Five-story boutique hotel headed to public hearing

By Daniel Dunkle | Apr 18, 2014
Source: Scattergood Design Architecture + Planning A drawing of the proposed five-story building at 250 Main St. The building's height will dwarf surrounding buildings and be seen from a long distance, according to illustrations on file at the Rockland Code Office.

Rockland — Neighbors and members of the public will once again have an opportunity to sound off on plans for a five-story hotel at 250 Main St. Tuesday, May 20, at 5:15 p.m. at City Hall.

The Planning Board has found the application for the 26-room hotel complete. The project has been proposed by Lyman-Morse Boatbuilding, though the application for site plan review is filed under the name ADZ Properties.

The hotel would occupy the corner of Main and Pleasant streets, where the Hollydachs building was torn down in September 2010.

The project is estimated to cost $2.9 million, according to paperwork on file at the Rockland Code Office, and is expected to be completed by June 2015.

Parking for the hotel will be located on the adjacent block, between Park and Pleasant streets, through a lease being finalized with Maine State Department of Transportation, according to documents at city hall. "The 30-space parking lot can be accessed from Union Street through the Midcoast Mental Health Center.  A second access route would be provided through 70 Park St., near Eastern Tire."

A previous plan for parking off Brick Street near the railroad tracks drew opposition from neighbors in February and would have required a zone change.

The building plan has been changed to a hotel. It was originally approved in 2010 as a five-story mixed use building for retail, offices and condominiums. After doing some work on the foundation of the building, Lyman-Morse did not complete the project and the previous building permit expired.

Courier Publications News Director Daniel Dunkle can be reached at 594-4401 ext. 122, or

Plans show the five-story, 26-room hotel at the corner of Main and Pleasant Streets. (Source: Scattergood Design)
Comments (16)
Posted by: Amy Files | Apr 28, 2014 16:32

Please take a look at the architect's renderings (cut and paste the link into your browser):

View from Main Street and Park:

View from Pleasant back near Trackside:

The zone calls for the building to be "compatible with existing uses and architectural scale." There is absolutely no way that anyone can argue that a 5 story (really 6 now with the roof and elevator bank) building is compatible with the one-story cape across the street, abutting 2 story home and the rest of the residential neighborhood of which it will be a cornerstone.

Posted by: Jon Koski | Apr 24, 2014 09:59

This is great project and I don't understand the negative opinions.  One person who has several posting that are negative regularly states refusal of paying for any increase in the tax bill.   How can someone justify complaining about the tax bill and then complain about a project that provides to the tax base? 

Posted by: Valerie Wass | Apr 24, 2014 06:43


Your not sure of the negativity?  Come on, look at the small site.  There will have to be parking for employee's also not just hotel guests.  Rockland has a major parking problem now.  This is a sure failure as there is no parking within site of the hotel.  I would drive right by, never looking for a hotel on such a small lot.  Bigger and taller is not better.  As for Rockland's extremely high tax base.  Look into RSU 13's waste and also all of the non profit's here in the city and right on Main Street.  Now, when your talking a hotel, Steve Smith has it!  The perfect place and view and parking and land.  But on the corner of Pleasant and Main?  Come on!


Posted by: Jim Gamage | Apr 21, 2014 07:32

I don't recall anyone wondering how the Brunswick rooms was going to be affected when Maine Boats, Homes and Harbors decided to renovate their building and add balconies.

Parking can be solved by adding a valet parking service for the hotel guests.

It's amazing to read the opposing views.  Let's remember that these investments in our city are generating jobs, taxes and bringing in customers to our local businesses and promoting our city.  They are not asking for any tax breaks.  Let the private sector work.  Just because you don't like the design or having multiple hotels doesn't mean we should oppose an idea.

And quite honestly, an argument that brings up the 1% is just plain foolish.  Get a grip on reality.


