
Following discussion and debate at its meeting Wednesday, the City Council conditionally approved a zone change and contract zoning making way for a new CVS Pharmacy project proposed for the corner of Court and Floral streets.
At the council’s Oct. 15 meeting to consider the requested zone change and contract zone agreement, the council voted unanimously to double the business’s cash contribution to the city as part of that agreement before granting first passage for both the zone change and contract zoning by 7-2 votes.
The CVS would be located on a 1.8-acre property consisting of four parcels at the corner of Floral and Court Street. Three existing structures that would be demolished and replaced with a 13,225 square-foot CVS Pharmacy with a drive-through window. Dawgtopia and Gilmore’s Seafood are currently located on this property.
The project, to be developed as proposed, requires three approvals: a rezoning or land use code map amendment to reclassify the land from R1 and C2 zones to C4 for the allowable use and opportunity to use contract zoning on the site; a contract zone; and site plan approval. The Planning Board granted site plan approval Oct. 7, contingent on the contract zone and zone change approvals by the City Council.
There was significant discussion centered around concerns of a project abutter at 52 Floral St., Elliot Mead, about the buffer measures proposed between the CVS parking lot and his property. He requested a retaining wall and stockade fence at an appropriate height to buffer noise and lighting and was dissatisfied with the type of trees the applicant was proposing. The zone change was approved with Councilors Steve Brackett, Kyle Rogers and David Sinclair opposed.
The buffering discussion continued and the council unanimously approved an amendment to the proposed contract zoning agreement stipulating that the screening at the Mead property be reviewed and that if any changes need to be done, they go through staff or the Planning Board for approval. The contract zoning ordinance as amended was approved with Sinclair opposed and Rogers abstaining.
Following the retirement of Assessor Paul Mateosian, the council also unanimously appointed its assistant assessor, Brenda Cummings, as the assessor. Cummings has been with the city for about 10 years — eight as assistant assessor — City Manager Bill Giroux said, adding she’s already doing the job. Council chair Mari Eosco said Cummings has been part of the city for a long time, know the city and “we are lucky to have her come into the fold in a new position.” At the start of the meeting she read a proclamation recognizing Mateosian for his 20 years of service to the city during which he wore various hats.
Tom Hoerth was unanimously reappointed to the positions of city arborist and tree warden.
The Council had discussed in September selling city-owned 10-foot-by- 48-foot lot in Winter Street Court to abutter Toader Serban so he can bring a deck into compliance with setback requirements; and conveying an easement to another abutter, Andrea DiBenedetto for the fence she constructed on the property. The Council unanimously approved a perpetual easement with City Solicitor Roger Therriault said is granted to DiBenedetto allowing her to continue maintaining the fence, parking and pavement and a small garden plot on the property, with the fee interest to be conveyed to Serban to solve the deck setback problem, “essentially maintaining the status quo.” DiBenedetto has the most use of the property is paying $1,000 and Serban is paying $500.
The city recently received a $500,000 Municipal Partnership Initiative grant from the state, this time for North Street. The city already had preliminary engineering plans ready to go for North Street when Public Works Director Peter Owen applied for the funding, which was approved within a couple days. Giroux said the engineering for that work is moving forward.
dmoore@timesrecord.com
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