01/30 -

FREEPORT PROJECT REVIEW BOARD MINUTES
FREEPORT TOWN HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 14, 2007
6:30 p.m.

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

CALL TO ORDER: Mr. Marstaller called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m.

ITEM I: Approval of the minutes from the February 28, 2007 Project Review Board meeting.
Ms. Larson stated that these minutes would be up for approval at the March 21, 2007 Project Review Board meeting.

ITEM II: Informational Exchange
Ms. Larson stated that she has done a Staff Approval for new signs at Brooks Pharmacy to change the name to Rite Aid. They wanted to also paint the sign holder for the ground sign blue, however she did not approve that and told the applicant that they would need to come to the Board if that is something that they wanted approval for.

ITEM III: Design Review
LL Bean – Bike, Boat, and Ski Store – Main Street
The applicant is proposing two new building mounted signs at the Bike, Boat, and Ski Store on Main Street. No illumination is proposed. Class C building. Tax Assessor Map 11, Lot 36-ETC. LL Bean, applicant and owner; Patrick O’Hanlon, representative.

Ms. Larson explained that the sign on the front of the building will be over the front entrance and will be attached with brackets. The sign will be made of sign foam with green letters which will be mounted on a beige aluminum back. The sign will be 30 s.f. The sign on the rear of the building will be individual foam letters (painted green) mounted on the surface of the building. The sign area will be 25.5 s.f.. No illumination is proposed.

Design Review Ordinance: Chapter 22 Section VII.C.10: Signs
The applicant is proposing two new building mounted signs on the LL Bean Bike, Boat, and Ski store on Main Street. The sign on the front façade will be made of sign foam with green letters which will be mounted on a beige aluminum back. The sign will be 30 s.f. The sign on the rear of the building will be individual foam letters (painted green) mounted on the surface of the building. The sign area will be 25.5 s.f. No illumination is 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 Fact and a Design Review Certificate for LL Bean for two new building mounted signs at the Bike, Boat, and Ski Store on Main Street, to be built substantially as proposed, submission dated 02/20/07, 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.
2) Prior to installation, the applicant obtain a sign permit from the Freeport Codes
Enforcement Officer.
Vote: 6 Ayes / 0 Nays (Gorman recused).

The Lazy Bear – 15 School Street
The applicant is proposing a new blade sign, a new ground sign, and exterior alterations to an existing structure. Class C building. Tax Assessor Map 13, Lot 22A. Joy and Dave DuBois, applicant; Brenda and Bruce Boudreault, owners.

Ms. Larson explained that one existing roof sign and one existing building sign will be removed. The applicant will replace the blade sign above the door with a sign of the same size (4’x5’). The sign will be made of sign-foam and attached with a new bracket. The sign will be black and burgundy with gold letters. The existing lighting fixture will remain.

The new ground sign will be made of the same materials and will have wood posts. The sign will be 3’ x 6’ and be 6 feet tall. The sign will be illuminated with one light and located on the front lawn. The applicant is proposing to add black vinyl shutters to the windows on the front of the building. New, black, decorative molding is also proposed for around the front door and sidelight. The applicant will be reseeding the front lawn as needed, and adding some perennial and annual plantings along the front of the building. A new outdoor bench is also proposed.

Joy Dubois, applicant, stated that the building will be painted the color as shown in the picture which will be a brick or cranberry red, or slightly darker. They also are proposing black shutters for a more appealing and welcoming look. The existing windows, lighting, and the sidewalk in front of the building will remain, but will be re-doing the trim around the door and sidelight to make it look like one.

Mr. Goodall asked about the color of the building noting that the ordinance requires that buildings have a look that predates 1930’s architecture. Ms. Larson stated that the Board does not have prevue over color other than for signs, but does encourage the use of a historical color palette. Mr. Goodall encouraged the applicant to look at a historical color palette. Mr. Marstaller stated that he likes the color and it is different, but looks historical and is eye catching. There were no comments from the public.

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 remain the same. The applicant is proposing to add vinyl shutters to the front windows on the School Street side of the building and to add decorative vinyl trim surrounding the front door and sidelight.


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 new shutters and trim around the front door will be made of vinyl. No other material changes are proposed.

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 will reseed the front lawn as needed and add some perennial and annual plantings along the front of the building. The applicant is proposing to place a decorative bench on the front lawn.

10. Signs.
One existing roof sign and one existing building sign will be removed. The applicant will replace the blade sign above the door with a sign of the same size (4’x5’). The sign will be made of sign-foam and attached with a new bracket. The sign will be black and burgundy with gold letters. The existing lighting fixture will remain. The new ground sign will be made of the same materials and will have wood posts. The sign will be 3’ x 6’ and be 6 feet tall. The sign will be illuminated with one light. The sign will be located on the front lawn.