Posted by: Susan P Reitman | Apr 20, 2014 07:21

The hotel proposed overlooking the Rockland Harbor and the boardwalk is the hotel that should be built in Rockland; that hotel will have my support 100 percent.  I am anxious to see if the hotel planned for the harbor will be scheduled for a Planning Board meeting.  It seems like POOR PLANING to have two new hotels built in such close proximity and I believe the majority of visitors to Rockland will choose to stay in the hotel that is proposed overlooking the harbor and boardwalk.  The parking on the above hotel is always going to be a problem.

Posted by: Mark W Ranney | Apr 19, 2014 22:31

I wonder what citizens who are famous for opposing spending a penny more of taxes for our schools do support if they don't support a commercial real estate project that enhances the employment and tax base with private funds and private risk?

Posted by: Frank Brown | Apr 19, 2014 18:21

This is one of the reasons why our economy is poor. Too many opinions and regulations inhibiting our business men and women. How can you honestly turn this hotel into some argument about the 1%? We have a local business putting more faith into our community and trying to make a little money, what is so wrong about that. If it were not for people like Lyman-Morse, you wouldn't have a job either. This is about bringing more tourists, more construction jobs and more opportunity to Rockland. If the city council does not support this hotel, I would be astounded.

I look at not enough parking spaces as a good problem to have, it means there are people visiting and spending money in our town.

Posted by: David E Myslabodski | Apr 19, 2014 16:19


Forget about the balconies facing Rock City. Have a look at LM's website: Notice that they conveniently photoshopped the smoke-stack out of the rendering.


Am convinced that this project will be blessed by Rockland's city council. I am wondering if LM is willing to put in writing that they acknowledge that Rock City was there first and that if the roasting aroma becomes an "issue" this would be LM's problem and if they do not like it, they [LM] will pay for and after-burner to reduce the emissions.


Many of us will certainly miss the roasting aroma, but this could be a workable compromise.

Posted by: David E Myslabodski | Apr 19, 2014 16:07

So not only are the 1% taking over our town. But now, they also want to rewrite it's history! It is true that LM seats where schooners used to be built. The difference is that the old ships were built for the trade and today, LM builds expensive toys for the 1% . . .

Posted by: James York | Apr 18, 2014 23:15

...I'm not sure of all the negativity surrounding the project?  It wasn't too long ago where the 'True Value" building was an eyesore. This building could be an asset to our downtown ...skyline?  The developers are not asking for any handouts and much of our city's downtown was built by local boat builders back in the day- nice to see that same development continuing today.

Posted by: James York | Apr 18, 2014 23:05

Looks like a nice building at this end of town; parking and other concerns are the worries of the projects developers... people want to stay downtown and they'll pay and they will walk a little.  I welcome the tax dollars and new architecture to the city.

Posted by: Susan P Reitman | Apr 18, 2014 17:23

Oh by the way, If this is approved, I can see the future  26 HUD RENTALS.

Posted by: Susan P Reitman | Apr 18, 2014 17:18

If this fiasco is approved every member of the ROCKLAND CODE OFFICE SHOULD BE FIRED ON THE SPOT for allowing this to go forward in the first place back when it was first proposed.   If the citizens of Rockland allow this boondoggle to go forward they need their heads examined.  I am really anxious to see how this idiot mess shakes out.

Posted by: David E Myslabodski | Apr 18, 2014 15:00

Money talks and the planning board walk . . .

Predict the same will happen with city council . . .

In a couple of years the 1% will fully take over Rockland and we will have to move somewhere else . . .


Posted by: Valerie Wass | Apr 18, 2014 14:44

I am very surprised that this is still being pushed forward.  So, it states that the parking will be between Park and Pleasant Streets.  That is a very broad area and in my opinion, I wouldn't want to walk any distance to get to a hotel.  This space is way to small for a hotel.  No parking, no good entry.  It would have been better to leave the old Wayfarer Hotel a hotel instead of condo's.  I do not think that that plan is going over well either.  Seems like a very ridiculous proposal.  One that is a great big eye sore for a few years, at least.  Would be nice to see something eye pleasing on that corner.


Posted by: PJ Walter | Apr 18, 2014 14:33

I am wondering how Rock City Roasters next door will be affected by this project.  The drawing seems to show balconies adjacent to the Rock City building.

If you wish to comment, please login.