Planning Board - Regular Meeting

to call to order the Auburn Main Planning Board November 10th, 2025 meeting. And I will start with the first agenda item, which is roll call to my left. Ed Barah, Bob Hayes, Paul Jacques, Stacy Leblanc, Tim D. Ro, Hopkins, Bal Hussein. All righty. Seeing as we have two absent members, Darren and Riley Bershon, I will be elevating Ed and Bal to full membership status with voting privileges. All righty. Next item on the agenda are the meeting minutes. So, at this time, I would seek to have a motion to approve or amend the meeting minutes. So, moved. Do I have a second?

Second. All right. All those in favor? Okay. Ed, you're a voting member. Okay, motion carries. Excellent. Okay, so the third item on the agenda is a public hearing site plan, 61 North River Road. Um, I will hand it over to staff. Thank you, Stacey. You're

welcome. And David, if memory serves me correct, this is the one that um we're going to table. Yeah, I'll explain in a moment here. Okay.

Oops. Apologies here. I'm trying to just get us something on the screen for you folks to kind of to look at. I'll zoom in on this in a moment, though. Uh Chelsea Lewis has submitted an application for the reuse of an 87,8700 foot commercial building for a pet retail store and grooming service business in the general business district at 61 River Road. accessory to this use will be a dog daycare service for grooming customers. Um, again, it's in the general business district. The reason this would even come before you folks is any property that occupies over 5,000 square feet or more is allowed as a special exception and therefore it needs approval from the planning board. Um, you will hear this evening that um, they are actually going to ask for this matter to be continued. Um, the project representative is here, but the actual applicant isn't. Um but they do want to get some input from you folks just to hear if there are any concerns um either from you or the public and then would ask for it to be continued to the December meeting. I will point out a few things with respect to their proposal. Um it is immediately adjacent to the river, but they're not proposing any additions to the building or anything of that nature. They're just reusing the site. We'll be making some um site improvements to the existing gravel parking lot out there as far as actually reducing the impervious area and improving access by narrowing the curb cut, adding some lman seed out there. Um they do expect to have up to six employees with grooming capacity up to 20 pets per day operating 7:00 a.m. to 7 p.m. There'll be an outdoor exercise area about 40 by 60 on the back side of the building. Um, I can zoom in on this later if we need to. Um, I did note in the application that they uh needed to provide right title and interest. There was a deed, but there wasn't anything from the applicant. Um, you folks since have in front of you tonight a copy of the lease agreement between Chelsea and

the property owner. So, we do have right title and interest with respect to the project. Uh, dog daycare services would be accessory to the grooming business utilizing both indoor and outdoor areas. Um, with that in mind, staff's recommending a condition that the total number of pets using the exercise areas at any given time shall not exceed 20. Um, some of this might sound familiar to you folks. I've been on the board for a while. It sounds like we've had um proposals before with um kind of dog daycare operations and whether or not they were allowed. This one isn't necessarily a dog daycare. This is actually just allowing dogs to stay there after they're groomed. Um, in the past there's been a question of whether or not that constituted constitutes as a kennel. Um, we don't believe it is const constituting as a kennel because it truly keeping it accessory to the grooming business. You bring your pet there what excuse me at whatever time you leave your pet there for the duration of the day for that matter. You come back, you pick up your pet. Um, it's not necessarily an operation where I'm going there every day to drop off my dog for daycare purposes, unless you were getting your dog groomed every single day. Um, that is it. Other than we there were some uh again staff was recommending the condition that um the dog daycare portion of this is accessory to the primary grooming and retail business with a total number of pets using the exercise areas indoor and outdoor at any given time not to exceed 20. Travis Nettle from Plats Associates. He's representing the applicant tonight and I believe he has a few uh comments or questions for maybe you folks and as well um if you can give him some impact input but again they're looking for this to be continued to the December meeting.

Absolutely. Yep. Forward. Thank you.

Thank you. Uh my name is Travis Neto. with Plats Associates Architects uh representing Henkins Point and uh Tim Millet the property owner and also um Maine Bark and Lounge the uh prospective tenant. Um uh appreciate your um uh your consideration of a a motion to continue to our next meeting. one of the items that we have been hammering out and and um David's been fantastic partner in um trying to trying to bring this project together in a way that's um good for this for the city but also good for the for the owner and the uh and the tenant. Um it's it's a little tricky as far as a conditional use and an accessory use. So we want to make sure that we have those uh strategies baked into our our uh design uh development proposal and uh especially to the extent of the operations. You know I think um uh this is a uh project while there's very little site work very uh no building addition and a lot of the um exterior aspects of the project are are to remain as is existing. Um, I think that operations aspect to this development is is an important piece and this would give us some more time to consider that and then offer to the board a more comprehensive uh development package for for you guys to vote on. So, looking forward to the opportunity to take on some uh some questions or comments, areas of concerns. Um, generally um the site is is along the river in a sort of deep into a commercial block uh of buildings. there aren't any residential uses nearby. Um so it makes a pretty good fit for this type of use. Um the uh parking area has been used as a layown for the city's ongoing work with the utilities up and down the road there. So there's a fair degree of reconstitution of that uh surface that needs to occur

now that the activities are are sort of waning. Um and I understand those that's happening now. As part of that, um, what I'm trying to bake into these drawings here is a is a narrowing of the entrance drive and removal of any parking and pavement areas within the the setback zone, the rightway setback. Um, so, uh, also the speak briefly on the exterior development. So, uh, there'll be a fenced in, uh, privacy fenced, um, outside exercise area. Um, this exercise area is envisioned as being partitioned in some way. to to allow for some um sorting of the animals so that there we can do some crowd control for lack of a better word. Um there'll also be some interior areas dedicated to um to exercise or or uh containment. um the idea of providing multiple um ex experiences for the animals, but also it allows us to to segregate animals that need to be segregated to to have effective crowd control, sound control, and and management. Um the dumpster location is envisioned at the back of the lot, screened from the parking area with a privacy fence that be anchored to the ground. All the fencing will be uh concrete anchored to the ground um and full privacy to 7 ft. That uh dumpster enclosure would also have a gate system on the front of it. So, it'll be completely screened from the street. The fenced dog enclosure or pet enclosure is um uh also has some some bushes and landscaping to help couch the uh the impact of that fencing uh on the surrounding contacts. But again, um there's a there's uh an existing building on the site um towards the water off the street that's not part of this project. This project is um is exclusively focus on the building that's um along North River Road and uh

adjacent tenants are are largely commercial in nature and um but we're still um looking to to offer a bit of screening to that fencing and and the dumpster enclosure. Um parking is uh going to be relatively in the same area. Um we're including some handicap parking spots that adjacent to the entrance of the building. Um we don't envision that parking field uh being used um in its entirety. So uh there there should be plenty of parking and and also the dimensions are such that you could turn around within that parking area. both cars and and um delivery vehicles and also the dump truck can um can take the trash back in within the lot and then enter the rideway uh with a forward approach. There will be no backing into the rightway. Um I guess uh that's that's pretty much it for the exterior uh components. Um and I guess if there's any questions from the board, happy to answer them. board have any questions for the applicant?

I'm sorry. I have questions, but I think they're more for staff. Okay. All right. Perfect. All righty. Great. Thank you. Um, so staff, the I hear we want a motion to continue, though we should probably still have public hearing. Correct. I'm sorry. So, I hear there's a motion to continue. Correct. Okay. But we should probably still have public hearing. Yeah, I think so. That's what the applicant is requesting. Okay. All right. So, at this moment, I would seek a motion to open up public comment. So, moved. Do you have a second? Second.

All right. All those in favor. Excellent. Um, so at this moment, if you would like to come forward to the podium, you can state your name, your address, and you have five minutes for any public comment. All right. Seeing none, I would seek a motion to close public comment. So, move. Do you have a second? Second. All right. All those in favor? Excellent. Motion carries. Okay. Questions for staff.

Um I heard no residential nearby. Does Can staff quantify how far this proposal is from the nearest residence? Maybe. This is the structure that we're talking about right here. Uh, put it in context. This is Cumberland Farms over here. Gippers is over here. So, um, the nearest residential use, I'm guessing, is this property here. Uh, two family. So if you're looking for actual distance,

is this the old boatyard down behind Cummings? Yeah, exactly. The last use of this property actually was marijuana grow and yeah, the boat this is where the boat launch is right here. All right. So there is a residence not far cuz I'm I'm just thinking as a homeowner myself, I don't know how happy I'd be hearing up to 20 dogs barking about. So I'm just trying to get that question answered. 400 feet approximately.

All right. Thank you. And my next question, um, what are the differences you mentioned earlier, um, doggy daycare and that staff doesn't see this really qualifying as that definition. Although from the gentleman that spoke, I hear an awful lot of preparation being made. That sounds an awful lot like a doggy daycare. So between this proposal and what a true doggy daycare is, what would the differences be?

That that may be a question for the applicant, but from staff's perspective, we don't allow we don't have a use category um in Auburn that allows a dog daycare. Um the next closest use is a kennel. Um, and even then when you look at the definitions of kennel, it's not a perfect match because it talks about the boarding of dogs. Uh, looking for the actual definition there. We allow kennels in one zoning district, a low density residential district. Um, and they need to have at least three acres of land. Apparently, in the past, we've had a couple of projects come before the planning board where it was accessory to some other type of operation. The board made that finding. The way I'm suggesting we could be comfortable with this or that the board may be comfortable with this is to say that it's accessory to what the use is out there, which our understanding is a grooming business, a retail operation. a doggy daycare or other dog daycarees that we're aware of are just that you drop off your dog. There isn't necessarily it's not accessory to anything. It's the primary use of that property. I drop it off as many days as I want. I pick it up in the morning. It's no different than maybe a daycare for children. Um unfortunately, we don't have that use category. So, how do we try to make something work here? And again, our understanding from talking to the applicant was that she was initially looking to do this accessory to the grooming operation. So that's why we suggested putting limitations on it as well so it doesn't become something else out there.

Okay. Thank you. I'm uh All right. Thanks. All right. Any other questions? Go ahead.

Yeah, the one that came up I don't know last year or something was right in the middle of a neighborhood. So it was a quite a bit of a different location. Um, and certainly the noise probably would have been an issue and it doesn't seem like that here. Um, because it's the dogs will be on the riverside. It's all open space and then it's commercial businesses ba for the most part surrounding it. So it I don't think it would be a nuisance to anybody. And the kennel thing kind of implied boarding or selling pets. Um it it's not clearly written. It could be I think more clearly written. There's language in the um it's not in the zoning ordinance. It's actually in the uh chapter 8 and it talks about um applying to a group of persons corporations engaged in the commercial business of breeding, buying, selling or boarding dogs or operating a veterary hospital providing a state kennel license is obtained. None of those things are what this person's

right. [Music]

Go ahead. you. Uh, David, I don't really think it makes a difference if you call it accessory. It's not allowed. It is a kennel. Um, you can have 20 dogs out there. There's nothing in your proposed motion that would limit the dogs to those that have been groomed. Um I don't uh the the ordinance in the general business zone it allows animal hospitals and pet shops, but no kennels and you got 20 dogs in a 40 by 60 enclosure. That's a kennel. I don't care if they're there for a day or a week uh or a part of a day. um seems to me that um if we're going to allow this under the guise that it is accessory um we have to be absolutely sure that it's not a kennel because just because something's accessory doesn't mean you can do it if it's prohibited in the zone. Uh, so I'd be looking the next time this comes before us for a much stronger condition and I'd like to know that it is somehow going to be enforcable without being a burden to the city that the business practices are going to be such that the only dogs that are there are dogs that are being groomed. I think staff shares your concern as far as how do we do that and how do we make sure that actually occurs.

I guess just as a followup, it would seem that one condition would be no overnight stay for sure, but I guess it also be somewhat of a function of how many pets could be groomed during a day or is anticipated might be groomed during a day. I may set some limit on the number.

All right. Any other questions, concerns for staff? Go ahead. I just want to make one other thing clear. I think the ordinance ought to be amended to allow for this sort of thing because I I in my experience and as you've described it, there aren't so many true kennels as there are combinations of kennels and grooming and what have you. But um this is a great site for this. I think there's there's a house that's almost 400 ft away and that's it. You know, it's probably one of the best places that you could do that, but I just don't think it's allowed um in that zone. Uh, and if we're going to thread that needle somehow, I think we're going to have to have some significant wording and a condition that allows it.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing, Ed, where if it seems like something that would fit in that if we were to make a change to something, it would fit in that special exception category, then we could determine whether it was a nuisance to the neighborhood or something like that. And then there's a little bit more conditional approval. But if it if it's not allowed, it's not allowed.

All right. Any other comments, questions? Okay. Seeing none, I would seek a motion. So moved. I need a motion. Motion to motion to uh postpone to December meeting for further discussion. Do I have a second? Second it. Any discussion of the motion? Was that the correct motion? That's fine. Okay. Just making sure. I know we've got some people that are very particular about motions. I think it's clear that. All right. So then all those in favor. Excellent. Motion carries.

Okay. Next item on the agenda is a public hearing site plan subdivision review. um 7 7 and 9 Fern Street. I will hand it over to staff [Music] actually. So, Dargo Architectural LLC on behalf of Woo Lake Street Properties submitted an application to develop two previously vacant lots at 7 and 9 Fern Street into a 5unit townhouse apartment. These properties are adjacent to Lake Street School and will share the existing driveway to the site. Uh the board may recall that this item was withdrawn at the September 9th meeting due to negative public neighborhood sentiment towards the project. Um so the applicant has now come back. You'll recall that this project is in the T42B formbbased code district. Uh they've since um submitted their application and they have met all the requirements of that district. Uh last time they were asking for a number of waivers and they've tweaked the plan so they don't need any waivers from the formbbased code. A couple things to note is that there will be a retaining wall. There was some discussion about that last time. Uh there'll be a retaining wall approximately 1 to 5t in height parallel to the residential properties on Fern and Holly Street. And on top of that wall there'll be some sixoot fence and landscaping. Uh each unit has its own parking space along with a guest parking space. Uh my comments noted that um they needed to provide evidence of financial capacity but that is actually in your

application. Um so you can disregard that comment there. Um since the withdraw project was withdrawn uh the applicant has provided some additional thought and they've noted in their application that um over the past year they've explored different options with the city and while they initially proposed a daycare uh they felt that was felt excuse me that they felt was well suited for the site neighborhood feedback showed a strong opposition to that use and a preference for housing that fits in that area. In response, they've developed a five unit townhouse proposal that provides home ownership opportunities and complements the scale and character of the neighborhood. The other change I should mention is that last time they were proposing this as a condominium development. Um they've since come back and chosen to do it as an apartment complex. um they can probably speak to the issues with that, but um from a simp simple perspective, it's a lot easier um legal legally with respect to association documents, easements, and things of that nature versus doing uh an apartment out there. Staff doesn't really have any other concerns with this project. Um, the only condition we're recommending is that prior to recording and issuance of building permits that the final plans be recorded at the Andiskagen County Registry of Deeds. Reminding you folks that this is a subdivision because it is the creation of three or more dwellings. So, they've met both the um site plan review criteria and the subdivision criteria. Tom Warrior is here on behalf of Dergo and he can uh walk you through the project and answer any additional questions.

