BATH
The City Council will meet at 6 p.m. at City Hall Wednesday night to consider a requested zone change and contract zoning to allow for a CVS Pharmacy at the corner of Court and Floral streets.
The Council would be granting first passage at Wednesday’s meeting.
In August, the Planning Board tabled its review of three applications submitted by TMC New England LLC proposing a new CVS Pharmacy on 1.8 acres at the corner of Court and Floral streets — where there is now Gilmore’s Seafood and Dawgtopia, and a third building. During its meeting Oct. 7, the Planning Board voted on recommendations for the land use code map change and contract zoning.
At that Oct. 7 meeting, City Planner Andrew Deci reminded the board the three CVS project items were a continuation of three items the board started to review Aug. 19. At that time the board found the applications complete but tabled them so the applicant could address outstanding issues regarding stormwater management and traffic.
The recommendations were not unanimous. James Hopkinson, the board vice chair, made a motion to recommend to the Council approval of the requested land use code amendment, which would require four affirmative votes. The board voted 3-3 however, with Andrew Omo, Clarence Stilphen and chairperson Robert Oxton opposed.
The proposed project requires changing the land use code designation of R1 and C2 zoning to a C4 designation — the city’s highway intensive commercial district. The applicant also seeks contract rezoning to develop the property with non-compliance with setbacks and yard areas. The project manager said the building architect design was revised and given a more classical look to match with historic Bath, as well as a tower to accentuate the entrance — among other features to help with screening.
“I think the spirit of the comprehensive plan is that we provide a transition from residential to commercial,” Stilphen said prior to the zoning change vote, “and I just don’t think this particular property does that at this location. And it seems to just extend the shopping center onto Court Street, in my opinion.”
Land use attorney Sandra Guay with Woodman Edmands Danylik & Austin P.A., said the first thing she did was look at the city’s comprehensive plan. This property at the corner of Court and Floral streets is separated from the residential neighborhoods the comprehensive plan seems to be talking about protecting, with small or medium impact, limited mixed residential uses allowed. A lot of uses currently allowed aren’t just office-type of uses, and include laundromats for example.
Omo pointed out the comprehensive plan says uses there are not to exceed 7,000 square feet, and “I think this is almost twice that.”
If the city is allowed to change the property to C4, Omo said, what is to stop the C4 zoning from going further down Court Street, which is a residential neighborhood.
Board member John Swenson agreed with Omo but said as one gets to this particular property, “it’s a property in need of redevelopment, and so therefore I can see that there is a need perhaps to modify the comprehensive plan in this particular case.”
In a 4-2 vote, Oxton and Stilphen also opposed Hopkinson’s motion to recommend approval to the Council for the requested contract zoning.
At the Oct. 7 meeting the Planning Board also with a 4- 2 vote approved a site plan application for the CVS, including a waiver for lighting at the Court and Floral street entrances — conditioned on approval of the land use amendment and contract rezoning approvals and stormwater management plans that satisfy the public works director. Oxton and Stilphen voted in opposition to the motion.
Neighbors of the proposed project again expressed concerns about draining on their property and to the general water problem in the area, proposed buffering and screening methods, and the traffic impact to Floral Street.
Wayne Cappen, 1040 Middle St., argued CVS is “going to let water migrate off their property and onto someone else’s… Every time we hot top more area, we create water problems for our neighbors. Every time.”
Cappen added that, “contract zoning in this city has gotten out of hand,” and said developers should bring projects forward that meet zoning requirements.
The Times Record Sustaining Sponsor
We believe a community must be informed to thrive. bowdoin.edu
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less