Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Avesta presents 33‑unit Home for Good plan for 1871 Forest Ave; board reviews waivers and cemetery buffer
Summary
At a May 12 planning‑board workshop, staff and Avesta Housing presented a four‑story, 33‑unit supportive housing project at 1871 Forest Avenue under Maine’s Home for Good program. Staff flagged multiple waiver requests and urged sidewalk and transit stop improvements; public commenters expressed general support but asked for stronger buffers around an adjacent active cemetery and for a safer crosswalk.
Planning staff summarized a major site plan application for 1871 Forest Avenue on May 12, describing a four‑story, approximately 28,000‑square‑foot building with 33 units, 100% proposed as affordable under the Home for Good program and eight on‑site parking spaces.
"The proposal provides 33 affordable units for chronically homeless individuals under the Home for Good program," Planning staff member Roa McAllister said during the overview, and noted staff recommended the board discuss requested waivers and potential sidewalk and transit upgrades.
Avesta Housing’s applicants and their design team described a development that would demolish a vacant restaurant on site, locate a phase‑one building on the eastern side of the parcel, and reduce impervious area while installing an underground stormwater detention and filtration system and a rain garden. The team said the eight parking spaces are intended primarily for staff and that on‑site car ownership is expected to be very low.
The applicant requested multiple waivers: a build‑to‑zone exception tied to a 12.5‑foot first‑floor setback; relief from certain bicycle‑parking requirements; modifications to parking‑lot landscape standards; and a technical waiver to allow a private connection into a city catch basin. Staff told the board they are supportive of some exceptions but encouraged discussion about tradeoffs, particularly for the build‑to exemption and bike‑parking numbers.
Public comment at the workshop included supporters and neighbors. David Hingston, who identified himself as a member of a nearby Friends meeting, praised the redevelopment but urged a robust fence and plant buffer to protect the adjacent active cemetery and asked that a proposed flashing beacon crosswalk be made "robust" to ensure safety for visitors and mosque attendees across the street. "We are very excited and enthusiastic about this project for the most part," Hingston said, while calling for privacy and quiet for cemetery visitors.
Cheryl Harkins, an advocate with Homeless Voices for Justice and a representative on the statewide homeless council, urged the board to approve the project, calling Home for Good a proven model that pairs housing with 24‑hour on‑site case supports. "The Home for Good models work," Harkins said, and pressed the board to allow this location to move forward.
Board members asked about an informal footpath that crosses the property to Hanford and whether it could or should be formalized. Project representatives said the path leads to property owned by a third party and that ownership and safety concerns (including a retention‑pond drop‑off) make formalization complex for phase one; they said the path could be reconsidered during a future phase of development.
The team also explained siting decisions behind the proposed resident patio and building setback: grading, utilities and stormwater considerations drove the preferred patio location and the request to retain some overhead utility lines rather than expensive undergrounding, which the applicants said would threaten project feasibility.
No formal action was taken at the workshop. Staff asked the board to weigh the build‑to exemption, bike‑parking waiver and staff recommendations for sidewalk and transit improvements as the project moves toward a subsequent public hearing.
