01/29 -
FREEPORT PROJECT REVIEW BOARD MINUTES
FREEPORT TOWN HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 11, 2007
6:30 p.m.
PRESENT: David Marstaller (Chairperson), Erik Anderson, Jason Donahue, Cliff Goodall, James Gorman, Dale Whitmore, and Donna Larson (Town Planner). Jane Benson was excused.
CALL TO ORDER: Mr. Marstaller called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m.
ITEM I: Approval of the minutes from the March 14, 2007 and March 21, 2007 Project Review Board
meetings.
Mr. Anderson / Mr. Donahue moved to waive the reading of the minutes from the March 14, 2007 Project Review Board meeting and to accept them as printed. Vote: 6 Ayes / 0 Nays
Mr. Whitmore / Mr. Gorman moved to waive the reading of the minutes from the March 21, 2007 Project Review Board meeting and to accept them as printed. Vote: 4 Ayes / 0 Nays / 2 Abstentions (Anderson, Gorman)
ITEM II: Informational Exchange
Ms. Larson informed the Board that she has done a Staff Approval for Acorn for a new sign. She also stated that the DEP has been to the YMCA site and agrees with the proposed stormwater design. The DEP has not issued an approval yet.
ITEM III: Design Review
Painter’s Parlor Corp – 128 Main Street
The applicant is seeking approval to replace the existing brick ramp and stairs with a granite ramp and stairs and to add a bench in front of Sherman’s Books. No other changes are proposed. Class C Property. Tax Assessor Map 11, Lot 91. Painter’s Parlor Corp, applicant and owner. Daniel Ucci, representative.
Ms. Larson explained that the existing railing will remain. A site plan indicating the location of the improvements has been submitted. The applicant is also seeking approval to install a granite bench in front of the main entrance. Dan Ucci, representative, added that there is a maintenance and safety issue with the mortar between the bricks deteriorating. The granite will match the existing granite used on the property, but will be slabs. The bench will be located in the alcove created by the railing. The bench will be 4 feet long by 20 inches in depth.
Design Review Ordinance: Chapter 22 Section VII.C.
1. Scale of the Building.
The scale of the building will not be altered.
2. Height.
The height of the building will not be altered.
3. Proportion of Building's Front Facade.
The proportions of the front façade will not be altered.
4. Rhythm of Solids to Voids in Front Facades.
The rhythm of solids to voids in the front facades will not be altered.
5. Proportions of Opening within the Facility.
Proportions of openings within the facility will not be altered.
6. Roof Shapes.
The roof shape will not be altered.
7. Relationship of Facade Materials.
The relationship of façade materials will not be altered.
8. Rhythm of Spaces to Building on Streets.
The rhythm of spaces to building on the streets will not be significantly altered.
9. Site Features.
The applicant is proposing to change the material of the existing steps and ramp in front of Sherman’s Books from brick and granite to all granite. The existing railing will remain. A new granite bench is also proposed.
10. Signs.
No new signs are proposed.
Conclusion: Based on these facts the Board finds that this project meets the criteria and standards of the Design Review Ordinance.
Mr. Anderson / Mr. Whitmore moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board approve the printed Finding of Facts and a Design Review Certificate for Painter’s Parlor Inc. for replacement granite steps and walkway and a new bench at 128 Main Street, to be built substantially as proposed, submission dated 03/19/07, finding that it meets the standards of the 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.
Vote: 6 Ayes / 0 Nays
ITEM IV: Final Approvals
Irene Howe Subdivision - Minor Amendment to a Right-of-Way
The applicant is seeking approval for a minor amendment to the previously approved Irene Howe Subdivision on Upper Mast Landing Road. The amendment would reduce the width of a portion of an existing right-of-way to 30 feet in width. No new lots are proposed. Tax Assessor Map 20, Lot 28-A. Cindy Berliner, owner and applicant; Shelly Brunelle, Deluca Hoffman, representative.
Ms. Larson explained that the amendment would reduce the width of 200 feet of an existing right-of-way from 50-feet to 30-feet, as now permitted by the ordinance. The existing driveway will be out of the right-of-way in places; however, that does not violate the Ordinance unless the driveway is no longer on the applicant’s property.
Shelly Brunelle, representative, stated that this four lot subdivision was created off Upper Mast Landing in 1995. They are proposing a reduced right-of-way width since the standards have changed. The driveway will be relocated in the right-of-way. No other changes are proposed.
There were no comments from the public.
Mr. Anderson / Mr. Gorman moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board move to approve the proposed right-of-way amendment to Lot 28-A of the Irene Howe Subdivision, to be built substantially as proposed, plan dated March 20, 2007, with the following condition 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.
Vote: 6 Ayes / 0 Nays
Wireless Telecommunications Facility – Old Brunswick Rd
The applicant is seeking Site Plan Approval for a new 150-foot tall wireless telecommunications facility on a parcel of land on US Route One / Old Brunswick Road. Tax Assessor Map 18, Lots 4 & 10. Navigator Properties, LLC., applicant; Steven and Valerie Taylor, owners; Christopher Ciolfi, representative.
