10/18 -

FREEPORT PROJECT REVIEW BOARD MINUTES
FREEPORT TOWN HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2007
6:30 p.m.

PRESENT: David Marstaller (Chairperson), Jane Benson, Jason Donahue, Cliff Goodall, James Gorman (arrived late), Dale Whitmore, and Donna Larson (Town Planner). Erik Anderson and was excused.

CALL TO ORDER: Mr. Marstaller called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.

ITEM I: Approval of the minutes from the February 14, 2007 Project Review Board meeting.
Ms. Benson / Mr. Goodall moved to waive the reading of the minutes from the February 14, 2007 Project Review Board meeting and to accept them as printed. Vote: 3 Ayes / 0 Nays / 2 Abstentions (Donahue and Whitmore)

ITEM II: Informational Exchange
Ms. Larson stated that she has done a Staff Approval for a new signs at Pedro O’Hara’s and at Maplewood Terrace. She also mentioned that she had put information in the Board’s packets about a presentation titled “Context Sensitive Solutions – A Public Forum” which is being put on by the Portland Area Transportation Committee. The public is welcome to attend and the presentation will be at Hannaford Hall at the University of Southern Maine on March 29, 2007 from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.

Mr. Goodall recused himself from the review of the next item and stepped down to join the public.

ITEM III: Approvals
One South Plaza – Renewal
The applicant is seeking renewal of an approval for the construction of a 14,600 sq. ft. building for office/professional space and a 9,800 sq. ft. building for restaurant use. Tax Assessor Map 22, Lot 29A. Eremita and Valley, applicant; Stephen Tibbetts, P.E., engineer.

Ms. Larson explained that the applicant is seeking renewal of an approval for the construction of a 14,600 sq. ft. building for office/professional space and a 9,800 sq. ft. building for restaurant use, to be located on Route One South. The previous renewal of the approval was granted on 11-09-05. This will be the fourth renewal of the approval and no changes to the plan are proposed. State of Maine rules regarding stormwater management have changed since the plan was designed. Albert Presgraves, Town Engineer, has reviewed the plan and the applicant will need to revise the Stormwater and Erosion Control plans to comply with the new DEP Chapter 500 Stormwater Rules. This has been added as a condition of approval, with the plan revisions to be approved by the Town Engineer and Town Planner prior to the start of any site work. The project will also now be subject to the Pavement Maintenance Impact Fee Ordinance. The amount of the impact fee will be based upon the building size of 24,400 s.f. Paying this fee, prior to the issuance of a building permit has been added as a condition of approval.

The applicant’s Tier One Permit from the MDEP has expired and will need to be renewed prior to a permit being issued for construction. The applicant will also need to obtain a Traffic Movement Permit from the MDOT. Once the applicant determines the tenant, they will move forward with obtaining the permit. In regards to the easement with the abutting property owner, the applicant had attempted to enter into a reciprocal easement, for truck access, with the previous owner however had no luck. The property has since changed hands and is owned by Puja Hospitality who operates the Holiday Inn Express. It is recommended to the Board that the applicant contact the new owner regarding a possible reciprocal easement.

Tom Valley, stated that they have owned the land for four years and intended to buy it as an investment. They did not want to build on speculation but want to keep the option of the site plan available so they can develop the site in the best way possible for them and the Town of Freeport.

Findings of Fact: (Section 602.F. of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance)
a. Preservation of Landscape.
The site plan includes multiple bioretention areas that will support plantings. A variety of plantings will also border the property boundary.

b. Relation of Proposed Buildings to the Environment.
This project did not require approval from the Design Review Board; however, the standards of Section 527 are met. The proposed building will meet all setbacks and zoning requirements.

c. Vehicular Access.
There will be two access driveways to the site with an easement between the applicant’s parcel and the abutting property (to the south) that will allow for truck access between the sites. The applicant is awaiting the issuance of a Traffic Movement Permit from the Maine Department of Transportation. To provide adequate public safety given the expected increase in traffic and impact on nearby intersections, the public safety departments have indicated the need for a preemption system for the light at the intersection of Route One and Desert Road and for public safety vehicles. The cost of this system is $4,000.

d. Parking and Circulation.
The number of parking spaces required would be 164 spaces of which the applicant intends to use all 164. Parking will surround the building on the front and sides.

e. Surface Water Drainage.
The applicant has installed multiple bioretention areas to assist with the management of stormwater. Albert Presgraves, Town Engineer, has reviewed the plan and the applicant will need to revise the Stormwater and Erosion Control plans to comply with the new DEP Chapter 500 Stormwater Rules. This has been added as a condition of approval, with the plan revisions to be approved by the Town Engineer and Town Planner prior to the start of any site work. Mr. Presgraves also recommends that the applicant and the Town enter into a stormwater facilities maintenance agreement.

f. Utilities.
All utilities will be underground. Solid waste disposal will be through the use of dumpsters on the back side of the property. The dumpsters will be screened with fencing. Final approval of the engineered sewer plans will need to be granted by the Freeport Sewer District prior to construction.

g. Advertising Features.
The applicant intends to install a free standing sign on the I-95 side of the property and a ground sign and kiosk at the entrance to the building, both signs are internally illuminated. The final sign drawings including dimensions and colors are needed. The sign adjacent to I-95 is limited to 32 s.f., the entrance sign is limited to 32 s.f. for the name of the plaza, and 20 s.f total for business identification signs below the plaza name.

h. Special Features.
A special feature of the site will be a delivery and service truck access easement between the applicant’s property and the abutting parcel (to the south). There will also be a walkway between the applicant’s parcel and the abutting Comfort Suites parcels for which the details will be worked out between the abutting property owners.

i. Exterior Lighting.
Pole and wall lights are proposed for the site. Lighting plans have been reviewed by Bartlett Design and are in compliance with the Freeport Ordinance (see letter dated November 26, 2002.

j. Emergency Vehicle Access.
All Department Heads have reviewed and approved this project. Freeport Public Safety Departments have requested a preemption system for the traffic light at the intersection of Route One and Desert Road.

k. Landscaping.
A variety of plantings will enhance the landscaping of the site.

l. Environmental Consideration. A site plan shall not be approved unless it meets
the following criteria:
All of the above criteria have been met. The Maine DEP has granted a Tier 1 Wetlands Permit.

Conclusion: Based on these facts the Board finds that this project meets the criteria and standards of Section 602 Site Plan Review.

Mr. Whitmore / Mr. Gorman moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board, renew the approval of the Findings of Fact and the site plan for One South Plaza, plan dated 09/27/02, last revised 01/15/03, to be build substantially as proposed, finding that they meet the standards of Section 602, with the following conditions of approval.
1. This approval incorporates by reference all supporting plans that amend the previously approved plans submitted by the applicant and his/her representatives at Project Review Board meetings and hearings on the subject application to the extent that they are not in conflict with other stated conditions.
2. A performance guarantee in an amount to be reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer, to cover the cost of construction, in a form acceptable to the Town Attorney be established prior to construction. The performance guarantee shall cover the cost of site preparation, parking areas and paths, erosion control, stormwater management, and landscaping. Along with the performance guarantee, a non-refundable administrative fee of 2% of the performance guarantee, in an amount to be reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer, be paid prior to construction.
3. Establish an inspection account for inspection of the site improvements prior to construction.
4. A Traffic Movement Permit be obtained from the Maine Department of
Transportation prior to the start of construction.
5. The applicant and the Town enter into a stormwater facilities maintenance agreement, as recommended by the Town Engineer, to be recorded in the registry of deeds, prior to the start of construction.
6. Prior to the start of construction, the applicant enter into an easement, preferably a reciprocal easement, approved by the Town Attorney, with Puja Hospitality, owner of the abutting parcel.
7. The final sign drawings including dimensions and colors are needed. The sign adjacent to I-295 is limited to 32 s.f., the entrance sign is limited to 32 s.f. for the name of the plaza, and 20 s.f total for business identification signs below the plaza name. Final sign design shall be submitted to Fred Reeder prior to the start of construction.
8. The $4,000 needed to install the preemption system be submitted before construction begins.
9. Prior to occupancy, final location and design of the sidewalk between the Comfort
Suites and this project be agreed upon and approved by the Town Planner.
10. The applicant receive approval from the Maine Department of Environmental Protection for renewal of their Tier One permit.
11. The applicant revised Stormwater and Erosion Control plans prior to any site work, with the revisions to the plans to be approved by the Town Engineer and the Town Planner.
12. When a building permit is issued, pay a pavement maintenance fee based upon the building size of 24,400 s.f. and current impact fee effective when the building permit is issued.
Vote: 5 Ayes / 0 Nays

Cushing Avenue Subdivision Amendment – Snow Road – PUBLIC HEARING
The applicant is seeking approval for a Site Plan and Subdivision amendment to add a duplex at a property on Snow Road. This is a multi-family development as there is an existing duplex on the property. Tax Assessor Map 11, Lot 51-2. Joseph Scala, applicant and Owner. OEST Associates, engineer and land surveyor.

