Planning Board - Regular Meeting

The hour of 6:30 p.m. having arrived, I'll call to order this regular meeting of the planning board. This meeting is being broadcast live on the city of Keen YouTube channel. The video is also streaming on the city's website and is posted on the website by the end of the next business day, barring any technical difficulties. [snorts]

Anyone wishing to view a copy of the agenda and supporting materials will find it on the city website. To receive electronic copies of future agenda packets, please go to the homepage and subscribe to the city meetings email list. The public and other board members will be recognized to ask questions and make comments on the agenda item under discussion. After being recognized, all remarks are to be made through the chair. Will the staff please conduct the role? Harold Ferington present. Robera Master Giovani here. Mayor Jay Conhan. Mike Remy here. Sarah Vazani here.

Ryan Clancy. Kenneth Cost. Armando Rangel here. Stefan Mayu present. Tammy Adams. Michael Hayer here. Joseph Kosa. That's it. Mr. Chairman, I like to note that the mayor is is present. Welcome.

Okay. Next on the agenda is the minutes of the November 24, 2025 meeting. um which were distributed in the in the agenda packet. Is there a motion to approve the minutes of November 24, 2025? So move. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Second. Second.

Thank you, Councelor Remy. Uh any uh questions, discussions? I have one that I was a little Maybe it's just me. line 312 and 313 in the minutes, the very last sentence. I just didn't quite understand what it was saying. Do you have a suggested edit?

Not really. I just was kind of stumped. Maybe I was trying to do it too quickly, but no, I I don't have a suggested wording. And if people are fine with it, that's okay, too. It's line 314, 315,

312, 313. Um so in most cases um when tenants come in and out of spaces in downtown um there's no outside changes to the uh to the building to the site, anything like that. So, in those cases, they those projects generally don't meet the threshold for formal planning board review. So, I think um

I understand the concept. I'm just I was just kind of Oh, you just you just I thought the words were very uh kind of confusing, but that's fine. If if everyone understands it perfectly, that's the purpose of it. So, Mr. Chair, Councelor Remy, thank you. I when I read it by itself after you said it, it was confusing, but when I read it with the sentence before, it made sense because it was a it's almost like it should have been a semicolon instead of like a full period there. But I like when read in context, I think it's okay. Okay,

good enough. Okay. So, uh, with no changes to, uh, to the minutes as, uh, published, uh, and a motion on the table, let's call the vote. All those in favor of the minutes? Any opposed? Oh, you know, I'm sorry. I I didn't, uh, I didn't ask if uh, Mr. Hayer and uh, Mr. Mayhew would like to participate as voting members this evening. So, indicated. Good. Okay. Trying to rush to the minutes. All right. Thank you. Next item is uh adoption of the 2026 planning board meeting schedule. This was also included in the packet. Um and with the exception of May and December, uh these are the standard fourth Monday of each month date. Uh in May, the fourth Monday is Memorial Day, so we're moving it to Tuesday or proposing to move it to Tuesday. And in December, um the fourth Monday is uh after Christmas. So we're proposing moving it to the 21st, the week be the week of Christmas. So you can see that. So, I will uh entertain a motion for uh accepting the proposed meeting schedule as included in our packet.

Move approval as presented. Thank you, Mayor Khan. Second. I'll second. But I'm going to try to stop reading motions and seconding because it's my last meeting. Someone else is going to start doing it. Noted.

Okay. Any comments? Great. Okay. All those in favor of the 2026 meeting schedule as proposed. Any opposed? Okay. Meeting schedule is adapted. Adopted. Could be adopted, but it's adopted. All right. This brings us to final final vote on conditional approvals. Uh, as a matter of practice, the planning board will issue a final vote on all conditionally approved plans after all of the conditions precedent have been met. [snorts] This final vote will be the final approval and we'll start the 30-day appeal clock. Uh, may I ask the staff if there are any applications tonight ready for a final vote?

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. We do not have any conditionally approved projects that are ready for final approval this evening. I will note that we do have a couple hearings that are before you tonight that um barring any needed changes may be ready for final approval this evening. However, Okay. Thank you, Mr. Clement.

Okay. All right. So, let's move into our uh our specific uh projects. So, our first on the on the agenda is a boundary line adjustment. So boundary line adjustment PB-2025-30 91 and 105 Maple A boundary line adjustment applicant Huntley Survey and Design on behalf of owners Cedarcrest and the First Baptist Church of Keen proposes to transfer approximately 7.5 acres from the approximately 21.5 acre lot at 105 Maple Avenue. TMP number 227-017- 6 approximately 6.7 acre lot at 91 Maple A TMP number 227-018-0000 the 105 Maple property is in the low density district and 91 Maple Avenue is in the conservation and low density districts. Okay. May I ask if staff has an application a recommendation for the completeness of the application? [snorts]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is Megan Forson, planner. The applicant has requested exemptions from submitting all technical reports. After reviewing these requests, planning staff have made the preliminary determination that granting the requested exemptions would have no bearing on the merits of the application and recommend that the board accept the application as complete. Thank you. So, I'll entertain a motion for the completeness of the application. Um, I would move to issue final approval for Nope. Nope. We're just looking at the uh we're looking for completeness right now.

