A Farmington resident is appealing approval of the building plan on several grounds.
By Donna M. Perry
Staff Writer

FARMINGTON – A Farmington resident has appealed the Planning Board’s conditional approval of a proposed university education center at Lincoln and High streets.

The board approved construction of the University of Maine at Farmington’s $8 million, four-story College of Education, Health and Rehabilitation Building by a 4-3 vote Nov. 17, pending an approved parking plan.

University officials are expected to bring that parking plan to the Planning Board on Feb. 9.

In the meantime, the Board of Appeals is scheduled to hear Ed David’s appeal of the Planning Board’s approval at 6:30 p.m. Monday at the Farmington Municipal Building.

David is a resident of Lincoln Street and a Farmington attorney. He appealed the Planning Board’s approval on the following grounds:

• Failure to notify abutting landowners.

• Failure to hold a public hearing.

• Failure of the board to take a view of the site.

• Granting approval contingent on future submissions not before the board – parking and Department of Environmental Protection.

• Failure to review parking requirements for this and future development.

• Other failures to adequately consider public health and safety.

• Conflict of interest of a Planning Board member, which should void the vote taken.

Thomas Eastler, a university professor and Planning Board member, voted in favor of the project.

Code Enforcement Officer Steve Kaiser stated in a memo to the appeals board that abutting landowners were notified and that David is not an abutter.

Kaiser also stated that there is no requirement to hold a public hearing. Doing so is at the Planning Board’s discretion.

Kaiser also noted that the Planning Board’s approval was conditional on the submittal of an acceptable parking plan, and therefore this approval is not effective until such a plan has been submitted and accepted.

Kaiser also stated that the Planning Board member alleged to have a conflict of interest must be identified, and the specific conflict of interest must be identified.

He also noted that David’s grounds of failure to adequately consider public health and safety were vague.

Additionally, Kaiser said at the Planning Board’s December meeting that a public hearing could still be held as well as site walk.

dperry@sunjournal.com

Copy the Story Link