Okay. Excellent. The applicant can come forward. Thank you. [Music]

Good evening. You have all of u this information in your packets. Um, but I thought I would just uh give a brief overview of what we've proposed to do here and then welcome any comments or questions that come after that. Uh, this is a combined planned uh with the Lake Street School project which is uh also part of Mr. Woo's uh development plan property he acquired from the city along with uh 709 Fern Street. Uh the upper right hand corner is a playground which is in the process of being reconstructed, modernized, and available to the public. Um the these town houses certainly felt like condominiums when we first uh conceived them. Um but afterwards, we thought, geez, you know, it probably would be a lot simpler uh with a common ownership and a con management uh company just to have the the whole corner here be rental units. And if in the future they was a desire to convert these to condominiums then we would be back to do that. But from a sort of a bird's eye view this is the the overall plan residential development of this corner. Um this is the proposed subdivision plan um with the uh at the intersection of Lake and Fern Street. the the dark gray box is seven and nine fern which we're proposing to annex into the 80 lake street one common ownership also helps with sharing services common areas for screened uh trash services and other things and maintenance of the common driveway and sidewalks.

utility plan. Um, we collect this rainwater from the previous area generated by the building itself as well as most of the driveways and the patio areas. Uh that all comes to the rear of the building, the rear being farthest away from Fern Street into a focal point for filtration and storm water quality and quantity control. at which point we propose to have it uh discharged into the city storm water system through in Fern Street through new piping and structures and uh utility corridor is pretty busy there on the back through the patio area, but that's where we propose to bring in water and sewer and electricity into the units. These will be sprinkled units, so they'll be fire protection. Uh, keeping the landscaping plan fairly simple. Um, we do call for tree uh street trees be replanted. There is one that I'm sure would like to save right in the right in the middle there if we can. just don't know if it's going to the construction, but we propose to replant that. Um, and then just some common indigenous uh lowmaintenance type nice looking shrubbery in different areas. Um, to maintain the buffer with our neighbors so that developmentally is Just a visual and bit audible screen along the

plan south of the building or the bottom of the building that brown area. We proposed a mulched planting bed with a privacy fence top a fairly short retaining wall that's just there to function to help the buildings themselves. Um, just to go to the renderings, we tried to something that aligns with the current architecture of that neighborhood. Something that definitely meets the intent of the formbbased code and um, which is small to medium structures with good pedestrian walkability stoops. Um, what we feel is a an addition to a great neighbor. All right. Any questions for the applicant?

Okay. Seeing Oh, okay. Perfect. Uh, you're Mr. uh, Perkins. Tom Perkins. Yes. Thank you. So, the property description says it's 1.9 some odd acres. Can you guys hear Ed? Okay. His mic's a little bit. The property description. Thank you. uh says that it's 1.9 acres more or less, but the project description says that it's 2.33 acres. Is there some land that we don't have a deed to that is part of this or is one of those numbers not correct? Uh there's no uh hidden land anywhere. One of those numbers is correct.

Um and the conveyance from the city to Mr. Woo. Um, you quoted some language from that conveyance and I gather there's probably a document of some sort that might expand on this, but um, it said that the property would be developed in a form to benefit the local community such as daycare center, recreational space, a green space, park, or other such development as the seller and purchaser shall determine as part of the planning board approval. Do we need anything from the city saying that the council is content that this is the an appropriate use of the the property?

So, um, so my understanding is administration and the council did discuss this in August and they did agree that um, housing is a community need and um, appropriate for the development of this site. Thank you. Any other questions before we open up for public comment? Okay, seeing none, I'd see a motion to open up for public comment. So, move. Do I have a second? Second.

All right. All those in favor. Okay. Excellent. Um, if you're a member of the public and you would like to come forward to specifically speak about this project, please come to the podium, state your name. You have five minutes and your address, please. Good evening. My name is Lin Civiel from 10 Fern Street uh right across this project on the other side of the road. Um I'd like to mention that last month this room was full of my neighbors ready to speak against this project. Um, unfortunately it looks like many of them were not able to show up tonight. Um, but with very little difference with the project from last month, I believe their statements would be the same tonight. Um, I understand and supports Auburn's effort to add housing, but I don't believe this proposal meets the standards of Auburn zoning ordinances 60-1277 and 60-1336 because it fails to protect the neighborhood character, the surrounding property values, and the quality of life um of the current people living in this area. Currently, Fern Street, it it consists of single family owner occupied homes with consistent scale setback in architecture. The proposed five-unit town home structure, it introduced a density and building form that is not compatible with what is there currently. The twostory attached design, the share access and the compact spacing will significantly change the visual

appearance of the street and replace the traditional feel with a denser multif family character. A shift like that will lead to diminished property appeal and slower appreciation for the neighborh which is contrary to the ordinance intends to preserve the property values. When we consider this project together with the redevelopment of the Nurvi Lake Street school site, this project will convert what is a quiet lowdensity block into a multifamily corridor. The proposed configuration will increase local traffic turning movements and visitor parking overflow onto Fern Street and Lake Street. Even if traffic studies suggest an acceptable acceptable, sorry, level of service, the residents will experience a meaningful increase in congestion and reduce safety for the pedestrian, especially children walking or biking in the area. Um, and with the new playground being introduced soon, there will be an increase of children in the area. A quieter low traffic street is part of what gives this neighborhood its appeal and stability and the project will erode that environment. Um, the proposed stone homes are positioned within an extremely short distance of the side and rear properties line with upper story windows and patios. They are oriented directly toward exi existing homes. The light the layout will lead to loss of privacy in backyards and living spaces that are currently shielded. And although the applicant proposes a full cutoff exterior lighting even those light fixture will increase nighttime illumination into neighboring properties. The clustering of five units and

driveways will generate additional noise from vehicles and daily activities. diminishing the quiet enjoyment of surrounding homes. For this reason, I respectfully request that the planning board denies or require major modification of the 79 Fern Street proposal. At the minimum, I urge the board to please require a significant reduction in density, less units on the site, um improve buffers for privacy for the existing homes, and design revision that would respect the surrounding single family pattern before granting approval. Thank you. Thank you. Any other members of the public like to come forward? Okay, seeing none, I'd take a motion to close public comment. So moved. Do

I have a second? Second. All right. All those in favor? Okay. Public comment is closed. Um I Yep. You know what's next? Um I didn't catch the young lady's second sighting. I know she said 60-1277. Could you tell me what the second sighting you gave me you gave us was? 1336. Thank you. Okay. Any questions for staff?

I have I have one. Um the staff report says that the traditional neighborhood district allows town home residential uses by right. Do we differentiate between town homes and other multif family dwellings? Is there a specific definition of town home or are we saying that that multif family dwellings are allowed here? We allow single family, we allow two family, we allow multif family. We don't necessarily make a distinction specific to townhouse, but it would fit under um the multif family definition. Thank you.

Maybe just a question refresher. How many apartments are actually into the old school house itself? I believe it's 10. 12. 12, excuse me. And u the retaining wall that's being put in, how what's the height of the retaining wall?

1 to 5t. David, I just want to u clarify something. Um the speaker mentioned section 1336. Is the application that's before us a special exception? Is this is that applicable?

Uh no, I will double check. 1336 deals with special exceptions and I just don't want to dismiss it if it's if it is indeed a special exception. So, I think we're in a what? T42B, I believe.

Correct. T42B. And multif family is a permitted use. If it was a special exception, it'd be an S like you see here. Um, and I'll I'm taking your word for it, Ed, that that section is that was a reference to special exception. Yes, thanks for taking my word for it. Yes, 1336 is special exception.

One one other comment. I did find it interesting that the speaker um uh impact on property values. Um that's a obviously a a complicated subject and one usually subject to some expert testimony, but I think a homeowner is entitled to to to offer that opinion. Um, we have a provision under the subdivision review standards which is a little a little um oddly worded says the project will not adversely affect the character of the surrounding neighborhood and will not tend to depreciate the value of property adjoining the neighboring property under application. I don't know what 10 to depreciate actually means, but um um does the applicant have any obligation to affirmatively demonstrate that a project such as this doesn't have an adverse impact on the surrounding property values?

Certainly, the applicant should be speaking to the criteria of the ordinance, including those of the subdivision. Um I guess if the board is looking for some additional evidence of some sort to say that this isn't going to have some type of um depreciative value on the joining properties. I guess that could be asked of them. I'd have to check. I would I tend to think and I I could check. I believe these criteria are the same as the state subdivision criteria. So, I don't know that they're unique to Auburn, but I not that that m makes a difference, but um I could check on that as well.

I I just think that it is a standard. It appears to be a standard in our ordinance. And uh um I'm not sure in my brief time here that I've I've had any developer touch upon that question. And I think it's really what drives people to come to these meetings because they're concerned about um uh effects of a project that are going to adversely affect their properties and therefore their property value. So I guess um I'd like to see um a little effort put into it by applicants to address that criteria in the future. I don't think this project necessarily has an adverse impact on the neighborhood. It's tough to make that argument when it's a permitted use. Um uh so I guess by definition it supposedly fits. Uh speaker brought up privacy concerns. Could you share what uh linear distance from these buildings to the nearest existing residences are? Well, and then I would extrapolate upon that and then the other houses and surrounding houses around that as well. It's a highly dense area to begin with. So, it's not like

I understand your point, but I'm just Mhm. just she brought up a valid point and I just thought we would cover that. Where the heck am I doing a good job navigating right now? This is the old Lake Street School. That's 12 apartments. This is where the five town houses are going. This is a residential use right here.

So, they'd be going where that playground is. Is that correct? Uh, no. No. The playground is right here. And this is where the town houses would be built. So, the nearest abuing use is this property right here. And I guess this property here as well. I don't mean to interrupt you, David. Maybe others can. I Are you using a cursor? Because I I I don't see it. Oh, you don't? No. I mean, I Yeah,

I know what you're pointing at. The problem is uh [Music] point that out Ed. So uh this is the property question. Five town houses here street school playground nearest resial use everything resial right so I can measure this out certainly less than 10

thank you but that's that conforms with the the pattern that's already in that neighborhood of a pretty densely packed neighborhood already correct Yes. Thank you. Paul's just saying that because he grew up there, that's why. All right. Any other questions, comments, thoughts? I think we all know what's next. If there's no additional conversation,

we have anyone that would like to make a motion?

Not a motion yet. I guess I just ask, do we have a little more description? We talked about the elevation both of the uh retaining wall uh one to five and then we have a six-foot fence and then we have plantings. Could we just have a little more detail? I'm trying to read this ballprint. My glasses aren't helping me at this point. Uh with respect to the plantings that are going to be put uh actually on the back side of the fencing towards the housing behind Tom, I don't want to steal your thunder here. Um, should I turn this?

Yeah.

So, this uh the idea behind this landscaping is so that the butters are the land's going to feel like it always has. We're going to have trees finished to a fence mulch area plantings on top fence and then the retaining wall actually steps down here so that we can make formbbased code required us to be so many feet within street grade. So we had to one of the changes we did since our first application was to drop the elevation of the building in it actually kind of goes into that subtle grade a little bit. Um so the idea here was that it would just you know aside from there you know now there's sort of a a tree bought it's going to be developed but we create that distinctive line there so it kind of shows

um I understood the Fern Street side you actually moved the entrance right to the Fern Street side so it looks like the front of a house right? Yes. there there are several other I don't know if several is the right word but other uh rental properties in the area. There's not several but there are other rented units. Um and just to kind of car carry back and could we go to the rendering I just want to uh down if you would.

So, uh it's probably hard to see unless you zoom in, but um because we wanted to uh do just that we wanted to preserve and and fit into the neighborhood. Um there's upgraded finishes here. There's extra roof lines. There's uh board and batten um sighting with some uh stone trims around the bottom. So the effort here is not to, you know, we could probably do the same building form square footage wise, uh, that would meet the intents of the requirement that would not be nearly as architecturally appealing to look at. And the other thing I'd like to point out is we treated all four sides of this building. So it's not just the street frontage and then you've got the back of the house that's plain. I mean, from from any angle, we strive to really make this a nice uh looking property addition to the Uh David, do do we have does the ordinance require a developer in an instance like this to maintain the fence to maintain the plantings to replace plantings that die? Uh and if so, is it a reasonable mechanism for the city to enforce? If it's on an approved site plan, then they're expected to maintain and keep those improvements in place. If they are damaged, die, whatever the case is, they have to we can take enforcement action then and say that it's no longer in compliance with it, but they got approved from the planning board.

You think that you can enforce that even though it's not a condition just simply because they show plantings on a plan, they have to do more than just plant them? I do. I think you folks are approving a specific plan. that's in front of you that has certain amount of improvements on it. No different if this building isn't built the way it is. That's contrary to the planning board's approval, the retaining wall, the landscaping out there. They're getting approval specific from something that you guys approved.

And that's all projects like not just a specific project. That's what I thought. Okay. You you're suggesting we have another proposal later on this evening and they've given us a rendering of what one of the 69 houses would look like. You're going to tell me that they're all going to look like that? Uh I think the applicant's going to tell you that the majority of them out there are going to be designed to look like that. Um but in that case, um I guess to your point, Ed, they don't have to meet design requirements in that zoning district. So they could deviate if they wanted to. this district there's specific form-based requirements that have to be met. Thank you.

They add they do they do address your question on page six of their proposal where they will assume perpetual maintenance of private drives, utilities, landscaping, storm water facilities as submitted in the draft declaration. Thank you very much.

