Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board advances 32‑unit Hampshire Commons 'housing first' project with waivers and conditions
Summary
The board approved the preliminary site plan for Hampshire Commons, a 32‑unit housing‑first project adjacent to Chestnut Street Park, granted minor dimensional waivers and concluded a requested parking waiver was not necessary; the board asked for stronger landscaping and finalized easement conditions.
Auburn’s Planning Board approved the preliminary site plan for Hampshire Commons Apartments, a 32‑unit housing‑first residential development proposed on Hampshire Street, advancing the project toward final review. The project is led by the Auburn Housing Authority in partnership with Developers Collaborative and local service and design partners and was presented as a preliminary plan because it qualifies as a major subdivision.
The applicant described the project as permanent supportive housing for chronically homeless individuals under MaineHousing’s Home for Good program. The proposal includes community spaces (a shared kitchen, lounges, conference and medical rooms), an elevator, and programming tailored to tenant needs; units are one‑bed studios sized to program standards. The proposed footprint is approximately 8,700 square feet with three stories (about 35 ft tall). The project team said many residents do not own vehicles and that 14 on‑site parking spaces will be adequate for staff and occasional visitors; staff noted the zoning calculation yields a higher theoretical maximum (21 spaces) but concluded a waiver was not required.
The board reviewed several form‑based waivers (lot width, building width, front‑yard fence). After discussion the board concluded the parking waiver was unnecessary because the code sets an upper parking cap for affordable housing rather than a minimum, deemed the front‑yard fence waiver not applicable because fences will be side/rear, and granted a minor building‑width waiver (112 ft proposed vs 110 ft allowed) as de minimis. Board members emphasized strong landscaping and long‑term maintenance commitments; a condition requires final sewer/water easements to be in place prior to activation and staff requested a robust landscaping plan for final submission.
The board recorded unanimous support for the preliminary plan; the applicant will return for final plan review with detailed construction documents, a final landscaping/lighting plan, and recorded easement language as required.