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

Ms. Benson / Mr. Gorman moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board approve the printed Finding of Facts and a Design Review Certificate for Joy and David DuBois for exterior alterations and two new signs at The Lazy Bear at 15 School Street, to be built substantially as proposed, submission dated 02/21/07, 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.
2) Prior to installation, the applicant obtain a sign permit from the Freeport Codes
Enforcement Officer.
Vote: 7 Ayes / 0 Nays

ITEM IV: Conceptual Review
Wireless Telecommunications Facility – Old Brunswick Rd
The applicant is proposing 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; Christopher Ciolfi, representative; Steven and Valerie Taylor, owners.

Ms. Larson explained that the ordinance is designed to encourage co-location of antennas before a new structure is built. The applicant’s potential carrier, T Mobile is already on the existing telecommunication facilities in Freeport and the applicant states that this new tower is needed to fill in a gap in the existing coverage area. The applicant has explored other options, and has found that there are no existing facilities or structures that could be used to fill in this gap.

The proposed facility is on parcels located within the MD-A District which permits a wireless telecommunication facility of 100 feet for a single user, or 150 feet if carriers are co-located. The preliminary plans submitted are for a 150-foot tower; the Board would not be able to approve a tower of this height unless the applicant submits proof of co-location. This is something that would need to be worked out prior to the applicant returning for final approval.

The plan submitted show the location of the tower and associated equipment in accordance with the setbacks required by the Freeport Zoning Ordinance. There will be a fenced area 70’ x 70’ which will enclose the facility and the associated cabinets.

The applicant is proposing an access road to the site. They have tried to develop the site in areas that maximize the use of existing roads and trails to minimize the need for clearing. The applicant is proposing to use an existing entrance, but will need to check with the State of Maine and the Town of Freeport to determine if an entrance permit is required. 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. The entrance would be gated to prevent others from accessing the site. The site will be connected only to power and telephone and there will be no other utility connections.

The ordinance requires that the facility be initially painted with a flat paint. The applicant is proposing that the tower be finished in a galvanized gray which would be washed prior to installation to reduce any shine. It is the opinion of the applicant that the structure would weather to a dull gray and therefore have less of a visual impact than a painted structure. There are some additional items the applicant will need to submit prior to returning for final approval.

Chris Ciolfi, representative, stated that he and other representatives are present to answer questions. He stated that they are working with T Mobile to build a new facility to fill in a coverage gap. The parcel is 73 acres and located on Route One near the Brunswick town line. They are proposing to use about ¼ acre and will improve the existing curb cut. The road will be 1200 feet from Route One to the site. The site layout has been designed for a tower which is 150 feet in height. There will be overhead utilities to the site due to there being a lot of ledge on the property. The height of the existing tree line is about 40-50 feet. T Mobile will have their antennas on top of the tower with the tops of the antennas being at 150 feet. The tower will be located in a compound area which will have a locked gate. They are proposing a monopole tower which would have the wiring inside, but also included information on a lattice tower, in case that is but the Board prefers. The site will not be accessed often and will be a low-impact use to the site and the environment.

Mr. Marstaller questioned the dimensions of the monopole. Mr. Ciolfi stated that the monopole would be 20” at the top. A lattice tower would be 15’ at the bottom and 6” at the top and would be open. Mr. Goodall asked if both options would have a galvanized finish, as they are proposing to not paint the structure. Mr. Ciolfi stated yes, and that painting can be useful with the right color, but if the color is not right, it can be worse and the structure would not fit in. The weathered galvanized finish fits in better with more lighting conditions. Ms. Benson asked if the applicant could provide photographs showing what the proposed finish would look like.

Mr. Marstaller asked if lighting was required. Mr. Ciolfi stated that no lighting or markings on the tower are required for a height of up to 199 feet. They have done an analysis of the structure at a height of 190 feet, to allow room for the whip antenna on top where the municipal antenna would be. Ms. Benson asked why the whip antenna could not go at 100 feet. Mr. Ciolfi stated that at a height of 150 feet they would get more coverage and has was not sure what the municipal coverage was now. Ms. Benson asked about noise from the facility. Mr. Ciolfi stated that near the structure you may hear a small hum, but T Mobile does use an equipment shelter for the associated components.
Mr. Goodall asked about the topo map submitted and the actual location of nearby houses. Mr. Ciolfi stated that he was not sure how current the topo map was, but there is a house across the street from the entrance and there are some new homes in the area that are not shown on the map. It is not a densely populated area. They did do balloon tests close to some of the houses. The engineer stated that when the balloon was flown, he was amazed that it could not be seen from many locations. This is a good site for the facility due to coverage and that the facility will be set back which gives even more screening since it is a wooded site. The coverage area targets Route One, Route 125, and Interstate 95, since existing coverage is blocked by the hill where the tower would be located. Mr. Marstaller asked if T Mobile was already located in Freeport. Mr. Peter Cooke, representative, stated that they already have antennas on both water towers. Ms. Larson noted that those antennas will remain. Mr. Ciolfi showed the Board maps which were submitted depicting existing and proposed coverage with the addition of the new facility and how the existing facilities would not provide coverage in the needed areas. Mr. Cooke stated that service for T Mobile drops on Interstate 95, north of the exits and there are also issues on Route One. This is consistent with other carriers as well, due to the terrain and the heavy tree cover. Ms. Larson stated that the Ordinance requires that the applicant demonstrate the need for the additional facility and that there are no other existing options available.

