement over the current provisions. He also noted that the City could consider additional changes in the future. Mr. Clark indicated that he found some of the language ambiguous, and felt that it could have an adverse impact on development. Mr. King felt that the staff had done a great job in developing the language, and it should be approved. Mr.Wheeler said that he agreed with Mr. Clark; and stated that the City should be developed, and not preserved as a wildlife area. Mr. Wheeler said that this sends a bad message to people looking to develop in Bangor. Planning Officer Weber stated that the amendment provided clarity and improved the language in a way that was good for development. This language was intended to help keep the City out of litigation. She maintained that the amendment is a better guiding tool than what is presently in the Ordinance, and would recommend adoption. Chairman Fournier asked for any other proponents. There being none, he asked for any opponents. There being none, Chairman Fournier closed the Public Hearing. Chairman Fournier stated that this amendment is a tremendous improvement over the current provisions. Mr. Costlow said that the Board has the judgement to make sound decisions and that the City has unique pockets of valuable environmental areas. Mr. Costlow felt that people should be able to bring evidence to the Board to evaluate in the application process. He stated that the Board should not be limited to existing published data. Mr. Masters restated that he was uncomfortable with the “gray areas.” Mr. Wheeler moved to recommend C.O. #02-357. Mr. Fournier seconded the motion. The Board voted one in favor and four opposed to recommending adoption by the City Council. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Item No. 3: Planning Board Approval of Minutes Chairman Fournier asked for a motion on the Minutes of the August 20, 2002 Meeting. Mr. Costlow moved approval of the Minutes of August 20, 2002. Mr. Guerrete seconded the motion. The Board voted 5 to 0 in favor of approving the Minutes of August 20, 2002. Chairman Fournier asked for a motion on the Minutes of the September 3, 2002 Meeting. Mr. Costlow moved approval of the Minutes of September 3, 2002. Mr. Clark seconded the motion, and the Board voted 4 to 0 in favor of approving the Minutes of September 3, 2002. Chairman Fournier abstained from voting, noting that he was not present at this meeting. Chairman Fournier asked for a motion on the Minutes of the September 17, 2002 Meeting. Mr. Costlow moved approval of the Minutes of September 17, 2002. Mr. Guerrete seconded the motion. The Board voted 5 to 0 in favor to approve the Minutes of September 17, 2002. OTHER BUSINESS: Discussion of the Planning Board By-Laws Planning Officer Weber discussed the proposed changes to the Board’s By-Laws that had been distributed to the Board. After some discussion that focused predominantly on the need to clarify the role and actions of Associate members, the Board voted not to adopt the new By-Laws. Planning Officer Weber indicated that Staff would address the Boards issues in another draft. ADJOURNMENT There being no further items for discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 8:37 p.m.