According to the Camden planning office, the Americans with Disabilities Act requires that towns allow Residential Substance Abuse Treatment Facilities for up to eight patients in districts where residential use is allowed.

The new definition, as proposed, is: PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FACILITY: A treatment facility that provides a comprehensive, voluntary recovery program for alcohol and other substance abuse disorders along with concurrent treatment for associated mental health issues appropriate for the level of care provided. The facility must only be utilized for private residential rehabilitation that requires overnight care. A Private Residential Treatment Facility does not provide outpatient care. Any operator must be licensed by the State of Maine to operate a Private Residential Treatment Facility. 

The new definition, and the related amendment, outline the requirements a treatment facility would have to meet in Camden in order to receive permission to operate. The The Coastal Residential District is the only district in Camden where these facilities will be allowed, according to the planning office. With the addition of residential treatment facilities as allowed commercial uses in the Coastal Residential District, more restrictive front and side setback standards are to be required from the Borden Cottage property. The setback from the road is to increase from 25 feet to 100 feet, according to Fox Hill attorney Paul Gibbons.

On April 10, Fox Hill Real Estate principal Rodman said no changes would be made to the exterior appearance of Borden Cottage with the increase in number of beds.  

“In doing so, we are not going to do any exterior construction,” he said. “It will be totally unobtrusive.”

Borden Cottage neighbors Des Fitzgerald and Lucinda Zeising, who own abutting property, said they endorsed the proposal, as well as the treatment facility. 

They have owned their Chestnut Street house for 25 years, and said that when Rodman approached them four years ago about establishing a treatment facility in the former summer cottage belonging to Charles and Julie Cawley, they were impressed by his vision.

“We were moved by his description and his firm belief in the public good that can be done with the project,” said Fitzgerald.

He said they conducted due diligence on Rodman, and called the Town of Princeton, Massachusetts, where MacLean operates a similar high-end drug and alcohol treatment center.

“There was nothing but good news from that town,” said Fitzgerald, adding that MacLean was considered a terrific neighbor and taxpayer in Princeton.

Fitzgerald said that since MacLean Borden Cottage opened in 2015, the neighborhood has been “a good bit quieter” since the days when the Cawleys owned it.

“It is as good as we could imagine and Tom is good for his word,” said Fitzgerald.

Zeising said, “there was a lot of fear and trepidation and skepticism when we were standing in the Opera House,” four years ago, deciding whether to approve allowing Borden Cottage to establish itself on the property. 

“What happened, I think, is all good,” she said. 

What could have happened, if the property had sold to other interests, would include possible code and noise issues, as well as undeveloped land issues, she said.

“What we got was the best thing for the town,” said Zeising.

Select Board members also endorsed the increase of beds at Borden Cottage.

Board member Alison McKellar said she supported the original project proposal when it came before the town four years ago, and continued to do so.

“I’m glad to see it moving forward,” she said, adding that she hoped treatment knowledge and help could expand across the community, and different income levels.

Bob Falciani, board member, agreed with the sentiment, saying: “Wonderful things are going on there. I wish we could figure how to do it for different income levels.”

Board member Marc Ratner said Borden Cottage, “provides a lot of jobs for people in the region and brings a lot of money to the town.”

“I agree with everything with what has been said,” said board member Jenna Lookner, adding that the facility is low-impact.

“It is the most helpful community-based use the property could have,” she said.

John French, board chairman, originally opposed the facility when its applications were proceeding through municipal review in 2014.

“I could say I was one of the ones who voted against it,” he said. Since then, he has changed his opinion.

“Tom and staff have done everything they said they were were going to do, and then some,” said French. “It is a great resource for community and fantastic neighbor. I’m so sorry it took this long to get this far but think we are moving in the right direction.”

Congregate Housing  

The amendment that changes the language governing congregate housing derives from a request of Bella Point, the new assisted living facility on the corner of Mechanic and Knowlton streets. That former mill, most recently known as the elderly housing facility Camden Villa, came under new ownership in January.

The sale perpetuated the building fitted for senior living, but expanded it to be a state-licensed and full-service assisted living facility. (Read: Camden's old mill buildings change ownership again — back to familiar faces)

But there was zoning language that limited cohabitation of congregate housing to individuals and family. The new language strikes the word “family” and allows people who are not blood relatives or spouses to live together, and allows more residents to share a unit, which, in turn, provides that Maine Care benefits are available.

Maine Care does not allow rentals of individual units.

The Select Board members agreed the former language bordered on being discriminatory and they especially liked the fact it opens up the housing to Maine Care funding.

“The fact that Maine Care recipients are going to be able to live there, in this facility in downtown Camden, is a triumph for economic justice,” said Alison McKellar.

The proposal to change and update food service definitions have been suggested but not finalized, and on April 10, the board agreed to table final decisions on April 24 at its regularly scheduled meeting.

The article would add a new definition for restaurant.

For many years the Zoning Ordinance has distinguished between Sit-down Restaurants and Fast Food Restaurants; continuing to make a clear distinction when the two are essentially the same, creates confusion in permitting and in enforcement, according to the planning office. Voting in favor of this amendment will allow the use of a single term for establishments that serve food to the public. If the new definition is approved, changes will be required throughout the Ordinance for consistency of terms.

The proposal now is to remove the definitions for Fast Food, Sit Down and Take Out and replace with definitions for restaurants and markets. In addition, the Zoning Districts were updated to allow restaurants in the Industrial Zone in the future.

Another amendment would add a definition for market, which is a retail businesses that primarily sell groceries and also prepares food on premises for takeout and change the term neighborhood store to market; and amend the ordinance throughout to add the term “Market” where permitted.