Ms. Benson asked if there were cutting restrictions for the remainder of the property. Ms. Larson stated that there are no clearing provisions in the ordinance, but the applicant needs to meet the setbacks in case the tower falls. Mr. Ciolfi stated that the applicant is only leasing ¼ acre of the parcel which is about 100’x100’ area with access. There will also be a gate towards the Route One entrance to keep people off the road as they do not want people up there. They are proposing a road with of 12 feet and at the steepest part the slope is 16%. Mr. Cooke noted that they like the facility to be unknown.

Mr. Goodall asked if a DEP permit would be required. Mr. Ciolfi stated that they would find out. Mr. Goodall suggested that the applicant should have an erosion control plan and suggested that they look at the Cumberland County Soil and Water Conservation District’s handbook for roads. Mr. Ciolfi stated that they will install hay bales and a silt fence. They will have water-bars, but do not like to install culverts unless they have to.

Mr. Marstaller asked about utilities and the plowing of the road. Mr. Ciolfi stated that the power would be above ground on poles, except from the last pole to the site there would be about 40’-50’ of underground. The road is not plowed due to the limited activity on the site and there is nothing up there to burn, however, if required they would plow it. Mr. Marstaller stated that the ordinance says that the site needs to be accessible by Public Safety at all times and it would be up to the Fire Chief.

Mr. Whitmore noted that the applicant needs approval from the Maine Historic Preservation Commission. Mr. Ciolfi stated that there is a study underway for NEPA and they have contacted the Maine Historic Preservation Commission and Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and are awaiting responses.

Ms. Benson stated that she would like to approve a height of 100 feet to start unless the applicant gets co-signers and would then be entitled to go up to 150 feet. Ms. Larson stated that the issue is that carriers will not sign agreements until the applicant has their approval but the Board cannot approve the additional height without such agreements. The Board could approve the full height, however the applicant would not be able to build that high until proof of agreements with multiple carriers are submitted. Mr. Ciolfi stated that there is cost associated with building the tower for one, and then bringing the machinery in to make it higher due in part the fact that the installed antenna would then need to be put up higher. He referenced graphics included in the submission which show the difference in coverage area depending on the different tower height, noting that there would also be better call quality. Mr. Cooke stated that the difference was not dramatic, but would improve service towards the area south on I-95. Mr. Goodall stated that there will be a demand for space on the tower and since the ordinance encourages co-location, going to 150 feet initially will encourage co-location and will allow for all the equipment to be brought out at one time.

Mr. Marstaller asked if technology allows for more calls per antenna. Mr. Ciolfi stated yes and noted that the technology has improved and more services are offered. Mr. Cooke stated that technology is more efficient, but the demand has changed and there are more users and subscribers.

The consensus of the Board was that they would be okay with a tower height of 150 feet. Mr. Ciolfi stated that he would provide information and pictures on the galvanized finish at the next meeting. Mr. Whitmore noted that information on stormwater management would also need to be submitted.

There were no comments from the public.

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

ITEM V: Approvals
LL Bean – Hunt/Fish Store – PUBLIC HEARING
The applicant is presenting final plans for a new addition to the LL Bean Flagship Store. This new 33,000 s.f. addition will be used for the Hunt/Fish Store. Design Review and Site Plan Review are required. Class B property. Tax Assessor Map 11, Lot 64-ETC. LL Bean Inc., applicant and owner; William Conway, R.L.A., Sebago Technics, representative.

Ms. Larson explained that the site plan and layout is very similar to those plans previously approved for the Outlet in this location and have been only be modified slightly. The applicant has submitted building elevations and is still trying to achieve LEED Certification. The building addition will have a transitional area where the addition will be connected to the existing building. The section will have a flat roof, as does the existing Flagship Store however will have a covered porch like the remainder of the addition. The main section of the addition will be two stories and will incorporate many features of the existing Hunt/Fish Store including the covered porch. The building will have fiber-cement panels with wood batten strips. The components of the porch will be wood. The applicant is proposing the standard paddle door handles. The building will have green asphalt roof shingles. The entrance area will incorporate a metal frame window and door system.

Signs and their locations are shown on the plan. The building signs will be made of foam and all will be externally illuminated with full cut-off fixtures. Sign dimensions are included in the submission and the total s.f. is within the requirements of the Freeport Sign Ordinance.

Service vehicles will access the new store from Justin’s Way as with the existing Flagship Store. A third loading bay will be added to the existing loading area on the rear of the Flagship Store. The service and parking area behind the store will be partially screened with a 6 foot privacy fence. The remainder of the parking area will be redesigned and will be similar in layout to the remaining parking lots. There will be interconnectivity with the existing parking lots.

A walkway is proposed in the area of the bioretention basin and surrounding the building. The plans show landscaping around the bioretention basins and the front and sides of the building. The landscaping around the basins will be part of a rain garden which will be used for the treatment of stormwater. A small area of split rail fence will be incorporated into the landscaping of the retention basin.