Well, the draft declaration was actually probably a carryover to the when it was going to be a condominium project and it's not going to be that anymore. That doesn't matter. They're still obligated. Correct. All right. Any other questions, comments? Motion. I make a motion that the proposal meets the requirements of sections 601277 and 601359 and approve the application and site plan submitted by Dargo Architectural Engineering LLC on behalf of Woo Lake Street Property LLC for a five unit townhouse apartment development at 7 and 9 Fern Street. The proposed project has met the standards pursuant to chapter 60 article 4 division 14 formbbased code article 16 division 2 site plan review in division 4 subdivision.

All right. Do I have a second? Second. Do I have any discussion of the motion? Yeah, I'm seeing um I know staff looks like they wanted a condition of approval above it. Certainly you folks can take that in cons into consideration. It's kind of belt and suspenders on our part just to make sure plans get recorded before any activity occurs. [Music] I'm okay with it. But

okay. All those in favor of the motion. All right. Motion carries. All right. Next item on the agenda is a public hearing site plan subdivision review for 530 and 538 Poland Road. And I will hand it over to staff. What? I heard you elevated. So I'd have to move one of them down and then elevate you. I mean I can.

You can. Okay, Riley.

I will [Music] Where's the Sorry folks, I just trying to get a site plan up for you. All right. Terodine Consultants LLC on behalf of Jonah Chappelle and Kyle Romick have submitted an application for three townhouse style multif family buildings with four units each for a total of 12 units at 530 and 538 Poland Road. This property is in the T42B district as well and access will be provided via a shared driveway. This is the same side that was initially a four lot subdivision that you folks looked at on September 9th. Um when they were doing two multif family structures with four units at that time you may recall they didn't meet the formbbased code requirements but they got some feedback from both you folks and the abutters. They've since come back with a redesign of that project. um the your application, we can pull it up um if necessary, but they've designed it so that um the structures and the placement will meet all the requirements of the T42B district. Um and they're also taking advantage of um utilizing a private share private shared access drive um minimizing the number of curb cuts and

then they can measure their setbacks off of that. Uh similar to the last development, this is a subdivision because it results in the creation of more than five dwelling units out there. Um the private access drive will be 24t wide about 350 ft long. Um they've met storm water requirements per both C the city and DP requirements. Um as with last time there's about 1,900 square feet of wetland alterations occurring. That's actually shown on the plan up there which I've been using my cursor all night and you can't see um but it's that shaded area kind of like 12:00 on the site plane there of 1900 ft of alterations. Um they're also proposing a filter strip with a perforated under drain along the northerly property line to keep drains from impacting butters and that may improve conditions as well. You may recall the neighbors on the northern side there um have concerns about uh wetlands or wet areas. You can see some of the wetlands actually go onto the abuing property out there. Uh the applicant can speak to this, but they believe they may actually be improving the conditions out there, not just for this site, but for the abuters. Uh they're also going to looking to put an 8 foot stockade fence along the northerly property line. That was a comment that came out of the last meeting as well. Again, they have to meet the site plan and subdivision uh criteria. Staff's recommending a similar condition as before where prior to any building permits being issued, the final subdivision plan be recorded at the registry of deeds. Craig is here on behalf of the applicant and terodine consultants. this one.

Hi, uh Craig Sweet with Terodine Consultants here on behalf of the applicants. Um thank you David. Um yes, so we're looking to do three different three multif family buildings townhouse style. Um they're each about 2100 a little under 2100 ft in area. Uh they all have plantings around the foundations. It's about 350 ft of new access drive going in. um which will have new um extensions for public water and there's a hydrant on the site and then it'll tie into the Auburn water and sewer district as well for both water and sewer. Um the proposed wetland is kind of up in the in the upper parking lot there. It's 900 ft to fill. And then as David mentioned along the northern property line where that fence is, we're also proposing to do a a filter strip which is stone and wrapped in perforated pipe. So, and that's set just a few inches below the existing grade. So, anything that would normally from the neighboring properties flow on or vice versa is going to go into there and be um there's a swale. If you go to the next page there, so there's a swale. So, it'll all tie into that swale which goes down to the back of the site um to a a levelup spreader and forced buffer for storm water treatment. So all those all everything will be collected from the roadways internally and for via catch basins out to that swale and then the parking lots will be drained to those swells. So everything's going to the that swell in the back. Um and it's going to be taking some excess water that's coming probably from it's very flat out there. So water kind of flows would pool where that wetland was. So with that being gone um in the in the filter strip there it's going to improve drainage all around. Um and then we're providing 25 parking spaces which is uh more than two per

space. I mean it one more but it's more um just for guests of residents. Um there are each two bedroom town houses and the existing lot one was separated out earlier this year which currently has a driveway entrance onto Poland Road which will come off of the new access drive to help eliminate the curb cuts as well. Um, and if you go up a couple slides, we just have the the renderings. Yeah. Show the like three or four up. There we go. And these were the um these were updated ones that were provided in the response to comments showing the frontage. So, the stoops are going to all be facing towards the the access drive um to you know meet the intents of the T4.2 to off the access drive as much as possible. Um, in that regard, backyards will have um back doors and the 8ft fence in the back to help have some privacy from the neighbors as well.

Yeah, happy to answer any questions. So, uh, regarding the drainage swailes, that's a change from when we saw you the first time, correct? Because if I remember correctly, public overwhelming concern of the public was the pooling of snow melt and rainwater. And that will address it on your property. Yeah. And it would um it would address it on this property and then if if anything flows from the other properties towards the back, it'll all go that swell and it wouldn't flow onto the parking lots from this on this property as well. So it would um if anything drains off their sites, it would help drainage on their sites as well. So at the very least, your property won't affect others.

Correct. At at the very best it may help others drain. Correct. Yes.

Any other questions for the applicant? Are these all rental units? Yes, they're all going to be rentals. And the existing home there is currently a rental as well, which is being rented right now. Can Can we see an elevation of the rear of the buildings? I don't we didn't have one in there. Uh just the front. I don't have one with me, but

I don't believe you have one, right, Craig? We We don't have one in there. Just the front. Well, there's going to be sliding glass. There's going to be sliding doors in the back um with a little patio. Um it's going to be very similar to the front, just but door, patio, and some windows on the second floor. But

we only had the front. No, I was just looking for the uh Oh, it's in the response. It's uh above that. Yeah,

I'm driving myself nuts right now. Right there. And we assume that the rear it's got to have the same roof line with the same pitches.

Yeah. I have another question. [Music] Uh, is your client here? No, they're not here tonight. So, the uh the the evidence of financial capacity, which is a requirement under the subdivision ordinance. Yes.

What we've been given is a letter that reads, "This letter confirms that Jonah Chappelle has a business banking relationship with Scagen Savings Bank that is in good standing. That doesn't tell me anything at all. That could be $50 in a savings account. I mean, I that's not evidence of financial capacity to carry out a project. We also had from Kyle as well. Um I don't remember the exact list says, but um

the one for Kyle says, "This letter is provided to verify that Kyle Romik does business with Key Bank and is in good standing." that that's not evidence of financial capacity. All right. Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you. Okay. At this time, I would seek a motion to open up public comment. So, move. Do you have a second?

Second. All right. All those in favor? Okay. If you're a member of the public, and I'm assuming you're you raised your hand. We just made a motion. Yeah. Um, so, uh, if you're a member of the public, you'd like to come forward, come to the podium. You have five minutes. State your name and address. Steven Lebec, five rock lab. Can you

use that? Use that mic. Thank you. All right. It's as much for the recording as it is for

That's my house right here. My property line from my line to the street you want to put. I don't know how wide this building's unless they put it right on where the driveway. This is that looks way bigger. I don't know measure that. But this right now that's to have a building there. I don't know. And that dumpster is still there. I don't want the drainage. If my property building So anyway, I that's my main concern. I just don't want all those houses to flood and the snow the fence. discussed that the last time you wanted fence.

My main concern is the water.

Any other members of the public like to come forward? I'm Kelly Levac, five rockill. Um, what is the distance between the bottom square of our property, that's our garage, to their property line? Cuz on this it looks really wide when actually it's not that wide. Yeah. You know what we can do? Um, because you have five minutes to do your public comments. So, we're taking notes. We're um we'll take your notes. will listen to your comment and then we'll address the staff taking your comments. So Okay. Yep. Yep.

So that was one concern I had and um I guess that's the only one I had because my husband said the rest. Sure. Okay. Yep. I think he said that one too. So any other members of the public like to come forward? Okay. Seeing none, I'd see a motion to close public comment. So moved. Do you have a second? Second.

All right. All those in favor. Okay. Closing public comment. Um, so there were some questions, some some concerns. There were some questions from the public. So I don't know if someone wants to kind of run with them. I think one of them was the distance. Thank you, David. You were looking at that. You folks are five Rock Hill, correct?

Yeah. So, I don't um Let's try this. So folks need to remember the GIS is not a survey. Um it's the city's best guess. So based upon this, their garage may be 48 ft to the property line. So,

and then as far as there was a question, um, and Craig may need to speak to this more than I can, but I'll just point out on the on the plan here, you'll see, um, boy, wish I had a mouse. Um, the dash line up there, the dash dash. Yeah, it doesn't. I don't know if this works or not. Five foot. So that's a five foot. Five feet. Okay. So if that's five feet, I'm guessing Craig.

Hey David, which side of the building is considered the front? For purposes of the vice code, you can measure your setback off of where the shared access is. This is the front. This is the front. the other building, right? So, the rear setback is a minimum of 10 and you said it was more than that, right?

Uh, yes, but that's not a rear setback that I just pointed out. This is this is a this is a side property line. So, even though this is the front, not even sure. I would argue probably the rear is probably that way all the way along the the railroad tracks. Not sure if we have an image of that or not. And then the sides are only five feet setbacks. So, whatever you want to call the side or the rear or the by uh ordinance requirements. Thank you, Paul.

I have a May I follow. So, a couple of questions about the the frontage of the the lot proposed to be developed. you just had up the city's GIS and I couldn't read it carefully, but it looked like it said 47 feet or so of frontage. It's both this lot and the lot next door. This is You guys can't see that, can you?

So, a total of about 94 feet are fronted, not by feet. Oh, I'm sorry. I can't see. like 137. Okay. Um why did you the dumpsters and is there any other spot where they might be um away from the auter?

Um they're there because when you have the L-shaped parking lot that becomes a dead zone and it's straight back for where any truck would come in and out. And then the other side, the parking lot is close to it's much closer to the southernly property line and there's swailes we have running along the whole edge to collect the storm water. Um so that that zone became you know the it it was in terms of a site navigation and the layout of this site uh internally it was the optimal spot and it has the full enclosure and then there's 8ft fence around it and we um even put a tree next to it to try and shield it a little bit additional from the neighbor side. So, it's got fencing immediately around it. Yeah, it's got and then it has a tree and then an 8 foot

Yeah. fence behind it, right? I believe it's seven foot around the dumpster, but I'd have to confirm it's six or seven foot around the dumpster. The standard and then 8ft fence around the property line and then the tree adjacent to it. Yeah, like chain link with vinyl slats kind of thing. It's a Yeah. Um or I think it's wood, but I'm not I don't remember off the top of my head, but it's privacy fence for both of them going to be. So, Where do you intend to store snow on the property? So snow can be pushed straight back on the road because the swale kind of starts.

The snow can be stored along, you know, uh straight back. And if it's in the swale, it'll or in front right in front of the SW. You don't want in the swell, but it'll help drain back that way. And then um it all the whole sites can be pitched towards that swale. So at the end of the parking lot there and then um adjacent to building two would be a good spot next to the swale. So as it drains it just goes right into the swale. And then it's it's the access drive will be curbed all the way back. So you can't just come in and you know you wouldn't want to trip up your curbs. They're going to want to push it towards the end where it's not curved.

Maybe explain to me again. I'm looking at the swailes, but the dumpster, why is it not all the way back almost right towards the swale where the truck could come straight in? still have room to I'm not sure I'm following uh the question. Are you talking about the right here? Nope. Come straight in. There's the drive itself. Straight towards the two swailes coming together. Oh, at the end of the access drive. Yep. Um,

I'm assuming you're gonna have to do some recontouring a little bit there. Um,

so if the swailes were moved back a little bit, could there not be a space for a dumpster for the truck to come straight in the access road and not interfere in either of the parking areas? the road does pitch all the way down that way. We'd have to regrade, you know, that it would cause a lot of grading on the road to change because then you'd have your entire storm water running into the dumpster enclosure. Um, as it runs straight back cuz it's been designed to run towards the swale. So, if we put the dumpster there, it would just be, you know, heavy rain events should be just flowing right at your dumpster. Um whereas it's it's at a higher spot up there and and tucked away where um it won't have the entire storm water flow directed right at it. So it would kind of prohibit I I wouldn't want to I wouldn't want to put the dumpster downgrading it with all the storm water site. Um that's not good for maintenance of that. All right. Any other questions, comments?

Question. Uh like are the plans for the swale in like the plans that you provided with us?

Uh they're just detailed on they're detailed in the grading plan there. Um, so those would be the contours of the soil. It's about, it's one and a half to two foot deep swale. Uh, some areas as you get towards the back, you know, it gets about 3 ft deep. Um, 2 and 1/2 as you get towards the back and the bridge change a little bit because you have to get down to the lower half where I think it's 5 foot drop from there to the level spreader. Actually, I'm actually going back to the original plan that came uh to the planning department first and then of course you had some thoughts of changing the plan. and you requested more time to work with it. And I guess as I look at it, was it just an economic uh you needed more units to make the project uh viable? Um no, they just um decided to move away from the lots aspect of it. Um they felt that this would be a good good ad to the site in the area. Um, since it's tucked back off off of Fen Road, it' be kind of its own little community there.

But trying to get that third building and it's made it more crowded. Uh,

uh, I, if I remember correctly, the the building kind of location in the front there is is very similar to the property lines as it was before. Um, yeah. I don't I think it's just they want we wanted to add another you know um felt it fit in there with the the layout in the neighborhood and um would give good opportunity for probably more rental units in the area. All right. Any other questions, comments? Okay. Seeing none, I would seek I would entertain a motion.

