Planning board approves 54‑space lot at 41 Main Street; members press on fire, materials and EV readiness

The Biddeford Planning Board on July 1 approved preliminary site plan review for 41 Main LLC to demolish an existing building and construct a 54‑space surface parking lot at 41 Main Street, a step the developer said is necessary to move a nearby apartment project forward.

Will Hopkins, an architect with Archetype Architects who presented the plan, said the single‑entry, one‑way loop and landscaping are designed to serve a larger, nearby conversion of the 19 and 20 Pepperell Mill buildings. “The reason we're proposing a parking lot where it is is because this is part of a much larger project across the street that's already permitted,” Hopkins said.

Why it matters: the lot is intended to make an adjacent multi‑family conversion financially feasible by providing closer parking than a municipal lot two blocks away. Board members said they supported the redevelopment but pressed the design team for clearer assurances about safety, maintenance and long‑term materials choices.

Board members focused questions on fire access and storm‑safety measures. A site design consultant told the board the fire department requested two additional hydrants located close to the fire department connections and reviewed revised water‑supply calculations after the fire tank on site was redesigned; the consultant said the tank size dropped from 175,000 to 114,000 gallons and that new hydrants and fire department connections will be provided.

Developer Nathan Bateman, Bateman Partners, told the board the lot is “key to that happening,” describing the lot as an initial investment that would later support a multilevel parking structure integrated with future development. “We're willing to take that initial risk, and subsidize it,” Bateman said.

Members also debated retaining‑wall materials. Steve Bushey, a civil engineer with LJB Inc., said the recommended structural approach is a reinforced precast modular block system that can be built to resemble granite but will be structurally reinforced behind the veneer; he cautioned that true granite is more costly and less practical at the proposed wall height. The engineer explained the height, reinforcement and drainage considerations that led staff and the consultant to prefer precast modular units.

Several members raised operational concerns: the lot's tight geometry, winter snow storage and removal, handicap accessibility, and the potential for emergency operations if a vehicle fire were to occur in a corner stall. The developer said some concessions are possible: conduit and electrical capacity can be vacated for future EV chargers so the lot can be made EV‑ready as demand increases.

The board moved and unanimously approved preliminary site plan review for case 2026.25, with conditions and follow‑up coordination to be finalized in the subsequent sign‑off process. The developer said staff will return final plans and conditions of approval for signatures and that the team expects to coordinate hydrant locations and other final details with the fire department.

Next steps: the project advances with preliminary approval; staff will finalize conditions and bring a signed plan back for administrative completion.