Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Business Operating Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board finds athletic training facility application complete, asks for parking and lighting details and continues decision to May 5

Saco Planning Board · April 21, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Planning Board found complete a conditional-use application from Southern Maine Athletic Academy for an indoor coach-led training facility at 73 Industrial Park Road but requested parking plans, lighting photometrics and proof the prior site-plan was built to plan; the matter was continued to May 5 with staff asked to draft findings and conditions.

The Saco Planning Board on April 21 reviewed a conditional-use application from Southern Maine Athletic Academy to operate a coach-led indoor youth training facility at 73 Industrial Park Road and, after extensive questioning, voted to find the application complete and to continue the decision to the board's May 5 meeting so staff can draft findings and the applicant can supply additional materials.

Applicant Jeremy Longchamp said the operation will be low-impact: sessions will be coach-led, capped at six to 12 athletes with two to three staff on site depending on schedule, there will be no team practices, games, tournaments or spectator events, and activity will be entirely indoors in approximately 4,200 square feet formed by combining two condominium units. "We're at capacity at our Portland location. It's actually why we're expanding...we have no desire of ever growing beyond, uh, 12 in a session with two coaches," Longchamp said.

Board members probed several topics: the applicant's parking allocation under existing condominium documents (the applicant said two and three spaces from two units give five dedicated spaces), whether there is overspill or guest parking, where those five spaces are located and how they will be marked, lighting and photometric plans for night arrivals, truck turning and delivery circulation in the industrial complex, and whether the prior site plan for the condominium project has been built exactly as approved. Several members asked staff to confirm whether required site improvements were completed per the prior approval and whether any outstanding conditions remain.

Jeff Brochu and others pressed the safety and compatibility question arising from a cannabis extraction operation across the street; Brochu said the board should consider proximity concerns when reviewing a facility that will bring children into an industrial area. Staff responded that indoor athletic training is a listed conditional use in the zoning ordinance (table 3-3) and that many site-layout elements were set by the condominium's prior approval, while acknowledging the board's ability to condition approval on operational limits or additional mitigation.

After debate, the board voted 4-2 to find the application complete and then opened and closed the public hearing (no public speakers). The board voted to continue the matter to May 5 and asked staff to prepare draft findings of fact and conditions, and to place the item first on the May 5 agenda to accommodate the applicant's near-term closing deadline and the board's 30-day review clock.

What the board asked the applicant to provide: a clear parking layout or photo showing the five assigned spaces and any overflow options; signage and building-door markings; lighting/photometric plans for night-time arrivals; and a brief summary of neighborhood meeting comments. Staff also agreed to check the record and confirm whether the condominium site was constructed per the previously approved site plan and to include that information in the May 5 packet.