The developer behind redevelopment of the former Lake Street School has withdrawn his proposal to build condominiums on an adjacent lot after receiving a negative reaction from neighbors.

City staff were notified that an application for the proposed five-unit condominium project at 7 and 9 Fern St. was withdrawn on the morning of a scheduled Planning Board public hearing Tuesday.

Developer Jim Wu’s decision to pull the project comes after a day care facility that was initially proposed for the Fern Street lot was scrapped in favor of condominiums, which both Wu and city staff said was in response to neighborhood concern with the day care idea and difficulty securing a day care operator.

A letter to city staff Tuesday from a consultant on the project said the request to withdraw the condominium project is “due to some recent negative public/neighborhood sentiment towards the project that we want to further consider so ultimately the project can be considered a positive development for the city and all stakeholders involved.”

Wu, a prominent Auburn developer, is behind a 12-unit redevelopment of the former Lake Street School, which he purchased from the city along with the Fern Street parcels for $100,000 in 2023. 

At the time, the approval was based on a reuse of the property that would retain a community benefit, specifically: a day care facility in a residential area that desperately needs it, and a new playground in front of the former school.

However, according to city staff, the day care facility was opposed by neighbors who became aware of the plan, and Wu has also struggled to find a willing day care operator.

In response, the condominium project was proposed. But after that was made public, some neighbors say it felt like a “rug-pull” to the community.

During the Planning Board’s public comment session Tuesday, William Baxter said he served on the initial ad hoc committee that was formed to look at how to best reuse the school.

Baxter, who lives on Holly Street, said the property abuts his from the back, and that discussions he was part of considered child care, public gardens, or other public uses. He said while none of those have materialized yet, “I don’t blame the developer for that.” But he said the idea of now considering condominiums “kind of feels like a rug-pull to the community in terms of what was approved of” and what neighbors were expecting to see.

Lindsay Viel, who lives next to the Fern Street lot, told the board she was “quite shocked to see the direction this project was taking,” and it seemed like the plan “completely shifted and that was concerning.”

She said she’s also concerned for how long it has taken for the playground to reopen.

According to city staff, the fence surrounding the new playground will remain until the state approves a final plan and the building is completed. State officials have to sign off on the project because it was a Land and Water Conservation Fund site that requires approval for site changes and upgrades, which staff expects to obtain within the next two months.

The city’s assessing department lists the value of the former school property at nearly $500,000, while each Fern Street parcel is valued at roughly $30,000.

After the Planning Board accepted the withdrawal of the application, board Chair Paul Jacques said he’s “glad developers are listening to the community and wanting all parties to be happy.”

Former longtime Planning Board Chair Evan Cyr told the board that it should consider a policy that would ensure the board is provided with details on purchase and sale agreements and other information pertinent to the redevelopment of city lots.

When the city issued a request for proposals to redevelop the school, the document stipulated that the project feature a child care facility given the “desperate need for child care” services in the area. 

Wu has not responded to requests for comment.