Ms. Larson explained that the ordinance is designed to encourage co-location of antennas before a new structure is built. The applicant has one carrier who will be locating on the new facility and is working with other carriers to allow for co-location. The ordinance allows for a tower for a single carrier to only be built to 100 feet in height. The applicant is proposing a tower at the height of 150 feet, with the understanding that there will be a condition of approval which will only allow the applicant to build the facility to this height once proof of a co-location is submitted to the Town of Freeport. The tower has been designed to accommodate up to five carriers, plus the municipal whip antennas. The ordinance requires co-located towers to be able to structurally hold 3 sets of antennas. A co-located tower must have more than one antenna array. The applicant has offered antenna space to the Freeport Public Safety Departments, however that does not count as a second antenna array.
The applicant is proposing to install a galvanized steel monopole structure which will have a weathered appearance. The applicant has stated that this finish would have less of a visual impact than a painted structure. The proposal also includes the approval of the TMobile antennas. These antennas will be made of fiberglass with either a tan or off-white, flat finish. Photos of examples have been submitted.
There is an existing road on the property which will be modified. A road width of 12’ is proposed and this width should adequately provide access to the site which will only be accessed occasionally by the carriers. This does require a waiver, as the ordinance requires a driveway width of 26 feet. There will be a gate at the entrance. The applicant has received approval from the MDOT for the Driveway Entrance Permit (dated 03-30-07). All Town of Freeport public safety department heads have reviewed and approved the plan including the gated access.
The project does not require any permits from the DEP. The applicant has agreed to follow the DEP Maine Erosion and Sedimentation Control BMPs. As part of the NEPA notification process, the applicant has hired a consultant to let various public agencies review the project. The applicant has not yet received a response from the Maine Historic Preservation Commission or the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife.
The applicant submitted supplemental documentation at the last meeting including a report from a PE describing the tower design, its capacity and the structural integrity; documentation of review by the FAA; and. proof of financial capacity. All submission requirements of the ordinance have been met and there are no outstanding items with this application.
Mr. Chris Ciolfi, representative, stated that they have met with the Public Safety Department Heads and they have indicated that they would like the antenna at 150 feet. They thought at the last meeting that they could go to 150 feet because there are two users and the Ordinance says users, not FCC carriers. They are talking with carriers other than T-Mobile, and the first carrier gets the preferential height and if they can only build to 100 feet to start, then they will relocate the antenna when they can build to 150 feet. They have received approval from the DOT for the driveway entrance which will need to be relocated about 60 feet to the south; this will be done during construction and is not shown on the plans. He presented the Board with images showing what the galvanized tower would look like. Mr. Ciolfi asked about the required impact fee. Ms. Larson stated that this is a one time fee and in this case would be based upon half of the total road length of 1,200 feet.
Mr. Marstaller asked if the Fire Chief had comments on the access road. Mr. Ciolfi stated that he talked to him about the road and gated access and noted that it would not be plowed. He has a letter from the Fire Chief stating that he is okay with the road.
Mr. Goodall referenced the Zoning Ordinance and the section pertaining to co-location and the design of the tower. The ordinance references wireless telecommunication users and not radio users, therefore the Board can only approve a tower to 100 feet unless there are multiple wireless telecommunication users. The definition of wireless telecommunication users references public or private users, which the Town is. The definition of wireless telecommunication structures includes multiple types of towers and transmissions. The Board agreed that there is not a limit to wireless telecommunication users. Mr. Ciolfi stated that they are having discussions with two carriers not and have a written agreement with the Freeport Police and Freeport Fire Departments. Mr. Anderson suggested that wording would need to be added to the motion if the Fire Department and Police Department were going to be considered users. The Board agreed and decided to clarify the approval by referencing the definition of a co-locator in the conditions of approval.
Mr. Donahue indicated his preference for the lattice style tower over the monopole style. Mr. Ciolfi explained the size differences between the two options, noting that the applicant is fine with either option and they are both structurally designed based on the number of antenna and factors such as wind and ice. They are designed to the same integrity, just look different. The Board agreed that they wanted the lattice style tower.
Findings of Fact: (Section 602.F. of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance)
a. Preservation of Landscape.
The site is currently wooded. The tower will be set on the ridge, however set back from the road and screened by the existing tree line. The applicant has done a balloon test to evaluate the visual impact of the tower from various points in Town and determined that the tower will not be visible from many locations in Town. The applicant is proposing a galvanized metal finish on the tower which will have less of a visual impact on the surroundings.
b. Relation of Proposed Buildings to the Environment.
In addition to the tower, small equipment cabinets will be installed however will not be visible from the public right-of-way. This parcel is not within the Design Review District.
c. Vehicular Access.
The existing driveway will be altered to allow for adequate access to the site. The applicant is proposing a 12-foot wide driveway which does required a waiver of Section 512.D.10 of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance which requires a driveway of 26 feet for non-residential uses. The driveway will be gated to limit access to the site to those who are authorized. The State of Maine Department of Transportation approved the Driveway Entrance Permit (dated 03/30/07).
d. Parking and Circulation.
No parking is proposed or required. The site will only be accessed by service personnel.
e. Surface Water Drainage.
Due to the nature and use of the development, Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plans were not submitted. The applicant has agreed to follow the DEP Maine Erosion and Sedimentation Control BMPs.
f. Utilities.
