Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-02-19 Planning Board Minutes ' ' , ' PLAI�TNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF BANGOR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 19,2002 ' NIINUTES ' Board Members Present: Richard Fournier, Chairman Frederick Costlow ' David Clark Robert Guerette Harold Wheeler ' Mary Ann Bostwick Robert Lingley , City Staff Present: Katherine Weber James Ring Peter Witham � David Gould John Hamer � Chairman Fournier called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The Chairman asked if anyone wished to remove an item from the Consent Agenda.Being none,he called for a motion. ' Harold Wheeler moved to approve the Consent Agenda, seconded by Fred Costlow. The Board voted unanimously to approve the Consent Agenda. , CONSENT AGENDA ' Item No. l: To consider a request for an eztension of the Starting and Completion Dates to construct a 7,174 sq. ft.building for office use in a Shopping and Personal Service District and a Stream Protechon District located at 824 Stillwater ' Avenue. Stillwater Realty LLC,applicant. Item No.2: To consider a request for an eztension of the Completion Date to construct ' an electrical switching station off Pushaw Road and Church Road in a Rural Residence and Agriculture District. Bangor Hydro Electric Co.,applicant. , � .' ' PUBLIC HEARINGS ' Item No.3: To amend the Land Development Code by changing a parcel of land located ' at 375 Mount Hope Avenue from Urban Residence One District to Contract Government and Institutional Service District. Said parcel containing approximately 1.56 acres.Pilgrim Orthodox Presbyterian Church, applicant. ' C. O.#02-103. Chairman Fournier opened the public hearing and asked for any proponents. ' Mr. Andrew Hamilton of Eaton Peabody,representing Pilgrim Orthodox Presbyterian Church,addressed the Board. Attorney Hamilton indicated that he was present with Steve ' Leavitt,Jonathan Conners and Pastor Brian Molder. Approximately 45 parishioners were also in attendance. Attorney Hamilton indicated that they approached this application as a , "housekeeping"matter to correct the Church's non-conforming sta.tus. Mr. Hamilton indicated that the City had a long history of mixed use neighborhoods ' where churches and schools coexisted with residential development. When the Pilgrim Orthodox Presbytenan Church was built,Mount Hope Avenue was a rural suburban axea. Since that time, it has developed with mixed uses, including a television station,medical office building and ' nursing home. Attorney Hamilton indicated that the church became nonconforming when the City deleted Mount Hope Avenue from the list of Major Streets which is a criteria for churches located in residential districts. ' Attorney Hamilton reviewed the use and development restrictions imposed by the contract zoning conditions. Attorney Hamilton indicated that consistency with the , Comprehensive Plan should be broadly interpreted, and not narrowly construed to mean only consistency with the land use policy map. Steve Leavitt, a Church Trustee,indicated that the Church was concerned that its status as ' a nonconforming use could be a financial disaster if the building were to be destroyed by more than 50%of its value. Further, should the church move, reselling the property as a church may ' require a long period on the market,in which time,the use may be deemed to have been abandoned. Mr. Guerette inquired if the church had considered insurance options which included ' building code coverage for such problems. Mr. Leavitt indicated that they had not. Jonathan Conner, a Church representative,indicated that the church intended to continue ' its present use into the future, and had no specific plans for any changes at this time. Mr. Lingley inquired if the day care facility provided for in the contract conditions ' limited such day care to Church-related functions. Mr. Hamilton indicated that the Church members had mixed feelings on such a restriction. They were agreeable to some stipulations ' relative to the operation of their day care,but did not want to limit it to"during church functions o y. �, � 2 ' � � Mr. Wheeler asked how the growth in parishioners has been in the last ten years or so. Mr. Leavitt indicated that while there were some new members, some have moved away, so he � approximated that they had only increased in congregation size by about ten people in the last ten years. � The Chairman asked for any other proponents. Beverly McCrum of 246 Howard Street indicated that she was in support of the Church and its application for rezoning. � The Chairman asked for any opponents. Charlie Murray, 69 Hempstead Avenue, indicated that he represented the East Side Neighborhood Association. Mr. Murray indicated that �this rezoning proposal was nottung new, and that the Neighborhood Association had been � working for a long time to maintain their single-family residential neighborhood. Mr. Murray noted that the neighborhood could not support this spot