By Emma Bouthillette 

Staff Writer

Half a dozen Kennebunkport residents expressed concern about plans for Hidden Pond II, a second resort development adjacent to existing Hidden Pond I on Goose Rocks Road, during the Oct. 1 planning board public hearing. Residents were also present to speak during the continued public hearing on the change of use for Hidden Pond I, but were denied because the public hearing was closed at the previous meeting. The continued public hearing was placed on the agenda by mistake. 

While the planning board voted to reopen the public hearing to convert Hidden Pond I to a motel use, the continued public hearing on the proposal has yet to be announced. 

Plans for Hidden Pond II on a 27-acre parcel include a 60-seat restaurant, pool, spa and 20 one-bedroom “motel” units. The motel units would be similar in design to the cottages already in place at Hidden Pond I and the second resort would maintain the same seasonal operation dates between May 1 and Oct. 31, Sebago Technics Landscape Designer Steve Doe said. He said plans for the restaurant include serving high-end meals for lunch and dinner, with the facility open to the general public as well as resort guests. 

Concerns about the proposal ranged from noise, smell from the restaurant, traffic safety and a negative impact on abutters property value. Abutter Bob Shappee presented the planning board with a petition signed by 60 residents. He said adding to the 26 units already at Hidden Pond I would have a “seriously negative effect” on the neighborhood and be detrimental to property value. 

Abutter Pamela Proctor said if she had known of the plans for development, she would not have purchased her piece of land on New Adams Road. She said she purchased the property with plans to build a retirement home, but is concerned the value of her lot has already depreciated and is no longer an investment. Proctor said the smells from the restaurant exhaust fans, noise from delivery trucks and car doors would affect the peace she was seeking when she purchased the lot. 

Abutter Ed Bassett presented the planning board with an estimated number of round trips that would increase the overall traffic on local roads. He said he based his numbers between one and four trips per unit per day, rather than a peak hour traffic study, and he urged the planning board to seek a traffic impact study from the town’s engineers.

Bassett also presented the board with reasons why they should deny the development, including fire hazards, crowding of Goose Rocks Beach and impact on natural habitat. Bassett said he was also concerned about the impact on abutting properties as this summer he experienced a guest of the resort asking if they could use his personal hot tub. 

While the planning board listened to the residents’ opinions, Chairman David Kling reminded them that planning board members base their decision on whether or not the application complies with regulations set forth in the ordinance.

“If it doesn’t exceed the limitations, we can’t prevent them from building,” Kling said. 

Planning board member Gordon Ayer said the board has to make a determination there will be a detrimental effect to the community in order to deny an application. He said abutters need to provide evidence based on experts evaluations, including traffic studies and property valuations. 

“We can’t say ‘because somebody thinks their property value is going to go down,’ and deny the project,” Ayer said. 

The planning board will continue a public hearing on Hidden Pond II after they receive results from the traffic impact study, which Doe said could not be completed before the Oct. 15 meeting. The continued public hearing for Hidden Pond I will occur at the same time as the continued public hearing on Hidden Pond II.