I need to be aware of how I word this. I make a motion that the proposal does not meet our requirements, citing page four of our development review checklist, specifically technical and financial capacity. I'm not convinced given the letters of uh information from Key Bank and Scow Heaggan Savings that the applicants have the financial ability as these letters are written to carry through with the project. Do I have a second? Second. All right. Do you have any discussion of the motion?

If the board's interested and I I would maybe look towards the applicant here. um versus denying it. I'm wondering if either there's a condition andor you folks continue it to have the applicant provide the opportunity give them the opportunity to come back with sufficient um evidence of financial capacity. That seems not approving it will um if they're able to do that um and not approving it, they would have to actually resubmit the whole application and go through the whole process again. I'll amend my motion to include that it be postponed until they can provide adequate financial information. Do we need

Do we need um a vote on the first motion before he amends it? Uh if somebody wants to make a I don't know who second it if they're willing to do a friendly amendment. Seconded it. I will make the friendly I will I will second that friendly amendment to the motion. Are we good? Um, my thought is do you folks want to postpone that to the next meeting like a date certain? That would be my suggestion to postpone to the next meeting if my thought is and certainly the applicant should be speaking to this but um if they can't do it in the next 30 days you know.

Yes. So our December meeting date certain. Yeah. Okay. So, we have a motion with a condition and a second. Staff, do you feel comfortable if I if we move forward without any further discussion? Any further questions? I'm I'm fine.

Okay. All right. So, all those in favor? All right. Motion carries. Okay. Okay, next item on the agenda is a public hearing site plan subdivision review Danville Quarter Road. So, I'll hand it to staff. I only have 600 pages to navigate through. I've gone too far. Well, Can you search, David?

That's thinking. So, while that's thinking, I'm going to talk. Uh, again, Pterodine Consultants on behalf of Timothy Millet has submitted an application for housing development consisting of 69 single family homes, three multif family buildings with 80 eight units each, and an accessory 5,000 foot warehouse on Danville Corner Road. Uh this parcel consists of this area consists of two parcels consisting of approximately 15.2 acres. Access will be provided by private roads. The final development will result in two lots. Single family homes will be conveyed while the remaining land and infrastructure will be retained by the applicant. This property is located in the general business district which allows residential uses permitted by the multifamily suburban district. Multif family suburban district permits single family detached and multif family dwellings. Uh the minimum lot width and depth depth requirements and density requirements of the multif family district also apply. This lot will be split. Uh lot one will consist of 0.9 acres. That's the recently approved fourunit multif family that was currently the uh previously the spurwing school. You folks just approved that a couple meetings ago. And then lot two will be the remaining 93 units. Based on 93 total units, the minimum lot area required is 4.45 acres. With 14.2 acres, the lot could support up to 241 units under the maximum density allowed of 17 units per acre. This project meets all the dimensional requirements of the general business multif family suburban district. Couple things to highlight is that access will be provided from Danville Corner Road via approximately 2,800 feet of private roads and sidewalks designed to city standards. Uh project will be serviced by public water and sewer. easements have been

shown on the approved plan and they must be granted to the water and sewer district prior to activation of the means. They've provided a preliminary traffic analysis that's showing 8:58 a.m. peak hour and 77 peak hour trips and then on the weekend 73 a.m. peak hour and 66 p.m. peak hour trips. That doesn't uh trigger the traffic movement permit. That's 100 trips in a peak hour. However, we have asked that they do uh more in-depth traffic impact analysis in accordance with the ordinance um to look at travel demand, system capacity, any other necessary improvements. The city can wave a traffic analys excuse me, the city may wave traffic analys analysis requirements if a qualified engineer shows that they are unnecessary. The applicant has indicated that they'll provide this additional information upon submitt of a final application. There's a large storm water uh gravel wetland on the east side of the property that will take care of uh storm water from DP and city requirements. And subdivisions with single family dwellings must meet open space and recreation requirements. Approximately 65% of the SA site will remain open space. For the 69 69 single family homes, 7.7 acres of open space is required and approximately 9.4 acres that are being provided. Under additional items, um this is a slightly different um review process than the board might be familiar with. Um, this development is being reviewed as a major subdivision. Being a major subdivision, the code requires a two-meating process which differs from past practice where subdivision approval was completed in one meeting utilizing site plan standards. This is allowed by state statute if a municipality adopts

this provision. AB Auburn hasn't formally adopted a one meeting process and has been advised that until an amendment is made, major subdivisions are subject to preliminary and final review process. Therefore, major projects are subject to or I should say major subdivisions are subject to preliminary and final review. Um, and I I will continue reading just because it is different. Um, planning board reviews preliminary plans at a public hearing, sets any conditions for the final plan, and grants preliminary approval as a guide. However, the final plan of approval is separate and may require additional changes or another hearing. The board may by majority vote determine whether a public hearing is necessary for a final plan. Subdivider must submit the final subdivision plan within six months of the preliminary approval. One six-month extension may be granted for good cause if requested in writing at least 30 days prior to. So, you're going to see tonight that um the recommended motion includes making a preliminary approval. And with that, the applicant would then have six months to come back with the final plans addressing any conditions or concerns that you folks may have. My guess is most applicants are going to want to come back after the next meeting because people are anxious to, you know, start development and have their projects move forward. Um, as with all the other subdivisions this evening, it's subject to the site plan review criteria and the subdivision review criteria. Staff is recommending several conditions. Uh, one again that the final plan must be recorded at the registry of deeds prior to the issuance of any building permits. Two, that water and sewer easements must be granted to the Auburn Water and Sewer District prior to the activation of the mains. And three, a traffic impact analysis must be submitted to assess systems impact and identify improvements

necessary to maintain acceptable levels of service. Um the applicant is aware of that and uh anticipates coming back at the next meeting with that additional information. Again, Craig is here from Pterodine to speak to specifics and I am going to try to find the plan to pull up on the screen for you folks. Hi me again. Um so if you I think a large portion of you guys had seen this last year in a different form with um the original just first loop and I think it was 48 units. Um the applicant has since purchased the the neighboring unit um which you did see for the spur conversion and looking to expand um the proposed development of the single family homes in that area. Um the loop from when you guys last saw it is largely the same. Um I know there was another iteration with duplexes, but it's back to the single family. Um he really likes the single family. He thinks it's he's done it in um before he said and has had good experience getting young first-time home buyers or people looking to downsize can able to easily afford a home um without having to you know it it cuts down some of the costs without the land. Um he had a sample we had a sample of the land lease agreement in there. Um and his attorney will be able to come at the next meeting to speak against about it. He was unable to come this meeting. Um but if there's any questions I can relate to to them and then he can come speak about that at at the next time we're in front of you. Um the original phase was about 1,400 ft of road with over the what's now South Grove Circle. Um those homes are largely are the same style that was presented last time. Um and he has a second style on what is now on Grayson Lane, which

those ones have garages. Um an example of that was also included in the packet. Um they're going to be he's going to be building them and then selling the units. Um there's going to be no real custom work with the people buying the homes. He's just building the spec two specs and going to be selling those. um proposing a 500 foot 5,000t warehouse um for his use um and then three multif family buildings um with associated parking on those. Um all all the units will be served by water and sewer which will tie into the Auburn water and sewer district and easements will be shown. Um it'll all go towards a pump station in the back of the site and then pumped out into um an existing stubbed connection. uh along Danville Corner Road and then all of the storm water on site will be collected via catch basin system and back into a large gravel wetland at the rear of the site. Um similar to last time, the wetland just larger now to accommodate the additional flows um from storm water. Um all the there's a pockets of common space. There's a trail in between the the center um circle. Um we're looking to maybe put another one next to the warehouse where behind unit it's um 53 and 54 will tie back into the sidewalk system um for for residents to walk on there and there's sidewalks as well um all designed to city standards um as David mentioned we're working on some additional traffic which we'll provide in our next submission um to address some of those concerns um and then let's see I think that covers covers everything on a on a high level for me and I'm happy to answer any questions. Um well the apartments will be two story uh four units per floor um

and associated parking for those and then um yeah all homes driveway sized for at least two cars and then the homes on Grace Lane will also have a garage which will will help with some additional parking and storage. All right. Any questions for the applicant?

Um, I'm confused about the ownership and about the applicant. You you've identified Timothy Millet as the applicant, but I don't see his name on any deed. What? Those are um he owns those corporations there. I can provide some good standing for those. Um yeah, and then it's going to be similar to um not quite but similar to how a mobile home park would work with the land lease. I believe it was 450 in there for a lease of the land underneath the home. So, it's largely, you know, if you go to a mobile home park, you you have a lot and then you you lease the land and you buy your mobile home. This is going to be a a regular home. um stick built home on kind of the same concept. Um he's done it before. He said it works really well for him, but he's going to maintain ownership of the rest. He's going to do snow removal on the driveways. He's going to do maintenance around it. Um but they own the units themselves. It's kind of like a mix between like a condo and a an apartment, but uh not apartment, the mobile home thing. But they're they're responsible for like shoveling their sidewalk to their driveway, but they'll plow the driveway. they can um maintain the landscaping around it if they want. And um

that's fine. Um so you I'm sure that maybe Mr. Mill could come to to the meeting or his his attorney can speak to this, but individuals are going to own these homes. They're not they're not they could be mobile homes. There could be 69 single wides out there, right? Uh he's going to be building they're they're going to be stickuilt homes what he's building out there. They don't have to be. That's what he's he's proposing to do that. That's what he's he's got the two designs that he wants to do that we've designed to fit in there. So anything else would have to be um run kind of through us to even see if it fits and we have to bring it probably to staff to make sure. But and and you say he's done this before. Yes. You know aware.

So are you questioning the applicant? I'm I'm confused. This is the first ad I've seen you kind of um question the applicant when he's not here and he's got his I'm I'm confused with your line of questioning. Well, he he's the applicant's representative and he's indicated that if we have questions for the applicant's attorney, he would take them back to him. I'm seeing that as an opportunity. Otherwise, when am I going to get my questions answered if I don't ask them? No, I'm just questioning your line of question, but keep going. Very good. Um excuse me. I were some of those directed towards the attorney just so I can make sure I mark that down for them.

Well, I I'll have some questions for the attorney about the the the land lease. I'm not sure why we have it in our packet at all, but there I did have some questions if if he's coming to talk about it. Yeah, he'll be here. Um, so I don't know if any open space is required. Uh but you're indicating that on page three um that areas outside the building and roadways will be available for open space. So wherever there's not a building or a road, anybody can walk around on wherever they want to. Correct. That's the that's the intent between between buildings and houses and Yeah.

All right. Um and the parcel about the the 15 acres or so is a combination of the two deeds that we have in our packet. Yes, it would be a combination of the two deeds. Yep.

Okay. Um, let me ask about the uh plan C21 grading and drainage. Sure. So, um, with respect to that particular plan, I'm having a little trouble like looking at unit 14. It looks like it's Are you planning to to add a lot of fill in those areas where the where the uh the building site seems to straddle um or go into deeply into what appears to be a pretty steep ravine?

There will be a little bit of fill uh on 14. Well, there'll be some fill on 14 and along the curve. Yes. Yep. Um those Yes. It'll take me a while.

I have a question in the meantime. Um I'm looking at the the land leasely section 15 termination of lease. Um it seems to give the uh landlord pretty broad termination rights. Um, these are home, stickuilt homes that are being purchased and the landlord terminates for failure to pay ground rent. What is the homeowner supposed to do with their stick built house that is no longer allowed to occupy the land?

I will have to mark that down and have the attorney answer that one for you. Maybe just a follow up on looking at that page C2.1. Are these a foundation built upon a foundation or on slab?

Most of them will be on a slab. Um we're on the ones on the end. We we'll want a foundation on those, but most of them majority of them will be on a slab. So the ones that were just referenced are particularly 14 was but then 15 16 17 uh 32 33 would all require foundation.

Those those would need a foundation. Yeah, you wouldn't want to do a slab on that. You'd want a foundation. Um we might see an um we're working on iteration that we might see in the final a slight change maybe have like a walk out basement if that one um with a foundation. So it pull pull the grades back a little bit at the base, but um no wholesale changes, just maybe a minor change there. But

I guess would be helpful for me to see an aerial view of this uh parcel at least or the two parcels in relation to uh Washington Street and to the lighting project that's a state project upcoming next year. to to which project Bob you're talking about next year the lights

oh you talking about the traffic signal okay yes sorry um so they are um Where's the light? How much what's the footage? What's the distance between that light?

Um, I don't know that that distance off top of my head. Nope. Which three driveways are you talking about of of this development? Yes. Okay. And clearly this is rough, right? Somewhere in here is where the driveway is a little bit. Yeah. A little bit closer to spurwing. Right about there.

So 1,700 ft. close to half a mile, a little less. Could I follow up on on that question? Since we're talking about the Washington Street intersection, which I I think is a is a matter of general concern. Uh, I I'm not sure why your traffic report or analysis wasn't part of this application now, but I trust that when you do submit one, you'll give us a sense of the number of cars that will exit this property and go toward Washington Street as opposed to the other direction.

Yep. because it's pretty tough to queue up there on Washington Street because there's a you need to be a like have a llama to get up over that hill um just off Washington Street up the old Danville Road. It's very uh steep. So um one other question about the the the land lease since you presented it to us. Uh, I guess I'd wonder, you could ask the attorney why under section 8 D C the tenant agrees not to damage the premises, the building or grounds. If the tenant owns the building, I think he's got every right to kick in his front door if he wants to. Not really sure why that's there. And the last sentence on that page, which is page three of 12, just doesn't make sense. that begins tenant may park and the sentence itself doesn't make sense.

Okay, I voted that for him. Which one doesn't make sense? Then the sentence that begins at the bottom of page three reads, "Tenant may park no private automobiles or motorcycles other or other such motor vehicles as landlord shall approve in parking area designated by landlord."

I think there's either a knot that needs to be in there or We're just giving you time to write. Oh, I'm sorry. No, I'm good.

I didn't want to throw anything else at you before you were ready.

Any other questions? Comments? I I have another question that is also a comment. Um I'm looking at section 8G and o overall this this does read like a rental agreement like you were renting a residential property and I'm wondering why if someone is purchasing a home presumably they're going to be selling it to another purchaser and not turning it back over to the landlord. I'm not sure why the landlord would require it to be cleaned prior to their vacating unless it's being turned back over to the landlord. Looks to me like somebody took a residential lease and is trying to apply it to a home that they're trying to sell to somebody. So, I'd like some clarification from the attorney what what the actual intent is here.