zoning. T'he proposal goes"way beyond" just being able to rebuild the church but would allow a large expansion that could generate � activity a11 week long. Mr.Murray indicated that a fifty-foot tall building with 15,000 square feet of floor area was not consistent with the neighborhood. rCynthia Brewer, 393 Mount Hope Avenue,indicated that the residents on Mount Hope Avenue wanted to maintain their single-family residential neighborhood, and would oppose � anything that was not single family residential. Rosalind Spear, 307 Mount Hope Avenue,noted that the East Side Neighborhood Association had a long history of maintaining the consistency of the neighborhood. She indicated that the neighborhood would be very different if not for the , vigilance of the Association. Gary Watson, 16 Saratoga Avenue, indicated that the day care could create additional � traffic, and would not like to see any changes in the neighborhood. Frank McGarry,442 Mount Hope Avenue,indicated he was concerned about traffic generated by potential day care activities. Beatrice Kaskin, 352 Mount Hope Avenue,indicated that increased activity at the � church property and day care would decrease the value of her home. Attorney Hamilton responded to some of the concerns raised indicating that it was � anticipated that under the proposed contract zone change,parking on-site could be expanded. Mr. Costlow indicated that if the day care were thirty children at one time then there � could be morning and afternoon sessions and significant drop-off and pick-up traffic trips. Mary Ann Bostwick noted that the contract conditions allowed for a floor area of 15,000 square feet, and the existing building was 5,600 square feet. Mr. Wheeler indicated that while he initially � understood the proposal to be "housekeeping,"it appears that it allows for a significant amount of expansion. � Attorney Hamilton indicated the rezoning needed to allow for growth of the church. Mr. Clark indicated that the Board should support the Church's efforts which are no � different than any other church in the community. The Board will have to address any potential problems when and if they arise through the site planning process. Mr. Fournier asked for staff comments. Katherine Weber,Planning Officer, indicated � that the existing church was a non-conforming use because Mount Hope Avenue is not � 3 � r in ' e M unt H e Avenu i an f mix � considered a Ma�or Street. Ms. Webe dicat d that o op e s area o ed uses of which the church has been a part of for many decades. While the proposed G&ISD designation is inconsistent with the City Land Use Plan,the proposed contract conditions limit � the potential adverse impact on the neighborhood. Given the restrictive nature of the proposed conditions that include having the property remain a church and day care,but no other � Government and Institutional Service District uses,Ms. Weber recommended that the Plamung Board recommend that the City Council approve the proposed rezoning with the inclusion of the amended condition that limits the day care to church members and attendees. � Mr. Lingley moved to approve the proposed contract zone change to the City Council with the language added as noted by the Planning Officer. Mrs. Bostwick seconded the motion. � The Board voted 4-1 to recommend the proposed contract rezoning to the City Council. APPROVAL OF MINUTES � Item No. 4: Planning Board Approval of Minutes Chairman Fournier indicated that the Board had the Minutes of January 15, 2002 and r February 5,2002. Mr. Lingley moved approval of the January 15, 2002 Minutes, and Mrs. Bostwick seconded. The Board voted 5 to 0 to approve the Minutes as written. Mr. Lingley � moved approval of the February Sth,2002 Minutes, and Mr. Costlow seconded. The Board voted 5 to 0 to approve the Minutes as written. Chairman Fournier indicated that he would take Item#6 out of order so that the applicant � would not have to wait any longer than necessary. Item No. 6: Final subdivision plan approval to construct a 650-foot City approved � private street located off Kittredge Road in a Rural Residence and Agriculture District. Spectrum Resources Towers, applicant. � , Erik Carson of Spectrum Resources Towers reminded the Board that he had been before them in December for approval of their 250-foot cell tower and preliminary plan approval of the � private roadway that services it.Mr. Carson indicated that it was a 50-foot right of way with a 24-foot paved roadway. Mr. Carson noted that the Engineering Department had raised some additional questions concerning erosion control, and the deed description for the right-of-way � easement. Mr. Carson discussed the additional erosion control details that had been added to the plan. He noted that,after review,they agreed with the City's engineers that there were some discrepancies in the metes and bounds description,which have been corrected. � Planning Officer Weber indicated that Jim Ring, City Engineer,could address the current status of their concerns. Mr. Ring indicated that Mr. Carson's plan had satisfactorily addressed � a11 their concerns. Ms. Weber indicated that the plan was in order for Final Pla.n Approval of the"Planning � Board Approved Private Street:' Mrs. Bostwick made a motion seconded by Mr. Lingley to approve the Fina1 Subdivision � Plan for Spectrum Resources Towers. 