Only electric and telephone utilities will be connected to the site. The site will not be connected to the Public Water or Public Sewer System.
g. Advertising Features.
No signs are proposed.
h. Special Features.
The applicant is proposing a 100 foot monopole tower or a 150-foot monopole tower if multiple carriers co-locate on the facility. The tower and accessory facilities will be located in a 70’ x 70’ area which will be enclosed by a fence. This area is setback from the road and will be screened by the existing tree line.
i. Exterior Lighting.
No exterior lighting is proposed.
j. Emergency Vehicle Access.
All Public Safety Department Heads have reviewed the plans.
k. Landscaping.
No additional landscaping is proposed. Clearing on the site will be limited to the 70’x70’ area that the applicant is leasing from the property owner.
l. Environmental Consideration.
The parcel is not within the Marine Waterfront District or the Shoreland Zone. No wastewater will result from the use. The applicant needs to obtain written approval, prior to any sitework, from the Maine Historic Preservation Commission stating that no archeological or historical resources will be negatively impacted by the development. The applicant has also contacted the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife about the proposed project and is awaiting a response.
Conclusion: Based on these facts the Board finds that this project meets the criteria and standards of Section 602 Site Plan Review.
Mr. Donahue / Mr. Whitmore moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board approve a waiver of Section 512.D.10 to allow the driveway to have a width of 12 feet, instead of the 26 feet required by the ordinance, in that the Fire Chief has agreed with the width and based upon the nature and use of the driveway, the driveway should adequately provide access to the facility. Vote: 6 Ayes / 0 Nays
Mr. Goodall / Mr. Whitmore moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board approve the printed Findings of Fact and Site Plan for the Navigator Properties, for a new lattice style self supporting telecommunication facility to be built on Route One North / Old Brunswick Road to be built substantially as proposed, site plan dated 02/16/07, finding that it meets the standards of the Section 602 of the Freeport Zoning 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) This approval allows the applicant to build the tower to a height of 100 feet which is the maximum height allowed for a single user, unless written proof of co-location with another user as defined for a wireless telecommunication tower in the Ordinance, is submitted to the Town of Freeport in which case the applicant may built the tower to a height of 150 feet.
3) All additional users looking to locate antenna on the structure, will need to return to the Staff Review Board for approval as required by the Freeport Zoning Ordinance.
4) Prior to any site work, the applicant do the following:
A. Establish a performance guarantee in the amount of $79,450.00, 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 the amount of $1,589.00.
C. As set forth in Section 528.F of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance, prior to construction, the applicant submit a bond, in the amount of $10,000.00 covering the cost of removal of the TMobile antennas and accessory facilities.
D. As set forth in Section 528.F of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance, the applicant submit a bond, in the amount of $30,000.00 covering the cost of removal of the tower and all accessory facilities.
E. Set up an escrow account, in the amount to of $700.00 to cover the cost of inspection of site improvements by the Town Engineer.
F. Obtain a building permit from the Freeport Codes Enforcement Department.
G. When a building permit is issued, pay a pavement maintenance impact fee based upon half of the total road length of 1,200 feet and current impact fee effective when the building permit is issued.
H. The applicant receive written approval from the Maine Historic Preservation Commission for the impact of the project of archeological and historical resources.
Vote: 6 Ayes / 0 Nays
Mr. Marstaller asked about the time frame for the project. Mr. Ciolfi stated that they would start to clear the site next month and then apply for a building permit to begin construction in June or July.
Mr. Anderson and Mr. Gorman recused themselves from the review of the next item and stepped down and joined the public.
Freeport Village Park – Bow Street
The applicant is seeking Site Plan approval for a new 6 acre park on Bow Street. There will be a small 9-car parking area which will be accessed from Bow Street. The plans include a trail system, open space, and picnic shelters. Tax Assessor Map 13, Lot 82 & portion of lot 81B. LL Bean, Inc, applicant and owner; Stephen B. Mohr, Mohr and Seredin, representative.
Ms. Larson stated that although the plans do indicate the possibility of a larger park in the future, the applicant is only seeking approval for the improvements on the property that they own. This project is within the Freeport Village Overlay District, requires Site Plan Review and Design Review.
The parking is intended to be for passive recreation and will include a series of trails, picnic pavilion, restroom, and small parking lot. Most of the wooded area on the site will be retained and the new structures will be located in the area of the property that is already cleared.
The applicant is proposing to install a trail system throughout the property which will include a series of bridges. The bridges will be 6-8 feet in width, or timber construction, and have handrails as required by code. The bridges will cross the ravine and stream and will require DEP approval for a Permit-by-Rule; the applicant has already applied and obtained approval for this. The trail near Bow Street will be paved with a bituminous concrete while the remainder of the trails will have a gravel base and a super-humus surface. Trail width will vary from 4-6 feet.
Structures, including the pavilion, restroom, information area, picnic tables, and signs will be built of white cedar and red oak and will have a rustic look. All wood will be treated with an oil and have a natural look. Details are included in the submission. There will be some security lighting within the park. The picnic area and restroom will have ceiling mounted fixtures which will be motion censored. The fixtures are not full cut-off but will be ceiling mounted and not on constantly, and therefore should not create light pollution.