Ms. Larson explained that because this lot is part of a previously approved subdivision, the addition of the duplex requires and amendment to the original subdivision plan. No additional lots are proposed.
This is a Village Open Space Subdivision and no secondary conservation areas have been identified on the property. Therefore the applicant is required to pay a fee in lieu of providing open space. The standards of the ordinance require 5,041.5 s.f. of open space. Based upon the fee of $0.70 per s.f., the applicant is required to pay a fee of $3,529.

The units will be connected to the public sewer system and the connection has been approved by the Freeport Sewer District (letter dated 01/22/07). Water will be provided by an existing well on the site. The existing driveway will be relocated to the northern side of the property, will be paved, and will provide access to all four units. The area of the old driveway will be re-vegetated with grass and some white pines. The applicant has submitted a Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plan which has been reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer. He has suggested (see memo dated 01/24/07) that the applicant make the following changes to the vegetated underdrain soil filter: increase the depth of the basin to over 6 inches and change the bottom elevation to 105.3. This has been added as a condition of approval to be made during construction.

This parcel is within the Freeport Village Overlay District, but not the Design Review District. The applicant meets the buffering requirements and will retain existing vegetation where possible. The applicant has submitted building elevations and a materials list. Fill cut-off lighting fixtures are proposed and the pitch of the roof is in accordance with the Design Standards. The exterior appearance will be similar to that of the existing building.

Some existing trees will be removed, but the applicant will modify the grading plan to maintain a 10 foot undisturbed buffer. A letter has come in from an abutter with some concerns. The abutter suggested a 3 foot berm; the Town Engineer suggested a 6 inch berm would be appropriate and the applicant has agreed to install it. The applicant will plant six evergreen trees once construction is complete and the appropriate locations can be identified. The applicant may be able to make some changes to the plan to reduce the amount of impervious surface such as reducing the parking stall depth; such a change could be done by a Staff Approval. The abutter also noted concerns for blasting. The applicant has stated that if blasting is necessary he will go with a slab or frost wall.

Joe Scala, applicant, stated that he built the existing building 20 years ago and he feels that this proposal meets the spirit of the village zone for in-town housing. This is a wooded lot and the woods will be maintained along the outside of the lot. Mr. Whitmore asked about the well. Ms. Larson stated that there is an existing well on the property and a new well is proposed for the new building. Mr. Scala stated that he has looked into pricing for extending the water and sewer lines and if it is feasible, he might do that. Mr. Whitmore asked if blasting were required, if the contractor would video tape. Mr. Scala noted that no blasting was needed when the existing building was installed and most contractors do make video tapes.

Mr. Donahue suggested that a window be added to the south elevation since that was the side facing the sun and no windows are shown on the plan. Mr. Scala stated that it could not be done on the first floor due to the kitchen, but it could be done on the second floor. He does not want to add windows on the other side near the existing building. Mr. Whitmore asked about sprinklers. Mr. Scala stated that the buildings would not have sprinklers and there is a hydrant about 80 feet away.

Mr. Whitmore and Mr. Gorman moved to open and close the public hearing as there were no comments from the public. Votes: 6 Ayes/ 0 Nays

Mr. Gorman asked if Mr. Scala had talked to the abutter. Mr. Scala stated no, and noted that they are former tenants of his. He has worked with the Town Planner and Town Engineer to address the concerns raised by the abutter.

Findings of Fact:
11.1 Pollution
There is a private well existing on the site. The project will be connected to the public sewer system.

11.2 Sufficient Water
There is a private well existing on the site.

11.3 Impact on Existing Water Supplies
This project will not be connected to the public water system.

11.4 Soil Erosion.
The applicant has submitted Stormwater and Erosion Control Plans which have been reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer (see memo dated 01/24/07). He has recommended a minor change to the plan to the depth and elevation of the basin; this has been added as a condition of approval.

11.5 Traffic Conditions
The driveway will be relocated on the property and a new curb-cut is proposed. The old driveway will be re-vegetated. The applicant will be required to get a Driveway Entrance Permit form the Freeport Department of Public Works, prior to any sitework.

11.6 Sewage Disposal
This project will utilize the public sewer system. In a letter dated 01-22-07, Thomas Allen, Freeport Sewer District, stated that the utility has adequate capacity to serve the development.

11.7 Solid Waste
The project will be required to contract with a solid waste disposal Contractor as required by the Freeport Solid Waste Control and Solid Waste Flow Control Ordinances.

11.8 Impact on Natural Beauty, Aesthetics, Historic Sites, Wildlife Habitat, Rare Natural Areas, or Public Access to the Shoreline
No wetlands were identified on the site.

11.9 Conformance with Zoning Ordinance and Other Land Use Ordinances.
The development meets all space and bulk requirements of local ordinances. This is a Village Open Space Subdivision and no secondary conservation areas have been identified on the property. Therefore the applicant is required to pay a fee ($3,529) in lieu of providing open space.

11.10 Financial and Technical Capacity
Due to the size and nature of the amendment information on financial capacity was not required. The subdivision plan has been professionally prepared by OEST Associates.

11.11 Impact on Water Quality or Shoreline
This property does not abut the shoreline or any waterbodies.

11.12 Impact on Ground Water Quality or Quantity
There is an existing well on the property which will provide water to the units. The new building will be connected to the public sewer system.

11.13 Floodplain Management
The parcel is designated as Zone C (area of minimal flooding) by the FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Maps.

11.14 Identification of Freshwater Wetlands
No wetlands have been identified on the site.

11.15 Rivers, Streams, and Brooks
No rivers, streams, or brooks have been identified on the plan.

11.16 Storm Water Management
The applicant has submitted a Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plan which has been reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer. He has suggested (see memo dated 01/24/07) that the applicant make the following changes to the vegetated underdrain soil filter: increase the depth of the basin to over 6 inches and change the bottom elevation to 105.3. This has been added as a condition of approval.

11.17 Spaghetti Lots
No spaghetti lots are proposed with this development.

11.18 Phosphorus Impacts on Great Ponds
The development is not within the watershed of a great pond.


11.19 Impacts on Adjoining Municipalities
This development is not within or does not border an adjoining municipality.


Conclusion: Based on these facts the Board finds that this project meets the criteria and standards of the Subdivision Ordinance.

Findings of Fact: (Section 602.F. of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance)
a. Preservation of Landscape.
The site layout has been design so that the new building will be located behind the existing building and away from the road. The applicant has retained existing vegetation where possible and meets the buffer requirements of the Freeport Village Overlay District.

b. Relation of Proposed Buildings to the Environment.
This parcel is not within the Design Review District and is located on Snow Road. The driveway to the property will be relocated and the existing driveway will be re-vegetated. The new building will be located behind the existing dwelling and will maintain the setbacks required by the ordinance.

c. Vehicular Access.
Vehicular access to the site will be from a new driveway proposed for the north side of the property. The existing driveway will be re-vegetated. The applicant will need to obtain a Driveway Entrance Permit from the Freeport Public Works Department for the entrance of the new driveway on to Snow Road.

d. Parking and Circulation.
The applicant is proposing to relocate the driveway to the other side of the property from where it currently exists. Seven parking spaces are proposed which meets the requirements of the ordinance.

e. Surface Water Drainage.
The applicant has submitted a Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plan which has been reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer. He has suggested (see memo dated 01/24/07) that the applicant make the following changes to the vegetated underdrain soil filter: increase the depth of the basin to over 6 inches and change the bottom elevation to 105.3. This has been added as a condition of approval to be made prior to construction.

f. Utilities.
There is an existing well on-site. The new building will be connected to the public sewer system. In a letter dated 01-22-7, Tom Allen of the Freeport Sewer District states that the District has the capacity to serve the development.

g. Advertising Features.
No signs are proposed.

h. Special Features.
There are no special features associated with this project.


i. Exterior Lighting.
Building mounted fixtures are proposed and will be full cut-off.

j. Emergency Vehicle Access.
All Public Safety Department Heads have reviewed the plans.

k. Landscaping.
Existing vegetation has been retained where possible. The applicant is proposing to loam and seed the old driveway and parking area and is proposing to plant white pines in that area.

l. Environmental Consideration. A site plan shall not be approved unless it meets the following criteria:
This property is not within the Marine Waterfront District or the Shoreland Zone. The Stormwater Management and Erosion Control plans have been reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer with one minor change suggested for construction.. The building will be connected to the public sewer system. This parcel is not in the Design Review District.