Okay. So, um I would like to move um for completeness of the PB 2025-30 the 91 and 105 Maple Lav boundary line adjustment for completeness. Thank you. Second. Second.

Thank you, Mayor Khan. Any discussion? Okay, so let's call the vote. All those in favor of uh the motion for completeness for application PB-2025-30 indicate any opposed. All right. Application is is voted as complete. So at this time I will ask the uh applicant to uh to present. facing.

Yeah. You want to face us? Yeah. They'll see, right? They'll see it on the TVs.

Good evening everybody. I'm Russ Huntley. Ah,

better. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Russ Huntley of Huntley Survey and Design. Uh, I'm here representing the First Baptist Church in Cedar Crest uh for the boundary line adjustment that they would uh like to have. Um, it's very straightforward. there. Uh the church is selling 7 and 1/2 acres of backland uh at the I guess south eastern end of their property to Cedar Crest along with a a strip um for access uh so Cedar Crest can uh reach the property. So [snorts] this is the access way and this is the land here that they uh wish to buy. [snorts] Um there's no changes in the frontage. Um the wetlands are shown, the setbacks, the 30 foot surface water buffers are shown. Um we have topography on the other sheet, the existing conditions. Um there's not a lot really to say about this one. Um, [clears throat] I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Okay. Board members have questions for the applicant. I I have one quick one. Sure. Uh, could you just remind us where the solar array is? Oh, sure. We were here a few months ago with the the solar array and that's uh on the conservation area just directly behind the seedrest building. Um, and I think that's some of the purpose of this strip here is so that we don't have to go through the solar array area. All right. Thank you. Other questions? Okay. Thank you. [laughter]

Thank you, Mr. Hley. Um, at this time, I'll ask staff to provide their comments. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is Megan Forson, planner. Um, so as Mr. Huntley stated, this is a very straightforward application. Um, the Cedar Crest parcel is mostly located within the lowdensity zoning district or excuse me, industrial park zoning district, soon to be medium density zoning district. Um, and the rear portion is located within the conservation district. I'm sorry, I'm messing up my my zoning districts here. It is low density that the front portion of the parcel is located in. Um, the First Baptist Church is located entirely within the low density parcel. And so the acreage of the Cedar Crest site that's going to be within low density is going to be increasing. Um, and the amount conservation is not going to be changing. Um, both sites are currently developed. The First Baptist Church site is developed with the existing church and a few outuildings. Um there's also some telecommunications facilities that are on the rear portion of the site that you can see if you look at the proposed subdivision uh plan. And then the Cedar Crest site is built out with their main campus building and some out buildings as well as an outdoor um seating area and then the rear portion of the site that's going to eventually be developed with a proposed solar array. um staff had made the preliminary determination that the proposed BLA does not um have any regional impact, but that will be something you'll need to discuss as part of your deliberation. Um there were no departmental comments on the application and to take you through a quick analysis of the applicable standards. Uh both

lots are going to comply with the lot size requirements in low density both prior to and following the boundary line adjustment. Low density requires a minimum of a 10,000 square foot lot size. And so following the BLA, the church is going to have a parcel that's about 14 acres in size. And then the Cedar Crest site is going to be about 14.2 acres in size. Um, if you look again on the proposed subdivision plan, there is an area of wetlands on the rear portion of the church site and it [snorts] does show the 30-foot surface water buffer that has to be maintained from this area in the low density district. However, there's no development proposed as part of this application. So, the applicant has gone ahead and added a note to the plan stating that if there is any development in that area in the future, it will need to comply with all local, state, and federal regulations. in terms of development near that area. So, that standard appears to be met. Um, for monumentation, the project narrative states that if approved, there's going to be new lot monuments installed as is pretty standard with our planning board applications. We are recommending um that a subsequent condition of approval related to the inspection of lot monuments be included. And then there are no uh special flood hazard areas present on any of the parcels. There is adequate fire protection and water supply provided from Maple Lav. Um there's no changes proposed to utilities and uh there's no changes proposed to site access. So again, a very straightforward application. When you received your agenda packet, there was a motion with four precedent conditions of approval that were recommended. You should have an updated list of recommended uh conditions for multiple applications in front of you tonight. Um the applicant has met most

of these conditions. Uh we have plans that have owner signatures. We've receeded the recording fees and we've also received the paper copies of the plans. So the only condition that we're now recommending is the lot monument inspection. And we're recommending that the board uh grant final approval this evening so that the lot monument inspection is the only thing that has to be taken care of by the applicant prior to uh recording of the plans. I'm happy to answer any questions. All right. Thank you, Miss Forson. Uh questions for staff. Councelor Remy.