There will be a small 8-car parking area which will be accessed from Bow Street. The driveway will be 20 feet in width with an 18-foot one-way loop road off which parking will be provided. There will be additional overflow parking in the shoulder which will be grass over gravel. The applicant is proposing a surface of reclaimed asphalt. This lot will not be plowed in the winter and therefore there are no maintenance issues with the use of the reclaimed surface.
The applicant has submitted Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plans. They are proposing two water quality basins to treat stormwater. The Town Engineer has reviewed and approved the plans (memo dated 04/11/07). The applicant will install underground electric, and will be connected to the water and sewer systems. The applicant has obtained written approval from the Freeport Sewer District (letter dated 04/10/07). The Freeport Water District has stated that they have ample capacity to serve the project, however will require a change to the plan (letter dated 04/04/07).
Neighbors raised concerns at the last meeting about buffering. The applicant has added additional plantings to the plan and is proposing a 4-foot high wood and wire fence along the property line abutting the Blackstone property. The fence will have cedar posts and 4”x4” black PVC coated wire installed on the inside of the fence. The applicant will address buffering issues for the other portion of the property, as such time that those plans are presented.
The applicant is requesting the following waivers:
1) Section 512.D.10 – to allow a two-way driveway width of 20 feet instead of the 26 feet
required by the ordinance.
2) Section 514.A.6 - to allow the aisle width of 18 feet instead of the 24 feet required by the
ordinance.
3) Section 602.D.2.g – to allow the applicant to submit a medium intensity soil survey and not
require that a soil map by a PE or CSS be submitted.
4) Section 512.D.7 – to allow a portion of the driveway to be located in the 10-foot side setback (along the Taggart/Girr property).
Although this parcel is within the Design Review District, only a limited portion of the development will actually be visible from the right-of-way, therefore requiring Design Review. This includes the driveway and parking area, fence, sign, and front side of the restroom. The existing buildings on the property are Class C and therefore a demolition certificate is not required.
Steve Mohr, representative, stated that on the property line along the Blackstone property, they are proposing a four foot high fence which will maintain the rustic look but also keep people from walking through to the abutting property. The fence will go for a length of 150 feet and there will be wire between the rails to keep people from cutting through. They will also be adding plantings which will grow through the fence and create a dense visual barrier. They have also added a buffer to the rear of the Taggart property. Bitimous pavement has been added to a portion of the trail coming from Bow Street. They have requested a few waivers and are also asking for the flexibility to work with staff in case they need to shift the location of the pavilion slightly.
The Board asked about the plantings shown near the overflow parking. Mr. Mohr stated that plantings have been added along the side of the entrance but they will still maintain a strip for parking for four overflow parking spaces.
Mr. Goodall questioned the ownership of the park, the maintenance endowment, and management. Mr. Mohr stated that LL Bean purchased the property and acquired the land and will do the park improvements for both phases. When done, the developed park will be given to the Town along with an endowment which will be an independent fund to cover the annual maintenance and operational costs and capital improvements, as needed. The fund will be managed by the Town Council. The issues of the park, such as off-season parking will need to be addressed by the Town, although more parking will be proposed in the plans for the Phase II. They have talked to some abutters about buffering, and some buffering has been incorporated in to this plan. They still need to talk to the Stewarts and finalize details for a trail to the abutting Freeport Housing Trust property; both details will be incorporated in to the final plan for Phase II.
Mr. Donahue asked about the existing driveway on the property. Mr. Mohr stated that it was a deeded right-of-way over the Taggart property and only allowed for access to the use of a single family house. They will remove the driveway and discontinue the use and restore the lawn. Mr. Donahue stated that he likes the sign design but was worried about the sign being compromised with the chain blocking the road being so close, noting the importance of the placement of the posts for the chain relative to the sign being important. Mr. Mohr stated that when set, they will tuck it in tighter to the driveway.
A member of the public asked for clarification on the location of the proposed park. Mr. Mohr explained the location in proximity to the Bow Street Market, Spring Street, School Street, and the existing pond.
Design Review Ordinance: Chapter 22 Section VII.C.
1. Scale of the Building.
The restroom building will be one story in height and partially screened by plantings and therefore will blend with the surroundings. It will be located in the area of the property that is already cleared. The existing house and garage will be removed.
2. Height.
The restroom building will be one story in height.
3. Proportion of Building's Front Facade.
Due to the nature and use of the structure, it will be smaller than the neighboring buildings but will also be set back quite a distance from the other buildings and the road.
4. Rhythm of Solids to Voids in Front Facades.
The front façade of the building will be 14 feet in length with an open canopy on one end. The façade will be broken up with a series of three information boards.
5. Proportions of Opening within the Facility.
There are no openings in the façade other than the open canopy on the entrance end.
6. Roof Shapes.
The structure will have a traditional peaked roof.
7. Relationship of Facade Materials.
The building will be sided with stained cedar shingles, have a cedar shake roof, cedar posts, and the end of the wood logs will be visible.
8. Rhythm of Spaces to Building on Streets.
Due to the nature and use of the property as a park, there will be significant open space around the structure.
9. Site Features.
The driveway to the parking area and trail entrance will be off of Bow Street and both will be paved. A fence will be installed along the abutting property line and will be made of cedar wood posts with black PVC coated wire applied to the inside . The sign will be located near the entrance to the property and the existing street tree in that area will be retained.
