Hannaford alters China store plan
By MARY GROW
Correspondent
Kennebec Journal & Morning Sentinel 01/10/2008

CHINA -- Responding to residents' suggestions, a Hannaford Bros. spokesman said the company will change two elements of its proposal for a South China store.

Mitchell Feeney told planners Tuesday that approximately 100 acres of land would be preserved from future development, and that storm-water runoff controls would be strengthened and improved.

"We're committed to conserving that property," which is mostly woods and wetlands, he said.

The runoff control measures were suggested at a Jan. 3 meeting with representatives of the Kennebec Water District, Kennebec County Soil and Water Conservation District, the China Region Lakes Alliance and other local groups.

Jeff Fredenburg of the soil and water conservation district told China planners he sent Hannaford a list of seven other proposed requirements, which he will also send to the Planning Board.

The supermarket chain is planning a 36,000-square-foot full-service supermarket, plus a 20,000-square-foot adjoining retail building off Windsor Road about 500 feet south of Route 3.

Tuesday's Planning Board hearing -- a continuation of the board's Dec. 11 hearing -- drew about 20 residents and lasted almost two hours. Most of the residents who spoke were concerned about traffic.

The traffic plan calls for installing a traffic light at the intersection of Windsor Road and Route 3; narrowing Route 3 to one lane each way approaching the light, with three lanes each way -- left-turn, through and right-turn -- at the light; and rebuilding the intersection of Route 3 and Lakeview Drive a short distance east of the Windsor Road intersection.

Hannaford has said it will pay for the road work.

There was unanimous agreement that people drive too fast on Route 3, and several residents fear that having a stop sign instead of a yield sign for drivers turning west onto Route 3 from Lakeview Drive would make it harder for entering traffic to get up to speed without being rear-ended.

Residents of South China Village asked about increased speed and congestion if drivers start cutting through the village to avoid the proposed new stop sign.

Residents of Vassalboro Road -- which intersects Route 3 too far west to be part of Hannaford's traffic plan -- say they expect the store will produce more traffic past their houses.

Planning Board Chairman Scott Rollins said the record of the hearing will remain open for additional written comments until 4 p.m. Jan. 18; and then until 4 p.m. Jan. 25, for rebuttals to any new comments.

Comments should mailed, e-mailed or hand-delivered to Code Enforcement Officer Scott Pierz at the Town Office by the deadlines.

Rollins said Pierz will compile a complete record of the proceedings that board members will review before starting to discuss whether Hannaford's application meets town ordinance criteria. Deliberations may not begin until March, he said.

The second item on Tuesday's agenda was discussion of Cleveland Street Retreat LLC's plan to convert rental cabins on part of the Pellerin Campground off Vassalboro Road to individually-owned "cabiniums."

Board members and Pierz advised co-owner Michael Sabatini to file a subdivision application and a request for a waiver from China's new standards for private subdivision roads.

Bookmark and share this story: digg del.icio.us Reddit


Reader comments

Sort by: Oldest first | Newest First

melinuxfool of Searsport, ME
Apr 23, 2008 3:09 PM
Why would you want to put a traffic signal on a road where traffic speeds are regularly in excess of 60 miles per hour? The only thing that's going to cause is a lot of rear-end collisions as people screech to a halt for a red-light.

A better, and safer, solution would be to create a third lane for merging. Don't disrupt that traffic flow, gas is over $3.50 a gallon, idling at traffic lights wastes gas, and at this point in time we need every mile per gallon we can get!report abuse
Al Althenn of China, ME
Jan 11, 2008 1:11 PM
I hope Hannaford retains control of the land to be held for conservation. I understand it was mentioned that Hannaford might “donate” the land to the China Region Lakes Alliance, a bad idea in my opinion.

I think that organization has done more to promote the interests of special interests needing and wanting to keep China Lake abnormally high than it has to done in the interests of protecting the natural lake.

The “Alliance” is not wholly owned and governed by China, another situation that could cause conflict within town.

Hannaford should either retain control of the land by itself or make sure there are restrictions as to it use. I’m sure Hannaford would not want hunting or shooting that might cause it’s customers any fear when they could easily prevent the issue in the first place.

A lot of people in China remember the women killed in her kitchen in China by a stray hunting bullet in the early 1950’s. Some are also aware of a bullet hole in the door at the store on 32 South that happened just a couple of years ago during hunting season.

Recreational vehicle use may also be a nuisance that Hannaford might want to make sure wouldn’t compromise the tranquility of their new store or turn the neighborhood into a noisy recreational site for the local motor sport fans if CRLA chooses to allow their use on it’s new land.

The tax issue is insignificant in my opinion as taxes on back land and wetlands would cost Hannaford next to nothing and result in next to nothing in tax revenue to the town.

I have a great deal more faith in Hannaford’s stewardship of the land than I do in the politically influenced China Region Lakes Alliance who might sell out use of the land to groups that would do great damage to a very sensitive. I think they would do that in an effort to gain political clout to influence keeping China Lake unnaturally high.report abuse
Paul Mac Donald of South China, ME
Jan 10, 2008 11:06 AM
I would like to express my support for Hannaford's for China. I belive that Hannaford meets and in most areas exceeds the Town of China and State ordinances and to impose even more stringent regulations would be unfair and belive unlawful to the people of China and would impede the future growth for China.report abuse

You must be a registered user of MaineToday.com to post a comment. Register or log in.