'The Board voted 5 to 0 to approve the final plan. 4 � � . � Item No.5: Discussion of the Comprehensive Plan 2000 in the Broadway Center Street and French Street Area. � Planning Officer Weber indicated that the City Council had requested that the Planning Board review the Comprehensive Plan 2000 to evaluate whether or not any changes should be � made in the Broadway and Center Street area. Ms. Weber explained the Land Use Policy Map, and Zoning Policy Map, and discussed relevant housing policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Weber emphasized that the Plan is a policy guiding document, and not a regulatory � tool. Mr. Lingley indicated that he would like to see some additionallanguage that would indicate where institutional and residential uses are competing,and a policy that would give � reference to the residential use. Mr. Clazk indicated that the expansion of the instiiutional use P would diminish the residential quality of the neighborhood. � Mr. Guerette indicated he would be content to stay with the existing plan. Mr. Wheeler concurred and indicated that no change to the Comprehensive Plan was warranted. Mr. Costlow � said he objected to the"piecemeal" approach that development was taking, and that there seemed to be no predictability in the process. Mrs. Bostwick indicated she felt the same frustration,but that there was little the Boaxd could do if the Hospital had no long-range plan. The Chair � indicated that he was happy if the Comprehensive Plan was unchanged. .f, Jim Elmore of Congress Street indicated that he would like to see more consideration �, given to the preservation of"Little City." The expansion of the Hospital is eroding the visual quality and the fabric of the residential neighborhood. He noted that since property owners see no future in their neighborhood,there is a disincentive to make improvements, and maintenance � is deferred. The current Plan actually endorses the erosion of the residential uses. Mr. Elmore suggested that,if the residential properties on the east side of Center Street were to remain as residential,the institutional sprawl would be held in check. � Mrs. Bostwick indicated that she did not want to see the on-going"parcel by parcel" � rezoning of properties in this area. Mr. Lingley indicated that the Board could not recommend any more single parcel requests. Mr. Wheeler disagreed, indicating that if the proposal was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan,the Board was obligated to recommend approval. � Mr. Wheeler made a motion to make no changes to the Comprehensive Plan. The motion was seconded and it failed 2 to 3. Assistant City Solicitor John Hamer indicated if the Board � wanted to amend the Plan they could just expand the residential area(yellow) and decrease the institutional area(blue). Mr. Lingley indicated that his preference was to add some additional text to the section that speaks about preserving residential neighborhoods. � Planning Officer Weber explained the amendment process under the Growth Management Law. Ms. Weber also indicated that the plan would be reviewed and updated around 2005. Chairman Fournier moved to recommend no changes to the Comprehensive Plan � at this time. Fred Costlow seconded the motion. The Board voted 5-0 not to recommend any changes at this time. � � 5 ' Mr. Lin le in uired if the Planning Officer would relate the Board's deliberation on this � g Y q item to the Council. Ms. Weber indicated that she would advise the Council of the Board's action. Mr. Wheeler indicated that the Board had had considerable discussion and came to a � decision. After more brief discussion,the Board concluded that the Minutes of the meeting would provide the City council with adequate information on the Board's deliberations. OTHER BUSINESS � Planning Officer Weber explained that there was a recent decision by the Law Court that � has directed the Planning Board to prepare specific"Findings of Fact"and conclusions relative to its initial decision of the Widewaters retail project. Assistant Ci Solicitor John Hamer indicated that Mr. Costlow and Mr. Lin le were the �� tY g Y only two Board members still on the Board who represented the majority decision on the Wide waters project. Mr. Hamer indicated that the City has not actually received an Order from the � Court but is aware of its finding. He indicated that they would hope the Board could fmalize written Findings by the end of March. � Mr. Costlow indicated that he was prepared to work on the required Findings with Mr. Lingley. � ADJOURNMENT � There being no further items for discussion,the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. � � � �� � � � � � 6 