Of course, I want to echo the same thing. These leases read like apartment leases or renting a condo or condo bylaws and it's I'm very confused as to exactly what this is and how and just the leases themselves like like worin said read like rentals. Oh, really? That Thank you. Do do we know what the purpose of the warehouse is?

Uh he has a lot of businesses in town. He wants to store some of his stuff inside the warehouse um for some of his businesses and access it when he needs it kind of stuff. So it isn't really related to the development. No, it's it's just for his use. I assume he'd keep some lawnmowers in there for the development of manage people, but primarily it's for he's got a bunch of businesses in town. He's going to store some stuff.

Any other questions? Okay, seeing none, I'd seek a motion to open up public comment. Thank you. So moved. Do I have a second? Second.

All right. All those in favor? Um public comment is open. Um please come to the podium, state your name, your address, and you have five minutes. Um Steven B575 Johnson Road and 93A Shepley Street. Um, I travel along this road very frequently, daily. I've been by there three times. Uh, today, uh, I don't have any issue with the business plan of the developer or the economics, but I do have some concerns about uh, what are called uh, in Maine, buildings on land of another, which is a whole special category of status. And in again without regard to the business aspect of it, I am concerned about the enforcibility of such things as municipal tax leans, uh, Auburn sewer district leans, uh, and I'm also concerned about the very extensive pattern of private roadways, which seems to be, uh, much larger than any other private road system that I'm aware of in the city. I think the uh board might want to consult with corporate council on some of these points because there's a whole host of issues that arise when you uh create buildings that are owned by one entity or individual and the land on which the building sits or into which the building is placed in the case of those buildings that have foundations uh is owned by another party. Ms. Hopkins and Mr. Beer have alluded to some of those issues. Uh the other issue that I would like to bring up is the traffic situation on Danville Corner Road. Mr. Hayes has made reference to the fact

that there's uh a traffic light uh problem and study underway. Uh the public comment period by the main department of transportation on that Danville corner road, Beach Hill Road, Washington Street Light has uh just concluded. I've had extensive communications with Mr. Michael Leurge who's the MDOT official ch in charge of this project. A number of suggestions have been made for changes to that traffic pattern. My understanding, however, is that all of those uh in all the pieces of information that have been received and the proposals that are likely to be forthcoming from MD DOT have no reference at all to the additional traffic load that's going to be placed on this road system by this proposed development. And I think that needs to be addressed definitely. I did not raise it to Mr. Leurge uh because it was not yet a reality. But if it's going to be a reality in some fashion, this is a very very substantial increase in what is already a very bad traffic situation at that light. Uh so I encourage the uh city to engage with MDOT uh on these very substantial traffic issues. I have no statistics, but my belief is that probably 90% of the traffic that comes out onto Danville Corner Road from this development will turn right and go down toward Washington Street. Uh whereas only 10% will turn left and go to Danville Corner and then either in town on the old Anvil Road or out toward Danville itself on the old Danville Road. So, there's going to be a huge new traffic load on that light system. Thank you. [Music] Anyone else like to come forward?

Yes. Hi. Uh, my name is Dan Mareno. I live at 41 Presidential Way um in Buffard and McFarland development. That's not too far from this. Um, I'm a hu I'm an architect. I I work for Plat Associates. I'm I'm not involved in in this project at all, but I'm I'm a huge proponent for affordable housing. Um, and I will just say that I I think part of the discussion you're having about lots and sizes speaks to changing your zoning to allow smaller lots to be sold in this economic times might be something to look at. But my real concern is Danville Corner Road and Washington A because there's a lot of traffic and uh um unlike the the gentleman was saying most of the traffic going in town. Just to give you a little heads up of of thought process here, I can go to Shaws in Lewon in half the time it takes me to go to the Shaws in Auburn or in town and I can go to Portland a lot quicker. And frankly, this is a great project for people for Portland to come here. And I really think you need to talk to MD DOT about the surge of traffic coming into town because uh I think the original design they had planned they weren't planning to use a shoulder and my my 21-year-old daughter and I got into an argument because I was telling her that you have to veer off onto the shoulder because people don't expect you to stop in the middle lane and there's a lot of traffic there. And I think part of this development you really need to let them know that this is not the first part. I think I said it the last time, when if you build it, they will come. More will come, more projects will come. Um, and I just think you really need to address Danville Corner Road because that incline going up that that road over the trestle or the trestle over the train tracks, it's really steep. It really bottlenecks everyone coming off of Washington on. And then there's the cross traffic across technically six

lanes of of traffic in both from both sides. and not to mention the the lacrosse path, but that's really just my comment on on that project. So, thank you. My name is Steve Warren, 241 Danville Corner Road. Uh the only residence across the street from this development. I have a concern about the character of the neighborhood changing so dramatically. This is going to be a huge change to a rural uh setting. And I'm not opposed to the idea of a development, but the radical change to this neighborhood without any provision for recreation or uh I think there's going to be a real problem with what these people, especially if they're families with with kids, what they're going to do. Um because the neighborhood has no provision for walking or any kind of recreation. So I would recommend uh putting some provision on that this project somehow contribute to a recreational opportunity in the neighborhood. So there isn't a problem with uh a lot of young people looking for something to do uh and the neighborhood

not providing that opportunity. That would be the my uh number one concern. I I think having uh such a radical change to the neighborhood requires a lot more thought than has has gone into this at this point. But I guess this is going to be a long process. So hopefully more thought goes into it u because I think there will be a lot of issues that come out of it.

Good evening. My name is Susan Linquist and I live at 473 Old Danville Road. And my biggest concern is the traffic. You're talking hundreds of cars leaving every morning and coming back every night. They're not all going to go over the trestle. They're going to go in town and they're going to go out by the junction. And it is very, very rural. The roads are not wide enough. You're going from a very very rural country roads to basically Washington Street's like a highway. There was actually and you probably all know it wasn't that long ago there were two fatalities there just a few months ago. Prior to that, I would say maybe three years ago before that there was another fatality. So that's why they put in the light. But there's fatalities because people come they stop or they start to go over people don't look. You can probably going to put in if they put in stop lightss, what is that going to do to the traffic and how does that back up? And again to your point, it is going to change the whole character of the neighborhood and again to put 44 houses on slabs is basically where they don't own the land. What is their responsibility to take care of all that? Or if they don't, it becomes a glorified trailer park. I'm not against development, but there has to be more to putting hundreds of units in an area that really doesn't have uh what I think the vehicle capacity to handle. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Anyone else like to come forward? Okay, seeing none, I'd take a motion to close public comment.

So moved. Do you have a second? Second. All right. All those in favor. Okay. So, questions, comments, thoughts.

David, could you pull up the GIS map and probably remove the zoning thing so we can see the land a little better? So with traffic concerns is of course if you're going into Auburn going straight to Washington Street makes the most sense. Is there another way out that people would reasonably use?

It's probably a better question for some of the folks in the audience. Yeah, I I mean I have a pretty good idea, but I think it would be especially if you're going to Portland because making a left turn is if you're going to Portland. Yeah. It's Yeah. I guess what I would say is, and not to cut you off, Paul, but I know that um part of staff's recommendation is a traffic impact analysis. I think we could sit here and surmise potentially just, you know, from our own anecdotal experiences, but I would rather prefer to have an expert weigh in on it.

Sorry. I guess as a a a quick reaction, maybe a need direct reaction. If we are to look at the site plan review, the section 601277, section 601359, even to accept this is the preliminary review. Personally I can't find that uh that this application to me does not meet the requirements of those two sections u you know with respect to surrounding neighborhood uh uh I think the landscaping or the effect of the uh the neighborhood fitting into the neighborhood uh certainly what we've already talked about with respect to the the traffic and unsafe safe conditions with respect to particularly that intersection and even back in section 61277 that still talks about vehicular and pedestrian m movement within as well as adjacent areas. So, uh I guess I could not even support uh proving even this is a preliminary uh application

without a traffic study or with a traffic like I I I feel like I'm trying to figure out what you're trying to say. I I think we're all collectively agreeing a traffic study is needed, but you're saying regardless of whether you get one or not, you're not going to do it. I'm conf I'm trying to follow your train of thought. I think I'd have to see that traffic study even to uh consider it as a preliminary.

I I would agree with that. I think we're missing that information. And I'm I'm also unclear on the nature of the proposal. The single family homes will be conveyed. I'm not seeing anything in here that indicates the conveyance. Everything that we're being presented with indicates to me that both the buildings and the land will be leased. Um, so I I would need some clarity on that to be able to move forward. Well, you said the buildings and the land will be leased, correct? Looking at the lease agreement that's been provided to us, it does not indicate a conveyance of a fee ownership of the actual building.

I agree with you on that. I do. Um I'm a little conflicted with adversely affecting the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Um clearly that's a change for what's generally around there. Uh it is the in the general business zone. So pretty much anything you built that would fit in that storage units could go

zone, right? Um is going to change the character of the neighborhood. So, um I I'm not sure I David, I would like you to address that a little bit. Um how it seems like it's conflicting, but at the same time, it is the general business zone, so there's many other things that could be built there. Uh that's true. Um basically, general businesses are commercial zoning district. It's the same zoning district that you find on Center Street. Um, so like a car lot could be there. A car lot, a big box store, a car wash, a gas station, storage units.

Um, I'm I'm guessing storage units, a warehouse, those types of uses out there. So, you can have some pretty um uses that folks might not think meet the character of the neighborhood if the character is in fact residential. Um the city chose not to have it zoned residential out there. The map up here on the screen right now. Everything in the orange color is that I guess it's pink up there. Um it's the uh general business district and everything going to the south um becomes some type of residential district. Purple color is the industrial district. So to Paul's point, you can have some pretty intense uses out there. Um, as noted in the comments too, the zoning allows for a lot of density as well. Um, so if a developer could make it happen, they could actually put more dwelling units on this property given the amount of land that's available. So, there's a vision for this area to be something other than um something other than what you the neighborhood might be um used to on other sections of old Danville Road or Danville Corner. Just as a followup question, under a lot of commercial applications of large developments, we could actually ask for a lot of offsite off offsite improvements to support that development. Is that correct?

If it triggered the need for them, absolutely. So off-site improvements typically would be triggered by a traffic movement permit. Traffic movement permits 100 trips in a peak hour. I don't believe this project is going to trigger a traffic movement permit. I do think it's going to raise concerns. I think some good points were raised tonight as to whether or not DOT is aware of, you know, 83 trips or whatever it is in the peak hour potentially coming down to to that intersection. So, it's information that we need to share and I think the applicant's going to have to be providing more analysis as well to see what needs to be done. Just because it doesn't trigger a traffic movement permit doesn't mean that off-site improvements might not be um welcomed. And in the same breath, a traffic movement permit doesn't necessarily mean off-site improvements are going to occur either. Just it's a it's a threshold where additional review is required on behalf of DOT.

Yeah. And I just want to remind the board when we make decisions like this, we're making decisions based upon the facts at hand and not any potential outside influences by um chatter behind the scenes. Do you know what I'm saying? Like we're we're beholden to do the planning board and work with the information that has been given to us versus um maybe some outside influences, I guess, is what I'm trying to say. What do you mean by outside influences? Specifically,

I just want to make sure that we're we're using the facts at hand and not potentially having conversations outside of the planning board whereby it then influences bringing um conversations forward on this.

I I would totally agree with it with outside conversations, but I don't want there to be a perception that we're limited to what we receive in these packages. We're we're taking public comments. any any other uh information that comes to us at these meetings ought to be considered and I don't think we have our we have to keep our uh heads in the in the sand if there's an article in the Sun Journal about traffic in that you know we're going to know it and we're going to have questions about that but I I appreciate what you're saying

I appreciate that and I think I think collectively as a board I think we can agree that traffic is a traffic study probably does need to be done if even if you said you don't think is going to trigger it. I think at least it'll provide evidence and clarity and information and data for us to move forward um and not speculate. What What do we There was a comment about open space and this and that. Um the applicant makes the statement that there's seven some odd acres 7.77 acres available for as open space and I questioned the uh applicant's representative about that. And that's if you walk around every house, I guess it's just, you know, everything except the road and and the houses. Um, is there is there a portion of the land that is is set aside? It looked like it all it covered nearly the entirety of the of the parcel. Is there anything set aside?

I guess I would ask the applicant that. I mean, this plan here shows an area in the center um that appears to be dedicated with trails, but I believe they're also indicating that all the other area around this can be counted towards that open space requirement. And can you I'd love to have the applicant explain perhaps confirm that what we're saying is is accurate. And then could you tell me maybe my fellow board members know, but what are the open space requirements? David,

are you asking what what they're required to provide or what they actually are? They are required to provide

think I made reference to that somewhere in here. Um, let's see. Approximately, let's see, for 69 single family homes, 7.7 acres of open space is required. It's one acre for the first 10 units and then 5,000 square feet for each additional unit. And the applicants indicated that approximately 9.4 acres is provided, including small internal trail network. That's what you see on the plan up there now. So, it's that ratio of 1 acre for the first 10 and then 5,000 square ft for each additional unit, which gets us to that 7.7 acres.

So, the open space is is as described. It's anything that's not a building or or paved. Yeah. I don't think um

I know there's a definition in the ordinance about it, and I believe it's anything outside of a roadway, driveway, and building envelope. Sidewalks, back patios are can be included in open space, I believe, is what the provisions of the ordinance state. Um, I know it's the buildings and the roadways. I don't remember if it's driveways off top of my head, but I do remember reading that patios um and any yard areas and sidewalks are included in the open space. I don't have that ordinance in front of me, but um that's just from memory, but um yes, the the frozen the trail system in there, which will be in in a wooded area to be kept, and then um we're looking to put another one probably next to the warehouse that's there as well. Sorry. Um I'll say it again because that was far away. Um we're keeping the tree safe in the middle there with some trails in little wooded area. And then next to the warehouse on the the neighboring lot um that's being brought into the project is um there's another decent sized area of land that will likely um put a trail system in for in the next submission packet. And then that'll tie back in to the sidewalk probably near um I think it's 54. I can't read it. 34. I'm sorry. It's small from here. by the intersection of of the roads.