Due to the redevelopment of the existing Factory Store Site where the new Village Center Project is going to be located, the applicant no longer has a parking surplus. Based upon the s.f. of this addition and the standards for shared retail parking, the addition requires 198 spaces. The applicant is loosing another 28 spaces in the existing Coyote lot due to this expansion. Therefore, the applicant will be required to provide a total of 226 parking spaces for this use. (The 3 spaces behind in the service area are for service vehicles only and are therefore not included in the parking counts). The applicant will be working with the Town of Freeport to satisfy their parking requirement and there are spaces available for lease in the parking pool.

The applicant has submitted detailed Stormwater Management and Erosion Control plans which have been reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer (memo dated 03/08/07). It is his recommendation that the applicant enter into a Maintenance Agreement for a Stormwater Management System. 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. The building will be connected to the public water and public sewer system. Obtaining approval from the Freeport Water District and the Freeport Sewer District has been added as a Condition of Approval.

Kylie Mason, representative from Sebago Technics, stated that not much has changed for site features. A third loading dock has been added to the existing loading area and will be better screened that with the previous design for the Outlet. The fence along Justin’s Way will be 6 feet in height and about 20 feet in length and be a standard cedar stockade fence. The plaza area is more unified and plantings are proposed.

Sean Selby, representative from Arrowstreet, stated that the building design takes cues from the existing Hunt/Fish Store such as the porch detailing, the two-stories, and gables. This building is a bit taller than the Flagship Store but there is a transitional piece. The height at the peak is 35 feet, which is compatible with the existing Hunt/Fish Store. The porch will continue from the addition to the existing building. The will be a large window and porch on the corner of the façade facing Cross Street. There will also be a small ramp on this side leading to the adjacent handicap parking spaces. The back façade will have windows and steps in the rooflines.

Mr. Donahue asked about the relationship of the second story floor to the windows and asked if spandrel glass would be used. Mr. Selby stated that the floor level will be the same in the existing store as in the addition so that people can walk between them. They are still working out the details on the glass. Mr. Donahue suggest that clapboard siding may be more appropriate than board and batten. Mr. Selby stated that this system of siding is used on the existing Hunt/Fish store and that most of the infill piece would pick up on the architecture of the Flagship Store. The use of the clapboards was a scale issue and it actually made the building look taller.

Mr. Goodall asked why the porch does not continue on the southside of the building. Mr. Selby stated that the porch is used on the existing Hunt/Fish Store but there are no plans at this time to expand it to the Flagship Store, although there has been talk of the possibility of expanding it in the future.

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

Mr. Whitmore noted the poor level of service at the intersection of Justin’s Way and Main Street and asked if there were any plans to improve it. Mr. William Conway, representative from Sebago Technics, stated that there were not plans for improvements at this time. There may be some added delivery traffic from this project, but the level of service will not deteriorate significantly more. Mr. Marstaller stated that this is an issue for the Traffic and Parking Committee to look at. Mr. Goodall stated that the applicant will have to provide parking somewhere else which will dispense traffic.

Mr. Donahue asked about lighting on the building. Mr. Selby stated that there would be lighting fixtures over the signs. The signs will be made of white letters and with the lighting above will appear illuminated.

Design Review Ordinance: Chapter 22 Section VII.C.
1. Scale of the Building.
The new building will be located to the rear of the existing retail store and the site and the building will incorporate features of the Retail Store and the existing Hunt/Fish Store.

2. Height.
The highest point of the roof will be 34’10”. The wall of the Flagship Store nearest the addition is 28’1”.

3. Proportion of Building's Front Facade.
The building will be 33,000 s.f. and will incorporate features of the nearby buildings. The expanse of the front façade will be broken up with the incorporation of the covered porch and entrance way with the metal window system.

4. Rhythm of Solids to Voids in Front Facades.
The front façade has a symmetric appearance. The entrance in the center has a large window system. There will be smaller windows evenly placed on either side of the entrance.

5. Proportions of Opening within the Facility.
The doors and windows will be square or rectangular in shape and are compatible with the style of building and the other nearby buildings owned by LL Bean.

6. Roof Shapes.
The roof of the main structure will peaked to match the existing Hunt / Fish Store. The addition area which will provide a transition between the new and existing buildings will have a flat roof but incorporate the use of a covered porch. These roof features are also incorporated on the other nearby buildings owned by LL Bean.

7. Relationship of Facade Materials.
The building will have fiber-cement panels with wood batten strips. The components of the porch are also wood. The applicant is proposing the standard paddle door handles. The roof will have green asphalt shingles. The windows will be metal.

8. Rhythm of Spaces to Building on Streets.
The layout complies with the space standards of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance. The building has been designed with areas of open space around the building including retaining the brick plaza area between this store and the new store and open space with landscaping near the bioretention areas.

9. Site Features.
The layout of the site has been designed to blend with the remainder of the LL Bean campus while providing interconnectivity and separation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic.

10. Signs.
Signs and their locations are shown on the plan. The building signs will made of foam and all will be externally illuminated with full cut-off fixtures. Sign dimensions are within the requirements of the Freeport Sign Ordinance. The color scheme will be green and white as are the other LL Bean signs.