Thank you. And I'm not sure it's relevant, but I'm curious what that the dirt area is in the middle of the lot there. That's like right on the border of what's being conveyed on satellite on the church site. Uh it's right on the property line. Um it looks like it is at least from when I'm looking at the it's like clearing in the trees. I'm not sure. I don't have a copy of the aerial in front of me so I'm not I can Oh, sure. Yeah. Mr. Huntley, if you uh I'm just could respond. It doesn't look like wetland, but I don't know what it is.

I'm Russ Huntley. Um it's not wetlands. It's a uh it looks like it's an old gravel pit. When I was out there, it looks like sand and people have been out there with four-wheelers and that kind of thing. Okay. Motorcycles just messing around. All right. I just wasn't sure what it was and if it's going to get split between the two. I wanted to make sure it wasn't something weird to be split, but Okay. Thank you.

Sure. Thank you, Mr. Hley. Uh, other questions. Mayor Khan. So, I I get the 50 foot access from one parcel that's Cedar Crest to another parcel back behind the church. The connectivity uh is that narrow strip. The distance is what is making it just seem odd. But I I if it's for compensatory storage or I it's just uh you know is is that I I guess it's the use that we aren't questioning but is it are we creating more wetlands back there in the future is I guess my wonder. Um, so since there is no development proposed as part of the application, we're just strictly you're reviewing the change in the proposed lot sizes. Um, and if there were to be any development on that portion of the site, they would have to comply with the surface water protection ordinance and any other, like I said, federal or state regulations that would come into play in regulating that area. So, nothing at this point,

right? I I can affirm at the moment I don't think there's any plans or at least I haven't been privy to any plans. Um, it's just a land transfer at the moment. Um, I can't really speak to anything else. Understood. Any more questions for staff? All right. Thank you, Miss Forson.

Thank you, Mr. So uh technically this is not a public hearing but generally uh we are willing to listen to comments from the public. Could I just see a show of hands? Is anyone uh wishing to comment on this application? That wasn't a hand raise, was it? Okay. All right. Seeing none, um we'll move on then to um to deliberation. So I think we'd like to start with a motion. Miss Master Giovani. Um, I would like to move to issue final approval for PB-2025-30 as shown on the plan identified as boundary line adjustment prepared by Huntley Survey and Design PLLC at a scale of 1 in equals 100 ft on November 12th, 2025 and last advised on December 5th, 2025 with the following condition subsequent to final approval prior to recording the final subdivision plat. The new lot monuments shall be inspected by the public works director or in lie of this a security shall be submitted to cover the cost of this inspection.

Thank you. Second. Second.

Thank you, Mayor Khan. Okay. any uh comments, discussion, deliberation regarding the uh the application. Would someone like to uh give their opinion about uh regional impact? I I I can't imagine the regional impact of this. This is these are two properties out on a a main street in the city. Uh the uh what is back behind here but uh Route 12 the highway uh bypass. it just uh has no impact on either of those access roads and uh uh I think there is no further impact to the region.

Thank you.

I would concur. Anyone have a different opinion? Great. Any other opinions? I I'll just I'll just say that to me it is very straightforward and uh I don't see any reason to uh not move forward with approval and uh given that we have a motion on the table uh I will uh call the vote now. So, all those in favor of final approval for PB-20225-30 indicate. Any opposed? Okay. Final approval is granted.

Mr. Chairman, I apologize. Who seconded that motion? Mayor Khan. [cough] [clears throat] Okay. Thank you.

Yep. Thank you. All right. Next on uh next up is a public hearing for 31 Robbins Road. Tax map plat number 558-019- [clears throat] appeal of street access permit decision. Applicant and owner Karen Royce is appealing a decision of the city engineer to deny a request for an exemp an exception from section 23 5.4. A.8 eight of the land development code regarding allowed driveway width. The parcel is 41 acres in size and is in the low density district. Okay. Uh does staff have a re recommendation for completeness of the appeal?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh the applicant has not requested any uh exemptions from the submittal requirements for this application. So staff is recommending that the planning board accept this application as complete. Thank you, Mr. Clement. Um, so I'll take a motion now for completeness of uh of this uh appeal. I'll move completeness of PB 202531. Nope. [clears throat] No, we're not there yet. This is the uh appeal for [clears throat] uh Robins Road. That's it.

That's it. 202531 is the subdivision for Cheshire Medical. Oh, funny. Both number 31, are they? I don't have that on mine. Well, it's 31 Robbins Road and then the the next application just happens to be PB number 31, right? The appeal sequencing. Yeah, the appeal does not have a PB number. doesn't have move completeness of 31 Robins Road. I'll second.

