Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-10-15 Business and Economic Development Committee Minutes BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Tuesday, October 15, 2013 5:00 PM City Council Chambers MINUTES Councilors: Sprague, Civiello, Baldacci, Longo, Nealley, Blanchette and Durgin Staff: Conlow, Emery, Wallace, Martin, Nicklas, Chair Sprague called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA Councilor Baldacci moved passage of the Consent Agenda as presented which includes the following items: 1. Community Development Residential Rehabilitation Loan – 98 Patten Street (Confidential Memo provided separately) 2. Maine State Housing Authority Agreement – Extension (see attached Memo and Draft Agreement) 3. REFERRAL – ORDINANCE 13-308, Amending Chapter 165, Land Development Code, of the Code of the City of Bangor, By Providing a Residential Setback for Quarries and Allowing Loam and Soil Harvesting in Rural Residence and Agricultural Parcels (see attached Council Action, Council Ordinance and Zoning Sketch) Councilor Nealley seconded the motion. Regarding Item No. 2, Councilor Civiello asked Jeff Wallace if he was comfortable extending this agreement in light of the shortage of Staff in the Department. Mr. Wallace indicated that he was. He explained that this was done as a favor to HUD and Staff did so willingly. Community and Economic Development Director Tanya Emery indicated that this extension is only until December 31, 2013 and that she was comfortable that they have the resources to do this until then. However, she indicated that starting at the beginning of the year, Staff focus will shift to the Third Main Neighborhood which will be a major focus of his time. Chair Sprague asked if there was any public comment. Lucy Quimby, 1230 Kenduskeag Avenue asked if there were safeguards in place to prevent loam harvesting from leaving scarred looking sites from such activity (Item No. 3). Assistant City Solicitor Paul Nicklas gave a history of the recent zoning 2 amendments which removed quarry and earth moving activities from the Rural Residence and Agricultural District. At that time, a question was raised regarding allowing soil harvesting in the RR & A and the theory was to put this activity back into that district. He indicated that soil harvesting is not a widespread activity that occurs in the City. He noted that if it is found to be an issue, the ordinance can be further amended to place additional restrictions and safeguards to try to regulate it further. Code Enforcement Officer Jeremy Martin explained that soil harvesting would fall under Planning Board review as a grade & fill provided that the activity is for more than a one foot in elevation or 10,000 sq. ft. in area. Councilor Blanchette asked at what point would soil harvesting become an erosion problem. Mr. Martin indicated that any activity could result in an erosion problem provided that erosion controls are not exercised. The Committee voted unanimously in favor of the motion to approve the Consent Agenda. REGULAR AGENDA 4. Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) Update. Tanya Emery introduced Jeff Wallace who distributed a handout explaining the NSP Program. He gave a history of the program and an update on the activities over the last four years. Mr. Wallace indicated that going forward, as part of the west side strategy area, Staff is proposing is a “local program” with a focus more on new buildings rather than rehabbing older buildings. Staff would like to build one new building the first year and add more money for more houses in subsequent years. Councilor Baldacci felt it would be helpful to have this information on the City’s website and local television station. He asked if the City kept any of the original money for the program. Mr. Wallace explained that the City was basically an administrator for HUD. Councilor Baldacci said that that program has increased property values and he would like to see more than one property constructed per year. Councilor Durgin felt that this was a big upgrade to the Buck Street neighborhood. Mr. Wallace pointed out that four other properties have had improvements done in the immediate area through private investment. 3 5. Commercial Brokerage RFP – Selection. Director Emery updated the Committee on the Commercial Brokerage Selection process. She indicated that there were two responses and Epstein Properties has been selected to provide services. Staff is requesting permission to negotiate a contract. Councilor Baldacci move to approve Staff’s request. Councilor Nealley seconded the motion. The motion passed. 6. Abandoned/Vacant Buildings. Director Emery distributed two handouts to the Committee. One a short list of the highlights contained in the proposed Ordinance amendment and a copy of the actual Ordinance. Code Enforcement Officer Jeremy Martin gave an overview of the elements of the proposed ordinance amendment. He said that the intent of this Ordinance is to require that a building that has been vacant for 60 days to have the property owner whether it be an individual or a bank to register as an abandoned vacant building. In cases where there is an out of town owner or a lending institution the Ordinance will require a local Maine based property management company represent them. The Code Office will go out with the owner/representative and inspect the property both inside and out to determine if it meets the minimum standards for a vacant building. The owner or property manager will need to visit the property weekly to ensure that the building remains secure and in a certain condition. This permit will need to be renewed every six months. Mr. Martin explained that there is also a provision for an owner to apply for an interim permit in cases where the property does not meet minimum standards. They would need to bring the property up to minimum within 90 days. Once they meet those standards they would need to apply for a permanent permit. Councilor Durgin asked what would permit the City to board up the property. Mr. Martin indicated that this provision is no contained in this ordinance but is in the City’s Property Maintenance Code. City Manager Conlow indicated that this Ordinance is another tool in the tool box to help the City address these issues in our neighborhoods. Councilor Baldacci asked if there was enough Staff to manage the enforcement of this ordinance. Mr. Martin noting that if passed, his staff will not be consumed day in and day out with these properties and this will allow them to do the work that they need to do elsewhere. If there is an issue, they will be able to call the owner or property manager. The vacant building will have a sign on it and he would also like to see the name of the property manager, their 4 contract information, and the bank’s name, if any, on the sign, as well. Mr. Martin indicated that he felt that not only will a neighbor call the Code office when they see a problem they most likely will call the property manager and the bank. Councilor Baldacci felt that this is a good first step but there still needs to be talk about certain other properties and areas in the City. Councilor Civiello asked about the permit fee. Mr. Martin indicated that Staff researched various fees charged by other communities and also calculated the number of man hours spent by staff to administer and deal with a vacant building in determining the fees. He said that the minimum fee to be charged is $250.00 If there are additional costs incurred (staff time, secretarial time, placard time, etc.) then additional actual costs will be charged. This will give them some incentive to get what they need to get done so that they won’t have to pay more than $250. If they are over the 90 days then they will have to pay another $250. Staff is spending a great deal of time with these properties. This fee was determined to be what a typical cost to the City is for their department to administer and deal with a vacant building. Councilor Longo asked if the fee could be waived for someone who was away in the military. Ms. Emery indicated that Staff would look into this and bring back some suggestions. Councilor Durgin asked what the penalties would be for failure to comply. Assistant City Solicitor Nicklas indicated that the penalty would be anywhere from $100 to $2,500 per day. At $2,500 a day it would add up quickly. Councilor Nealley moved to place this item on tomorrow night’s City Council Agenda for referral back to the BED Committee at its next meeting. City Councilor Conlow noted that this would need to be done under suspension of the rules. The motion was seconded and it passed unanimously. Staff indicated that it would include the additional provisions suggested by the Committee in the proposed Ordinance. The meeting was adjourned at 6:35 p.m.