|
|
|
Paul Schumacher, Executive Director |
|
J.T. Lockman, Planning Director |
|
|
|
|
Where are we now in the process? |
|
What are the existing conditions? |
|
What could happen? - IMPACTS |
|
What will we do? - ACTIONS |
|
What is
the role of surrounding towns in the decision-making process? |
|
How will studies, assessments, or needed
improvements be funded? |
|
|
|
|
Location of Proposed Site |
|
Roads and Approaches |
|
Surrounding Features |
|
Constraints |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Existing approaches to the Casino site have
noticeable capacity issues at this time. |
|
Intersection problems and occasional bottlenecks
occur in neighboring towns already. |
|
|
|
|
Significant road and intersection improvements
will be needed in Sanford and surrounding communities, and funding will be
tricky. |
|
Other casino resorts rely heavily on
motorcoaches. |
|
The Downeaster has capacity issues. Conflicts with freight traffic will make
additions to passenger train schedule challenging. |
|
|
|
|
Other roads besides Rt. 109 will experience
traffic increases, as Mainers north of Wells, and New Hampshire residents
approach from other directions. |
|
Significant additional resources would be needed
to estimate such impacts. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We’re already in a housing crisis, without the
growth a proposed casino might bring… |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is a very low supply of apartments or
houses for rent, with little new stock planned. |
|
Housing prices have climbed faster than incomes,
leading to significant affordability problems throughout the region. |
|
|
|
|
Demand for new single family housing will
outstrip supply, with or without a casino, particularly with many towns
having adopted building caps. |
|
It is hard to predict how many new employees
will relocate to this area, or how many will commute to their new job. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demand for multi-family housing will increase. |
|
Single-family homeowners may offer lodging to
new employees as “boarders.” |
|
Long-term rental of lodging units as housing
will increase. |
|
Significant additional resources would be needed
to estimate such impacts. |
|
|
|
|
While unemployment is generally low in York
County, Sanford typically has higher rates of unemployment at any time than
other communities in the County. |
|
However, a large casino could not be served by
existing labor from within the Sanford Labor Market Area. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With a large casino project, long term commuting
and in-migration would occur, but it will be difficult to predict the
allocation. |
|
Workers would be drawn from surrounding counties
and areas, including New Hampshire, Central Maine, and Northern
Massachusetts. |
|
Already, some summer service industries are
bringing in workers from outside the region on a temporary basis. |
|
During the construction phase, agreements to
hire organized labor may lead to significant commuting to the site. |
|
|
|
|
USM Economist Charles Colgan predicts that a
casino would draw service workers from the existing service businesses,
because of higher pay, hours, and benefits, and year-round work
opportunities. |
|
|
|
|
Many communities near the proposed casino rely
on Sheriff patrols, and have relatively thin police and emergency coverage
overnight, particularly in winter months. |
|
MSAD’s 57 and 71, and the Wells-Ogunquit CSD are
constructing new schools now because of capacity/facility obsolescence
issues. |
|
Sanford is facing declining enrollment and
facility closings. |
|
|
|
|
|
The new York County Jail, opening soon, was
designed before a large casino resort was proposed for this County. Its future capacity should be
re-analyzed based upon experiences of other similarly-sized resort casinos. |
|
|
|
|
Impacts on Schools, Police & Emergency
Services, Jail and Courts are very hard to predict, since experiences of
casino host communities vary widely. |
|
Significant additional resources would be needed
to estimate such impacts. |
|
|
|
|
Town of Sanford Contract Rezoning Process |
|
DEP Site Law Review |
|
Regional Planning Commission Statute |
|
Role of SMRPC |
|
|
|
|
Enabled by a State Statute, and allows
municipalities to impose conditions in exchange for a rezoning |
|
Conditions must relate to the “physical
development or operation of the property.” |
|
It is unclear whether this might include
requirements to provide off-site improvements outside of the Town of
Sanford. |
|
The entire site plan approval process is folded
into the contract rezoning application. |
|
|
|
|
Sanford will be changing from a Town Meeting to
