The Saco Planning Board met on April 7, 2026, to conduct its regular meeting. The board addressed a zoning map amendment, a residential conversion, a subdivision, and a mixed-use development completeness review. Actions included approving minutes, granting site plan approvals, and scheduling a public hearing.
During the general comment period, no members of the public spoke.
Flag Pond Road Public Hearing: Two residents spoke in opposition to the rezoning.
The board considered a petition to rezone two parcels (Map 76, Lots 12-2 and 13) from industrial to Portland Road (PR). Applicant representative Drew Gagman (Gorrell Palmer) argued the parcels are isolated from the industrial park, constrained by wetlands, and better suited for mixed-use workforce housing. He contended the current industrial zoning is spot zoning.
Board members expressed concerns about losing industrial land. Jeff noted the finite supply (estimated 196–400 acres) and that this rezoning would remove about 20% of it. Jim and Catherine emphasized consistency and comprehensive planning. Joyce and Chris worried about truck traffic on Flag Pond Road. Councilor Johnson provided history: the rear parcel has been industrial for decades; the front lots were changed to industrial in 2021–2022 to allow a previous owner to develop, but no industrial use materialized. He suggested a broader industrial land strategy.
The applicant's representative countered that site constraints make industrial development infeasible and that the isolated industrial zoning itself constitutes spot zoning.
After deliberation, the board voted 6-0 to direct staff to draft a report recommending denial to city council, citing preservation of industrial land, spot zoning concerns, and consistency.
A continued review of a preliminary subdivision and site plan to convert an office building at 100 Main Street into six residential dwelling units (Saco Island Zoning District). City Planner Charles Tettelman reported that prior concerns about mezzanine repairs and sight distance were addressed.
Applicant representative Drew Oleowski (Haley Ward) proposed trimming vegetation and modifying the sign with a clear lower panel to improve sight lines. Public safety concurred.
Jeff questioned the sign's internal lighting and long-term maintenance, but the board found the conditions of approval adequate.
The board adopted findings of fact (as amended), adopted conditions (removing a reference to private sewer), and granted site plan approval. All votes were 6-0.
A continued review of a preliminary subdivision and site plan for a 14-lot residential subdivision (West Residential District). Applicant James Lowry (BH2M) reported a fresh wetland delineation identified three additional wetlands; two can be avoided, but one small area (385 sq ft) is unavoidable, requiring a tier one NRPA permit. Updated plans were submitted but not yet peer-reviewed.
Discussion focused on:
The board adopted findings of fact (6-0), adopted conditions with a minor correction (5-0-1, Jeff abstained), and granted preliminary subdivision and site plan approval (5-0-1, Jeff abstained). The conditions include the sidewalk in-lieu requirement.
An application completeness review for a site plan for Park North Development LLC to construct approximately 58,000–60,000 sq ft of mixed-use buildings (five buildings) on a parcel at 991 Portland Road (Map 63, Lot 6). The project is within the Park North Contract Zone; staff are seeking legal clarification on whether residential uses are permitted.
Applicant Elliot Chamberlain, with Matthew Cummings (Cummings Architecture) and Matt Orr (Sebago Technics), presented a phased, pedestrian-friendly design with a central pavilion, four-sided architecture, and a fire pump station.
Key discussion:
The board voted to find the application complete (6-0) and set a public hearing for May 5, 2026 (6-0).
All right, good evening, everyone. Ladies and gentlemen, esteemed members of the planning board and valued community representatives. I welcome you all to this evening's assembly of the Socwal Planning Board. As chairman, it is my privilege to convene this gathering dedicated to the thoughtful planning and development of our community. Today we come together with a shared commitment to shaping the future of our city in a manner that reflects our values, respects our heritage, and fulfills the needs of our residents both now and in the future. It is our duty to maintain transparency, fairness, and inclusivity in our proceedings, ensuring that the voices of all are heard and respected. Together, we must embrace the responsibility entrusted to us by our community, working diligently and thoughtfully to chart a course that fosters growth, prosperity, and harmony. Also with us this evening, our city planner, Charles Tettelman. Do board members have any questions, comments, or edits on those minutes. Mr. Chair, I'd move to approve the minutes of the March 17th, 2026 meeting is presented. I would second that. Thank you for the motion, Joyce and the second Jeff. Any additional discussion? All right, those in favor, Chris? Abstain. Jim. Yes. Joyce? Yes. Jeff. Yes. Catherine. Yes. I'll vote yes as well. Motion passes five four one abstention. Our next item on our agenda this evening is our planning board public hearing guidelines. This is a document developed by the board and city staff outlining the procedure in place for our public hearings that are held. This explains the purpose of the public meetings, the outline procedure of reviewing an application, and the public comment presentation and meeting duration. This is a document available at the rear of the auditorium as well as online. And if anyone has any questions on that, um please let us know and we'll do our best to answer those questions. Our next item number five is our public comment period. Our public comment period is an opportunity to hear from members of the public. We limit the this agenda item to a total of 15 minutes for items or topics not under planning board review. The planning board appreciates public comment and recognizes that the public comment about matters before it can help the board understand neighborhood concerns, review an application, or help understand additional items. Those wishing to make statements about an application currently under planning board review are asked to provide those statements during the applicable public hearing period. Comments are limited to three minutes per person. However, if there are multiple multiple members of the public looking to speak, we may reduce that time per person to accommodate all speakers. So with that, if anyone is with us this evening to speak on a general planning item, please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record. We do have a few items on our agenda this evening that are before us for public hearing. A few of those briefly are zoning map amendment for Flag Pond Road, uh 100 Main Street, and 196 Jenkin Road. So those three items do have public hearings this evening. So if anyone would like to speak on those items, there will be opportunity during those agenda items. This is our planning application review and public hearings this evening. First item within that agenda is item 6A. And this is Flag Pond Road Map 76, lots 12-2 and 13. And this is a public hearing for a petition of a zoning map amendment to rezone two parcels from industrial to Portland Road. Charles, anything to add on this item before we begin? Uh yeah, just the the recommendation, uh, whether it's in support of or not, doesn't have any uh I didn't prepare any motion that'll be on the board to provide a recommendation with reasoning at the end if you want to make a decision tonight. So I didn't prepare any findings of fact or conditions of approval because just a rezon.