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 layout of the site has been designed to blend with the remainder of the LL Bean campus while providing interconnectivity and separation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Similar landscaping, lighting, and parking lot layouts have been incorporated into the plan.

b. Relation of Proposed Buildings to the Environment.
This is a Class B property in the Design Review District. The new building will be located to the rear of the existing retail store and the site and the building will incorporate features of the Retail Store, the existing Hunt Fish Store, and remainder of the LL Bean Campus. The highest point of the building will be 34’1”. The wall of the Flagship Store nearest the addition is 28’1”.

c. Vehicular Access.
Access to the parking lot on site will be from both Morse Street and Cross Street. The parking lot entrances are designed to maintain interconnectivity with the abutting lots. The applicant will need to apply for an entrance permit from the Freeport Department of Public Works. There will be pedestrian walkways providing access from the parking lots to the stores.

d. Parking and Circulation.
The applicant will incorporate the features of the parking lots and walkways existing on the remainder of the campus to provide for safe interconnectivity. Due to the redevelopment of the existing Factory Store Site where the new Village Center Project is going to be located, the applicant no longer has a parking surplus. Based upon the s.f. of this addition and the standards for shared retail parking, the addition requires 198 spaces. The applicant is loosing another 28 spaces in the existing Coyote lot due to this expansion. Therefore, the applicant will be required to provide a total of 226 parking spaces for this use. (The 3 spaces behind in the service area are for service vehicles only and are therefore not included in the parking counts). The applicant will be working with the Town of Freeport to satisfy their parking requirement and there are spaces available for lease in the parking pool.

e. Surface Water Drainage.
Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plans have been approved by the Town Engineer (memo dated 03/08/07). 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. Obtaining written approvals from the Freeport Water District and Freeport Water District has been added as a condition of approval.

g. Advertising Features.
Signs and their locations are shown on the plan. The building signs will be made of foam and all will be externally illuminated with full cut-off fixtures. Sign dimensions are within the requirements of the Freeport Sign Ordinance. The color scheme will be green and white as are the other LL Bean signs. All signs will be externally illuminated with full cut-off lighting fixtures.
h. Special Features.
The service area will be located to the rear of the building and shared with the service area for the Flagship Store. A third loading bay will be added to the existing loading area on the rear of the Flagship Store. There will be a 6 foot fence around a portion of the service area to screen it. Waste will be stored inside the building.

i. Exterior Lighting.
All lighting will be full cut-off and similar in style to the existing lighting style and plan used on the remainder of the campus.

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

k. Landscaping.
The plans show landscaping around the bioretention basins and the front and sides of the building. The landscaping around the basins will be part of a rain garden which will be used for the treatment of stormwater. A small area of split rail fence will be incorporated into the landscaping of the retention basin and there will be fence partially around the service area. The general landscaping scheme will blend with the remainder of the campus.

l. Environmental Consideration.
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 the public water system. This parcel is in the Design Review District. 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.

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, a Design Review Certificate, and Site Plan for the new LL Bean Hunt /Fish addition to the Flagship Store, to be built substantially as proposed, site plan dated 02/21/07, 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 be reviewed and 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 to be reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer.
C. Set up an escrow account, in the amount of $6,000.00, to cover the cost of inspection of site improvements by the Town Engineer.
D. Enter into a Maintenance Agreement for a Stormwater Management System with the Town of Freeport, 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. Obtain written approvals from the Freeport Water District and the Freeport Sewer District for connections to the public utilities.
G. Obtain a Driveway Entrance Permit and Street Opening Permit from the Freeport
Department of Public Works.
H. When a building permit is issued, pay a pavement maintenance impact fee based upon the new construction building size of 33,000 s.f. and current impact fee effective when the building permit is issued.
Vote: 6 Ayes / 0 Nays

Casco Bay YMCA – Old South Freeport Road
The applicant is presenting final plans for a Site Plan Amendment at the YMCA. The proposal includes enclosing the airnasium, adding 7,500 s.f. of new building space, adding a new 104 car parking lot, and adding a service area with a driveway and a small parking area. Tax Assessor Map 25, Lot 8. Cumberland County YMCA, applicant and owner; Mitchell Rasor L.A., MRLD LLC, representative.

Ms. Larson explained that the proposal includes enclosing the airnasium to create a field house, adding a 4,000 s.f. infill building between the two existing buildings and a 3,500 s.f. addition behind the existing airnasium, adding a new 104 car parking lot, and adding a service area with a driveway and a small parking area. The new additions have been designed to blend with the existing structures and will not be visible from Route One. The additions incorporate similar building materials such as aluminum frame windows and a combination of cement clapboards and wood shakes. The applicant does plan to construct the buildout in two phases.

