The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2023-10-03 Planning Board Minutes �� ; � . ��i; � �; �� '� � �'�a"�Q��'� � ;� r� .. �a :� o ��V.EL,��E1`�T . � CITY �� BANGCaR. PT.,hNtluI1�IC DIVIS[C�V�I PLANNING BOARD TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2023, 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 3RD FLOOR CITY HALL MEETING MINUTES Board Members Present: Chair Reese Perkins Vice Chair Ted Brush Michael Bazinet Jonathan Boucher Trish Hayes Kenneth Huhn Donald Meagher Joshua Saucier Citv Staff Present: Anne Krieg, Planning Officer/Development Director (via Zoom) Anja Collette, Planning Analyst David Szewczyk, City Solicitor John Theriault, City Engineer Chair Perkins called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMITS 1. Land Development Permit — Site Development Plan and Conditional Use — North Banqor Road — Map-Lots R11-012 & R11-013 - Land Development Permit Application — Site Development Plan — Conditional Use for construction of two 40'x120' minor retail buildings, each divided into three 40'x40' stores, and five 30'x100' self-storage buildings, at property located on North Bangor Road, at Map-Lots R11-012 & R11-013, in a Contract Shopping & Personal Service District (S&PS). Applicant/Owner: Duane Williams & Glenn McLellan (G.E. McLellan Construction). Alternate Member Joshua Saucier mentioned a possible conflict of interest, as he had prior dealings with applicant Glenn McLellan. Chair Perkins confirmed that since Saucier will not be required to vote at this meeting, the conflict does not need to be addressed unless it seems necessary during the course of discussing the application. City Solicitor Dave Szewczyk noted that, if it does need to be addressed, the Board should conduct a vote on whether Saucier does, in fact, have a conflict of interests. Aaron Dyer, applicant representative, presented to the podium and gave an overview of the application. 73 HARLOW STREET,BANGOR,ME 04401 TELEPHONE: (207)992-4280 FAX: (207)945-4447 WWW.BANGORMAINE.GOV City of Bangor Planning Division Planning Board Meeting Minutes —Tuesday, October 3, 2023 Chair Perkins asked the staff for any questions or comments. There were none. Chair Perkins asked the Board for any questions or comments. Member Huhn asked to clarify the possible retail usages. Dyer confirmed that the retail spaces are intended to be use for low-traffic businesses, such as office space or showroom-style retail (i.e. kitchen cabinetry, etc.). Huhn commented that he feels this is a good use for this lot. Chair Perkins concurred that this is a great use for the lot, as it's an odd piece of land that could be difficult to find a usage for. Noted that, since the storage units are a conditional use, there is a limit on the size of the units and a requirement that no hazardous materials be stored and that no sales be conducted from them. Wanted to confirm that applicant is aware of these of these conditions. Applicant Duane Williams presented to the podium and confirmed that they are aware and will comply with these conditions. Dyer added that many storage unit rental agreements include this conditional language. Chair Perkins opened the public hearing. No public comments. Public hearing closed. Vice Chair Brush asked if the conditional use language should be included in the motion. Development Director Anne Krieg confirmed that the Board can add this to the motion if desired. City Solicitor Szewczyk recommended that it be added. Planning Analyst Anja Collette clarified that the question was whether the approval of the conditional use ought to be included in the motion. Krieg confirmed that it should be. Member Bazinet commented on a section of the zoning contract that requires that the two lots on this parcel of land be combined prior to any development. Chair Perkins confirmed that the motion will also need to include this condition. Dyer noted that the applicant is already in the process of combining the two lots. Development Director Krieg suggested adding this condition to the motion as a requirement prior to the issuance of a building permit. Vice Chair Brush moved to approve the Land Development Permit Application and Conditional Use for the property located on North Bangor Road, Map-Lots R11-012 & R11-013, for construction of two 40'x120' minor retail buildings, each divided into three 40'x40' stores, and give 30'x100' self-storage buildings, under the condition that evidence of the combining of the two lots be provided prior to the issuance of a building permit. Member Meagher seconded. All in favor, none opposed. Motion passed. 2. Land Development Permit — Site Development Plan — 559 Union Street — Map-Lot 020-011 - Land Development Permit Application — Site Development Plan for parking lot expansion of ten additional spaces, at property located at 559 Union Street, Map-Lot 020- 011, in the Urban Service District (USD). Applicant/Owner: Hughes Cani LLC. Chair Perkins noted that this application is also conditioned upon the combination of two abutting lots. Applicant David Hughes presented to the podium and gave an overview of the application. Chair Perkins asked the staff for any questions or comments. There were none. Page 2 �4 City of Bangor Planning Division Planning Board Meeting Minutes —Tuesday, October 3, 2023 Chair Perkins asked the Board for any questions or comments. Vice Chair Brush noted that the two lots to be combined are zoned