Spring Street redevelopment amendment would allow up to 150 units with 20% affordable set‑aside; council to send plan to planning board

Planning consultant Chris Cauley gave a 10‑minute overview of proposed amendments to the Spring Street redevelopment plan at the May 14 council meeting, describing two subareas and the plan’s key land‑use and design provisions.

Cauley said Subarea 1 (the larger side of Spring Street) would permit a multifamily building up to 66 feet and a maximum of about 150 units, with stepbacks and design standards timed to topography. "Key point here, 20% of those are required to be affordable," Cauley told council, noting that requirement equates to roughly 30 affordable units — higher than an earlier target discussed in previous settlement documents.

Subarea 2, Cauley said, is intended for less building density and more open space; the plan reserves about 75% of a particular lot for publicly accessible green space, including a minimum 8,000‑square‑foot passive area along the Liberty River. Lot 6, a turn‑of‑the‑century building on the smaller subarea, is identified for rehabilitation where feasible; any replacement structure, the plan says, must match unit counts and include affordable units.

Public commenters and council members pressed staff on several operational details: who owns particular lots (the administration acknowledged the town owns some of them and will clarify ownership), where future residents will park if Lot 6 is rehabilitated or replaced (the plan currently discourages new curb cuts and on‑site parking that would disrupt the adjacent open space), and how the town will manage potential tenant displacement. Planning staff agreed the redevelopment agreement (RDA) that follows adoption will specify traffic studies, parking solutions and any relocation or anti‑displacement measures.

Several members of the public urged adaptive reuse of the existing electrical/plumbing supply building on Spring Street. Deborah Bridal Laynan presented a petition signed by about 120 people asking developers to incorporate that structure into a new design; Steven Zach Lukiewicz called for the council to educate itself on adaptive‑reuse practices. Planning consultant Phil (present with the team) said options had been considered over the years and identified practical constraints — notably the need for a flat parking platform and the high cost of integrating modern parking under or around a preserved structure — that led staff to favor concentrating residential development on Subarea 1.

Procedure: Council introduced Ordinance O-12-2024 to adopt the Spring Street redevelopment amendment by title; the plan is scheduled for planning‑board review on May 23 and may return for adoption after a public hearing on May 28. Staff said adoption of the plan will be followed by an RDA with more detailed drawings and requirements.

Sources: presentation and Q&A during the May 14 council meeting, including statements by planning consultant Chris Cauley and public commenters Deborah Bridal Laynan and Steven Zach Lukiewicz.