10. Signs.
There will be one ground sign located near the entrance and visible from the right-of-way. The sign will be made of wood and will have a sign face of 8 feet in length and 2 feet in height. No illumination is proposed. There will be three information boards on the front façade of the restroom which will be shadow boxes with a wood frame and plexi-glass front.
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.
The applicant has retained existing vegetation where possible. A trail will be added through the woods, but will not result in that much clearing. Site improvements such as the driveway, parking area, restrooms, and information kiosk will be located on the portion of the property that is already developed and cleared. The existing house and garage will be removed.
b. Relation of Proposed Buildings to the Environment.
This is a Class C property in the Design Review District. The existing house and garage will be removed. There will be a restroom area, picnic area, and information kiosk located near the parking area. The remaining structures will be located throughout the park and screened from the existing tree line. All structures will be one story and small in size. Most will not be visible from the public right-of-way.
c. Vehicular Access.
The existing driveway will be removed and a new driveway will be installed off Bow Street. In a letter dated February 11, 2007, William F. Bray, P.E., stated that he has checked the site distance at the proposed entrance and it is adequate. The applicant is also proposing a pedestrian walking trail that will connect to Bow Street which will be in a separate area from vehicular traffic.
d. Parking and Circulation.
The applicant is proposing a small parking area off Bow Street that will be surfaced with reclaim and will have parking for 8 cars. There will also be overflow parallel parking along the grass and gravel shoulder that will accommodate 5 additional parking spaces. This lot will not be plowed in the winter and will remain closed to vehicular traffic.
e. Surface Water Drainage.
The Town Engineer has reviewed and approved the Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plans (see memo dated 04/11/07).
f. Utilities.
Underground electric service will be installed. The project will also be connected to the public water and public sewer systems. The applicant has obtained written approval from both the Freeport Water District (04/04/07) and the Freeport Sewer District (04/10/07) . Although the Water District does have the capacity to serve the project, they have requested a change to the utility plan.
g. Advertising Features.
There will be one ground sign located near the entrance and visible from the right-of-way. The sign will be made of wood and will have a sign face of 8 feet in length and 2 feet in height. No illumination is proposed. There will be three information boards on the front façade of the restroom which will be shadow boxes with a wood frame and plexi-glass front. There will also be signs located within the park for accessibility and directions.
h. Special Features.
The park will include a series of small structures such as a restroom building, information kiosk, picnic tables, picnic pavilions and bridges. These structures will all be relatively small in size and most will not be visible from the public right of way. There will be trash receptacles and pet waste bags located near the entrance to the park. The park will be open from dawn to dusk and the parking lot will not be plowed in the winter. There will be a chain that will be installed across the driveway to prohibit access during those times.
i. Exterior Lighting.
There will be some security lighting within the park. The picnic area and restroom will have ceiling mounted fixtures which will be motion censored. The fixtures are not full cut-off but will be ceiling mounted and not on constantly, and therefore should not create light pollution.
j. Emergency Vehicle Access.
All Public Safety Department Heads have reviewed the plans.
k. Landscaping.
Existing vegetation will be retained where possible. The applicant is proposing supplemental buffering along some property lines which will incorporate a variety of species including balsam fir, spruce, and birch trees. A fence will also be installed along the Blackstone property. The fence will have cedar posts and a black PVC covered wire on the inside.
l. Environmental Consideration.
This project is not within the Shoreland Zone or the Marine Waterfront District. The project will be connected to both the public water and sewer systems. Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plans have been submitted and reviewed by the Town Engineer. Inland Fisheries and Wildlife has reviewed the plans and determined that there are no known Significant Wildlife Habitats on the property (letter dated 03/29/07). The applicant has received approval from the Maine DEP for a Permit by Rule for the stream crossings.
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. Goodall moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board move to approve the following waivers:
- Section 602.D.2.g to not require that the applicant submit soil information through a Class C medium intensity soil survey in that this information is not usually submitted and the project will be connected to public utilities.
- Section 512.D.10 of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance requiring that a two-way driveway serving non-residential units be 26 feet in width, in that a driveway width of 20 feet is proposed and should be adequate due to the size and nature of the development.
- Section 514.A.6 of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance requiring an aisle width for one-way traffic of 24 feet, in that the applicant is proposing an aisle width of 18 feet which should be adequate due to the size and nature of the development.
- Section 512.D.7 of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance requiring a 10 foot driveway setback, to allow a small portion of the driveway to be located in the 10-foot side setback, in that the Ordinance allows for a waiver if there is an existing use or structure on the site, the driveway will be relocated further away from the property line than it currently exists, and a vegetative buffer is proposed.
Vote: 4 Ayes / 0 Nays (Anderson and Gorman recused)
Mr. Whitmore / Mr. Goodall moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board approve the printed Finding of Facts, Site Plan, and a Design Review Certificate for LL Bean Inc. for the Freeport Village Park on Bow Street, to be built substantially as proposed, site plan March 7, 2007, revised through 04/10/07, finding that it meets the standards of the Design Review Ordinance and Section 602 of the Freeport Zoning 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) Non-substantive changes may be made with Staff Approval.