All right. Thank you. Uh motion made by Mayor Khan, seconded by Miss Master Giovani. Um oh, you know what? Let's uh before we That's completeness. So um so any comments regarding completeness? All right, let's call the vote. All those in favor of uh accepting this motion as complete. Any opposed? All right. [clears throat] Uh proposal is considered complete. So at this time, I would ask the applicant to present to us.

And just for clarity, it wasn't PB202531. It was the appeal of street access permit decision. I just want to make sure we're all for the purposes of the record that we're not Yep. when we get to the motion. No, it's careful. Yeah. So, um, is Miss Royce here?

I don't know her. Do you know of Okay. All right. So, I don't So, we see her here. I I don't believe the applicant is present. Um I've only ever spoken to her on the telephone. I haven't met her. So, um but all things considered, she doesn't seem to be coming up. Um we can continue the application to January uh if you'd prefer, Mr. Chairman. I think in fairness to Miss Rece, I think that would be uh prudent. Okay. Yeah, council room.

Thank you, chair. And we because we haven't started deliberations on this, right? It didn't start any clocks. That's what I want to make sure we don't accidentally start some special hearing clock that we need to meet again in 15 days.

Uh too soon. Um no, so the the 65day clock does start once the planning board accepts an application as complete. Um that is a waveable timeline that the applicant could wave the planning board if everybody involved feels like they need more time. Um that is the standard procedure for normal planning board applications. Um not earth excavation applications. Um so uh I I believe the applicant was made aware of of the meeting this evening. Um but yeah, I think continuing to January to to give them another chance uh to appear uh would be fair.

Yeah, I think that's fair. But um we'll need to vote on that. Yeah. So I'll I'll entertain a motion to continue this appeal. Yeah, I'll move continuation until the January planning board meeting. Thank you, Mayor Khan. Second. I'll second, Mr. Mayhew. Thank you. All right. Um, just one moment. Sure. Apologize. Yeah. So, uh, date, time, and location certain. So, it's the January 26 planning board meeting at 6:30 located in council chambers. That's 6:30 p.m.

Thank you. Let the motion be read as such. All right. Um, any discussion? Okay. Let's call a vote. So, all those in favor of the motion to continue the appeal to the January 26 meeting, any opposed? Good. All right. Uh, motion is continued to the January meeting. Mr. Chair, can you just clarify the motion? Sure. Stefan may. Yep.

Okay. Next up. Next up is PB 2025-31 62 Maple Lab. It's a Cheshire [clears throat] Medical Center two lot subdivision. Applicant Huntley Survey and Design on behalf of owner Cheshure Medical Center proposes to subdivide the approximately 50 acre lot located at 62 Maple A TMP number 227-00006-0000 into two lots approximately 1.3 acres and approximately 48.6 acres in size. The parcel is in the industrial park district. Okay. Uh, does staff have a recommendation for completeness?

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. This is Megan Forson, Planner. Um, the applicant has requested exemptions from all technical reports. After reviewing each request, planning staff have made the preliminary determination that granting the requested exemptions would have no bearing on the merits of the application and recommend that the board accept it as complete. Thank you, Miss Forson. [snorts] Um, we have a motion for completeness, Miss Master Giovanni. Um, yes. I'd like to um move that uh PB 2025-31 is complete. Thank you. Second.

Second, Khan. Thank you. Any discussion of completeness? All right, let's call the vote. All those in favor of uh PB-20225-31 is complete. So indicate. Thank you. Any opposed? All right. Motion is completed. Uh at this time, I will ask the applicant to present two in a row for Mr. Huntley. So again, I'm Russ Huntley, Huntley Survey and Design. Um, I was hired by actually uh the city of Keen to uh effectuate this subdivision of uh Cheshure Medical's land on Maple Avenue. Um I will show you this first sheet is the existing conditions survey which we performed a couple years ago. Um and it indicates wetlands. It indicates uh the 100red-year flood, 500year flood. uh the topography uh the impermeable surfaces along on the eastern uh southeastern end of the campus uh the northwestern end and this little tail going to the south are all undeveloped. Um and so what we are trying to do here, this is a blowup of the project area. Um is to subdivide off a 1.28 acre parcel. Um currently the the zoning is

industrial park, but I I know there's a a motion to change the zoning. I don't know the result of the meeting the other night if that has actually happened or not. Um but the change would make this medium density and that's the what this plan represents is the zoning requirements of medium density um which we meet. We have all our setbacks um the frontages all of that works. The new uh 1.2 acre parcel um doesn't have any wetlands on it. it's not within the flood zone. Um, all that stuff remains uh on the the remainder parcel. Um, again, I probably I don't know the reason for the subdivision, so I can't comment on the the future use of what might happen. Um, I've just been asked to to do the the survey portion of it. Um, it's basically all flat grass right there at the moment, so it will be developable. I'm sure there is some plans for it. Um, there aren't really any features on the property to save. So, like I said, it's just grass. Uh, the monuments have all been set. Uh, they were set uh November 11th, uh, December 11th. Um, we address the special flood hazards areas, fire protection, water supply. It's existing within uh Maple Avenue. Um, it's going to be the same access, I believe. Um, there's an access point right here. I don't know if the city is going to put in their own driveway or not that or if they're going to use the same access point that's already there. Um, but that's kind of the proposal in a nutshell and then again I'd be happy to

answer any questions. Thank you. Uh, questions for Mr. Hman. Councelor Remy. Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's actually not a question, but on Thursday of last week, the council did vote unanimously to pass the ordinance which adjusted that zoning. So, just for your awareness. Thank you.

