A group of Bangor residents are asking a court to overrule the city’s approval of a new subdivision that’s expected to bring 30 duplexes to a lot off Lancaster Avenue near Essex Woods.
Brian Ames, Sandra and Dwight McIntosh, Laurie Cote-Dunn, Jeffrey Gray and Melissa Bolduc filed an administrative appeal against the city and developer Emily Ellis on Oct. 13 in Penobscot County Superior Court, according to court records.
The five residents, all of whom live in properties facing the planned Maine Woods subdivision, are asking the court to set aside the city planning board’s Sept. 20 decision approving the subdivision.
They alleged that the decision was “arbitrary,” “capricious,” “contrary to law” and was made without supporting evidence, according to the appeal.
Charles Gilbert, the attorney who filed the appeal, declined to comment. Two of the neighbors declined to comment.
The Bangor planning board approved Ellis’ application last month to build 60 units as part of a duplex project on a 12-acre lot off Lancaster Avenue. The lot is surrounded by single-family homes on Essex Street, Lancaster Avenue and East Broadway. The 60 units are among 121 new housing units the planning board approved at its Sept. 20 meeting, with the other 61 units planned for a subdivision off Broadway featuring two-story townhouses.
Residents opposed the application for the Lancaster Avenue subdivision during public comment at four planning board meetings. Planning Board Vice Chair Reese Perkins noted the board had never held so many deliberations on one project.
The residents argued Ellis’ plans would harm their properties because the lot required blasting due to the presence of ledge, that the subdivision units would be too dense for the neighborhood, and that an influx of new residents would add more traffic and dilute the neighborhood’s water pressure.
Ellis said she thought the planning board had been “extremely thorough” in its review.
“I mean, we had four meetings,” she said. “The neighbors have a right to appeal, but I really see no reason why a court would reverse the decision.”