Well, I don't want to go too far into the weeds. I'm looking at the definition of open space and it says it means land within or related to a development which is not individually owned. We have one individual owner here. Mr. Mr. Millet or his LLC is going to own everything. So, it's not land that's in common. It's not land that's otherwise available to others. It's owned by him.

Well, I think I I I I'm not I believe it also gives stipulations for like a homeware association which would be one in one owner as well, but uh I'm not I'm not an attorney and I believe it was there was other areas in there I read. I don't have it in front of me obviously, but um I can I can address it in the next, but I can't I don't have it in front of me to speak to it right now.

May I ask a question of of staff about a procedural question? I'll ask you um the suggestion in in the staff memo is that we would grant preliminary approval and then we would have another hearing. Question being whether it would be a public hearing for a final review, but there's nothing that would prevent us from continuing this preliminary review. Not at all. Not at all.

Would you feel comfortable continuing this preliminary review after you received a traffic study? Okay, that makes that's reasonable. So, what I'm hearing kind of formulating as a motion is continuing with a traffic study. Is there any And then I think you also we're going to have the attorney here next time as well. Yeah. Yeah. He wasn't able I think he wasn't able to come for health reasons. It was, but he'll be here next time. Okay. All right. So, front and center is that agreement that Yes. Yeah. I don't relay all the questions you guys had back to the applicant for that. And I guess if I would to be helpful maybe providing another draft that reads a little bit better.

Yeah, if that Yeah, I'll try and get that. And we already talked with I already talked with the city engineer about the traffic um study. So, we're already we're already working on that. But

did you have a question, Bob? I guess I'd just add to the traffic study to be sure we have some communication with the state in writing is that they recognize now this project and that that should be reviewed uh along with all the other comments that have come in within the deadline but to make sure that we get some communication back directly from the state with respect to the traffic situation at that particular intersection. Could I ask staff um not as part of our official motion, but just as a um something that might be helpful to us is if we did have the city attorney um weigh in on some of Mr. Beiel's questions. you know, specifically, are there any concerns for the city when we are approving this type of arrangement where you have buildings owned by individuals on land owned by another? Um, I'm not familiar enough with that arrangement to really opine on that, but I I would love to have an illegal opinion on that if there are any concerns for the city. Do you want to make that like terms of your of a motion or it's just an ask? I I guess that would be a point of order that I'm not sure about.

Yeah, I I'm just asking as something that would be helpful um to help inform your decision.

I think that's fine. Similar to uh what you've asked of Craig, we can do some homework on our side too to come back for the next meeting. Perfect. Could you also uh determine whether the open space definition is met by this proposed scheme? Sure.

I have one for D. Paul has a question. We're just waiting for Dave. Not that not to call you out

work. So I'm not specifically seeing Oh, yes I am. Okay. So yard requirements is kind of part of the open space like what's considered o it's pretty clearly defined in here under what open space means and it's actually stricter than the multif family one or it's larger than the one I don't see anything specifically on that um but it does count any unbuilt space uh but it also doesn't include wetlands or stuff that you can't reasonably access. So, another place to do homework.

Yeah. What I um again, I'll I'll review the ordinance because we we did bring this to the applicant's attention. What I'm not familiar with is um what Ed mentioned as far as the ownership of the space out there. I I need to look into that. I think all good discussion a lot of due diligence. So, do uh someone want to make a motion?

And I would suggest with that motion, if it's going the way I think it is, again, to make it for a date certain um that way for the benefit of the public, they know that they can come back at a certain time.

I would move that we continue review of this matter until our December 2025 meeting. Second. Do I have any discussion of the motion? Staff, a point of order. Do does he need to like would you like to like specifically call out um you know the lease items, the traffic study and the open space questions or do you think that we're fine? Um it's probably a better question for the applicant. I know what I need to do, but I'm not sure if the applicant does needs any further clarification. Okay.

Okay. So, any discussion of the motion before I proceed? Okay. All those in favor of the motion? Excellent. Motion carries. All righty. And for the benefit of the public, that meeting is December 9th.

All righty. Next item on the agenda is a public hearing site plan. Another subdivision review. 15 Academy Street. If you didn't, I was going to Right. and Goro Palmer on behalf of Auburn Town Apartments LLC has submitted an application for 53 residential units at 15 Academy Street. Development consists of two vacant parcels consisting of 1.43 acres, some of which is used as a parking lot by the community little theater. Access to the site will be from Main Street in coordination with the existing five unit townhouse on the corner of Academy Street. The site will consist of a single three-story building uh with 53 units, individual ground floor entrances and stair towers. This site is located in the T42 traditional downtown district which is a form base code uh district and it allows multifamilies as a matter of right. Projects that must meet specific requirements unless a waiver is granted. Any waiver request from the formbbased code standards and requirements must identify which regulation is being requested for the waiver and include a narrative as to how the waiver if approved will allow the project to meet the purpose of the formbbased code. Initially the applicant requested several waivers from the T42 district. Upon further review, revisions have been provided and the applicant has met the building placement and configuration, building frontages and external elements of the T42 district with the exception of section 60-549.1.

The applicant has requested a waiver of the maximum building width. The code requires the frontage buildout, it's the amount of the building that actually faces the street out there, in this case, Academy Street, shall not exceed 60% of the lot's width. Property is unique in that is one of the largest parcels in the T42 district. T242 district with approximately 300 ft of frontage on Academy. This lot size creates a conflict in the building placement and configuration standards where the required frontage buildout is 60% minimum and the maximum building and lot width requirements are 110 and 120 ft. Based on the 300 ft of frontage meeting the building front out standards would require a building at least 180 ft long which conflicts with the 110t maximum building width. The proposed building is approximately 270 ft 76 feet along academy exceeding the 110 foot maximum noted in the standards. Although the building has a continuous footprint, it's broken up along academy in two ways. One, the facade undulations occur along each building module at intervals of 10 to 12 feet but no greater than 25 ft. And two, building steps occur eight times along academy due to finished site grades. These design elements provide an appearance that separates the structure along the facade, supporting the intent of the traditional downtown neighborhood and reinforcing a moderately dense street wall pattern. Staff recommends that any waiver granted by the board be noted as a condition of approval. As with all the other projects tonight, folks are looking at site plan and subdivision review standards. Some things to note. Um, access is coming from Main Street via a shared driveway and parking area with the existing town houses on the corner of Maid and Academy. Necessary easements

and agreements for site reconfiguration and improvements have negotiated. Final easements will be executed upon site and subdivision approval. The site's expected to generate 415 weekday trips with 30 p.m. treat 30 p.m. peak hour trips. Again, this is a project that goes underneath the D threshold. Uh there is one high near by high crash location, Elm and High Street, but that since had a raised intersection, and that's appeared to reduce inc reduce incidences. Site distance on Main Street driveway exceeds city and DOT standards, though nearby parking may obstruct views. Uh the report notes that sight distance looking left on Main Street like looking into town was obstructed by parking parked vehicles along Main Street was determined that without parked vehicle sight distance would exceed the requirements and the city may want to consider restricting parking in the immediate area of that driveway. Therefore, the board may want to consider a condition that before issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant must coordinate with the city to determine whether parking restrictions on Main Street are necessary. Um, I'll note in addition to that, the parking that was striped out there is now striped differently by DOT and um what DOT had striped and what the city had striped, apparently neither one of them or what was supposed to be striped out there. Um, so in addition to whether or not parking is creating a sight distance issue out there, there's just a question as to what and how it should be straight for parking. The applicant uh has noted that the site proposes 58 on street parking spaces, including those for the existing 5-unit townhouse. The code requires 73 parking spaces. Required off- streetet parking in the formbbased code may be substituted by

public or private parking within a thousand feet of the principal be building as measured along lines of public access. The code does not provide excuse me the code does not allow a waiver for this provision. The applicant is pursuing multiple off-site parking locations and community including the community to little theater in the village inlot. board may board may require as a condition of approval that no approved plans be recorded and no permits issued until 15 additional off- streetet spaces are provided. Um again this is a major subdivision so this will be a preliminary review similar to the last project that you heard. Uh the applicant has addressed many of the site plan and subdivision criteria and staff is recommending um should the board grant preliminary approval to consider a number of conditions including prior to the issuance of building permits final subdivision plan be recorded in the registry. No plans be recorded, no permits issued until the applicant demonstrates to the city staff or the planning board. If you folks feel necessary, that 15 additional off- streetet parking spaces are provided. No plans are recorded until the applicant demonstrates the final easements are all signed and recorded. Uh that the board finds that a waiver from the maximum building width be granted to allow the proposed 276 built 76 ft building along Academy Street. that prior to a co the applicant must coordinate with the city to determine whether parking restrictions on Main Street are necessary in the immediate vicinity of the driveway. Caleb is here on behalf of Goro Palmer and the applicant. Hi, good evening. Caleb Brassa with Goral Palmer. uh here on behalf of the applicant in Auburn Town Center Apartments LLC.

Uh just going to give you a brief uh presentation uh on the 53 unit Marquary Apartment uh building proposed at 15 Academy Street. Uh David did a good job of just kind of covering uh broadstrokes the um site scope and uh number of items that we've been coordinating with staff on. Just wanted to kind of know really appreciated the coordination with staff. Um, as was noted in the planners memo, we had, I think, four waiverss in our original application, gotten that now down to one with um, just a few uh, tweaks to the site. So, uh, certainly helpful in that respect. Um, on the first slide that you'll see here is a view of the apartment building um, looking uh, northwest. And in this view, you would actually be standing on Main Street. Uh in the next slide I'll show you just for orientation again if you don't mind David. So in this view here you'll be standing there on the plan. Um north is top of page south bottom of page. Uh this is just taken from uh the city's GIS website. So this generally shows the um limits of the property boundaries here. Uh there is a small portion that is identified with a uh lighter red dash line that just identifies the area with the adjacent condominiums. Um that we're working forward uh working with those uh condominium owners on um just uh additional uh access agreements and utility agreements and and the like. Um there are existing cross access easements and utility easements there now uh just based on the shapes of the lots and the original subdivision for those two lots. um going back uh several years now. So, uh if you go back actually just to that rendering. So, I just kind of wanted to touch on this and we can we can bring this back up when we get into discussion, but uh I'll just preface it with uh there's certainly been a lot of time gone into this

project here. A lot of thought gone into it. Uh the applicant team here, we're certainly really excited about this project and to to get some feedback from you folks this evening. Um but I think um going into um the formbbased code u items here um we're certainly trying to build on the street wall presence here. You can actually see just on the very right hand side that actually shows the existing uh town houses that start at the intersection of Main Street and Academy Street. So really trying to pick up where they left off and bring that street wall uh up Academy Street here. Uh we think it's a great location with the with the park across the street, uh CLT across the street, um in these this downtown urban environment. So just a lot of access to local um just the local businesses there as well. Uh great access back to um um the uh just adjacent infrastructure for roadways, everything like that. Um there's certainly a lot of grade across this site. Uh as you'll kind of see on my not so descriptive black and white plans, but um this this rendering really kind of does it justice. Um as was noted, there's eight steps in the building right now. Um so I think that what goes into and becomes kind of a complexity with our design actually became kind of one of the most unique features of the design. So I think this is a really uh really good-look building in that respect. Um you'll see at each end on the top left and then bottom right of this building there is it's a three-story building but there's a section uh notched out on the academy street side for upper level. Um that would be like a second floor or a third floor terrace, excuse me. Um in addition to some other interior uh amenity spaces in there. There's uh bike storage, I believe, dog wash, um some other ground

floor bathrooms, kayak storage, lots of space there, internal mail rooms. Um so, um with a lot of these projects now, it's really a lot of amenity based. So, really happy that we could provide this in this building scope. Um I think with that, if you turn it over to uh next slide here. So, uh this would just be our existing conditions and removals plan. Um you can see uh the 15 academy parcels the larger parcel um predominantly on the left hand side of the screen with the kind of elbowshaped parcel uh being the main street parcel. Um we'll still uh maintain our access from the main street parcel uh and just reestablish that curb cut effectively. Um we'll maintain access and and reestablish parking for the adjacent condominium owners as well. Uh but we'll be removing the curb cut on Academy Street as a result. Uh you can see generally uh the border or the middle of the site between the two lots in here. Uh we certainly have to deal with uh some significant grades as you kind of saw back to the rendering here. So um there are um elements of um just retaining walls around the site. Um there's the steps in the buildings and um we are making upgrades as you'll see on the uh parking lot plan um just to set up a kind of a high and a low parking area. Um but with that these two lots they're historically developed um currently vacant we'll call them. Uh the main street parcel actually is the primary access for the existing condominiums. So that's a paved curve cut with uh some utilities running through it as well. Uh and then generally the upper area is just more or less a gravel lot at this point. I understand that the CLT um when they have events um they're we allow them access uh just to park on on there now. So if you go to the next slide. Uh so

this is the site layout plan. Uh showing the building here too. Uh so this is about a 20,800 footprint. Seems like a lot but I think that with the architecture and what you see in the rendering, there's a lot going on. Excuse me. Uh a lot going on where we're um undulating the building face um a lot architecturally um with unit balconies. We have individual ground floor access with stoops just as going along with the formbbased code as well. Um additionally on the back side there are stoops to those ground level units as well. Uh there are internal stair towers for other folks that live on the upper levels uh to access as well. uh sidewalks um going around the building connecting to the Academy Street frontage and then additionally to Main Street. So uh we like that we're you know we're generally on the corner of Main Street, Academy Street, very close to the downtown. You have the parks uh the river close by. A lot of access for for tenants to get in and out um just via foot traffic as well here too. So um we think it'd be a great addition in that respect too. Um what you can see as I was talking about before um generally the same location for the curb cut on Main Street uh actually slightly shifted just kind of plan um south uh on here but uh we're setting up a lower parking area here which includes the uh spaces that would uh be relocated or reestablished for the existing condominiums. Uh, of course we're maintaining utilities for those folks there and uh currently working with uh those folks in CMP to actually um relocate their existing uh electrical services underground to try and actually get rid of the overhead wires that are along Academy Street or at least along our frontage. Um there is a uh gazebo area for some additional uh exterior amenity space uh that would be allowed for access with the with the condominiums as well. Uh and a ramp