Two parking areas are proposed; a small 18 space parking lot behind the building and a 104 space lot which would be connected to the existing lot. Based upon the s.f. of the airnasium and the two small additions, the parking requirement according to the ordinance (1 space per 300 s.f.), and a total new s.f. of 28,500 s.f. ; 95 spaces are required. Since 10 existing spaces were allocated to the existing airnasium, only 85 new spaces would be required. The plans show 122 new parking spaces, of which the 18 space lot will be built as part of Phase II.A and a minimum of 52 will be installed as part of Phase II.B. Should the Town of Freeport determine that a parking problem exists on site, the applicant would be required to install the remainder of the required parking. The plans do show surplus parking, as the applicant was trying to anticipate possible future needs of the facility. The applicant may opt to build all of the parking as the phases of construction are completed.

Eaton Traffic Engineering (Brunswick, ME) has reviewed the proposal (memo dated 01-11-07). A Traffic Movement Permit from the DOT is not required for the project. Improvements to public roads were made with the original approval of the YMCA in 1997. No high crash locations have been identified in vicinity of the YMCA.

Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plans have been reviewed by the Town Engineer (see memo dated 03/07/07). 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 received approval from the Army Corps of Engineers for their NRPA Tier 2 Permit. The applicant still needs to obtain written approval, prior to any sitework, for the Tier 2 Permit and Site Location Permit from the DEP. This has been added as a condition of approval.

The applicant has received approvals from Aqua Maine and the Freeport Sewer District for the connection to the public utilities. The applicant has submitted information on the lighting fixtures and a lighting plan. The fixture type and illumination levels comply with the standards of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance. One 48 s.f building mounted sign is proposed.
The applicant has granted a trail easement to the Freeport Conservation Trust for trails over the property. The trails connect to the trails in the abutting River’s Edge Subdivision which provide access to the water. The public will be able to access these trails through the YMCA property. In addition, as part of the wetland mitigation plan, the applicant is proposing 8.51 acres of conservation area. This will be added to the existing 2 acres of conservation land.

The applicant has requested two waivers which the Board will need to act on. The first is a waiver (Sec. 602.D.2.g) requiring that the applicant submit information on soil types and the location of soil boundaries as certified by a registered PE or certified soil scientist. This project will be connected to public utilities and therefore this information may not be necessary and is commonly not submitted. The applicant is also requesting a waiver (Sec. 512.D.10) to allow the driveway/fire lane to the service area to have a width of 24 feet, instead of the 26 feet required by the Ordinance. Based upon the nature and use of the driveway and that the Fire Chief is okay with the width, I do not see any issues with this request.

Scott Krause, Director of the Casco Bay YMCA, stated that the YMCA needs more room to be able to provide programs to the community.

Mitchell Rasor, representative from MRLD, stated that the original building was approved in 1997 and the applicant is returning for approval for plans for an expansion. The applicant has applied for their NRPA Permit and for the Site Location Permit from the DEP. The applicant is proposing to phase the project into phases A and B. The sitework is what will be mainly visible, as the existing building will absorb the addition which will not really be visible from Route One. Phase A will include the infill building, loop road and service area, and the 18 space parking lot. The plan is to start in the fall of 2007. Phase B will include enclosing the field house, the large parking lot, and stormwater facilities.

Mr. Anderson asked about stormwater and how it has been addressed. Mr. Rasor stated that as part of the DEP review, and by working with the Town Engineer, the stormwater plans have been given a lot of consideration. There is a stormwater system for the existing facility and Phase A will be treated by a buffer and the large parking lot will be treated by a wetpond. The DEP has been to the site to look at it, and any issues have been addressed and the suggested revisions of the filter type and pipe have been made. To send the water the other way, they would need a new stormwater system with a long culvert. This would require that water from one watershed by put into another watershed which the DEP does not like to see. The facility can handle the peak flow and as the water leaves the site, it meets pre and post standards. Ms. Larson noted that the applicant has been working closely with the Town Engineer.

Mr. Rasor stated that the applicant is proposing to add 8.5 acres to the existing 2 acres of conservation land. This land abuts the 41 acres of conservation land which is part of the abutting River’s Edge Subdivision. There will also be some trails in the mitigation area. The Army Corps of Engineers has already signed-off on the mitigation plan. The trails will be open to the public and will be provide interconnectivity to the abutting property. The site already has excess parking per the ordinance, but due to the intensity of the use and the expansion, additional parking is needed. The parking will be built as needed and there will be a buffer. The buffer from the abutting property will consist of 28 white pines.

Ms. Benson asked if there will be an entrance in the rear of the facility. Mr. Rasor stated that there will be a service area with a gate in the rear. The entrance will be used by staff and will provide an area for deliveries and for emergency egress. Mr. Whitmore asked if the fill resulting from the large parking lot will be used to construct this area. Mr. Rasor stated that is may not work out with funding or with time.

Mr. Goodall noted that it does not appear that there is room on this site for outdoor athletic fields. Mr. Rasor agreed, although there may be one small area to bump out. Mr. Donahue asked if the enclosure of the field house will replace the need for the previously proposed gymnasium. Frank Oliva, architect, stated that the idea for the field house is for a track with an Astroturf center.