Other questions or comments? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Hunley. At this time, I'll ask uh staff to provide their comments. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is Megan Fortune again. Um so this parcel is directly across the street from Cedar Crest in the First Baptist Church. So, you'll have to excuse. That's why I was so confused before because yes, as Mr. Huntley mentioned, um this parcel along with four other parcels along Maple were part of a recent ordinance application to reszone them from industrial park to medium density along with two parcels across Route 9 that are were um reszoned from industrial park to low density. Um, so this application only complies with the requirements of the medium density district and you're able to move forward with acting on it because the zoning has been changed. So as of now it complies with zoning. Um, the parent parcel is 50 acres in size and the proposal is to uh carve off a little almost one and a quarter acre section. Um my understanding is that the intent is for this this smaller parcel to be gifted to the city uh because Cheshure Medical Center has um basically a program with the city called pilot which is payment in lie of taxes. And so this would be given to the city to potentially use for future development. We have no idea what the development would be. As Mr. Huntley noted, this is just strictly a subdivision to change the lot lines at this point in time and create a new developable lot. Um, in terms of a determination of regional impact, staff had made the preliminary determination that we don't believe there's any regional impact. And then in terms of

departmental comments that were received on the application, uh the only comment was that obviously the proposal would need the zoning map amendment would need to be passed in order for this proposal to comply with zoning which has been taken care of. I'm going to quickly run through the applicable subdivision regulations. Um section 20.2.1 2.1 of land development code basically says that any new lots have to comply with all of the zoning dimensional requirements of the underlying district. So in this case the lot is going to have um 631.9 ft of frontage along Maple A and then the newer that's going to be the the 48 acre portion of the lot. The one and a quarter acre portion is going to have 189 feet of frontage along Maple A and will comply with all other required zoning dimensions in the medium density district. In terms of the land, as Mr. Huntley had mentioned, it's a relatively flat grass piece of land. Other portions of the larger 48 acre parcel do have special flood hazard areas and have areas of wetlands, but there's no development proposed as part of the application. and none of those site features exist on the proposed lot. So, that standard appears to be met. Um, the new lot is uh along a city street that has access to city water and sewer. So, there's no potential for scattered or pre-bure development. Um, I believe that Mr. Huntley has already set the lot monuments and those do need to be inspected by the city engineers office. So the inspection of the monuments is included as a recommended subsequent condition of approval. And then I think I addressed everything else in terms of special flood hazard areas, fire protection and water supply and utilities. And then again, as Mr. Huntley had mentioned, traffic and access management would be handled as part of any future potential development

on the lot. There's no changes proposed at this time. And again, as with the Cedar Crest and First Baptist Church site, the recommended motion has changed from what was included in the staff report, we now are recommending final approval with the only condition being the completion of that lot monument inspection prior to recording because we do already have plans that are signed by the property owner and we do have the recording fees. So, I'm happy to answer any questions if there are any for staff. Thank you, Miss Forson. Uh, questions for staff. Mr. Hayer.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I think you I was curious to why the city was had contracted this work out. Um, and so I think you covered it with the the the concept of this payment in lie of taxes. So the the intention is for treasure med to donate this to the this land to the parcel to the city. That's my understanding. And then yes, it would be under the city used or sold by the city, right? Okay, thank you.

Okay. Thank you, Miss Forson. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

All right. This is a public hearing. Um so, um may I just see a show of hands of anyone who would be interested in making a comment on this proposal? Are you raising your hand? No. Okay. All right. I need better glasses, I think. Okay. Um, seeing no uh uh no one willing to come forward and comment on this, I will close the public portion of the meeting. and we will proceed to the deliberation. Um, so may I uh ask for a motion on this application? I would like to move to issue final approval for PB-20225-31 as shown on the plan identified as two lot subdivision plan prepared by Huntley Survey and Design PLLC at a scale of 1 in equals 50 ft on November 14th, 2025 and last revised on December 3rd, 2025 with the following condition subsequent to final approval. Prior to recording the final subdivision plat, the new lot monument shall be inspected by the public works director or in lie of this a security shall be submitted to cover the cost of this inspection.