a Town Council form of government next January. |
|
The Contract Rezoning may go to a Town vote in
Sanford, depending on timing and/or the wishes of the Selectmen/Councilors. |
|
Any rezoning could be put to a town vote by
citizen petition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By its very nature, contract zoning allows the
Board or Council to consider uses that are not currently allowed by the
existing ordinance…. |
|
However, DEP in its Site Law Process may not be
willing to conduct a review of a casino application until the use is
legalized. |
|
|
|
|
Impacts on Wildlife, Wetlands, Drainage,
Endangered or Threatened Species |
|
Impacts on Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant –
Discharge License |
|
Impacts to State Roads at Entrance, Nearby
Intersections, Traffic Levels |
|
Opportunity for regional municipalities to
provide input at the “scoping” meeting, and presumably at a hearing of the
Board of Environmental Protection. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-A M.R.S.A. 2305 et seq. |
|
Statute encourages regional solutions through
the RPC without creating new entities unless necessary. |
|
RPC may study any problem common to 2 or more
members that it considers appropriate. |
|
|
|
|
The RPC may “promote cooperative arrangements
and coordinate action among its members. |
|
It may “make recommendations for review and
action to its members and other public agencies that perform functions
within the region.” |
|
|
|
|
RPC’s may review municipal actions which in the
RPC's judgment have a substantial effect on regional development, such as
zoning ordinance amendments. |
|
The RPC is empowered to conduct hearings if
necessary. |
|
RPC’s may make recommendations on the basis of
its plans or studies. |
|
|
|
|
So far, the Commissioners as a group have not
“weighed in,” and do not see a county role in the decision-making. |
|
There is no explicit role for counties in
“local” land use decisions. |
|
Potential impacts on the Sheriff’s Department,
Courts, and Jail. |
|
|
|
|
We can’t copy a plan by following the trail of
other communities or regions that have experienced casino development,
because our forms of government are so different. |
|
Maine has no County government involvement in
land use planning |
|
The degree of municipal control is unprecedented
when compared to other parts of the United States. |
|
There is no State or Regional Review of large
developments in Maine, other than Site Law |
|
Nationally, many casinos are on Tribal Land, and
this project will be on private land with municipal approval. |
|
|
|
|
Holder of forums and hearings to gather input |
|
Coordinate regional municipal input for Site Law
Permit process by DEP, and for Contract Zoning and Site Review by Town of
Sanford |
|
Clearing house for gathering existing research
on casino impacts and developing new information on projected impacts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
SMRPC could administer a regional grant or
revolving loan fund for projects to mitigate impacts from the casino,
unforeseen during the approval process.
Other states have set up such a mechanism funded by a percentage of
casino revenues. |
|
This structure could be in the form of a
foundation, development district, regional authority, or any other entity
supported by an interlocal agreement. |
|
|
|
|
We are seeking funding to study the regional
impacts of a casino resort in York County, and to devise a process for
surrounding municipalities to participate in the the decision-making. |
|
The State Planning Office has allowed us to
devote a significant portion of our FY04 contract to this project. |
|
|
|
|
We are seeking a $15,000 Regional Challenge
Grant from the SPO to fund the project, which will require a $15,000 match. |
|
We wish to obtain matching funds from the
municipalities and from the Tribes, through the Town of Sanford’s contract
rezoning process. |
|
|
|
|
While using tribal or developer monies, even in
pass-through fashion, is controversial, it is no different than the way all
other types of development review studies are typically funded. |
|
If no developer funds are employed, significant
municipal funding will be necessary. |
|
|
|
|
Regional planning work for transportation and
housing is vitally important, and the casino proposal is a “wake-up call”
for us to work together. |
|
Even if the statewide vote on the proposed
casino fails in November, or if Sanford rejects a contract rezoning, we
believe that plans for a casino in this region will continue in some
fashion. |
|
The time to determine our regional needs, and to
make sure they are considered in an approval process is RIGHT NOW. |
|
|
|