Mr. Whitmore / Ms. Benson moved to open the public hearing. Vote: 6 Ayes / 0 Nays

Dave Desjardens, representing the Schenks, stated that the Schenks have no problem with the building and aesthetics, but the issue is with the runoff going in to the road and to a ravine that goes through their property. They are concerned with the amount of flow and possible eroding. The Schenks have contact the DEP and the stormwater runoff permit has not yet been issued. The DEP is coming on Friday to look at the Schenk’s property and the YMCA property to see if the water can flow on the YMCA property. The Schenk’s think that the YMCA could treat stormwater on their own property if the existing pond was altered. They have talked to Mr. Groves, the applicant’s engineer from Sebago Technics, and the Schenks will be hiring their own engineer to review the design. They are also concerned for runoff running into the Cousin’s River and the amount of runoff from the new parking area. The increased runoff may cause more erosion on the Schenk’s property and decrease their property value. They do not feel that their concerns have been addressed.

Mr. Goodall noted that they stated that the water will go on to the Schenk’s property, but he thought that it was going from the parking lot to the wet pond. Mr. Desjardens stated that there is an existing culvert that goes across South Freeport Road. Mr. Rasor stated that there will be no added water to the pre and post calculation and the design meets the standards of the Town of Freeport and the State. The neighbor is concerned for the water from the parking lot which is in a separate watershed. When the water enters the right-of-way, there will be no increase to the pre and post water and they are not allowed to have an increase. He does have documentation of correspondence between Mr. Groves and the DEP. Extra scrutiny has been given to the design due to the concern of the abutters. DEP concurs with the final revisions and they have also been reviewed by the Town Engineer.

Ms. Larson stated that the peak volume will actually go down with the creation of the new pond. The Town Engineer has been very involved and has been working with both parties, and thinks that this is the best design. If the DEP gives approval of the plans with conditions, then changes will be needed. She would like the Town to go on the site walk Friday with the DEP and the engineer.

Mr. Desjardens stated that the Schenks would like approval delayed until the DEP approval is granted. He has been told that the DEP has never walked the site and he would also like the report from the Schenk’s engineer to be presented to the Board. Mr. Rasor stated that a representative from DEP in Augusta walked the site in January and looked at the abutters concerns. They need to meet the standards for water going in to the right-of-way. The walk was set-up between the applicant’s engineer and the DEP.

Mr. Goodall suggested that the Board approve the plans except for the surface water drainage for Phase 2.B. and the applicant return when they can provide clarification of the stormwater drainage for this phase and when the DEP has approved the plans. Then the Board will need to see if they agree with the DEP and review the materials. Mr. Marstaller stated that he would also like to see the report from the abutter’s engineer. Mr. Desjardens stated that they would like to see why they cannot handle the water on their site. Ms. Benson suggested that this could be a condition of approval to be reviewed by staff. Mr. Goodall stated that this is a lot of responsibility for staff, and if there are two conflicting reports, the Board will need to decide. Ms. Larson noted that there may be two different ways to treat stormwater.

Mr. Donahue asked how crucial the differing watersheds are in regards to the DEP review. Mr. Rasor stated that the property is divided in to three different watersheds and the water is going in three different directions which is what the DEP wants to see. It is not “watersheds” in terms of the big picture. Mr. Whitmore noted that there is a wet pond under-drain near the outlet pipe, but he is not sure what it is filtering or where is goes. Mr. Anderson stated that the facilities have been designed to catch water and slow it down and the applicant is not purposefully increasing flow and directing it to the neighbor’s property.

Proposed Findings of Fact: (Section 602.F. of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance)
a. Preservation of Landscape.
The proposal includes enclosing the airnasium, adding a small addition to the rear of the airnasium, and adding a small infill building between the two existing structures. The new structures will not be visible from US Route One. The project also includes an emergency access drive with a smaller parking lot in the service area located to the rear of the buildings; this too will not be visible from Route One. An expansion to the parking lot is proposed however the parking lot expansion will be buffered from the nearby properties.

b. Relation of Proposed Buildings to the Environment.
This parcel is not within the Design Review District. The proposal includes enclosing the airnasium, adding a small addition to the rear of the airnasium, and adding a small infill building between the two existing structures. The additions have been designed to blend with the existing structures and incorporate the use of similar building materials.

c. Vehicular Access.
Vehicular access to the site will remain from South Freeport Road. A new interior driveway will be installed leading to a service area in the rear of the structure. This driveway is being required by the Fire Chief. The applicant made improvements to intersections in the area when the original building was built in 1997. Eaton Traffic Engineering has conducted a traffic study for the proposed expansion and determined that a Traffic Movement Permit from the MDOT is not required and there are no high crash locations on roadways in the vicinity (see memo dated 01-11-07).

d. Parking and Circulation.
The applicant is proposing two parking lots; a small 18 space lot and a larger lot that can accommodate 104 vehicles. The 18 space lot will be built as part of Phase A and a minimum of 52 of the 104 spaces will be installed as part of Phase B. Should the Town of Freeport determine that a parking problem exists on site, the applicant would be required to install the remainder of the required parking. The new lot will be connected to the existing parking lot. The applicant will install crosswalks and walkways to separate vehicular and pedestrian traffic.