Thank you. Second and second. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Um at this time we can discussion uh edits questions. Mr. Vzani, I hate to put you on the spot, but you have any uh comment on the uh regional impact. Thank you for asking, Mr. Chair. Uh I I agree with the staff recommendation that there doesn't seem to be a regional impact and it looks like a pretty straightforward transfer or subdivision of the land. Um makes sense to me and I don't see a reason why we wouldn't move forward.

Thank you. Other discussion? Okay, let's uh let's call the vote. Uh there's a motion on the table to uh for final approval of PB-2025-31. All those in favor, please indicate. Any opposed? Okay. Uh PB 2022-31 has received final approval. Thank you. Okay, moving right along. Thank you everybody. Yep. Thank you, Mr. Hunley.

Give him just a minute to uh pack up. [snorts] Okay. The next item on the agenda is PB-25 2025-28. This is 98 Peg Shop Road, a two lot subdivision. Application D. Bernardo Associates on behalf of owners Mitchell and Erica Greenwald proposes to subdivide the approximately 33 acre lot located at 98 Peg Shop Road TMP number 232- 022-0000 into two lots approximately 28 acres and approximately 5 acres in size. The property is in the rural district. So at this time I will turn to the staff and ask if they have a recommendation for completeness of this application.

Thank you Mr. Chairman. The applicant requests exemptions from submitting a drainage report, traffic analysis, and soil analysis. After reviewing these requests, planning stand planning staff recommend that the board grant the requested waiverss and accept the application as complete. Thank you.

Okay. Um, so I'll entertain a motion for completeness of the application. I'll move to accept this application as complete. Second. Second.

Thank you, Mayor Khan. Uh, any comments about completeness of the application. All right, let's call the vote. So, um there's a motion on the table for um recommending completeness of this of 2025-28. All those in favor indicate. Any opposed? All right. Motion is considered complete. All right. At this time, I would invite the applicant to propose to to discuss the proposal. Uh, good evening. I'm Joe Deonardo from Debonardo Associates, uh, licensed land surveyors. I'm here representing, um, Mitchell and Erica Greenwald on a two lot subdivision located off Peg Shop Road. I'm going to apologize. I didn't bring a board to put this on, so I'm going to do my best at uh, displaying it for you. Uh essentially uh Peg Shop Road runs uh in a east-west uh direction. Property uh being subdivided is north of Pegop Road. It is located in the uh rural rural district which has a minimum lot size of 2 acres uh minimum width at the building site of 200 feet and 50 foot uh building setbacks on all sides. Uh the parcel that's being subdivided is to the east of the developed portion of the lot. Uh it currently is going to consist of 5.0 acres even with 200.05 ft of road frontage. And then the lot narrows as it traverses to the north. But there at the building site uh we we did maintain the 200 ft of

width. uh test pits have been done by Audrey Clum as well as uh the needed wetlands by her as well shown [clears throat] on the north portion of the lot the 5acre lot to be subdivided. Um in addition to that just to note there's a national grid easement uh on the west side of the property uh 250 foot wide um easement that runs through the property. That's it. I'll take some questions.

Thank you. Uh, questions for Mr. D. Bernardo. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. So, at this time, I would invite staff to provide their comments.

Just one quick favor. We should run that.

Good evening everyone. Evan Clemens, planner, deputy zoning administrator. Um, so the uh uh the applicant did a very good job of explaining the existing conditions as well as the the proposed lot. I'll just give some a little bit of additional um information. I'll go through the uh the the planning board subdivision standards really quick. Um so the proposed subdivision subdivision would create a new 5acre residential building lot with approximately 200 feet of frontage on a class 5 road. Um in the rural district there's only 50 ft of frontage required and a minimum lot size of 2 acres. So the proposed new lot will be larger than the minimum required size and have greater than the minimum required amount of frontage. The standard appeals to be met in regards to the character for the land for subdivision. The applicant has stated in their narrative that the proposed lot is suitable for development and will not propose a danger due to hazardous conditions. Um due to the characteristics of the site, development is likely to occur closer to Peg Shop Road due to the topography uh to the rear. It appears that standard has been met. Uh the applicant proposes uh to create a single building lot on a city maintain class 5 road in an existing rural residential neighborhood. So, in regards to scattered or premature development, um, uh, this application does not appear to be such. Um, the development potential for the lot, which could be developed as a single family home or with an accessory dwelling unit, is such that the proposal is unlikely to create any hardship for city services. It appears the standard has been met. In regards to the preservation of existing features, the applicant states that the proposed lot design takes existing features into consideration but requiring development to be located closer to the road. Steep slopes and wetlands located to the rear of the lot will not be able to be impacted by development due to the lot narrowing to the north and this will