Conclusion: Based on these facts the Board finds that this project meets the criteria and standards of Section 602 Site Plan Review.

Mr. Goodall / Mr. Whitmore moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board approve a Design Standard Certificate, site plan, subdivision amendment, and printed Findings of Fact, for Joseph Scala for a new duplex on Snow Road, to be built substantially as proposed, subdivision and utility plan dated January 2007, revised 01/03/07, finding that it meets the standards of the Section 602 of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance, the standards of the Freeport Village Overlay District, and the standards of the Freeport Subdivision Ordinance, with the following Conditions of Approval:
1) This approval incorporates by reference all supporting plans that amend the previously approved plans submitted by the applicant and his/her representatives at Project Review Board meetings and hearings on the subject application to the extent that they are not in conflict with other stated conditions.
2) Prior to any site work, the applicant do the following:
A. Obtain approval from the Freeport Department of Public Works for a Driveway Entrance Permit.
B. Install the vegetated underdrain soil filter basin to over 6 inches and change the bottom elevation to 105.3, as recommended by the Town Engineer.
C. When a building permit is issued, pay a pavement maintenance fee based upon the building size of 2,100 s.f. and current impact fee effective when the building permit is issued.
D. The applicant pay to the Town of Freeport, the required open space fee in the amount of $3,529.00.
Vote: 6 Ayes / 0 Nays


LL Bean – Data Center / Subdivision Amendment – Stonewood Drive
The applicant is seeking final approval for a new 19,600 s.f. building and 19 space parking lot on an undeveloped parcel on Stonewood Drive. The building will house computer equipment and associated mechanical systems. This application also requires a subdivision amendment to the previously approved Stonewood Subdivision, as two parcels will be merged. Tax Assessor Map 23, Lot 70B & 70C. L.L. Bean Inc., owner and applicant; William Conway R.L.A., Sebago Technics, representative.

Ms. Larson explained that the building will be sided with metal and wood siding and will have a white membrane roof. The windows will be made of wood. The layouts of the parking area and loading areas have been revised. The Codes Enforcement Officer has reviewed the application and determined that the parking standard for manufacturing and processing would be appropriate for determining the required parking. Based upon the square footage and the requirement of 1 space per 1,000 s.f., 20 parking spaces are required; the applicant is proposing to built 8 at this time. The parking area with the 8 spaces will be located to the left of side of the building. The applicant is requesting that the Board waive the requirement that all of the spaces be built and the applicant does not intend to build the remaining 12 spaces at this time, however the spaces have been shown as could be built in front of the building.

The Town Engineer has reviewed and approved Stormwater Management and Erosion Control plans (see memo dated 02/16/07). The applicant has also applied to the DEP for a Modification to the Site Location of Development Permit for the property. The building will be connected to the public water and public sewer system. The applicant has approval from the Sewer District (letter dated 12-27-06) and Aqua Maine (letter dated 01-12-07).

A change to the proposal since the last meeting is the requirement for an amendment to a previously approved subdivision. Since the original submission, the applicant has purchased the abutting lot and would now like to merge the two lots. Since no additional lots are being created, this is a rather simple amendment. The applicant has submitted a revised subdivision plan showing the amendment which upon approval, will need to be recorded into the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds.

William Conway, representative, stated that the site plan is consistent with the conceptual plan and the applicant has responded to comments made at the site walk. Kylie Mason, representative, stated that an arbor has been added near the entrance and near the side parking lot. They have tried to retain existing vegetation and have added a mix of evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs. A slight berm has been added to the front of the building to screen the facility. The loading dock has been reconfigured and they did run AutoTurn to ensure that there is proper space for truck movement. No signs are proposed.

Chad Fowler, The ID Group, explained that this is a LEED certified building. There is an existing building on the campus and this building incorporates some finishes of the other building. A stone wall and arbor have been incorporated in to the plan. There is a lower portion of the building which has a metal roof and there is a stairway located behind the glass. Mr. Marstaller asked about the components that contribute to the LEED certification. Mr. Fowler explained that where the wood comes from, the lighting, environmental requirements, insulation value, and bringing in natural light to where there are occupants, all contribute to the certification. Mr. Goodall asked about the heating system. Mr. Fowler stated that the system will have a large cooling capacity as the computers in the building will give off a lot of heat. There will also be heat pumps inside the building in the small office areas. There were no public comments.

Proposed Findings of Fact:
11.1 Pollution
The lot is connected to the public water and public sewer systems.

11.2 Sufficient Water
The project will utilize the public water system.

11.3 Impact on Existing Water Supplies
This project will utilize the public water system. In a letter dated 01-12-07, Ron Seaman, Superintendent, Aqua Maine, states that the utility has the capacity and the ability to serve the project without adversely affecting the public water supply.

11.4 Soil Erosion.
The applicant has submitted Stormwater and Erosion Control Plans which have been reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer (see memo dated 02/16/07).

11.5 Traffic Conditions
No new curb cuts off Stonewood Drive are proposed.

11.6 Sewage Disposal
This project will utilize the public sewer system. In a letter dated 12-26-06, Thomas Allen, Freeport Sewer District, stated that the utility has adequate capacity to serve the development.

11.7 Solid Waste
The project will be required to contract with a solid waste disposal Contractor as required by the Freeport Solid Waste Control and Solid Waste Flow Control Ordinances.

11.8 Impact on Natural Beauty, Aesthetics, Historic Sites, Wildlife Habitat, Rare Natural Areas, or Public Access to the Shoreline
Wetlands were previously identified on the undeveloped portion of the property and are shown on the recording plan.

11.9 Conformance with Zoning Ordinance and Other Land Use Ordinances.
The development meets all space and bulk requirements of local ordinances. Due to the zoning district, the applicant is not required to set aside open space and complies with the Freeport Subdivision Ordinance.

11.10 Financial and Technical Capacity
Due to the size and nature of the amendment, and the fact that no additional lots are being created, information on financial capacity was not required. The subdivision plan has been professionally prepared by Sebago Technics.

11.11 Impact on Water Quality or Shoreline
This property does not abut the shoreline or any waterbodies.

11.12 Impact on Ground Water Quality or Quantity
The new lot will utilize the public water system and Aqua Maine has approved the connection (letter date 01-12-07). No individual wells are proposed.

11.13 Floodplain Management
The parcel is designated as Zone C (area of minimal flooding) by the FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Maps.

11.14 Identification of Freshwater Wetlands
Freshwater wetlands have been identified and shown on the plan.

11.15 Rivers, Streams, and Brooks
No rivers, streams, or brooks have been identified on the plan.

11.16 Storm Water Management
The Town Engineer has reviewed and approved Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plans (see memo dated 02-16-07).

11.17 Spaghetti Lots
No spaghetti lots are proposed with this development.

11.18 Phosphorus Impacts on Great Ponds
The development is not within the watershed of a great pond.

11.19 Impacts on Adjoining Municipalities
This development is not within or does not border an adjoining municipality.

Conclusion: Based on these facts the Board finds that this project meets the criteria and standards of the Subdivision Ordinance.

