Planning Board continues review of proposed athletic dome after technical, environmental and design concerns

A public hearing on a proposed air-supported athletic dome on Cascade Road drew detailed technical testimony from the applicant and more than a dozen public speakers at the Saco Planning Board meeting on June 17.

City Planner Emily Cole Prescott summarized outstanding staff issues including sewer design, sidewalk connections, a legal opinion limiting the board’s authority to grant a Shoreland-slope waiver, and outstanding agency comments from Maine Inland Fisheries & Wildlife. She said the board had been provided a legal opinion concluding the board “does not have the authority to grant that waiver.”

Silas Canavan, civil engineer with Atlantic Resource Consultants, representing the applicant 4 A Property LLC, described the proposal as “approximately 75,000 square foot, enclosed athletic facility. It'll house an indoor soccer field and, pickleball, pickleball courts,” and reviewed technical materials the applicant supplied on the dome fabric, skylight light transmission, interior lighting fixtures, HVAC noise estimates, and a revised gravity sewer alignment the team agreed to provide after staff raised concerns about a pump station and force main in the DOT right-of-way.

Canavan summarized the manufacturer data the team handed board members: the dome skylight material transmits about 4–5% of incident light and the manufacturer’s calculations show the dome would remain substantially inflated for at least 30 minutes in a worst‑case loss‑of‑pressure scenario. Canavan said the proposed interior fixtures are full cutoff downward‑facing luminaires and that, on that basis, “the skylight is not going to cause any issues with dark sky requirements.”

Planning Board member Jeff Bruscia pressed the engineering team on cumulative noise modeling at property lines, noting the project’s equipment (main inflation blower, backup blower, and generator) could operate simultaneously. He asked the applicant to revise models to show realistic multi‑source scenarios and recommended peer review if needed. Canavan said the team would double‑check the generator sound inputs and update calculations.

Board members and staff also discussed: whether the building can meet building‑code occupancy and life‑safety standards (Maine Uniform Building and Energy Code/MUBEC and related building code provisions for air‑supported structures), whether sprinkler requirements would apply (the Fire Marshal is still reviewing), and shoreland/NRPA setbacks; Canavan told the board the applicant had reconfigured the plan to meet the 2:1 slope requirement and avoid encroaching inside the 75‑foot setback to Cascade Brook.

Members of the public spoke both for and against the project. Supporters described youth‑sports demand and economic benefits: Garrett Abrahamson said the facility would draw visitors and spending to Saco; Daniel Heaney, Seacoast United Soccer Club director, said the club’s roughly 850 youth players would benefit. Pickleball advocates urged more indoor courts for year‑round play. Multiple nearby residents, including Andrea Fotanities and Fred Fotanities Jr., raised concerns about scale, visual impact, noise, and safety. Attorney Sandy Gay said Cumberland Farms informed the board it holds an access easement overlapping part of a proposed parking area and asked the applicants/engineers to coordinate.

After public comment and board discussion, Planning Board members voted to open the hearing earlier in the meeting and later to continue the public hearing on the athletic dome to the board’s July 15 meeting so staff can receive additional materials and agency comments; the board also scheduled a site walk on June 30. The motion to continue passed 4‑0.

The board recorded several items the applicant must supply before the next hearing: updated multi‑source noise modeling and documentation of generator sound calculations; revised sewer drawings showing the new gravity alignment; any IF&W comments when received; clarification of building‑code compliance related to MUBEC and the State Fire Marshal’s determination on sprinklers; written confirmation of material specifications (including MSDS/certifications for the dome fabric and the insulation sandwich); and resolution or documentation of the Cumberland Farms easement issue.

The board left the hearing open and directed staff and the applicant to coordinate the June 30 site walk and to circulate revised plans and technical responses in time for the July 15 packet. The application remains under review.