ensure that natural features are maintained and this standard also appears to be met. Uh for monumentation, the applicant has proposed a 5/8 inch diameter diameter, excuse me, iron rods at all points uh shown on the plan. Uh these monuments have since been installed and inspected by the city engineer. This appears to be met. Uh the special flood hazard uh is not applicable. Uh in regards to fire protection and water supply, the applicant states uh that the proposed subdivision has frontage on a classified road that allows for reasonable access for emergency vehicles and that standard also appears to be met. And lastly, for utilities, um the proposed lot is located within the rural zone outside of municipal water and sewer. So private well and septic uh will be required for development of this lot. As the applicant mentioned, they have done test pits uh that prove suitability for a septic system to be cited on this property and that standard also appears to be met. Um that's all I have. Uh staff is recommending that the board consider this application for final approval this evening. um with one uh condition precedent that uh recording fees in the amount of $51 be supplied uh uh to the city to record the mylars. That's all I have. I'm happy to answer any questions at this time.

Uh thank you, Mr. Clement. Uh councelor Remy. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, we did receive one email with concerns and I just want to, it seems to me when reading through that that a lot of those are concerned with a potential future development, not with the actual application for the subdivision. Is that a fair reading?

Um, I I did also um read uh the correspondence um which should be included in the revised application materials that you all received. Um the the concerns I I would agree uh councelor Remy that the concerns were more focused about uh land disturbance, drainage, things like that um that will be evaluated uh at the time of uh the building permit for that single family residence.

Thank you. Yeah, I I have a question which probably falls into that category as well as when uh when the next shoe falls here, but is there screening on the on this property currently, you know, between the the road and I believe there's some existing vegetation um on the site. A single family residence is is not subject to our site development standards, so additional screening won't be required. um at least by us um the the new future owners may choose to plant landscaping.

Okay, fair enough. Thank you. Other questions for staff? Okay, thank you, Mr. Clarence. Uh this is a public hearing as I mentioned. So at this time I would like to ask if there's anyone in the audience who would like to comment on this.

Good. [clears throat] Is it on? I'm color blind. I can't see. Thank you. U Mr. Chair Mitchell Greenwald uh 98 Peg Shop Road the petitioner. And I should probably keep my mouth shut because everything is sounding very good. But I did want to say that it is my intention and the reason for this is to create another housing lot, another housing opportunity in Keen. You notice that it's five acres, which I have said as a city councelor, I think the rural district should be five acres, not two. And our deed when we do sell this will restrict no further subdivision, just to make that clear. Uh there are trees. There's no big trees, there's little trees. It's a nice lot. A lot of screening. There's more screening between that lot and my residence than is definitely required because I agree it needs to remain rural, which is what it will be. Any questions? My wife suggested I should say it's to create a housing lot. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Greenwald. Anyone else? Seeing none, I am going to close the public portion of the meeting and move ahead to deliberation phase. At this time, I will entertain a motion.

[clears throat] I would like to move to issue final approval for PB 2025-28 as shown on the plan set identified as plan showing subdivision of property of Mitchell H Greenwald Revocable Trust Erica Greenwald Revocable Trust prepared by D. Bernardo Associates LLC at 1 in equals 100 ft on September 24th, 2025 and last revised on December 3rd, 2025 with the following conditions subsequent the submitt of a check in the amount of $51 made out to the city of Keen to cover recording fees. Thank you, Miss Master Javani. And a second

second. Thank you, Mr. Okay. Uh any discussion, any comments? If you're looking for comments on regional impact, I think this is a this is a very lightly traveled road with little connectivity to other roads. Uh I think it's minimal impact on uh the neighborhood and uh and in the city and region.

All right. Thank you. Uh I just have a quick question for uh Mr. Clement. The uh waiverss as part of the uh completeness, we don't need to vote on them right now. No, I them as part of completion. There are no waivers. I used the wrong word. I apologize. Those were those were exceptions from submittal requirements. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for that clarification, Mr. Hayer.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, we already brought up the uh the public um comments uh from Leah Butter. Um but just to to reiterate the that we saw and heard those comm concerns from from what I'm hearing and seeing, this is intended to be a one one resident lot. No further subdivisions will be allowed when the deed passes according to the applicant. So, um I would find no reason not to to move forward with this uh this approval tonight. Thank you. Other comments? Okay, we're knocking these off quickly. All right, so let's uh let's call the vote. Uh, all those in favor of final approval for PB-20225-28, please indicate. Any opposed? Okay. PB-20225-28 has final approval. Thank you. I will give them a second to finish the paperwork

before proceeding to the next item. [clears throat]

[clears throat]

Okay, this is the last item on our public hearing uh portion of the agenda. The next item is PV-2025-29, 454 Elm Street, a cottage court conditional use permit, surface water protection conditional use permit, and major site plan. Applicant Fieldstone Land Consultants PLLC on behalf of owners Paul Chester and Gail Marie Dubriski proposes to redevelop the property at 454 Elm Street. That's TMP number 521-00004-0000 into a cottage court development with 18 single family dwellings. A surface water protection conditional use permit is requested for approximately 1,435 square feet of impact within the 30foot wetland buffer. The parcel is approximately 2.3 acres in size and is in the low density district.