system to get up into the site. Obviously, as I mentioned with a lot of those grades, uh you'll see we have several sets of stairs um coming up through um but the addition of the ramps uh there at the bottom of the screen or sorry to the right hand side uh the bottom of the building and then uh there's additionally there's other ramps to get up into the site shown just kind of top left of that building there too. um in the you can see where we break the existing dry vial and that's more or less where we're steepening our grade so that we can climb back up into the site try to limit our site retaining walls that we have as well um to that extent if you flip over to the other slide here David um we're more or less uh trying to maintain grades obviously um to academy street I know within the formbbased code there are requirements for relative grades um with the stoops from the finished grade at the street and then getting up into those units. So that actually kind of set how we started to do our grading across the site here too. Um but you'll see we have um several retaining laws like we had talked about. Uh the any of them range from 1 to 7 ft. In reality um there's one that's on the lefth hand side at the very end of that building. That retaining wall is in fact really only one to two feet. Um, and it's really more just kind of to set up um a straight face so that we can actually have a little bit more just flat zone off the back of those units there. Uh, we have a perimeter fence to all of the properties uh along the uh north and the west of us as well. Um, we have a another retaining wall that's on the northand side of our parking area um in the same general range 1 to 7 ft. Uh, and then a couple other smaller retaining walls in between ground level units just to make upgrade. Uh and then one additional retaining wall just below the building in between those and the existing uh condominiums. Uh site

drainage is fairly straightforward here. This is a flat roof that we have. We'll be connecting our roof drainage system into the closed drainage system in the uh parking area. That all flows down to what you see on this plan is a kind of big gray box uh with a dash line around it in our lower parking area. Those are just subsurface uh storage chamber systems. So we're controlling the peak flow uh as it uh emanates on site here and then controlling it as we discharge it into the uh city storm drain network and then uh a short while thereafter uh I think even 56 hundred feet away discharges right into the Anderson. So um with that if you go to the next slide uh this is just the utility plan here. So great access to utilities being downtown. Uh our water services uh emanate from Main Street actually and we bring those in and then split up into separate domestic and fire services uh down on the south end of the building. We actually uh come out of the building turn plan south and we'll connect our sewer service into the uh sewer line that is in Academy Street. And then additionally our power services will emanate from Academy Street as well. I don't think I had any additional slides. Uh I just wanted to kind of touch a couple other items in here. I know David had uh forwarded along. There was a comment from the abuter that I think is just playing west uh that direct abuter there. Um as I had mentioned, we have a uh fence. I believe it's called out as a 6ft white PVC fence there. In addition to that, I wish I had included them. We might be able to pull them up just with our packet. Uh we have three lilac trees that are along uh that edge of the property as well. um just to uh help with some of the views, just buffering uh to those folks that are next door there. Uh there is some additional um landscaping uh certainly throughout the site. Um so if any other folks uh had comments and we could pull up that plan and and point that to you

as well. Um just on the parking item, um that was one item that we had talked about previously with David. Uh so we're providing 58 spaces on site which uh essentially meets the um the requirement for the actual tenant spaces. I just wanted to make that distinction there that although it's required that we had the 73 uh required really the difference is actually in what would be required by the code for for guest spaces. So um we're certainly motivated the applicant has already started to reach out to I know CLT and a couple other um local off- streetet uh sites for parking. So, um, we're going to have, um, we'll hopefully have some more feedback for you folks, um, on that discussion and how those are going and that those can be secured. I know David had mentioned something in our conditions as well. Um, in addition to that, I'll just note too that we are on Main Street. Um, so there is public on street supply. I know that doesn't count, but just in general, it would be um pretty typical for kind of an urban environment like this in the downtown that if there are visitors of the building and someone's driving to the site that they might see an on street parking space and and take that one, too. So, I think that there's certainly um a lot to kind of discuss on that piece um if we so choose, but um I think we can certainly handle that. Uh we do have the one waiver um and I think David covered that fairly well, too. Uh but just wanted to reiterate that. I think it came in to be um that it was um you know for our lot being a rather large lot it didn't quite fit with how the the code uh provision was kind of written there. Um so but that being said I think that going back to the architecture the uh the various steps in the building. I think that creates a lot of just differential across that building. Um and really one still continues to reinforce that street wall that we're feeling comfortable that that might be a waverable item um from you folks.

And uh last item I know was uh spoken about in just one of the previous items here too was actually just going to be the financial capacity. I I would think um I understand we have kind of a similar letter to how the previous applicant had it. Um so we're certainly motivated again. uh we'll try to provide as much information as we can in our next submissions to you folks. And so I I actually can't recall how that application and if they u just move to continue the preliminary plan review or if that might be something that uh the board would be open to uh granting that as a condition uh that we provide that prior to the final uh plan review. Um certainly open to to that discussion too. Um with that that that's the conclusion of my presentation. So, I appreciate you that hearing me tonight and open up to discussion.

All right. Any questions for the applicant?

Just one concerning parking. Uh on the colorful picture we had earlier, uh there is parking shown along Academy Street. Is that part of the count?

Uh no, it is not. And actually I I really kind of glossed over that piece. Um as we're kind of coordinate that that's something that the applicant is coordinating with uh city staff on is we're showing kind of conceptually what is out in the road as some public improvements. Um, so we certainly saw it and saw that there could be opportunity for additional on street parking that could be uh included there as well with um some realignment of the curb line and then an opportunity for street trees um if we're removing overhead wires and and things like that. So um but no, that's not included in in the account. Everything that is on site uh is what is what is included. I I was somewhat bothered because it's a two-way street, but yet we had vertical uh drive in towards the building.

U all correct to be in the wrong direction to the flow of traffic.

Yes. and and David actually had noted that that came up in I believe uh A001 which is just part of the architectural package as part of an old rendering uh actually circle last year uh where we were working with city staff and had even envisioned as part of a just a larger um kind of transportation study with the downtown potentially uh that that could be a one-way. So that that's no longer part of it. Um but we're certainly still showing this just as as a thought and something that the applicant will work with the city staff on. Yep. I I have two questions. Um, can can we either see a visual or can you tell me how far you are from the parking the parking lot and parking garage here on Main Street? I wish we were closer.

Yep. Yeah, I believe what we found for the standard was that we would be looking to count anything within 1,000 feet and we had looked at this with with David and I think we're at,00 ft uh technically. So So we're close uh just not quite there. That's measured from your building. From the building, correct? To what point on this property? I think it was to the parking garage we were measuring that I'm not sure that matters. Well, already I'm at 400, right? Sorry. Not to the parking before you get to the parking lot,

right? Yeah. Not the garage, the lot. Right. That this is the lot up here, like the surface lot. Okay. So, if I get to the garage, I mean, now I'm cutting across the parking lot. Point being is it's it's over and we can't we can't measure from the the condominiums that are somehow being incorporated into this project rather than from the new building that's being constructed. Those are separate project separate owners. Aren't we doing aren't they doing something in in coordination with them uh regarding access shared access way or parking and things of that nature? Uh do you want to speak to

Yeah, I think we're certainly reestablishing the parking uh but we're not introducing these as new units. So so those the construction of those structures is not obviously they're existing structures so it's just not part of the application. Um we we really did we looked at it every which way and tried to get as close as we could but I just couldn't quite get there. So, um, well, what if what if this board were to say that that's close enough? I don't know why that existing building, if it if if its amenities, like its parking and all are being incorporated into yours, and they are, right? Not sure.

Then why can't that be considered the principal building? And if you did, would that knock off enough footage?

Can we do that? Actually, I mean, I feels a little stretchy. Yeah, I think we're on the edge because because certainly we have um

the applicant has coordinated with those adjacent condominium owners to uh establish uh agreements or easements for um for the restructuring of their area, but nothing associated with with the units too. Um I think it's certainly close. Um, but I I wonder maybe if there's something, David, that uh or some some way perhaps that if if the board was amendable to it that we might um maybe formally note the the distance from our proposed structure to the garage and if if the board was amendable to that uh maybe voting or or saying that that might be uh acceptable acceptable to for use. Um,

I I don't think I don't know. I don't know if we can stretch. I don't think we can do that, but I thought we might be able to the building a little bit. Well, okay. Tried to help with that one. Let me ask you about this one because this isn't going to be helpful. Um, your deed from the city says that under project grantee shall construct residential housing development consisting of a minimum of 16 market rate apartments. So, that's not a problem. I guess I need you to show me where the common space, green space, and adequate parking are. Where's where we've talked about parking. Where's the green space and the common space?

Uh the green space and common space would because these are rental units of course. Uh it's ultimately the the entire lot and all the spaces that are included within that. So uh for instance, exterior of the building would be uh the gazebo area and that adjacent lawn. Um there is some additional lawn space um one right adjacent to all those ground floor units. Um but then some space um just on the sides of of the parking area as well. Uh we just have some landscaping planned within there and and that could also be utilized for snow storage but uh but nothing else. And then in addition to that uh we just had touched upon um the uh the top floor terraces um that have been kind of planned in for the building too. So, um, that was just our approach and and what we're providing for amenities and open space for for the tenants.

Any other questions for the applicant? Okay, seeing none, I'd take a motion to open up public comment. So, moved. All right. Do you have a second? Second. All right. All those in favor? Okay. If you're a member of the public and you would like to come forward, um, come to the podium, state your name, your address, and you have five minutes.

Madam Chair, uh, members of the board, and, uh, Mr. Hedigar. Yes.

Yes. Hi. Uh, my name is Ron Russell. I've been a Auburn resident for a long time. Uh could we have the visual for the vert the property areas around um I've lived there um in an been taxpayer, been a resident there for over 50 years. We've had four generations of our family uh raised there. Um I uh was very impressed with your I got excited about it almost. But I must say I have some uh some damp water I'd like to uh talk about. It's a historical neighborhood. A lot of hysteria is right there. Um, you've got the across the street from us is the women's literary union. Um, the other side of the street from academy is the old high school which maybe some of you attended. I I think you have to be quite old to do that. But in any event, there's a lot of history there. Uh, Edward Little. Uh, uh, I could go on. There's there's many places. Uh our house was owned by uh one of the founders of the town. I think Jacob Broke um started the bank. Uh after that it was uh Ralph Lun who owned a shoe company. Uh the big place where the barn used to be. Um after that it was uh another another notable Wallace White who was a senator was the minority

uh whip in the Senate through the war years 15 years or so. Uh so there's a lot of history amongst my place. I'm very proud of it. Um and also the neighborhood. U this particular project if I can take on take my notes here. I don't want to forget anything. U uh this like I say will radically change the neighborhood. Um you've got 52 units going in. I would say that's probably more than double the whole um the whole uh number of people that are on the block. So, it's going to be a big input and a big change. Um the 52 families and the population will will more than double. Uh traffic is going to increase to I think intolerable levels. There's going to be 52 families coming back and forth right behind our houses uh right in the center of all of the constru of all the buildings that are in the town in the the block area. And uh this will be all day, all night. Um there's probably going to be a lot of noise. I know we're not enforcing the uh noise limits in the town, so the motorcycles coming in and out are going to shake the rafters. Um the zoning limit seems to uh I think you mentioned was 110 ft and it's going to be down the block probably 276 ft. which is two and a half times the limit. I don't think that's a good idea. I think they're shoehorning in as many

pieces of property that they can get revenue for. And while that's a business decision, I don't think it's good for the neighborhood. I think it's it's going to it's going to drastically change it the look of the neighborhood and it's got the ability if these people who are from Florida I want to change the perspective I took a look at the rendering and it looks beautiful but during construction you know changes occur could go to vinyl sighting uh things like that would make this u just an eyesore were I think and uh detract from the town. [Music] I don't know. I don't know much about town and country. They might be good people. Uh but they are out of state. One of the things that I'm concerned with I would like to see all of the revenue

Sorry sir, your five minutes. Sorry, didn't mean to have that go off, but um thank you. We appreciate your time. There's five minutes per person, so we appreciate it. Thank you. You're welcome.

Hi. Um my name is Gabrielle Russell. I'm I live at Five Locksley Road in Auburn. Um, I'm here um not as in a butter, but I um uh my dad just spoke. I grew up on this um block, so it's very dear to my heart. And um for full disclosure, I'm an architect at Plat Associates, but I've got no working relationship with um with this project. Um and I I'm not opposed to it at all. I think housing is very needed and this is a good location for it. Um, just wanted to express a couple concerns that I had. Um, the primary one being the 276 ft of wall. I think that that changes the character of the neighborhood significantly. um the um this residential urban neighborhood that we have um I think it's broken up um you know between smaller buildings you there's a permeability to the neighborhood um and having um such a long wall along uh Academy Street changes that a lot like the only other building that I can think of um that is similar to that is probably the rope block which is um in more of a a downtown character. Um so and then um the uh the rendering was uh quite nice and

I think part of um my concern as well is that materials and quality of materials they like they really change how a neighborhood feels. And so the way the rendering is showing it, I um I appreciate that there's brick and stone and painted um clapboards. And I think that that um can be a very successful accommodation if that um is a requirement that um or if that's part of uh how this project gets approved and is in character with the neighborhood. I would hate to see that change because I've seen it on a number of projects where that gets taken out um at the last minute because an owner can't afford to do such quality materials. So, um, and then, um, I also just want to make sure that the light from, uh, lighting of the parking lot and everything that that doesn't penetrate onto other people's properties. So, just the placement of the light poles is an important feature. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else like to come forward?

