This property, located at 60 Bay View Road, is the proposed spot for eight cottages, six of which will be seasonal homes. While the project is tabled at the Planning Board level, a public hearing on May 7 gave neighbors an opportunity to voice dissent over many aspects, including the amount of construction that has taken place prior to project approval. ABIGAIL WORTHING photo

SACO — A potential development on the coast in Saco has some neighbors up in arms.

The development, located at 60 Bay View Road, is proposed to include eight units on the 1.341-acre property with six seasonal rentals and two year-round residences.

The property is owned by Estates at Bay View LLC, comprised of Tim Swenson and Melissa Remington. It is the second development in the area for Estates at Bay View LLC, which also created the group of homes and apartments located at the site of a former convent located directly on the beach. The property in question was formerly home to 13 cottages, two of them year round residences while the other 11 were seasonal.

Plans for the project were submitted to the Planning Board on March 26. Due to the nonconformance of the new plan to the 13 cottage former use of the land, the project was subject to a site plan review and public hearing, which took place May 7. In materials provided to the board, developers had no lighting plan submitted. The board was given the opportunity to either grant a waiver to allow the plan to be reviewed without the plan, or to deem the application incomplete.

At the May 7 meeting, the Planning Board voted to declare the project application incomplete and to table further discussions until completed. While under normal circumstances this would halt any further discussion on the project, the board voted instead to proceed with the scheduled public hearing, as council chambers were filled with neighbors who wished to speak about the development. The original meeting to discuss the plans, scheduled for the end of April and postponed, was slated to be held in the conference room. The venue was changed when officials learned that a number of neighbors planned to speak out about the project.

Prior to the meeting, a collection of abutting neighbors submitted a letter to the Planning Board, signed by 34 homeowners, some of whom spoke at the meeting, protesting the project. The collection of neighbors met several times prior to the drafting of the letter.

“We had 17 families come to our meeting about this project,” said Cathy Stackpole, an abutter of the project. “Sixteen families signed that letter. That should say something about our concerns over this development.”

In the letter, homeowners listed concerns about zoning compliance, water runoff, speed of the project and safety concerns with parking, police and fire. The letter expresses dismay over construction that’s already underway, which includes blasting and clearing, taking place before Planning Board approval.

“The blasting and clearing of the property has been in haste since March. Are we to assume that the developer has an inside track to an approval process without neighborhood approval?” according to the letter.

Swenson, who spoke at the meeting, defended the clearing and work being done at the property.

“A lot of other developers have to bring in people to work, but I do a lot of it myself,” Swenson said. “I’ve stayed within the parameters set.”

Code Enforcement Officer Dick Lambert confirmed that the work has been done within approved limits.

Speaking on behalf of his father Hector, who lives in the adjacent Christopher Terrace, Charles Moreno talked at length about the zoning of the project, which would, under current regulations, usually only allow two dwellings on the property instead of the proposed eight. He further cautioned against continuing to use the term “grandfathering,” as the project is very different than the original.

Moreno is concerned about to dates of the “seasonal” time frame, as in the plans it suggests that “seasonal” should be from April 1 to Dec. 31. In material provided by City Planner Emily Cole-Prescott prior to the meeting, it is suggested that the dates be shortened to the traditional May 1 to Oct. 31. This sentiment was echoed not only by Moreno, but others who spoke at the public hearing, who worried of renters overstaying and renting out the property well beyond the timeline. In the memo, Cole-Prescott suggested amending the plan to include a mandatory water and electricity shut off by October, with a fine of $100 a day should written proof not be provided to the city.

One notable letter of dissent came from Planning Board Chairman Neil Schuster, who recused himself from proceedings, as he is an abutter on the Ferry Road. In his letter, which he submitted as part of public comment, he detailed at length the many concerns he has with the project, not limited to the conformance of the plans, the onsite demolition, compatibility and off-site impacts to the neighborhood.

“I can speak from my own anecdotal experience that the blasts were felt at our home to the point of objects rattling on our shelves,” according to Shuster’s email. “Typical construction projects are required to meet certain criteria as they begin their projects following approval. That has not been the case here. It has rained a lot, so most of the mud has run down the storm drains.”

Members of the public spoke about concerns of the new cottages becoming AirBNB or VRBO properties, as some of the Bay View Estates at the other end of the road projects have become A search on VRBO or Home Away shows that some of the homes built in the area are available for rent throughout the summer, ranging from $800 to $1,350 a night throughout summer.

“If this is truly going to be owner occupied and ‘residential’, why do the condominium documents allow for weekly and monthly rentals,” according to Shuster’s email. “If this is truly owner occupied as stated, I would assume the condominium documents would not allow this frequent turnover.”

“We don’t need Saco to become an AirBNB hub,” Moreno said.

City Attorney Tim Murphy told the Planning Board that the decisions were ultimately up to them, and whether the project is truly grandfathered is up for their own debate.

The project has been tabled until a completed project can be presented at a future, unscheduled meeting.

Contact Staff Writer Abigail Worthing at news@inthecourier.com.