Findings of Fact: (Section 602.F. of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance)
a. Preservation of Landscape.
The layout of the site has been designed so that the developed area remains closest to the development on the abutting parcel. The access to this building will be through the use of a driveway on the abutting parcel. The two parcels will have parking lots which are close in proximity and which are interconnected.



b. Relation of Proposed Buildings to the Environment.
This parcel is not within the Design Review District and is located at the end of Stonewood Drive. The layout of the site will retain existing vegetation where possible. The building will be sided with metal and wood siding and will have a white membrane roof. The windows will be made of wood. The building will not be visible from US Route One.

c. Vehicular Access.
Vehicular access to the site will be through the use of the existing driveway on the property and will be connected by the parking areas. No new curb cuts off Stonewood Drive are proposed.

d. Parking and Circulation.
The Codes Enforcement Officer has reviewed the application and determined that the parking standard for manufacturing and processing would be appropriate for determining the required parking and therefore 20 parking spaces are required. The applicant is proposing to construct 8 spaces and will only construct the other 12 should a parking problem arise Due to the nature and use of the facility and the small number of people that will occupy it, the 8 parking spaces should meet the parking demand of the facility.

e. Surface Water Drainage.
Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plans have been approved by the Town Engineer (memo dated 02/16/07). It is his recommendation that the applicant enter into a Stormwater Maintenance Agreement with the Town of Freeport, to be recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds prior to any site work. The applicant has applied to the DEP for a Modification to the Site Location of Development Permit. Obtaining written approval from the DEP prior to any site work has been added as a condition of approval.

f. Utilities.
The building will be connected to both the public water and public sewer systems. The applicant obtained approval from the Freeport Sewer District (see letter dated 12-27-06) and from Aqua Maine (see letter dated 01-12-07).

g. Advertising Features.
No signs are proposed.

h. Special Features.
There will be an underground oil tank located on the south side of the building. The location of this tank was approved by the Fire Chief. Solid waste will be stored inside of the building.

i. Exterior Lighting.
The applicant has submitted a lighting plan which meets the standards of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance. All lighting will be full cut-off.

j. Emergency Vehicle Access.
All Public Safety Department Heads have reviewed the plans.

k. Landscaping.
The plans show landscaping around the building and the parking area. Existing vegetation will be retained where possible. Additional plantings will also be added to the parking lot islands in the existing lot, which are along the roadway that lead to the new building.

l. Environmental Consideration. A site plan shall not be approved unless it meets the following criteria:
This property is not within the Marine Waterfront District or the Shoreland Zone. The Stormwater Management and Erosion Control plans have been reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer. The building will be connected to the public sewer system and public water system. This parcel is not in the Design Review District. The applicant needs written approval from the DEP for a Modification to the Site Location of Development Permit. Obtaining written approval from the DEP prior to any site work has been added as a condition of approval.

Conclusion: Based on these facts the Board finds that this project meets the criteria and standards of Section 602 Site Plan Review.

Ms. Benson / Mr. Whitmore moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board approve the printed Findings of Fact, Site Plan, and amendment to the previously approved Stonewood Subdivision, for LL Bean for a new data center on Stonewood Drive, to be built substantially as proposed, site plan dated 12/20/06, revised 02/09/07, finding that it meets the standards of Section 602 of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance and the standards of the Freeport Subdivision Ordinance, with the following Conditions of Approval:
1) This approval incorporates by reference all supporting plans that amend the previously approved plans submitted by the applicant and his/her representatives at Project Review Board meetings and hearings on the subject application to the extent that they are not in conflict with other stated conditions.
2) Prior to any site work, the applicant do the following:
A. Establish a performance guarantee in the amount of $639,790.00 to be approved by the Town Engineer, to cover the cost of all site improvements, in a form acceptable to the Town Attorney.
B. Pay to the Town of Freeport, a non-refundable administrative fee of 2% of the performance guarantee, in an amount of $12,795.80.
C. Set up an escrow account in the amount of $6,000.00 to cover the cost of inspections of site improvements by the Town Engineer.
D. Enter into a Maintenance Agreement for a Stormwater Management System be recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds.
E. Obtain written approval from the DEP for an amendment to the Site Location Permit.
F. When a building permit is issued, pay a pavement maintenance fee based upon the building size of 24,400 s.f. and current impact fee effective when the building permit is issued.
Vote: 5 Ayes / 0 Nays

Village Center Project – Depot Street – PUBLIC HEARING
The applicant is returning for final approval for a new building which will include 118,500 s.f. of retail/restaurant space and an approximately 530 space parking garage. Class A & B properties. Design Review and Site Plan Review are required. Tax Assessor Map 11, Lots 112-ETC & 114. Berenson Associates Inc., applicant; L.L. Bean Inc., owner; William Conway R.L.A., Sebago Technics, representative.

Ms. Larson explained that the final design submitted includes a parking garage and retail/restaurant/office space. It is possible that some of the space on Depot Street could be used as office space. Due to the size of the project it is anticipated that some minor modifications may come up. There will likely be changes to the internal layout of the complex, and so long as the parking requirements are still being met, this is something that could be approved administratively.

There are many conditions of approval proposed, however due to the length of time to construct the project there is still plenty of time for any outstanding details to be worked out. As details are worked out, minor changes to the stormwater plans and layout of the building may be required. She wanted to know if the Board would support that minor changes not affecting the overall number of parking spaces or appearance of the structure, were to be approved by staff. This would allow the applicant to not have to return to the Board every time a minor change is needed. For example a change to a stormwater structure which would be reviewed by the Town Engineer or the change to the interior of the garage to allow for mechanical equipment. Any major changes affecting the layout or any changes to the exterior appearance of the structure will require the applicant to return to the Board.

Design Review - The applicant has previously presented plans to the Board and some minor changes have been made to the exterior of the building since the last meeting. The tower at the corner of Mill/Depot Streets remains the same. Details on materials are shown on the plan and were previously submitted. The applicant has submitted a plan with details on possible signage, noting the total square footage permitted per building. The applicant will return to the Board for approval of any kiosk and project identification signs as well as off-site signage within the Design Review District. The individual tenants will be required to return for approvals for store signage. Details on the arch at the entrance have also not been worked out, and the applicant will need to return for Design Review approval for that as well. An issue brought up at the last meeting was the Mallet Building and the exposure of the granite foundation which is limited due in part to make the building accessible. The applicant has adjusted the plans so that 6 inches of the granite foundation will be exposed.

Landscaping – The applicant has submitted a detailed landscaping plan and lot coverage plan for the property. A variety of plantings are used, but remain consistent throughout the project. There will also be some moveable planters with seating on the plaza level. The Historical Society did comment on the types of plantings proposed around the Mallet building. Based upon their comments the applicant has added some daylilies and spring bulbs to the gardens abutting the building. The applicant has submitted a lot coverage plan indicating that they do meet the requirement of the ordinance for maximum impervious area coverage of 90%. Some of the areas where the pervious area is located may change, but the applicant will still meet the maximum requirement of 90% impervious surface.

Public Safety – All Department heads have reviewed the plans. As a condition of approval the applicant will be required to submit copies of fire alarm plans and sprinkler system plans. The applicant will also provide the Town of Freeport with two hose packs which will be compatible with the standpipes. The entire project will be monitored with security speakers and cameras. This will allow security personnel to communicate with people at the site. The applicant has submitted lighting plans and details for inside the garage and for the remainder of the facility. It is a suggested condition of approval that these plans be reviewed by Larry Bartlett (the Town’s peer reviewer) for compliance with the standards of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance and to ensure that a safe and adequate level of illumination is proposed for inside the garage.

Off-site improvements – The Town and the applicant have agreed to a series of off-site improvements. For example, the reconstruction of Mill and Depot Streets (from Grove Street to Bow Street) and some re-striping on Bow, Main, and West Streets. The applicant will also be doing some landscaping, widening the crosswalk on Main Street, and installing some signage.

The applicant is proposing some improvements for loading on the abutting property. The applicant will need to submit copies of the easement(s) they have with Mr. Denney for such improvements. This easement will allow for the shared use of an existing loading dock. The applicant was unable to obtain a written agreement with Mr. Leighton at this time; however the entrance/exit on the Bow Street side of the property meets all standards.

Traffic and Parking Issues – The applicant has met with the Traffic and Parking Committee. The Committee supports the project and the applicant will need to continue to work with the Committee and Town Staff on things such as way-finding signs and plans for maintaining traffic flow during construction. This project will require that the Traffic and Parking Ordinance be amended to eliminate 3 parking spaces on the south side of Bow Street and to make Mill Street 2 way from the Depot Street intersection 200 feet north. This Board does not need to take action on any of these items.