differently, and asked how combining them will affect the zoning. Planning Analyst Collette clarified that a portion of the abutting lot at 79 Fourteenth Street has been re-zoned to Urban Services District (USD) to match the zoning of the lot at 559 Union Street. Chair Perkins noted that the applicant is listed as Hughes Cani LLC, but the owner of the lot at 79 Fourteenth Street is Katherine Hughes. Asked how this can be resolved in the possible approval of the application. Hughes noted that Katherine is also the owner of Hughes Cani LLC and shares the same principal interest in both properties. Noted that the property at 79 Fourteenth Street was intentionally purchased by Katherine personally so that they would have the ability to combine only a portion of this property with the property at 559 Union Street. Had the two properties been owned by the same entity (Hughes Cani LLC), then they would have to combine the entire lot at 79 Fourteenth Street with the lot at 559 Union Street. Development Director Krieg asked City Solicitor Szewczyk if the condition can be stated that the two lots need to be combined under one owner prior to the issuance of a building permit, or if there is another concern. Hughes noted that this is already their intent. Chair Perkins expressed concern that the application, if approved under the name of Hughes Cani LLC, might not have legal standing to complete the work that includes the property owned by Katherine Hughes. City Solicitor Szewczyk confirmed that the condition suggested by Development Director Krieg would cover this. Planning Analyst Collette noted that the condition of approval to combine the 559 Union Street lot and the strip of land on the 79 Fourteenth Street lot would automatically eliminate the dual ownership issue. Chair Perkins opened the public hearing. No public comments. Public hearing closed. Member Meagher moved to approve the Land Development Permit Application for the property located at 559 Union Street, Map-Lot 020-011, for parking lot expansion of ten additional spaces, under the condition that evidence of the combining of the two lots under single ownership be provided prior to the issuance of a building permit. Member Bazinet seconded. All in favor, none opposed. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARING — LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS 3. To amend the Land Development Code by adding the Use of Permanent Supportive Housing as a Conditional Use in the LDR (Low-Density Residential), HDR (High-Density Residential), and M&SD (Multi-Family and Service District) Zones. Planning Analyst Collette presented an overview of the ordinance to the Board. Chair Perkins asked the Board for any questions or comments. Perkins asked to clarify the number of residents allowed per dwelling unit, or whether this was regulated at all. Collette confirmed that this is not stipulated in the zoning, but the Building Code does regulate the square footage required per person in a dwelling unit. Development Director Krieg added that the model for permanent supportive housing is typically efficiency apartments with some common space, and on-site services. Collette Page 3� 4 City of Bangor Planning Division Planning Board Meeting Minutes —Tuesday, October 3, 2023 stated that the Building Code would apply to these units the same as it does to any other dwelling units. Chair Perkins opened the public hearing. No public comments. Public hearing closed. Member Meagher moved to recommend City Council ought to pass the amendment of the Land Development Code to add the use of permanent supportive housing as a conditional use in the Low-Density Residential (LDR), High-Density Residential (HDR), and Multi-Family & Service District (M&SD) zones. Vice Chair Brush seconded. All in favor, none opposed. OTHER BUSINESS 4. Meeting Minutes — September 5, 2023 and September 19, 2023 Member Huhn moved to approve the meeting minutes of September 5, 2023. Member Bazinet seconded. All voting members in favor, none opposed. Member Huhn moved to approve the meeting minutes of September 19, 2023. Vice Chair Brush seconded. All voting members in favor, none opposed. Chair Perkins asked to clarify the language of"ought to pass" or"ought not to pass" when making a motion. Feels that the language of"ought not to pass" can become confusing in a motion due to the double negative when voting "no" on these motions. Asked if future votes can be presented as "ought to pass" only so that the intent of the votes can be clearer. Chair Perkins also mentioned a comment by a member of the public during the last City Council meeting in which the Planning Board was praised for their diligence in deliberations. Member Meagher asked to clarify the procedure for voting on "ought to pass" motions. Asked that, if the motion fails, the recommendation is automatically "ought not to pass." City Solicitor Szewczyk confirmed that this is how it is typically interpreted, but that if the Board is concerned about this they can follow up with another motion of"ought not to pass." Planning Analyst Collette noted that staff presents memos to City Council detailing the votes for the sake of clarity. City Solicitor Szewczyk also noted that the Planning Board Chair can make a clarifying statement at the end of these votes to avoid confusion. Meeting adjourned at 7:51 pm. Respectfully submitted, Sarah Maquillan, Development Assistant Planning Division Page 4�4