HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-01-02 Planning Board Minutes
PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF BANGOR
TUESDAY, JANUARY 2, 2018,7:00 P.M.
THIRD FLOOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
MEETING MINUTES
Board Members Present: John Kenney, Chair
Charles Boothby
Nelson Durgin
Dora McCarthy
Chuck LeBlanc, Assoc. Member
City Staff Present:David Gould, Planning Officer
Paul Nicklas, Asst. City Solicitor
Sean Gambrel, Planning & HPC Officer
John Theriault, City Engineer
Chair Kenney called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING
1.Text amendment –Parking in Neighborhood Service District–To Amend Chapter
165, Land Development Code, Section 165-72, by removing the requirement that
Neighborhood Service District Parcels be previously established in order to benefit
from relaxed parking restrictions as is presently requested under the City Code. C.O.
#18-064.
Paul Nicklas, Asst. City Solicitor presented the text amendment. He explained that roughly a
year ago the zoning ordinance was amended to reduce parking required for NSD parcel ifit was
apreviously existingparcel. Staff would like to remove that requirement for NSD parcels in the
future.
Chair Kenney opened up the public hearing. No member of the public spoke for or against the
amendment. Chair Kenney closed the public hearing.
Chair Kenney asked for the staff report. Planning Officer David Gould stated that the original
reason for thischangewas that becauseNSD zones are largely grandfathered, the parking
exemption was to be only for existing grandfathered NSD uses. He noted that there is some
concern that this exemption without the grandfathering stipulation could be used in the future
as a loophole to get out of parking requirements.
Mr. Nicklas remarked that the Board will have to keep this in mind for future rezonings. Chair
Kenney asked if this loophole couldbe remedied through contract zoning. Mr. Gould advised
that it could be done through a contract zone. Member Durgin stated that because rezonings
go through the planning board and council, there are points of review and that approval
wouldn’t be automatic.
Mr. Gould noted that this is not an uncommon problem, and that there are spots like this
throughout the city because the comprehensiveplan and zoning identify most of these parcels
as residential.Mr. Nicklas advised that we’re trying to encourageneighborhood service uses
and many of these uses have been difficult to redevelop because options are limited based on
their being grandfathered.
Member McCarthy asked what the parameters of NSD arenow. Mr. Gould indicated that NSD is
fairly restrictive-no drive-thru’s, no alcohol service, limited to 2000 s.f. commercial space.
Typically, these are not uses that will generatea great deal of traffic or parking. Chair Kenney
confirmed that because zone changes are public hearings, neighbors would have an avenue to
voice concerns to the board, and that this would provide flexibility for appeals.
Member LeBlanc moved to recommend the text amendment as presented by staff. Member
Durgin seconded the motion. The motion waspassed -5 voting in favor, 0 voting in
opposition.
NEW BUSINESS
2.1000 State Street –Molly Pitcher –Land Development Permit for Site Development
Plan Approval–proposal toadd one residential use to the property and includes existing
grandfathered commercial building, which is 1,990 s.f. The development would encompass
three principal use structures and is requesting the Planning Board approve exceptions to the
required setbacks under a Cluster development plan. No site improvements are proposed at
the propertylocated at 1000 State Street, in a Low Density Residential (LDR) district.
Jim Kiser, engineer forthe applicant presented the project. He stated that this is a pre-existing
situation that the applicant is trying to bring into compliance. The existing commercial use was
grandfatheredandthe small accessory residential unit was previously a workshop. This unit
currently has a living space and bathroom but no kitchen, so it is not truly a dwelling unit. The
applicant would like to have ability to put in kitchen so that this could be considered a separate
dwelling unitand available as use as a rental.
Member Durgin asked if the three areas shown on the plan would be separate saleable parcels.
Mr. Kiser advised no, it would be set up to be single ownership.
Chair Kenney inquired if they were requesting any exceptionson the property. Mr. Kiser
responded that the only exceptions requested were interior building setbacks.
Chair Kenney asked Mr. Gould for the staff report. Mr. Gould reported thatthisconfiguration
has existed for some number of years and essentially there are several unapproved primary
uses on one parcel. The only option is to make this legal is through a Planned Group
Development (PGD). Staff had some concerns with vehicle circulation, but the applicant has
addressed the concerns by making the driveway a one-way loop. He suggested that ifthe
board hadany conditions to approval, the applicant may be agreeable.
Member Durgin statedthat because any modificationto the PGDwould requirethe owner to
return to the Board for approval, he had no concerns.
Member LeBlanc moved to approve the Land Development Permit for Site Development Plan
Approval, seconded by Member Boothby. The motion was passed–5 votingin favor, 0voting
in opposition.
3.28 Somerset Street –John Bapst Memorial High School -Land Development Permit
for Site Development Plan Approval–proposesto construct new 15,640 s.f. gym/fitness
center and associated parking and site improvements. New building will serve as the primary
space for John Bapst Memorial High School physical education department and sports team
practice use, at property located at 28 Somerset Street, in a Government & Institutional Service
District (G&ISD).
Andy Hamilton, attorneyrepresenting applicant, presented the project. Theapplicant is
requestingPlanned Group Developmentapproval fora new building containing apractice
gymnasiumand fitness center, as well as additional parking. There are several members in the
PGD; Seven Islands, Vance Gray, Latsch & Cooper, and other John Bapst properties. The new
gym is needed because the existinggym in the basement of the school is unsafe. Mr. Hamilton
introducedMel MacKay of John Bapst Memorial High School. Mr. MacKay statedthat there
have been no major renovations at the school in approximately 90 years, and that these
changes were long overdue. He noted that portions of the PGD are in a historic district and
that the architecthas attempted to be sensitive to the surroundings.
Mr. MacKay indicatedthat the existing building on site cannot be renovated to this use in an
effective, economical way, so theschoolwould like to build new.
Member Boothby expressed concernsabout students crossing Somerset St.several timesper
day, and the danger itpresents. He observed that when school opens and closes, students are
not often attentive to trafficon Broadway and is worried about potential vehicular injuries. Mr.
MacKay said that theschoolhasconsidered this, and that the plan includes a mid-block
crosswalk with differentiated materials to increase safety. The school has done a traffic study
on Somerset St, and in the past eleven years, they have had no vehicular injuries.
Member Durgin asked how much parking wouldbe added. Mr. MacKay advised that this PGD
adds a significant amount of parking thatwill hopefully reduce pressure on the neighborhood.
This PGD will total53 spaces, roughly 30 of which will be new. Member Durgin felt that in
terms of safety concerns, the mid-block crosswalk,if well-lighted, would be safest. Additionally,
one large central parking lot is beneficial over several individual smaller lots.
Chair Kenney asked how the Board wouldgo about approving this project. Mr. Nicklas stated
that generally these PGDs are approved with a condition that the reciprocal easement
agreement,approved by all parties, is forwarded to the city. He advised that any additional
conditions that the Board wished could also be added.
Member LeBlancmoved to approve the Land Development Permit for Site Development Plan
Approval, with the condition that the executed Reciprocal Easement Agreements are provided
to staff prior to construction, and that additional lighting me provided at the mid-block
crosswalk on Somerset St. Member Durginseconded the motion. The motion waspassed-5
voting in favor, 0 voting in opposition.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
th
4.Planning Board Approval of Minutes–Minutes from the December 19, 2017 meeting
were unanimously approvedwith minor changes.
Meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m.