Prior to this project, the property owner (LL Bean) had a parking surplus of 204 spaces. Upon approval of this project, closure of the entire parcel due to construction, and the discontinued use of the existing buildings on the property, LL Bean will have a parking deficit of 21 spaces. LL Bean will be required to lease parking as part of the shared parking system overseen by the Town of Freeport. The applicant is already working on an arrangement for these spaces, but a lease will need to be finalized before any sitework begins and the site is closed off to the public.

Stormwater – The applicant has submitted stormwater plans which have been reviewed by the Town Engineer. He does recommend a change to the plan; this has been added as a condition of approval. The applicant is also required to obtain a Site Location Permit from the DEP and the plans will be reviewed as part of that review. The Town Engineer has recommended that the applicant and the Town of Freeport enter into a Stormwater Facilities Maintenance Agreement to be recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds.

Other approvals needed – The applicant still needs to obtain the following written approvals prior to any site work, with copies being forwarded to the Freeport Planning Department:
~ Freeport Water District for connection to the public utility and for any improvements proposed to the water lines.
~ Freeport Sewer District for connection to the public utility and for any improvements proposed to the sewer lines.
~ Maine Department of Transportation for a Traffic Movement Permit
~ Maine Department of Environmental Protection for an amendment to the Site Location Permit.

Mr. Conway stated that the applicant is looking for approval tonight because it is important to the developer to be able to proceed with the project due to his commitments. Mr. John Cole, representative from Arrowstreet, showed renderings of the development and explained that there is a 6-foot grade change from Main Street to the plaza. The entrance slopes down, but due to the grade, no handrail is required. The slope aisle is 20 feet in width and 72 feet in length. The slope is needed because the complex could not be designed to be level with Main Street because then the Depot Street side would have been too high.

The plans submitted include an alternate layout with the option of having a theater tenant at the corner and the applicant would like that option with the approval. This would result in the loss of some parking on the ground level. He showed the Board a rendering explaining what the roof of the theater would look like and he has reviewed it with Fred Reeder. The entrance to the theater would be on the corner of Depot Street and people would walk up the stairs to the entrance on the second level. They have been in contact with Larry Bartlett about the lighting and will need to return to the Board with the specifics for developer related signs.

Ms. Benson stated that she is concerned with the proposed arch and the building identification, and that it may take away from the village. With this rendering it is like part of the village, but if changes were made, she would like the applicant to return to the Board with a specific design.

Mr. Whitmore asked about the stormwater system and if there was a separator for the water going in to the system. Mr. Cole stated that it is part of the design and is required by code, but the details have not been submitted at this point. Mr. Conway added that they have reviewed the plans with Albert Presgraves and Tom Allen. The garage will be internally draining and tied into the sanitary sewer system. Mr. Whitmore stated that he has talked to the Fire Chief, but has concerns about the garage and the ventilation system, specifically what would happen in the case of a fire due to the amount of smoke and the high toxicity level. Mr. Cole stated that there are two mechanical vents on the Main Street side of the structure which go through the roof of the retail above.

Mr. Whitmore / Ms. Benson moved to open the public hearing. Vote: 5 Ayes / 0 Nays

Gary Vogel, attorney for Grove Property Trust, noted that he sent a letter to the Board (dated 02/12/07) and spoke at the last meeting. His client has issues with the loading dock and on Mill Street and feels that the project does not meet the standards for a loading dock. The developer has made some good efforts to address the concerns for the loading dock, such as adding restrictions on delivery times, but if trucks get held up, driver may not adhere to the time limitations and therefore the hours of operation should be added as a condition of approval of if it becomes an issue, the Town could enforce it. His client has an issue with the size of the trucks and the proposal to limit it to a WB-40 which is a semi trailer that has a 40-foot trailer. This would be a large truck for Mill Street due to the narrow entrance and steep grade. He suggested that there should also be limits on truck size, so that the largest truck allowed would be the largest non tractor trailer. There should also be a condition of approval that there can not be a left turn off Main Street to Mill Street. The other concern is that the proposed Mill Street improvements stop just before the Main Street intersection and his client feels that the improvement should be continued to Main Street.

Mr. Marstaller noted that Mr. Vogel’s client’s loading dock is across the street for the proposed one and he has seen semi’s there before. Mr. Vogel stated that there is a dock there and the issue is with deliveries and if they are asked to bring a small truck and they bring a larger truck. Most of the trucks delivering to his client are smaller trucks that park on Mill Street. He suggested that the Board could limit all trucks on Mill Street. Mr. Marstaller stated that there needed to be flexibility in the hours of delivery in case a truck is off schedule. Mr. Vogel stated that there could be some flexibility as there would be slippage from time to time, but they would need to be reminded of the delivery times. The time restriction is reasonable, but needs to be enforced.

Mr. Goodall asked why a delivery truck at 11 am on the 3rd Monday in January would be a problem. Mr. Vogel stated that the developer proposed 10am for the latest delivery time and it was a reasonable approach. If deliveries in January were later, it would not be a problem. Mr. Goodall stated that it would be a problem because if the time restriction were made a condition of approval it would be enforceable. He has a problem making such a condition when it could cause legal problems and people would be subject to fines. Mr. Vogel stated that the Town should have the opportunity to enforce the delivery restrictions if they are not working and the Codes Enforcement Officer (CEO) would have the discretion to enforce. Mr. Goodall referenced the case of Freeport vs. Greenlaw and noted that as a condition of approval, this would be a restriction which would be violated on a regular basis. He noted that the Traffic and Parking Committee would have the opportunity to post Mill Street during busy times and if such changes were made they would also apply to Mr. Vogel’s client. It is fine if the applicant wants to include the restrictions as a lease provision. Mr. Vogel suggested that the delivery restrictions could apply to a time such as Memorial Day to Labor Day, but the Town needs a way to address them. The applicant recognizes that there are traffic and parking concerns which is why restrictions have been put into the leases.

Fred Leighton, owns 8-10 Bow Street, questioned the façade of the garage along Bow Street. Mr. Cole presented a rendering to the Board. Mr. Leighton noted that there are basically no openings on that side for cars. Mr. Cole noted that there is an opening in the façade near Mr. Leighton’s property.

Mr. Goodall asked what happen at the Traffic and Parking Committee meeting when they reviewed the plan. Ms. Pelletier stated that the applicant and his representatives, including Mr. Conway, met with the Committee and the committee endorsed the plans with conditions of approval, some of which the details still need to be worked out. Mr. Marstaller asked if the Committee discussed the stacking area. Mr. Conway stated yes. Mr. Whitmore added that the Committee did discuss the traffic report, snow removal on the Mill Street sidewalks, and the pedestrian crossing on Main Street. Ms. Larson noted that the issue of the pedestrian crossing is not fully resolved and Diane Morabito is working on a proposal for it. There is an ordinance that says that it is the responsibility of the adjacent property owner to maintain the sidewalks and the Town has talked to the applicant about this. In this case, Berenson would be responsible for the sidewalk to Mill Street.

Mr. Whitmore / Mr. Donahue moved to close the public hearing. Vote: 5 Ayes / 0 Nays

Mr. Marstaller asked if the stacking area was designed for a 40 foot semi. Mr. Conway stated yes and noted that the applicant originally wanted to allow larger trucks, but there was an objection from Mr. Vogel so the applicant compromised to allow smaller trucks and the staging area allow for a continuous through lane of traffic. The situation on Depot Street is the same. MDOT liked the combination of this loading dock with Mr. Denney’s. The applicant used software to determine that the trucks would not encroach on the travel lane. He noted that there is currently a restriction on making a left turn from Main Street on to Mill Street. The intersection at Main Street and Mill Street will be modified to deter people from making the left turn. The reconstruction limit on Mill Street was the property line, but they are working with Town staff and are agreeable with making improvements up to Main Street. A WB-40 is the smallest tractor trailer truck and actually has a smaller turning radius that a smaller single truck. The delivery restriction in the leases will be from 10 am to 10 pm and this does not occur anywhere else in the village.

Al Yebba, applicant, stated the issue with deliveries would be included in all leases for the full 99-year commitment. He asked the Board to allow the developer to manage the issue in a way that they are able to implement it and that will not create legal issues. It is a rigid date and time issue, but they will do their best to manage it, noting that there are issues such as weather. They are trying to implement a restriction of 10 am to 10 pm since that will be the tenant operating hours. They are using this as a negotiating item with the leases and in most cases, tenants are agreeing to it. The restriction would apply to both loading areas.

