BANGOR, Maine — Neighbors have filed a lawsuit against a former city councilor’s business and the city over a decision that allowed him to operate his landscaping company out of his Ohio Street home.
As a result of the dispute, the city is considering a zoning ordinance change that its assistant solicitor says would clarify what businesses are allowed to operate in what’s known as the rural residence and agricultural district, thus nullifying the suit. If the ordinance is not changed and the neighbors win the lawsuit, the assistant solicitor said several other Bangor landscaping businesses could be forced to relocate.
Last July, City Councilor James Gallant, who did not seek re-election when his term ended at the end of the year, applied for and received a certificate of occupancy that allowed him to operate his landscaping business on the 1.5-acre property at 2100 Ohio St. The address is in the city’s rural residence and agricultural district.
That decision irked three of Gallant’s neighbors, including Rep. John Schneck, D-Bangor, and his wife, Mary Tedesco-Schneck; Thomas and Lori Edwards; and Jacques and Carolyn Larochelle.
The rear lot of the house is used to store equipment for Gallant’s company, Bangor Lawn and Landscape. That equipment includes several pickup trucks, a small excavator, a compact tractor and trailers. Gallant’s employees gather at the property in the mornings before being dispatched to job sites.
Neighbors challenged the occupancy certificate ruling during a September 2014 hearing before the city’s board of appeals, arguing that operating a landscaping business was not a permitted use in the district.
The board rejected the appeal in a 2-2 vote. Historically, Bangor has allowed landscaping businesses to set up shop in the rural residence and agricultural district — without controversy. There are several landscaping companies already operating in such zones, including Sprague’s Nursery and Garden Center’s landscaping wing, Patchwork Lawn Care, Black Bear Lawn Care and The Green Works, among others, according to city code officials.
In their complaint, the plaintiffs, represented by attorney Ed Bearor, argue that “landscaping is not enumerated as a permitted or conditional use in the district.” City officials have used the “agriculture” permitted use to justify landscaping.
Agriculture is defined in the code as “the use of land and structures for soil tillage, for the production of crops, dairying, pasturage, agriculture, horticulture, floriculture, raising of fur-bearing animals and animal and poultry husbandry and accessory uses.”
Gallant says he plants trees, shrubs and flowers on his property as displays to potential clients, while the plaintiffs argue that many of those plantings existed before Gallant moved in.
The plaintiffs later filed a request for reconsideration, asking to show the board of appeals pictures of Gallant’s property to refute his claims, but that request was denied.
The lawsuit asks the state Superior Court to override the board of appeals’ determination that landscaping is allowed in the district.
As the lawsuit plays out, the city is weighing whether to change its land development code to clearly identify landscaping business as an allowable use. The amendment, drafted by city attorneys and code officials, also lays out some restrictions and setbacks for such businesses.
City Assistant Solicitor Paul Nicklas argued during an April 21 meeting with the city’s Business and Economic Development Committee that without a change in the ordinance, existing landscaping businesses in the district could be forced to move out of the city if Bangor loses the court case.
The council is expected to review the ordinance change during its meeting at 7:30 p.m. Monday. The only councilor who voiced opposition to the proposed amendment is Pat Blanchette, who expressed personal displeasure with Gallant’s business operation.
“I would like to put this on the back burner until the courts come down with a decision,” she said.
The rest of the councilors at the business and economic development meeting favored the ordinance change, recommending the full council’s approval in a 4-1 vote.
The seven-member Bangor Planning Board, however, voted against recommending approval of the ordinance change in a 6-1 vote on April 22, in large part because they were hesitant to weigh in with a pending court decision as a backdrop and felt they lacked enough information to recommend approval.
Nicklas said the amendment, if enacted, would protect the city from future lawsuits if neighbors become displeased with nearby businesses by both ensuring such businesses are allowed and setting physical boundaries between those businesses and residences.
Gallant said in an interview Thursday that he owns property in Glenburn and is considering moving his business there if the lawsuit is successful. If he decides to do that, he said he would continue living in Bangor.
He said he’s concerned about how the lawsuit might affect other businesses in the city.
Attempts to reach the Schnecks on Friday were unsuccessful.
Follow Nick McCrea on Twitter at @nmccrea213.