Vote: 4 Ayes / 0 Nays (Anderson and Gorman recused)
Mr. Anderson rejoined the Board.
ITEM V: Conceptual Presentations
LL Bean – Parking Lot Expansion
The applicant is proposing a new 48-space parking lot on Justin’s Way. Four existing houses will be removed. Both Design Review and Site Plan Review are required. Class C properties. Tax Assessor Map 11, Lots 77, 78, 78A, & 79. LL Bean, applicant and owner; Kylie Mason, Sebago Technics, representative.
Ms. Larson explained that all four of the existing houses are Class C buildings in the Design Review District and therefore the applicant does not need Design Review approval to demolish the structures.
The parking lot layout, including landscaping and lighting features, has been designed to be similar to the existing LL Bean parking lots in the area. The lighting will match the existing illumination levels in the other lots and the same full cut-off fixtures will be used.
The applicant will need to submit stormwater management and erosion control plans to be reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer prior to returning for final approval. In addition, the project will require the applicant to obtain approval for a minor amendment to their Site Location Permit from the Maine DEP. In addition the applicant will need to submit a landscaping plan.
Two letters from abutters came in today; one is regarding the preservation of a trail which is actually not on this property but is on an abutting property and the other requests an edible border near the community gardens.
Kylie Mason, representative, stated that this is a 48 space parking lot with two curb-cuts on to Justin’s Way and some stormwater improvements. They have included a small buffer near the community gardens and will work with them on an edible fence. The lot will be next to the property where the new storage barn is located and will have pedestrian connections with the remainder of the campus. The lighting will be consistent with that of the other LL Bean parking lots and will incorporate full cut-off fixtures. Details on the location of lighting will be incorporated in to the final plan.
Mr. Goodall noted his concerns about the edible fence requested by the abutter and that this fence may not keep kids out of the parking lot. He suggested that maybe the applicant could consider a fence similar to that used on the last project. Ms. Mason stated that they could consider a fence as well as plantings.
Mr. Donahue asked about how drivers would maneuver to this lot. Ms. Mason stated that this is not a good area for interconnectivity with other nearby lots and will require drivers to go to Cross Street. The design will reduce the number of curb cuts on the properties from four to two.
Mr. Marstaller questioned the need for additional parking. Ms. Larson stated that the applicant does have a need for additional parking to meet the parking requirement of the ordinance and this need does vary at times, based upon the different projects currently being worked on. Mr. Marstaller noted his concern for the level of service at Justin’s Way. Ms. Mason stated that the traffic engineer looked at this and there is no change to the use but they will be meeting the parking need with more spaces and the level of service will not be decreased. Mr. Goodall noted that this would be an issue for the Traffic and Parking Committee.
Mr. Goodall asked if the west end of the lot abuts a residential property. Ms. Mason that the lot is currently vacant.
Kelly Fitzpatrick, 19 East Street, stated that she is disturbed that four homes are being torn down to create more asphalt. Mr. Marstaller asked if the applicant was trying to find someone to take the houses. Ms. Larson noted that these parcels are not Class A or B within the Design Review District and therefore there is no waiting period for demolition and they are not required to try to find someone to take the structures. Mr. Goodall noted that many people share Ms. Fitzpatrick’s concern and changes have been made to the Ordinance to not require the full build-out of parking and planning is being done to address the issue of having a town where people can live.
Mr. Gorman rejoined the Board.
Park Place Apartments – Park Street
The applicant is presenting conceptual plans to add a 3-unit building to a property on Park Street. There are four existing dwelling units on the property. This is a Village Open Space Subdivision. Site Plan Review and Subdivision Review are required. Tax Assessor Map 13, Lots 48 & 48B. Chris Kelley, applicant and owner; Art Colvin, Associated Design Partners, representative.
Ms. Larson stated that the property is currently two individual parcels with four units in three buildings. Since this is a multi-family development and three or more units are being created within a five year period, both site plan review and subdivision review are required. This parcel is also located in the Freeport Village Overlay District.
The net residential acreage allows for three additional units. A ravine and wetlands are located on the southern portion of the property and have been deducted from the NRA calculation. Mark Cenci Geologic has been to the site to identify the wetlands an in a letter dated February 2, 2007, has stated that the “wetlands are not Wetlands of Special Significance. The location of the wetlands will need to be shown on the final recording plan.
The new building is proposed to be added to the rear of the two existing dwellings at 43 Park Street and away from the wetlands and steep slopes. An existing garage located to the rear of the property will be removed to make room for additional parking. There are two existing curb cuts off Park Street and two existing small parking areas. A new parking area will be centrally located on the parcel in the area where the existing garage will be removed. The new parking standard of the ordinance requires 12 parking spaces and only 11 are shown on the plan. One additional space will need to be added to the final plan.
The applicant will need to submit Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plans to be reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer prior to returning for final approval.
The applicant has submitted building elevations which comply with the standards of the Freeport Village Overlay District. The applicant is working on a landscaping and buffering plan which will be submitted with final plans.
The project would require 21,544 s.f. of open space. Since this is a Village Open Space Subdivision and there are no primary conservation areas identified on the plan, the applicant will be required to pay the open space fee in lieu of providing open space. Based upon the amount of open space required, and the fee of $0.70 per s.f. , the required fee would be $15,081.