Mr. Marstaller stated that the restriction makes sense for larger trucks, but not for smaller trucks such as UPS or FedEx. Mr. Goodall stated that the Town has the authority to implement the Traffic and Parking Ordinance which can be amended and gives flexibility. It can be enforced by the Police. Conditions of approval are civil actions which are enforced by the CEO and last for perpetuity and it seems absurd to add such a condition.

Mr. Marstaller questioned the sidewalks on the north side of Mill Street. Mr. Conway stated that pedestrians will come down a set of wide stairs made of pavers and granite curb. When they get to the loading area, there will be a pedestrian barrier to direct the pedestrian crossing at a narrow place. There will then be a sidewalk on the other side of the loading dock and there will also be a pedestrian easement through Mr. Denney’s courtyard. This is a huge improvement over pedestrian safety today.

The Board agreed that the time restriction for deliveries is something that they would not restrict for now, and that could be addressed through the Traffic and Parking Ordinance if needed. Mr. Goodall suggested amending condition of approval number 4 to state that submitted plans be “approved by the State Fire Marshall.” Ms. Benson asked about signage and if there was a way for tenants to come in with a holistic view rather than individually. Mr. Cole stated that they have made a signage allocation for each building and they review all signs before the tenants come to the Town for approval, and they will try to group them together.

Mr. Marstaller asked the Board if they were comfortable with the Town Planner doing a Staff Approval for minor changes which do not change the exterior appearance. Mr. Cole stated that for any changes that affect the appearance of the perimeter, they would return to the Board. There may be modifications to the interior layout which may affect the appearance on the internal plaza. Ms. Larson noted that there may be internal changes to the parking and changes if the theater comes in. Mr. Cole stated that the theater would change signage and the roofline. Ms. Larson stated that the elevations have been presented for a Design Review Certificate and there is some flexibility for site plans, but she wants the Board to be aware that issues may come up. Mr. Marstaller noted that Staff Approvals would apply to any changes no visible from the right-of-way.

Ms. Benson stated that she has concern for, and would like to know about any changes on the interior that would affect the overall amount of public space. Mr. Cole noted that on the elevations, there could be some changes to the tenant faces due to the actual amount of area leased (ie: some may get wider or narrower), and there is a small area on the plaza where the notch is that could be changed, but otherwise it is fixed. They want the plaza to be an inviting and a comfortable space. Ms. Benson stated that it seems reasonable.

Mr. Whitmore stated that when the applicant is redoing Depot Street, if they go by any businesses whose roof drains are connected into the sewer, they should separate them out.

Design Review Ordinance: Chapter 22 Section VII.C.
1. Scale of the Building.
The building will contain a two-story garage with a plaza level including retail, restaurant, or office space on the top level and in the surrounding buildings. The building has been designed to fit into the natural grade of the site and appears much smaller on the Main Street side than the Depot Street side due to the 30 foot grade change. The scale of the building is also broken up with the use of various siding materials and varying rooflines. The design is sensitive to the existing Mallet building and has been designed so that the new structure does not overshadow the Mallet building. The pavilions on the plaza level will be low in height so that the portions of the building behind them will still be visible.

2. Height.
The building has been designed to fit into the natural grade of the site and appears much smaller on the Main Street side than the Depot Street side due to the 30 foot grade change. The building blends on each side with the height of the abutting properties. The structure is within the height requirements of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance.

3. Proportion of Building's Front Facade.
The building will have 3 front facades; facing Main Street, Mill Street, and Depot Street. The facades have been designed to blend with the abutting buildings on each side. The use of various window and siding types and styles help minimize the proportions of the front facades.

4. Rhythm of Solids to Voids in Front Facades.
The designs of the façade incorporate features of the nearby buildings including the rhythm of solids to voids and help break up the expanse of the facades and blend the structure in to the existing village.

5. Proportions of Opening within the Facility.
Many different sizes and styles of windows and doors are used. Most of the windows will be rectangular in shape, however the side abutting the Mallet building does incorporate some round and arched windows tie in with the features of the arched lintels on the Mallet building. The pavilions on the plaza will be made entirely of a glass and aluminum storefront system.

6. Roof Shapes.
Most of the roof appears flat to replicate the roofline of the former Cumberland Shoe Factory building which was located on this property. The rooflines at the towers marking the points of entry and the roofline of the clock tower are slightly slanted. The pavilions will have slightly peaked roofs.

7. Relationship of Facade Materials.
The facades of the building incorporate a variety of materials which are already used in the village, including: aluminum storefront systems, fiber cement siding and trim, brick, concrete, and a metal roofing system. The surface of the plaza will be primarily brick pavers with some accent pavers.

8. Rhythm of Spaces to Building on Streets.
The front facades will extend up to the front setback as do most buildings in the village. There will be small pockets of green space throughout the development and along the streets. The plaza level will incorporate moveable planters and features such as seating and benches which create a pedestrian friendly environment.

9. Site Features.
The proposal includes a parking garage with retail, restaurant, and office space surrounding the garage and on the plaza level. There will two access points to the garage; one on Depot Street and one on Mill Street. There will be some areas of outdoor seating for the restaurants with wrought-iron railings proposed. Some fence is proposed along the Bow Street side of the building as a screening method. The plaza level will consist of brick pavers with some accent pavers. Bollards and chains will be installed on the sidewalks in front of the Main Street pedestrian entrance.



10. Signs.
The applicant has submitted a sign plan indicating general guidelines for tenant signs and details on the total square footage of signage proposed. No signage has been submitted for approval with this application and the applicant will need to return to the Board for approval of any signage including tenant signs, project identification signs, kiosk signs, off-site signage, and any associated lighting fixtures.

Conclusion: Based on these facts the Board finds that this project meets the criteria and standards of the Design Review Ordinance.

Findings of Fact: (Section 602.F. of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance)
a. Preservation of Landscape.
This site is currently developed with multiple buildings and a large parking lot. The existing buildings, with the exception of the Mallet building, will be removed. The applicant is proposing a parking garage with retail, restaurant, and office space surrounding and on the plaza level. The structure will be built into the slope of the land and due to the grade change between Main Street and Depot Street will blend well with the lay of the land and will have a compatible scale with the nearby buildings. The applicant will make improvements in the public right-of-way which will include small areas of green space. The plaza level will also provide a pedestrian friendly environment with features such as moveable planters, benches, and seats.

b. Relation of Proposed Buildings to the Environment.
The applicant has used the natural slope of the land to blend the structure in with the abutting buildings and scale of the overall village. The materials and features of the design will be visually compatible with nearby buildings. The design has been sensitive to the existing Mallet building and will incorporate some features of that building, however will still allow the building to not be overshadowed. This parcel is within the Design Review District and the existing Mallet building is Class A. The existing Class C buildings on the property will be demolished.

c. Vehicular Access.
Diane W. Morabito of Maine Traffic Resources has completed a traffic study for the project. In addition the applicant has applied to the MDOT for a Traffic Movement Permit. There will be two entry points to the garage; one on Mill Street and one on Depot Street. The applicant will continue to work closely with the Traffic and Parking Committee and Town Staff on issues pertaining to vehicular access and traffic flow. This will include some improvements in the public right-of-way such as the reconstruction of Mill and Depot Streets (from Grove Street to Bow Street), some re-striping on Bow, Main, and West Streets, and the installation of way-finding signs.

d. Parking and Circulation.
Based upon the square footage of the retail/restaurant/office space the parking requirement (for parking structures) is one space per 250 square feet. The plan as proposed includes surplus parking spaces. Diane Morabito of Maine Traffic Resources has completed a traffic study. There will be two loading areas on the property; one on Depot Street and one on Mill Street. The MDOT has recommended stacking lanes on each of these streets to allow for the delivery trucks to access the site while still maintaining traffic flow. The loading dock on Mill Street is existing, and will be shared between this project and the abutting property. The existing conditions will be improved by adding a truck staging area on the north side of Mill Street. The staging area is in the public right-of-way and may be used by other store owners. The leases for tenants in this complex will contain limits on loading including no loading between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. The size of trucks will also be restricted to a maximum of WB-40. The applicant will be making off site improvements in the right-of-way, to the roads and sidewalks, which will further improve both pedestrian and vehicular circulation. A new sidewalk on the north side of Mill Street will provide for a separation for pedestrian traffic. The applicant will continue to work closely with the Traffic and Parking Committee and Town Staff on issues pertaining to parking and circulation.

