By Nate Jones

Staff Writer 

Residents along Scarborough’s Running Hill Road and New Road, some with property directly abutting the Maine Mall development area in South Portland, have been largely appeased by changes made to a new zoning initiative for the area after expressing concerns with the proposed Running Hill (RH) and Running Hill Two (RH2) zones for the past two weeks.

“The more you think about it and talk to your neighbors and look at this every day, [you realize] change is going to happen,” resident Ron Aubrey said. “This could be a good thing.”

Town Planner Dan Bacon said the zone change is intended to create guidelines for development destined to pop up in the area. 

“Regardless of what the [Comprehensive Plan] says this area is going to change and have commercial development,” he said. “If the zoning isn’t changed we’re likely to see more commercial development in [the current Business 2 zoning for the area] and contract zone requests in the [Rural Farming zone].”

Bacon said changes to the zones inspired by public comment included grandfathering existing single family homes in both areas, shifting some properties originally placed under the new RH2 zone to the RH because they will continue to be owned by the same resident and requiring buildings over 45 feet in height to have a 300 foot buffer from the road – a stipulation originally only included in the RH zone encompassing properties to the north of Running Hill Road – for structures on both sides of the pavement. 

“Long Creek and Red Brook, which are both urban impaired streams do run through these zones,” Bacon said. “Any development that is going to occur needs to be more vertical rather than being spread out to avoid [Department of Environmental Protection agency] complications.”

Planning Board Chairman Allen Paul said he felt the new zoning for Running Hill – which he referred to as being “deeply rooted” in the town’s comprehensive plan – was favored by the community.

“Not everybody approaches you around town about these issues,” he said. “This one has been rather unique in that people are approaching me because they do want it to happen.”

While several residents have thanked the town council for changes made to the zoning, others are still concerned about what development could mean for the area. Resident Loretta Aubrey said she was “greatly disappointed” to hear of plans to develop properties in the area and was concerned about an increase in traffic on New Road.

“Right now we live in a nice area with deer, moose and turkeys,” resident Dennis Deasmal said. “All that’s going to go away when the developers come in.”

Town Clerk Tody Justice said a town council vote for final approval of the new zoning is scheduled for the Sept. 17 council meeting.

In other business, Scarborough Conservation Commission members and environment consultants spoke against several proposed amendments to the Conservation Commission charter – which include limiting the commission’s right to review developers’ site plans – after the organization tried to “put a bullet through the heart” of the Eastern Village subdivision, Carey Anderson, spokesperson for Ballantyne Development LLC, said.

“[The change to the Conservation Commission charter] appears somewhat punitive,” Environmental Consultant Thomas Eshner said. “If there’s a problem with an individual member of the commission, they should be dealt with individually. This is not a reason to amend the charter of a commission.”

Councilor Sylvia Most said although a “drumbeat” of requests have been made for the resignation of the Conservation Commission Chairman Paul Austin, she believed altering the charter was a more holistic approach to “describing more completely what the commission can do.”

“It takes personalities out of the action,” she said. “The fact that the group continues to use punitive, personal and disrespectful language is unfortunate.”

Town Council Chairman Jeffrey Messer said the council decided to review the role of the commission after several members signed and submitted a petition to the Department of Environmental Protection without first informing the town council.

“There were some serious errors made by the conservation commission that undermined the planning board and town staff,” he said. “Ultimately the town council is responsible for the commissions we charter.”

Messer, who described the actions of members of the commission as “out of control and abrasive,” said he believed members that signed the petition should have stepped down from their positions before the petition was submitted.

“You can’t be a member [of the Conservation Commission] one second then a citizen another,” he said. 

Anderson and Messer both said they believed the commission had “targeted” the Eastern Village project and persuaded up to 50 people to attend the planning board’s final approval of the project, convincing residents the construction of the 154-unit subdivision would result in flooding to nearby homes. 

“They were trying to grab anything they could to try and kill the project,” Anderson said. “They rallied Old County Road residents, we had people [addressing the planning board] who didn’t know what they were talking about.”

Councilor Michael Wood, who partnered with Most and Bacon to draft amendments to the charter, said the changes did not entirely eliminate the commission’s ability to review site plans. The commission would still be allowed to review site plans at the specific request of either the town council or the planning board, he said. 

Conservation Commission Chairman Paul Austin said any councilor who voted against the new limits for the commission would do so “for the good of the community,” and councilors in favor of the changes were supporting a “personal vendetta” of an individual council member. 

After the council unanimously agreed to a language change recommended by Councilor Judith Roy to portray the changes in a more “positive” light, the amendments to the Conservation Commission charter passed with a 5 to 1 vote with Councilor Carol Rancourt in the minority. Councilor Ronald Alhquist was absent from the meeting.