By Amanda Estes

Staff Writer

Local developer Joel Fitzpatrick, whose proposed 46-unit Eastman
Meadows condominium project has angered residents, is pushing back
discussions with the Cape Elizabeth Planning Board to next month in
order to make modifications to the plans.

“We’ve just come across some wetlands that we need to be a little
further away from than we thought in the beginning,” said Fitzpatrick
on Nov. 7. “The design itself is going to look similar, but the roads
and buildings are going to be shifting.”

Fitzpatrick and his team were expected to discuss the project and
traffic calming proposals on Eastman Road and possible additional
alteration of wetlands at a Nov. 6 planning board workshop. That
meeting has been rescheduled for a Dec. 4 workshop. A formal meeting
with the planning board will likely be scheduled for January.

The 40-acre property is flanked by wetlands on both sides.

Owens McCullough, a senior project manager with Sebago Technics, said
he and Fitzpatrick are working on some modifications on the eastern
side of the property, closer to the road’s intersection with Spurwink
Avenue.

“We’ve done some more work on the property and as a result of that work, some of the setbacks have changed,” McCullough said.

According to an Oct. 16 memo to the planning board from Town Planner
Maureen O’Meara, Fitzpatrick has applied for a resource protection
permit to alter 1,075 square feet of wetlands to construct boardwalks
for pedestrian trails that will connect with trails on existing open
space including Winnick Woods and Sprague Corporation land.  

The development would consist of 46 single-story, two-bedroom condos,
which will be marketed toward retired empty-nesters, Fitzpatrick has
said.

According to O’Meara’s memo, Fitzpatrick is restricting development to
the area beyond the required 250-foot setback from critical wetlands,
which according to the town’s zoning ordinance can include a marsh or
an area of high value to wildlife. A narrow strip on the western side
of the property has been classified as RP2 wetlands, considered
sensitive to development.

During an Oct. 16 planning board public hearing, residents called for
an independent wetland review, citing potential adverse environmental
impacts and errors in the wetland delineation, which could affect
setback and density calculations.

Following the hearing, Fitzpatrick said he brought in another engineering company to review the property.

“I wanted to put the wetland issue to bed,” Fitzpatrick said.
“[Residents] had some concerns about traffic and concerns about
wetlands and some other things so I’m in the process of making sure
their questions and concerns are answered.”

In an email to a resident, O’Meara confirmed Fitzpatrick hired Woodlot
Alternatives to review the RP1 and RP2 boundaries on the site. The town
has hired the firm in the past for wetland mapping and peer reviews,
according to the email.

A round of recent emails shows residents have lingering concerns about
wetland setbacks, protecting open space and development in the
watershed of Trout Brook, which has been designated an impaired urban
stream by the state Department of Environmental Protection. (DEP).

“Why is the planning board not taking the strictest interpretation of
the zoning ordinance to protect the overwhelming desire of the
townspeople to preserve the rural character and open space over the
interest of a developer?” wrote one Shore Road resident in a Nov. 1
email.

In her replies to residents, O’Meara wrote Fitzpatrick is designing the
project to comply with the 250-foot buffer and will be required to meet
state regulations for development in an impaired watershed. Vegetative
buffers, part of the Eastman project, are the most effective and
efficient way of protecting water quality, she wrote.

Clustering development and preserving large areas of open space is an
effective way of preserving the town’s rural character, she wrote.

“Instead of spreading out the proposed units, this project is
clustering them in one part of the site and preserving approximately 60
percent of the total gross area of the site as permanently protected
open space,” O’Meara wrote in a Nov. 1 reply. “Legal public access to
that space will be deeded to the town.”

Residents also continue to request the planning board require
Fitzpatrick to deed restrict the units to the 55 and older population.

In an email, a resident called for “restrictive covenants to protect
against building additions which would add size, bedrooms or height to
the dwelling units.”

While Fitzpatrick is not interested in restricting the units to people
55 and older he is considering deed restricting a second floor to
prevent homeowners from building up. He said the units would also have
trusses on the roofs for that purpose.

O’Meara said if the project is approved, adding a second story to any
of the units would require an amendment to the approval and an
amendment to the condominium documents.

Fitzpatrick said his list of interested buyers has grown from 20 people to 25 and some of those people are younger than 55.

The potential buyers include people in their late 40s with children in
high school, who are considering moving out of their homes in a year or
two, Fitzpatrick said.