The applicant is asking for three waivers:
1. Appendix B of the Freeport Subdivision Ordinance – requiring that the applicant submit
Soils through a Class C medium intensity soil survey.
2. Section 512.D.10 of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance – requiring that a two-way driveway serving 3-9 dwelling units be 18 feet in width (a width of 14’ is proposed)
3. Section 514.A.6 of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance – requiring an aisle width for two-way traffic of 24 feet (a width of 20’ is proposed)
Mr. Jim Thibodeau, representative from Associated Design Partners, stated that the applicant is proposing a dense use in the Village I Zone. There is a large existing gulley and wetlands on the property. The wetlands were delineated by Mark Cenci and they have provided a setback from them. The area of the slope and wetlands have been deducted from the Net Residential Acreage calculation and the total area of the parcel is just under an acre. A three-unit building is proposed and elevation drawings have been submitted. They will meet the new stormwater requirements and will submit a landscaping plan.
Mr. Whitmore noted that the plan states that the gulley is to be filled. Ms. Larson stated that she has discussed this with the applicant and the note will need to be removed from the plan. If the gulley was going to be filled, the Board would need to see detailed plans.
Mr. Whitmore asked about soils, the building foundation, and the surface of the driveway. Mr. Thibodeau stated that no other geotechnical explorations other than the work by Mark Cenci has been done. There are existing houses on the property and they are assuming that the soils are good for the similar use of a residential foundation. They are assuming that they will install a standard basement foundation but will need to work out the details. The parking area will be paved.
Mr. Donahue noted that the existing house appears to be in the setback and questioned what the required setbacks are. Ms. Larson stated that detached garages and sheds can be up to five feet from the property line. The existing house is legal non-conforming. Mr. Goodall noted that the plan shows two lots under the same ownership and setback lines will be changed once the two lots are merged into one.
Richard Menard, 34 Park Street, noted his concern for addition cars on the road since Park Street is not on the paving list for another four years. The sewer system on Park Street is also faulty and these issues will need to be addressed. He has a general concern for traffic and the roadway itself. East Street is also in poor condition and paving of that street is two years away.
Mr. Gorman / Mr. Whitmore moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board move to approve a waiver of Appendix B of the Freeport Subdivision Ordinance to not require that the applicant submit soil information through a Class C medium intensity soil survey in that this information is not usually submitted and the project will be connected to public utilities.
It was further ordered that the Freeport Project Review Board move to approve a waiver of Section 512.D.10 of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance requiring that a two-way driveway serving 3-9 dwelling units be 18 feet in width, in that a driveway width of 14 feet is proposed and should be adequate due to the size and nature of the development.
It was further ordered that the Freeport Project Review Board move to approve a waiver of Section 514.A.6 of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance requiring an aisle width for two-way traffic of 24 feet, in that the applicant is proposing an aisle width of 20 feet which should be adequate due to the size and nature of the development.
Vote: 6 Ayes / 0 Nays
Mr. Whitmore / Mr. Gorman moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board finds that the layout of the Conceptual plan for the proposed Park Place Apartments shows that the appropriate areas have been designated for development.
Vote: 6 Ayes / 0 Nays
ITEM VI: Preliminary Subdivision Approval
West Cove Subdivision – Litchfield Road – PUBLIC HEARING
The applicant is proposing a 31-lot open space subdivision on 111.03 acres on Litchfield Road. A new road off Litchfield Road is proposed. Approximately 64.77 acres of open space are proposed. Tax Assessor Map 19, Lots 73 & 75. West Cove LLC, applicant and owner; Art Colvin, Associated Design Partners, representative.
Ms. Larson explained that since the last meeting, one lot has been removed so now only 31 lots are proposed; the NRA calculation would allow for 35 lots. The lot has been removed in part so that the project can comply with the DEP Chapter 500 rules. All of the lots can accommodate a septic system and a Nitrate-Nitrogen Impact Assessment, Hydrogeologic Evaluation, and Preliminary Site Evaluation were all completed by Mark Cenci Geologic, Inc. in March 2007. A nitrate plume plan has been submitted and the well exclusion zones for each lot have been indicated. Due to the nature and size of the development and the directions of the plumes, she suggested that the Board have a peer review of the plan done by Matt Reynolds at Drumlin Environmental. This would be done at the expense of the applicant. In addition, a note should be added to the final recording plan referencing this plan, and noting that any changes to the locations of septic systems must be reviewed and approved by a qualified professional and approved by the Freeport Planning Department.
The applicant is proposing a new 3,400 foot long road off Litchfield Road. The road will be 18-feet wide with 2-foot shoulders on each side. The road will require an Entrance Permit from the Freeport Department of Public Works. The Board granted waivers to allow the length of a dead-end road to exceed 2,500 feet and to allow more than 15 homes on a dead-end road. The applicant will need to submit final road plans to be reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer prior to returning for final approval. The applicant will need to get the road name approved by the E-911 Addressing Officer.
The issue of the intersection of Litchfield Road and Flying Point Road needs to be discussed. The work on Flying Point Road has been put off at this point and there are concerns that the project will be pushed back further past June. She would recommend that the developer make the necessary improvements to the intersection because this development will significantly increase traffic at the intersection. An analysis of the intersection has been done and there is the perception that there is a problem.