e. Surface Water Drainage.
The applicant has submitted stormwater plans which have been reviewed by the Town Engineer (see memo dated 02-21-07). He does recommend a change to the plan; this has been added as a condition of approval. The applicant is also required to obtain a Site Location Permit from the DEP and the plans will be reviewed as part of that review. The Town Engineer has recommended that the applicant and the Town of Freeport enter into a Stormwater Facilities Maintenance Agreement to be recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds.

f. Utilities.
The applicant is proposing underground connections to the telephone and electric utilities. The project will be connected to the public water and sewer system. The Sewer District has reviewed the preliminary plans and in a letter dated 12-27-06 describes improvements to the sewer lines that will be required. The District does have the capacity to handle the sewer flows from the project. The applicant will need to receive final written approval from the Freeport Water District and the Freeport Sewer Districts for connections to the public utilities and for any improvements proposed to the water and sewer lines.

g. Advertising Features.
The applicant has submitted a sign plan indicating general guidelines for tenant signs and details on the total square footage of signage proposed. No signage has been submitted for approval with this application and the applicant will need to return to the Board for approval of any signage including tenant signs, project identification signs, kiosk signs, off-site signage, and any proposed lighting.



h. Special Features.
There will be underground propane tanks located on the Depot Street side of the building. The location of this tank was approved by the Fire Chief. Solid waste will be stored inside of the building. There will be two loading areas on the property; one on Depot Street and one on Mill Street. The MDOT has recommended stacking lanes on each of the streets to allow for the delivery trucks to access the site while still maintaining traffic flow. The loading areas will be screened with landscaping. The applicant will be making significant off site improvements and will continue to work with the Traffic and Parking Committee and Town Staff on the details of these improvements.

i. Exterior Lighting.
The applicant has submitted detailed lighting specifications for all lighting fixtures on the exterior of the project and for the interior of the garage. A photometric plan for the plaza level has been completed and the applicant will be submitting a photometric plan for the interior of the garage. All lighting details will need to be reviewed and approved for compliance with the standards of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance and to ensure that a safe and adequate level of illumination is proposed for inside the garage, by the Town’s peer reviewer, Larry Bartlett. Based upon his review, if changes are needed to either the fixture types or the plans, the applicant may be required to return to the Board.

j. Emergency Vehicle Access.
All Public Safety Department Heads have reviewed the plans. As conditions of approval, and at the request of Department Heads, the applicant will be required to submit copies of fire alarm plans and sprinkler system plans. In addition, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant will provide the Town of Freeport with two hose packs which are compatible with the installed standpipes. The entire project will be monitored with security speakers and cameras. This will allow security personnel to communicate with people at the site.

k. Landscaping.
The applicant has submitted a detailed landscaping plan and lot coverage plan for the property. A variety of plantings are used, but remain consistent throughout the project. There will also be some moveable planters with seating on the plaza level. Based upon feedback from the Freeport Historical Society, the applicant has added some daylilies and spring bulbs to the gardens abutting the Mallet building. The applicant does submit a lot coverage plan indicating that they do meet the requirement of the ordinance for maximum impervious area coverage of 90%.

l. Environmental Consideration. A site plan shall not be approved unless it meets the following criteria:
This property is not within the Marine Waterfront District or the Shoreland Zone. The Stormwater Management and Erosion Control plans have been reviewed by the Town Engineer (memo dated 02-21-07). He has suggested one change to the plan which has been added as a condition of approval. The building will be connected to the public sewer system and public water system. This parcel is in the Design Review District. The applicant needs written approval from the DEP for a Modification to the Site Location of Development Permit. Obtaining written approval from the DEP prior to any site work has been added as a condition of approval.

Conclusion: Based on these facts the Board finds that this project meets the criteria and standards of Section 602 Site Plan Review.

Mr. Goodall / Mr. Whitmore moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board approve the printed Findings of Fact, Design Review Certificate, and Site Plan for Berenson Associates for the Village Center Project on Depot Street, to be built substantially as proposed, site plan dated 11/22/06, revised 02/21/07, finding that it meets the standards of the Section 602 of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance and the standards of the Freeport Design Review Ordinance, with the following Conditions of Approval:
1) This approval incorporates by reference all supporting plans that amend the previously approved plans submitted by the applicant and his/her representatives at Project Review Board meetings and hearings on the subject application to the extent that they are not in conflict with other stated conditions.
2) Prior to any site work, the applicant do the following:
A. Establish a performance guarantee in an amount of to be approved by the Town Engineer, to cover the cost of all site improvements, in a form acceptable to the Town Attorney.
B. Pay to the Town of Freeport, a non-refundable administrative fee of approximately $18,000.00.
C. Set up an escrow account in the amount of approximately $18,000.00 to cover the cost of inspection of site improvements by the Town Engineer.
D. Enter into a Maintenance Agreement for a Stormwater Management System to be recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds.
E. Revise the Stormwater Plans as requested by the Town Engineer, Albert Presgraves, in his memo dated 02/21/07.
F. Obtain written approval from:
a. DEP for an amendment to the Site Location Permit;
b. MDOT for approval of the Traffic Movement Permit;
c. Freeport Water District for connection to the public utility and
for any improvements proposed to the water lines.
d. Freeport Sewer District for connection to the public utility and for
any improvements proposed to the sewer lines.
G. Submit copies of recorded easement(s) with the abutting property owner,
George Denney, for the loading dock improvements and for pedestrian/vehicular access over the property.
H. Obtain written approval from the Freeport Department of Public Works for an
Entrance Permit and Street Opening Permit.
3) Continue to work with the Traffic and Parking Committee and Town Staff to resolve the outstanding traffic and parking issues identified at the Traffic and Parking Committee meeting.
4) Submit copies of Life Safety System plans, including ventilation, approved by the
State Fire Marshall.
5) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant will provide the
Town of Freeport with two hose packs which are compatible with the installed standpipes.
6) The applicant and tenants will need to return to the Board for approval of any
proposed signage, including awnings and lighting fixtures.
7) Prior to construction of the buildings, and at the expense of the applicant, the lighting plans for the entire complex be reviewed and approved by Larry Bartlett, the Town’s peer reviewer.
8) The applicant obtain approval from the Freeport Town Council for the required amendments to the Traffic and Parking Ordinance.
9) Prior to the closing of the lot for construction, LL Bean must enter into a parking lease for the 21 space parking deficit as a result of this project.
10) Any substantial elevation changes, as determined by the town planning staff, that can be seen from a public way, shall be submitted to the Project Review Board for approval, other changes can be approved by the Planning Staff.
Vote: 5 Ayes / 0 Nays

ITEM IV: Subdivisions – Conceptual Reviews
Freeport Heights Retirement Community – Old County Road
The applicant is presenting conceptual plans for a retirement community on Old County Road. The proposal includes adding an 83-unit lodge and 75 duplex units to the existing facilities. This project requires both Subdivision and Site Plan Review. The location of the Retirement Community Overlay District was approved by the Freeport Town Council in March 2001. Tax Assessor Map 26, Lots 38A, 38B, and 38C. First Atlantic Corporation, applicant and owner; Mark Burnes, Foreside Architects, representative.

Ms. Larson explained that the Board held a site walk on February 3, 2007. Based upon comments made at the last meeting, the plan has been revised. The number of overall units has stayed the same, however there has been an increase in the number of cottage style units (from 58 to 75) and a decrease in the number of units in the lodge (from 100 to 83). The general layout has been tweaked slightly to have the units be closer together with a more neighborhood feel. The applicant has still managed to retain the existing natural vegetation abutting the property lines. Another change to the plan is the elimination of the second entrance off Old County Road Extension. Only one additional entrance is proposed at this time in the same location as approved on the original conceptual plan. The applicant will need to work with the Freeport Department of Public Works on the location of the new road and provide information indicating that there is adequate site distance. The applicant has some preliminary building elevations which will be available at the meeting.

The applicant will need to submit preliminary stormwater, drainage, and erosion control plans to the Town Engineer for review as part of the preliminary submission. The applicant should also submit updated information on topography and wetlands.

