Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-06-22 Business and Economic Development Committee Minutes BUSINESS & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Wed., June 22, 2011, 5:00 pm City Hall Council Chambers Minutes Councilors: Chair Weston, Blanchette, Bronson, Durgin, Hawes, Longo, Nealley, Palmer Staff: Conlow, McKay, Morgan, Patterson, Pereira, Willette Others: Pam Shadley of Shadley Associates 1. Waterfront Planning Progress Update Rod McKay outlined some of the issues to be discussed at today’s meeting such as the splash pad issue, the general consensus of the majority of the City Council is that the City should not proceed with this. There is a building plan to house the restroom facilities as well as the CSO tank monitoring equipment and it has been suggested to expand that building to provide a food take-out service. Also, at Tuesday’s Infrastructure Committee meeting the Committee toured possible locations for the waterfront concerts including the Waterfront and there was agreement that its location should be at the Main and Railroad intersection site, but that the stage should be reoriented and pulled back to the south end of the site redirecting the sound towards the downtown and leaving an area on the corner of Main and Railroad Streets available for other uses. Pam Shadley of Shadley Associates proceeded to do an overview of the Waterfront Master Plan, reviewed the plans for the previously authorized next phase of Waterfront Improvements, and showed renderings of a proposed design for the building expansion concept that will house a take-out eating service. Pam has also been working with Alex Grey on possible locations for the Waterfront Concerts. Councilor Durgin related the discussion held at last evening’s Infrastructure Committee meeting (six councilors present) held at the waterfront and Bass Park whereby they viewed the various options where the concerts could be held. Currently, there is a stage on the Bangor waterfront for concerts, however the concert noise levels in the adjoining residential areas are an issue with the residents and they are requesting the City to resolve the sound problem. The Infrastructure Committee’s unanimous conclusion is to recommend the Patten Street site (Option 1) as the better location. The advantages to this site are:  It has a waterfront projection so that people who are seated facing the stage will be able to enjoy the waterfront environment.  It offers pedestrian traffic to come directly off Main Street, on the side of the railroad tracks away from the water, so there would be easy access.  This will move the stage up and away from the large green lawn (on the corner of Railroad and Main) and would continue to offer an option for other development along the waterfront keeping the space opened for performances. The Infrastructure Committee also recommended that, if the City Council concludes this is the best location, the City could be ready to offer the stage area for performance in 2012. It would not be totally completed as far as all of the amenities but it would be at least as well functioning as the current stage area, and would begin to answer the questions of the general public about noise and congestion. Also the attempt to move traffic along the Main Street corridor has been quite successful the way that it is currently engineered. City Manager Cathy Conlow stated that this location, as with any, there will be noise; need to test that tolerance level by allowing concerts to run for a year. If at the end of that year, the Council is satisfied and the public seems satisfied then we can go forward with permanent plans. Councilor Palmer raised issues of safety due to the size of the crowds attending as well as accessibility for the handicap. Councilor Durgin replied that there will be the capability for total handicapped accessibility. Before any plans are finalized the City will have a public safety assessment of the property done and will know before going forward that they are able to move people quickly in and out of the venue. Chair Weston asked councilors present for their consensus on supporting the Patten Street location as the established waterfront concert venue area. All councilors responded that they are in favor of the Patten Street location. Rod stated that with the council’s consensus it will allow staff to move forward planning for the area between the railroad track and the Penobscot River, downriver from Railroad Street. Shadley Associates has been working on this – they are about 50% complete on the design; hoping to go out to bid later this summer on that work. Two issues that should be addressed are: a) blocking the views with plantings and existing trees along the water. b) Pam to review the building plans on what the Council would like to do with those. At Chair Weston’s inquiry on the coal tar area and vegetation, Pam responded that the intent with this area is to cap it and cover it with stone. There are two locations where the stone is allowed to vent (acqua block – where the stone vents including the pipes; the other is the armor). Her understanding is DEP would like to discourage people from walking anywhere on those blouders that are on the side of the river tide line (where there is no shoreline vegetation). In addition to that, there is the shoreline zoning where the City is prohibited from any pervious pavement walkway within 25 feet of mean high water. In the drawings that Pam has prepared the walkway has been kept beyond that point and the grading for the walkway must conform to no steeper than a 3- 1 slope. Acting City Engineer, Art Morgan related that there is a letter that former City Engineer Jim Ring drafted to the DEP seeking permission to remove what we have removed for the current phase of the coal tar remediation. He will be reviewing this with Pam Shadley tomorrow about the design. Committee members expressed concern about tree height and that it not obstruct the river views; that it needs to be protected for future generations. Pam reviewed the list of shade trees she has compiled in her planting plan for the waterfront – they are intended to be indicative of Maine. She further explained the process of presenting to DEP for approval the various plant species chosen. Pam went on to explain in detail the proposed building plan to house the restroom facilities as well as the CSO tank and the equipment to monitor that at the waterfront, and it has also been suggested to expand that building to provide a seasonal food take-out service there. If the equipment room for the splash pad component comes out of the building plan there is a potential architectural re-design to narrow the width of the building. By narrowing the building, it would also open the river views. Councilors in attendance are in favor of narrowing the building as described and thus directing Pam to move forward with a re-design of the building. 2. Authorization to file an Application with the State Department of Economic and Community Development for Grant Funds under the Communities for Maine’s Future Grant Program Rod introduced this item to the Committee stating that the City of Bangor has submitted a letter of intent to the Maine Department of Economic and Community Development for the Communities for Maine’s future grant program. This grant program provides funding to downtown for community infrastructure projects that promote sustainable development. The City’s proposal for this grant is to fund phased renovation of West Market Square and wayfinding signage for downtown Bangor. The City has requested funding for $400,000, with a $526,000 match from money already budgeted for FY 12 through the Downtown TIF, CDBG and in-kind support for these projects. DECD, after reviewing our application, has invited the City to submit a full application. Staff at this time is requesting authorization from the BED Committee to file an application with DECD by the July 1, 2011 deadline. A public hearing in support of the application will be held at the June 27 City Council meeting. Councilor Durgin made a motion to move staff recommendation as requested; seconded by Councilor Blanchette. Unanimous Committee vote. Meeting adjourned.