The applicant has submitted Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plans which are being reviewed by the Town Engineer. The applicant will need to obtain the Town Engineer’s final approval before returning with final plans. The applicant will need to obtain approvals from the DEP before returning for final approval. The project requires a Permit-by-Rule, Tier I Permit, and a NRPA Permit.
The applicant has submitted draft legal documents which will need to be reviewed and approved by the Town Attorney prior to final approval. The applicant has indicated that some of the open space will be retained by the Homeowner’s Association and some will be conveyed to the Freeport Conservation Trust. Details on this will also need to be worked out prior to final approval.
Mr. John Mann, representative, stated that in an analysis of the stormwater buffers, it was determined that the lots, building envelopes, and buffers would be better if one lot was removed from the plan. A lot from the ridge area has been removed from the plan. All lots will be accessed from the new road. Mr. Marstaller asked if the houses would be visible from Litchfield Road. Mr. Mann stated that there will be a buffer, but some of the homes may be visible depending on the time of year. A neighbor has requested addition buffering, and a buffer of 450 feet is shown on the plan. There are gullies between the two properties which will accommodate the drainage. The road has been shifted, per the Department of Environmental Protection, to be further away from the gullies and now avoids the second dip near the stream. The distance between this road and the nearest private road is about 1,200-1,500 feet.
Mr. Marstaller asked about the open space and which land would go to the Freeport Conservation Trust (Trust). Mr. Mann stated that most of the open space except for the field area near the Ouellette property and Litchfield Road and a 50 foot wide strip around the lots would go to the Trust. This remaining land would be retained by the Homeowner’s Association. This allows for one abutter to the Trust’s land and acts as a buffer for homeowners. There is a total of 64 acres of open space with about 52.98 acres going to the Trust. Mr. Marstaller asked if this connects to other land owned by the Trust. Mr. Bob Santomenna, Trust, stated that the Trust does own an abutting parcel, as shown on the plan. This is also near the Jackman Woods property that they have an easement on. This open space will be a significant contribution to the existing trail system and to open space in the area. Mr. Goodall asked about a 50 foot wide access way for the Homeowner’s Association. Mr. Mann stated that this access-way is needed to provide access to the open space from the road, due to the shifting of the road. Mr. Goodall suggested that this access-way could be gravel.
Mr. Goodall asked how the developers plan to deal with the intersection of Flying Point Road and Litchfield Road. Mr. Mann stated that a driver can see an approaching car, but since one cannot see the pavement, there is the perception that there is a problem. There is adequate site distance, so they did not plan to address this. They have looked at the intersection in the field and an analysis was previously done with another subdivision on Litchfield Road. They will be subject to the impact fee based upon the length of the new road and the money could go towards improvements here. Mr. Marstaller noted that Litchfield Road is in poor shape and questioned what the impact fee would be. Ms. Larson stated that it would be about $16,000 for the pavement maintenance fee for the road and then each house would also be required to pay a fee based upon the square footage of the house. The fees paid do not go to a particular road and the improvements still need to make their way through the capital improvement plan.
Mr. Whitmore / Mr. Gorman moved to open the public hearing. Vote: 6 Ayes / 0 Nays
Jim, Sandy Beach Road, asked if the location of the abutting open space is relevant to the Board’s approval of the project. Mr. Marstaller stated that the Board likes to see interconnectivity of open space where possible, but it is not needed for approval. Mr. Mann noted that the applicant is working on trails on the abutting properties as well and this is all working towards a larger plan.
Mr. Santomenna stated that this developer kept the Trust in mind with this development and has also helped to get easements over the abutting piece. There will be a continuous trail from the Jackman Woods property, down Litchfield Road, to this property, and to Flying Point Road.
Mr. Whitmore / Mr. Gorman moved to close the public hearing. Vote: 6 Ayes / 0 Nays
Mr. Marstaller noted that a letter has come in against this subdivision and notes concerns for traffic. This is a dead end road and no through road is proposed. Mr. Goodall noted that another letter came in from the Peases who reference the Ordinance, the purpose of the zoning district and reference noise. The purpose section of the Ordinance is not a regulatory section and the noise ordinance is for noise levels measured over a certain period of time and he does not see how a residential subdivision could achieve these noise levels.
Mr. Anderson / Mr. Whitmore moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board move to approve the preliminary subdivision plan for West Cove Subdivision, plans dated 03-11-07, with the following conditions of approval:
1) This approval does not constitute approval of the final plan or intent to approve the final plan.
2) The following items should be incorporated into the final plan/submission:
a) Written approval from the DEP for the Site Location Permit, NRPA Permit, and
the Tier 1 Permit;
b) Approval of the Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plan by the Town Engineer;
c) Approval of all legal documents by the Town Attorney
d) Results of a peer review of the Nitrate-Nitrogen Impact Assessment and Hydrogeologic Evaluation by Matt Reynolds, the Town’s peer reviewer, with any recommended changes being incorporated into the final plan.
Vote: 6 Ayes / 0 Nays
ITEM VII: Persons wishing to address the Board on non-agenda items.
None.
ITEM VIII: Adjournment.
Meeting adjourned at 9:58 p.m.
Recorded by Caroline Crean Pelletier
|