e. Surface Water Drainage.
Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Plans have been reviewed by the Town Engineer (see memo dated 03/07/07). 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 received approval from the Army Corps of Engineers for their NRPA Tier 2 Permit. The applicant still needs to obtain written approval, prior to any sitework, for the Tier 2 Permit and Site Location Permit from the DEP. This does not include the technical information for Phase II.B.

f. Utilities.
Utility connections to the site are existing. In a letter dated 09/01/06, Ron Seaman of Aqua Maine states that the utility has the capacity to serve the expansion. In a letter dated 08/18/06, Tom Allen of the Freeport Sewer District states that the utility has the capacity to serve the expansion.

g. Advertising Features.
One 48 s.f. building mounted sign is proposed.

h. Special Features.
There will be a service area located to the rear of the building. The service area will be screened by the building itself and by existing vegetation. There will also be a dumpster in this area which will be screened with a cedar fence. Some small existing outbuildings will be removed from the site.

i. Exterior Lighting.
The applicant has submitted a photometrics plan and cut-sheets of the lighting fixtures. All lighting fixtures are full cut-off and the photometrics plan meets the standards for illumination levels as set forth in the Freeport Zoning Ordinance.

j. Emergency Vehicle Access.
All public safety department heads have reviewed the plans. The Fire Chief has requested that the access road around the building be installed and maintained as a fire lane (see latter dated 08/09/06).

k. Landscaping.
Existing vegetation will be preserved where possible. Landscaping plans for the entire property have been submitted. The applicant is proposing a series of 28 white pine trees to screen the parking area from the abutting property. Extensive plantings are also proposed around the wet pond as well as a section of vinyl coated chain link fence.

l. Environmental Consideration.
This project is not within the Marine Waterfront District of the Shoreland Zone. The applicant has granted a trail easement over their property to the Freeport Conservation Trust which will conserve points of public access to the water. In addition, the applicant is proposing 8.51 acres of conservation area to mitigate the impact to the wetland. This acreage will be added to the existing 2 acres of conservation area. The project will be connected to the public water and sewer systems. The applicant has obtained approval from the Army Corps for their NRPA Tier 2 Permit. Obtaining written approval from the DEP, for approval of the Site Location Permit, prior to any sitework 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. Gorman moved to order that the Freeport Project Review Board approve the printed Finding of Facts and Site Plan Amendment for the Casco Bay YMCA, to be built substantially as proposed, site plan dated 02/09/06, revised 07/28/06, finding that it meets the standards of the Section 602, except for Section E. Surface Water Drainage for Phase II.B, 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) Prior to any site work, the applicant do the following:
A. Prior to the start of Phase II.A, establish a performance guarantee in the amount of $241,937.00, to cover the cost of all site improvements, in a form acceptable to the Town Attorney. Prior to the start of Phase II.B, establish a performance guarantee of $349,600.00.
B. Prior to the start of Phase II.A, pay to the Town of Freeport, a non-refundable administrative fee of 2% of the performance guarantee, in an amount of $4,838.00. Prior to the start of Phase II.B, pay to the Town of Freeport, a non-refundable administrative fee of 2% of the performance guarantee, in an amount of $6,992.00.
C. Set up an escrow account ($ 5,000.00) to cover the cost of inspection of site improvements by the Town Engineer and legal fees associated with the project.
D. Enter into a Maintenance Agreement for a Stormwater Management System be recorded in the Cumberland County Registry of Deeds.
E. When a building permit is issued, pay a pavement maintenance fee based upon the new construction building size of 7,500 s.f. and current impact fee effective when the building permit is issued.
F. Receive written approval from the MDEP for approval of the Site Location Permit and the Tier 2 Permit.
G. Before beginning construction of Phase II.B, the applicant shall have the surface water drainage for Phase II.B approved by the Freeport Project Review Board.

Mr. Whitmore / Mr. Anderson further ordered that the Freeport Project Review Board approve a waiver of Section 602.D.2.g of the Freeport Zoning Ordinance requiring that the applicant submit information on soil types and the location of soil boundaries as certified by a registered PE or certified soil scientist, in that the Board finds that this information is not necessary due to the scale and nature of the project, and the fact that the facility will continue to be connected to the public utilities.

It was further ordered that the Freeport Project Review Board approve a waiver of Section 512.D.10 to allow the driveway/fire lane to the service area to have a width of 24 feet, instead of the 26 feet required by the ordinance, in that the Fire Chief is okay with the width and based upon the nature and use of the driveway, the driveway should adequately provide access to the rear of the facility.

Vote: 7 Ayes / 0 Nays

Ms. Larson noted that the applicant did a medium intensity soil survey review as part of the stormwater report and isolated the locations and soil types in the developed area; however it has not been shown on a plan. Mr. Whitmore noted that the project will be connected to public utilities. Mr. Rasor stated that they have done test pits in the location of the wet pond per the DEP.

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

ITEM VII: Adjournment.
Meeting adjourned at 9:52 p.m.

Recorded by Caroline Crean Pelletier