Good evening. My name is John Cleveland. I live at 183 Davis Avenue in Auburn. Um, I've only had a short time to review this and this is a 375 page submission. Um, in fact, I understand if you print it all out, it weighs 10 lbs uh for the plan. So, I you'll excuse me if I don't remember every detail in that uh plan, but because I'm limited to 5 minutes, I only going to speak to two items. That doesn't mean I don't have more. The first item I'd like to speak to is the parking and access to the facility. Has been mentioned here. The requirement is 73 spaces. Currently, I think on on the lot is 58. So that means somewhere other than on the lot, they have to find 15 parking places to meet the requirements. Um I there have been some uh discussion in the application that you could use general street parking that the city has has around the block. I would strongly suggest that that not be considered as part of the parking. Somebody might incidentally do it but that is a very dense area with many multi-story buildings with many apartments. Um there's also the community little theater there and the far mansion uh that the women's literary union runs. They have many activities. The limited parking on the street is really premium. Um so that really should be available for the general public and when the downtown the city has events like the balloon festival, the lobster festival, they block off the street and there's parking all over the neighborhood. So that should really remain as public parking in no way dedicated to this project whatsoever. Um also like to talk about the site distance from the entrance. It speaks to

it in the application. When you're coming out of that lot, if there's a vehicle parked on the left hand side, it obstructs the view and therefore you don't meet the minimum requirement to be able to have sight distance. That's a busy road right there on Main Street. cars coming and going, you really have to consider whether you can allow parking on those corners of that ingress and egress to make make sure you have the proper sight distances. Um, the other thing I'd like to mention is, and those of you who are familiar with this is the distance between Academy Street and Elm Street's relatively short, and it's busy Main Street, Route 136 also goes through there. Just imagine for a minute with the number of traffic that'll be coming out of there, how difficult it will be at times, particularly at the peak travel periods of even getting out into Main Street because cars are queued up all the way from the light at Academy all the way to Elm Street and beyond. It's really hard to find a way to get in there. Also consider if you're going north on Main Street, that is towards the downtown, and you want to turn into that space, you're going to have to stop in that travel lane, and put your blinker on and wait until the cars going south clear out. What's that going to mean for all the traffic that travels down that way while they queue up behind these waiting turning traffic? I think that needs to be considered or you're going to have some real traffic backups in those intersections going forward. Finally, I really think you ought to look at the snow removal. As I took a look at that plan, there are only three locations they identify as storage areas for snow. Two of them are down on the

lower level. Only one is up on the upper level. can't tell from the drawings when they're adequate, but given the size of a of the 58 car lot, it during the course of the winter, you're going to pile up a lot of snow. Um, and it's important that be out of there because you need all 58 parking places. You can't sn pile snow up in your parking lot um to do this. And I'm not even clear whether the storage areas are also used for any kind of landscaping along the building or not or any other amenities. You certainly don't want to be piling snow up on top of your amenities uh to do that. So I think plus the driveway that goes in goes up that steep slope uh from Main Street and that slope is 6 to 12% grade. That's going to be really important in the winter time to keep that clear so vehicles can go in and up there in a safe manner. Um, just a note, public roads cannot be more than 8° grade. So, this is a pretty street grade getting up into that lot and it needs to be properly maintained constantly.

Thank you, sir. You're uh you're you reached your five minutes. Sorry. appreciate it. Let me just say that the issue with the um technical and financial uh submitt is completely inadequate and if I had time I'd speak more to it. All right. Anyone else like to come forward? Okay. Seeing none, I'd seek a motion to close public comment. So moved. Do you have a second?

All right. All those in favor? Okay. Motion carries. Um, I'll open it up to the planning board to have you guys your thoughts, questions, comments. I guess one comment and I not just with respect to this project but I guess I've become somewhat bothered with a development of this type and other larger developments that for safety sake it almost seems like there should be a second egress or entrance. So if one u access point becomes plugged uh there should be a a secondary entrance exit. I this project because it faces you know a main street uh as far as fire suppression at least you know one whole side would be exposed and be accessible. But it seems to me in the past we've always kind of thought and kind of recognized that maybe we should have a second uh exit entrance. And I I guess just to continue that a little bit. I that question had come to my mind earlier because it really does seem that we're putting a lot of pressure onto Main Street with a short distance to that light. And you know, I u like the project, but it would seem that uh and maybe it addresses, you know, the question of the uh 276 ft

versus 110. uh at least if there was a little reduction in the number of units and allowing for uh an upper exit that would especially recognizing that a lot of traffic I'm you know kind of speculating but assuming that uh a lot of it's going to be coming out and going up Academy Street probably looking to get on to Route four. I do think that Mr. Cleveland's um comments about the uh backing up of traffic or the possible difficulty making a lefthand turn if you're going north on on Main Street probably deserve some consideration. And I know that Gorl Palmer has made a made quite a name for itself in being the leading traffic engineering firm in the state. So I'm I'm trying to skim your report while this is going on. It doesn't look like you've addressed those issues. Do you think that you could next time uh address what you anticipate the uh uh likelihood of the the extent of that problem might be or any other problem that you've heard discussed regarding access to the site because

Absolutely. I'm sorry. I I didn't hear you. You You realize that might not have made it into the report. I really do recall uh because we had completed our traffic review uh with city staff. Um I know there was discussion of queuing uh and the like, but um I think that uh if not, we can certainly try to build upon that for you. I I think I just want to note too that um you know between the two streets I I think there's certainly sufficient capacity for what in the peak hour is is 30 additional trips onto that. There's obviously um you know certain amount of uh traffic already on the roads. Um as far as location of um you know our access it is an existing location right now for the uh existing town houses granted additional units within that but um we've certainly we've talked with staff about the site distance issue. Uh and I know that's something that the city is going to be reviewing a bit further. Uh and if that's something that we as the applicant might need to um um address with the city then we're happy to. But, uh, it seems to me if that were an issue, then we might have to just review, uh, whether we remove that space, that on street parking space. So, but to your point, uh, we'll certainly build on the on the queueing for you.

I'd like to speak on Miss Russell's point about the um, the rendering of the complex. Is that the actual rendering that is planned and that we would see if the complex was constructed or is is that just an artist's interpretation subject to change? and your plans state that

I'll stand up here just in case. So, um yeah, that's certainly the intention. Um I I'll note that we have um on the building development side uh we're actually fairly far along and I know the applicant's going through with his um you know construction loan process. Um so a pretty thorough package already prepared for the entire building. Uh that's certainly the intent uh is to build what what's been on the screen. So I I can appreciate her point. That's it's a beautiful rendering and I've seen it myself. I've seen a project go other than what the original rendering was. Sure.

And Miss Russell, I'm I'm sure her point I know it resonates with me. Can only assume it resonates with others. Hoping that that if it does pass and it is approved that what we see in the rendering is what we will see. Yep. Certainly to your point, Tim, I don't think it hurts um if and when this project is approved to again, you could place an additional condition on there just to re-emphasize that point because that is a concern um that can easily get lost for the reasons that were stated. Thank you, Dave.

I also have a question to Miss Russell's point about lighting. Um, I haven't had the opportunity to read every page in here, but have you provided a lighting plan that will show the lighting at the property lines? Uh, yes, we have. Okay. Yep. So, um, yeah, full cut off fixtures, just a mixture of wall packs, uh, and then, uh, perhaps some re recessed lighting just at some of those entrances. Uh, but then we do have light poles on site. um in addition to being um you know faced obviously away from property lines, there's obviously the the grade differential between sites too. So um yeah, there certainly won't be any light intrusion on adjacent lots. Thank you.

Yep. So, uh, first of all, I just want to say this was like a very comprehensive packet that we had, probably the most comprehensive today. Uh, but I guess my concern, uh, and something that stuck with me is parking. Obviously in the lot we've got the 50 or so around 50 parking lots which which are short of the requirement of 73. Uh I don't know what the requirement is for ADA accessible and seeing how the property is graded as it as it is. I wouldn't feel comfortable. I mean, obviously, I feel like you're going to need more ADA. Uh, if this ADA, cuz I think there's only three that I spotted in the parking lot, and I just don't feel comfortable if you are required to have more ADA parking to place that on wherever we find those additional 15. So whether it be on the street, whether it be in some of those businesses that you were working with, uh I'd like to see that in, you know, in the in this uh the the parking closest to the property. That makes sense.

Sure. Yeah. And then to Mr. Cleveland point about uh balancing that public and private interest obviously uh the site requirement is going to be an issue and downtown parking is you know downtown parking you know cuz that's that's what's hot and that's what everybody wants and needs and so I guess I'd like to see some sort of balance with that in terms of the private interest of having that maximum uh meeting that minimum requirement and then also you know having some spaces that are available for the general public.

Uh do you mind if I respond? Yeah, sure. Of course.

I wasn't sure if we were going to get another comment. So, um uh to your comment on um what happens if there's more ADA required. Um ultimately um the architectural team has reviewed um there are fair housing act laws for you know how many of the units um should be um you know able to accommodate. So what we have planned for um the general amount of spaces it kind of meets that that uh amount. So there's only a certain amount I can't tell you off the top of my head. I could try to provide that for you for for our next round as to how many units can accommodate. Um but that that's what's provided for the time being. I think that you know in the future um um you know I guess all I can speak to is kind of that that minimum requirement uh for the Fair Housing Act. So there's certainly been a study uh that goes into all aspects uh you know not just the parking um you know goes down to even the placement of fixtures and units but um um so we're feeling comfortable that the plan provides what what would be required um if that's a fair enough statement. um and that there might not be, you know, we might understand there might be more demand, but um this, you know, this building meets what uh would be at least be able to provide uh for for those units. So, um, but to speak to the parking comment again, um, you know, I think we're certainly understanding that, um, you know, parking is a hot commodity and, um, you know, we are in the kind of downtown area, uh, which certainly is a benefit to us where, you know, a lot of other public streets might not if you're, you know, a few blocks away. Um, so we're certainly not depending on I know there was another comment. Um, you know, we had in our original application, I don't think we had clarified that yet. Uh, but we spoke with David about was, um, you know, we're not going to count the on street parking. I just wanted to note for the for the boards mentioned that there certainly could be a scenario where if

there's on street supply, then uh, that that's certainly open to to guests to be able to use. We do benefit though from some of the adjacent lots. So, um, like I had mentioned, right across the street, we have the CLT. Uh that's kind of like the primary um target right now that the applicant is coordinating with those folks. Um which ultimately I believe once they have a kind of a uh give us the nod kind of goes back to the city since the CLT leases that land from the city. Um so we've started to review that have a pretty good understanding and just need to kind of start to um you know cross the tees dot the eyes. So I think we're feeling confident that um you know we certainly benefit from that for a lot like that right across the street. [Music] I'm sure. All right. I have a question for David, but they might need help.

Go ahead.

So, in order to meet the um dimensional requirements, the 110 ft um you'd probably have to have three buildings. You could do it with two, but Sure. Sure. could do it with two, but you'd have a lot of a lot more open space in the middle or wherever you decided to put it. Um I do and I I it cuz it's a budding sort of not a budding but right near the T52 which would allow a little bit more than this. Um it that permeability word that uh Miss Russell used earlier. Um I'm sure that's part of the restrictions on building size or width. Um so I I am pondering a lot of that and the implications of that. There's no other like just for precedent because T42 is kind of covering some area in the in the uh city for allowing it here. And your building is absolutely beautiful. It is appropriately designed for the grade of the It's just an awesome rendering there. Um I just am concerned about giving waiverss. Um this is a big one too. Sure. Totally understood. Yeah.

You know, I think if there's anything else that we can

um talk through with you to that point, I think, you know, obviously we covered the key points being um the kind of building, you know, face undulation. There's certainly a lot of uh fenestration going on uh and the grade differential across the lot. Yep. Um, you know, we had touched uh briefly on the potential for, you know, introduction of street trees or or other plantings and I know we do have plantings actually on property um as well that are in front of the building uh and are are kind of shown on that rendering too. So, um you know, we're trying to create that uh that that level um but um you know, any other any other thoughts or or comments you might have? I, you know, I think we've done a pretty good job and and tried to do our best to kind of set ourselves up for that. So,

and the other side of my argument is it is sort of the edge of the neighborhood, you know what I mean? So, it's not in the middle of the neighborhood. Um, so I'm not sure the for me the permeability is as big of a deal. Mhm. Um, but that that is certainly uh I liked the word that she used because that is what neighborhoods are in in that area anyway. Yep. Yep.

All right. Any questions? We have a motion. I would move that we continue the preliminary review until our December 9th meeting. Seconded. Do you have any discussion of the motion?

All right. All those in favor? All right. Motion carries. Okay. At this point in time, it is um 9:18 and we're past the 9:00 time frame. Um so we have to uh have a unanimous vote going forward if we want to, you know, continue to move on. Um I personally would suggest that we move this next item to our December meeting and we move to ajourn. Um but I welcome other people's thoughts. I agree with you. Okay. Do you agree, Ed? Did I hear you? Man, I If this if this if this item takes more than 10 minutes, then we've blown it. I

And if what if this item takes more than 10 minutes, we've blown it. This is a no-brainer, I think. But it's up to the board. I'm holding you to it, just so you know. All right. So, do we need to make a motion that um we've continued the meeting to only include this one item to not surpass 9:30? I would move that we continue till 9:30. Okay. Second. Okay. All those in favor? Okay. You got it. You're on the clock.

All right. Government buildings, uh, public safety buildings, they require a special exception from the planning board. Police department's on the third floor. Criminal investigations divisions up there. 911 is going to move into that space. They need a temporary home until Mined Avenue is completed, which will probably be in a year and a half or more from now. So, they need to go over into 95 Main Street. You need a special exception permit. You have to do a community needs analysis. Community needs analysis was acted upon by the council at that last meeting. They agreed that this is a reasonable request. You folks need to act upon it as a special exception to go into that building. Nothing is going to change. It'll have less traffic. It's where general develop uh excuse me, community and economic development and general assistance was. If anything, there'll be less traffic over there as a result because no public will be going over there. Police department's still going to use the parking garage here. No one is going to know what's over there unless you're looking for that division. All the other police services will remain in this building. Eric's here and you can ask answer any more questions.

Do you guys have any questions for David or Eric? Okay, seeing none, I would seek a motion to open up public comment. So moved. Do you have a second? All right. All those in favor, if you'd like to come forward on this item, please come forward. Go to the podium. Say your name. You have five minutes. Your name and address. Okay. Seeing none, I'd seek a motion to close public comment. So moved. Do you have a second? Second. All right. All those in favor? All right. Perfect. Any questions for staff or the applicant? Okay. Seek a motion.

I got 10 minutes still. What kind of car do you drive? I make a motion that the proposal meets the requirements of section 60-1277 and section 60-1336 and approve the application and site plan submitted by the city of Auburn for the temporary use of existing office space to accommodate the police department's criminal investigation division at 95 Main Street. The proposed project has met the standards pursuant to chapter 60, article 4, division 14 formbbased code, article 16, division two, site plan review, and division three special exception. That was the longest part of this whole thing. Do I have a second? Second.

Okay. All those in favor. All right. Motion carries. Um, can I seek a motion to adjurnn? So moved. All right. Do you have a sec? Second. All right. All those in favor? Okay. Perfect. Thank you everybody. It's a long meeting. Appreciate it. [Music] I know. A little bit of pressure. What? A little bit of pressure. Don't let me stay again. I wasn't even sure you were