Tom Emery LA, Land Use Consultants, stated that the conceptual plan was approved in 2001 when the zoning was approved. He gave an overview of the property location and noted that the entrance has been relocated due to concerns brought up by an abutter. They have had a pre-application meeting with the DEP. The total number of units proposed will not change, but the types of units might. They are leaning towards having more cottages and fewer units in the lodge.

Mark Burnes, representative, presented a building elevation of the lodge and explained that the number of units in the lodge has been reduce from 100 to 83 and therefore portions of the lodge will now be two-story and the total area will be about 80,000 square feet. He presented the Board with an image of a cottage noting that they will have a similar roof as the lodge.

The Board asked about the types of cottages and illumination. Mr. Emery stated that some of the cottages will be single units, but most will be duplexes. There will be lighting at critical areas and intersections, but not on a regular basis which would be over-illuminating and appear too commercial.

Mr. Donahue noted that the proposed parking near the lodge is a big improvement from the previous plan. Mr. Goodall asked if the lodge has a medical facility. Craig Coffin, Chief Operating Officer, stated that there is no space where medical procedures are done, but they do provide some medical care to residents and there is a wellness center and they do provide home healthcare services. This facility will have all levels of care since there are existing facilities.

Mr. Marstaller asked about the number of proposed entrances. Mr. Coffin stated that there are two entrances proposed; one on each end. They eliminated the entrance in the middle which was a concern to the neighbor and eliminating it enhances the plan. Ms. Benson stated that there may be some buffering concerns at the entrances and they should try to take into consideration the concerns of neighbors.

Mr. Marstaller asked about the general layout of the cottages and the footprint noting that they have done a nice job tightening up the development and making it more like a community. Mr. Emery stated that the issue the Board had with the original plan was that it was too linear and sprawling. The site is linear, but they did try to cluster the units together into little neighborhoods, so the footprint may seem slightly larger. There is a minimum of 20 feet between cottages. They tried to take advantage of the natural features of the site and the solar orientation. Mr. Goodall asked about the square footage of the cottage rendering. Mr. Coffin stated that the cottage shown is a single unit with a one car garage and it is about 1,500 to 1,600 square feet.

Bob Santomenna, resident, asked for clarification on what a continuous care retirement community, such as this one, is and how it works. Mr. Coffin stated a continuous care retirement community offers all levels of services on one campus including a nursing facility, assisted living, congregate care, and independent living cottages.

Lesa Andreasen, resident of Pine Street, stated that there are not many people here tonight who were also here for the discussion of the proposed retirement community on Pine Street, and when that proposal was being discussed, there was no mention of this retirement community on Old County Road. There are two retirement community projects; one on a perfect site and the other which people have put a lot of time and money into. This project was never mentioned during discussions of the community on Pine Street, even though it was approved in 2001, and many people feel fooled.

Mr. Whitmore noted his concern that such communities would have on the Town’s Fire/Rescue teams due to the age of the residents. Mr. Coffin stated that typically these retirement communities contract with a 3rd party ambulance company and use the Town of Freeport’s services only in extreme emergencies when they can not get someone there timely. This is what they do with the existing Hawthorne House and Freeport Place facilities. He noted that this would be a for profit project and therefore substantial taxes will be paid from this project.

Mr. Donahue / Mr. Whitmore moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board finds that the layout of the Conceptual plan for the proposed Freeport Heights Retirement Community includes that the appropriate areas have been designated for development and for open space. Vote: 5 Ayes / 0 Nays

Freeport Living Retirement Community – Stagecoach Road
The applicant is presenting conceptual plans for a retirement community on Stagecoach Road / Pine Street. The proposal includes adding 155 living units in a variety of housing types, a lodge, and amenity building. This project requires both Subdivision and Site Plan Review. The location of the Retirement Community Overlay District was approved by the Freeport Town Council in October 2006. Tax Assessor Map 23, Lots 43, 45, 49, & 64. Freeport Living LLC, applicant; Terry DeWan, Terrence DeWan and Associates, representative.

Ms. Larson explained that the Board held a site walk on February 3, 2007. Based upon comments as the site walk, the plan may be slightly revised to pull the units in closer together and the road location may be slightly, but the general areas for development and for open space will remain the same. There are some issues that the applicant will need to be working on before returning for preliminary approval. Some of the site information needs to be updated such as the topography; this may result in some slight shifting of the structures.

The following issues need to be worked out prior to preliminary approval, with any necessary documentation being included with the preliminary submission:
~ work with the Freeport Fire Department on issues for fire safety including access
from Pine Street.
~ submit preliminary stormwater, drainage, and erosion control plans to the Town
Engineer.
~ work out details on the status on the NET Easement existing on the property and
the status of Old County Road (aka Old County Road Extension).
~ preliminary building elevation drawings so that the applicant can get feedback to
proceed with the final building designs.
~ issues of internal pedestrian and vehicular circulation including pedestrian access to the
lodge.

Ms. Larson stated that some of the buffer area will be offered up as a public conservation easement with trails, but they still needed to work out who takes the space. During review of the Overlay District by the Town Council, Councilor White recommended that the developers place a conservation easement on the property that is zoned Resource Protection (RP) and Medium Density Residential (MDR) to prevent future development in these zones. If the applicant is going to be putting land in a public conservation easement, information on this should be submitted.

Mr. Wing stated that he had nothing new to add, and the applicant is looking for feedback to more forward with the plans. The locations of the buildings may move a bit depending on topography and impervious surface etc.

Mr. Goodall asked if the applicant has given more thought to pedestrian circulation. Mr. Wing stated that they would propose a system of trails and sidewalks, with details to still be worked out. They would also create pedestrian ways to Route One and the commercial area so that people can take advantage of those services.

Mr. Donahue asked about the lodge. Mr. Wing stated that the building would be 2 ½ stories with a basement and it would have a gable which would give it a more traditional look. They do have more land than they originally thought, due to a recent boundary survey and decreased areas of slopes and wetlands and therefore there has been a change to the net residential acreage.

Ms. Benson questioned the unit sizes. Mr. Wing stated that due to market research, they need to provide a variety of housing types at a variety of prices. The units will be 650 square feet and up, and some units may have a garage. There will be different types of apartments and there will be green houses which will have 7-10 adults who each have their own room and bathroom.

Mr. Marstaller questioned buffering and the visibility of the units and the lodge. Mr. Wing stated that there have been changes since the original plan to consolidate units, incorporate community gardens, and to maintain the existing tree-line. The layout tries to take advantage of the natural character of the site, as much as possible. They have done balloon tests for the height of the lodge at 35 feet and have been unable to see them. The lodge will sit nicely in the hill, but they cannot guarantee that it will not be seen from somewhere in town. He noted that there is an existing road to the water tower and they will need to talk to the Water District to see what they want to do. Mr. Donahue asked if the tower was on the ridge and noted that the towers sometimes get over-filled. Mr. Wing stated that it is located pretty close to the high-point on the ridge.

Mr. Wing noted that they are still working on the trails and the details with the Freeport Conservation Trust. Mr. Donahue asked how the building line along the open space was determined. Mr. Wing stated that the design keeps the buildings out of the Resource Protection II District (RP-II) and they may move the buildings to consolidate them more and moved them further away from the RP-II line. He thinks that having two retirement communities is a great asset for the town and thinks that they are both great projects for the town. Ms. Benson noted that people still have concerns about the proposal on this site and older people. This is a great site and the proposal is within the standards of the ordinance. Mr. Marstaller noted that the developer has done a good job of taking a dramatic site and keeping it separate, yet close to amenities.

Mr. Donahue stated that he would like to see details on the proposed entrance on Route One. Mr. Wing stated that a traffic study, including trip generation has been done, and the project does not trigger the need for a permit from the Maine Department of Transportation. There is adequate site distance. Mr. Benson asked about the property line closest to Route One. Mr. Wing stated that the property line is to the edge of the right-of-way on Stagecoach Road and the parcel also abuts Old County Road which they need to resolve the status of.

Mr. Whitmore / Mr. Donahue moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board finds that the layout of the Conceptual plan for the proposed Freeport Living Retirement Community includes that the appropriate areas have been designated for development and for open space. Vote: 5 Ayes / 0 Nays

ITEM V: Persons wishing to address the Board on non-agenda items.
None.

ITEM VI: Adjournment.
Meeting adjourned at 9:53 p.m.

Recorded by Caroline Crean Pelletier