Mr. Chair, can I recuse myself from this?

Thank you, Miss Fani. Yes. I just note that Miss Vzani has recused herself. Okay. I think I had finished reading the uh the tea up uh paragraph. So, at this time, I would like to ask if staff has a recommendation for completeness of the application.

Bear with me one second, Mr. Chairman. I apologize.

Of course. Why is the Yes. So, I noticed an error in my staff report related to um [clears throat] completeness and what was exempted and I'm trying to get the correct information. Thank you very much. Okay. The applicant has requested exemptions from a traffic analysis, soil analysis, historic evaluation, and screening analysis. Um, after reviewing these requests, uh, planning staff has re uh made the initial determination um that these requested exemptions uh will have no bearings on the merit of the application and recommend that the board accept the application as complete.

Thank you, Mr. Clement. So, I'll entertain a motion for completeness of the application. I'd like to um move to um see that this application is complete. Thank you. Second. I'll second that.

Thank you, Mr. Mayhew. And just for the record, it's PB-20225-29. Uh motion for completeness. Any discussion of the completeness of the application? Seeing none, we'll call the vote. Uh, all those in favor of finding PB-2025-29 as a complete application, please indicate. Any opposed? Okay. Uh, application is considered complete. So, at this time, I would ask uh Mr. to Nunan to present.

Good evening. John Nunan with Fieldstone Land Consultants here on behalf of the applicant and land owner Paul and Gail Duberski. Um so I'm here tonight to present the plans for a cottage court overlay with 18 homes. These are single family residential homes meeting the cottagec court regulations for no larger than 900 square feet in footprint size and not to exceed the 1,250 square ft of overall average gross area. So that's all the homes square footage um average for the entire 18 homes cannot exceed that. So, um, with the calculations, we we end up with, uh, just under both of those thresholds. So, we end up with, uh, 18 units on the 2.3 acre lot. As was discussed at the sitewalk last week. I know some members of the planning board were in attendance. Um, and then we followed with the conservation commission meeting last Monday. Following the sitewalk, we did amend our uh cup application for surf surface water protection that was revised for initially we're asking for a full reduction from a 30-ft buffer down to a 10-ft buffer. We then revised following that meeting to request just for the impact area only. So the areas that are not impacted to the 30-foot buffer would remain as the 30-oot buffer. Um, ultimately that comes down to if if any change was done on the site plan later on, they would they would have to come back for a conditional use to impact any additional square footage in the 30- foot buffer. So, we're just looking for the approval of the impact of the buffer, which was the 1,435 square ft. That impact area um which is down to the southwest corner of the lot, that is for storm water management. We have a level spreader um taking [clears throat] storm water off of the end of the last

home and end of the parking lot turnaround area. It's uh for permanent tree removal. So there are large trees there. They would be removed and um those trees would not be replanted because of the storm water management system in that area. And then at the discretion and review of the conservation commission, they had they had requested that some plantings be done in that area of the impact in the 30-foot u buffer. So we've called out a pollinator northeast pollinator friendly seed mix. So that's a like a wildflower type mix. Um in addition to a few plantings for silky dog woods which absorb a lot of water um as they deemed fit for that area. They also requested some plantings at the front of the site and along as uh tree plantings for street tree plantings. So, we ended up revising and submitting a revised plan last week following that meeting that showed trees being planted along the proposed street. So, um the overall concept on the plan is that these 18 homes are a condominium unit. So, each home is a condominium unit with a limited common area around it. So, you would have some area around each home that you would utilize as almost your own property. However, it's not a um true subdivision of of property into the lots. It's condominium units for each home. Uh there would be a homeowners association that would maintain the road, the storm water management systems, utilities um that are to each home, the main run of water and sewer that would be municipally owned. So, we're extending water and sewer off of Elm Street into the um units and that would be protected by an easement granted to the city of Keen where they would own water and sewer

infrastructure on the site. Um overall, it's a it's a 20 foot wide main driveway which is is built to a city street standard. uh curbing on each side which is asphalt Cape Cod Burm style um curbing and then individual driveways. This the shortest driveway is 18 ft on two of the homes and then the other ones are longer. Um each one able to accommodate one car parked in the driveway and each home has a garage. There are three types of homes styles that could be chosen from and um those were submitted with floor plan layouts to to verify that we met the cottage court square footage requirements. Um and then each one is is indicated on what type of home is is where. Um but we have a mix between um Cape Cod style home with a garage on it, a Cape Cod style home with a garage under because we we have some topography changes as it comes up in slope from Elm Street to the back of the lot. So some of these will be um enter the garage and first floor at the garage level and then walk up to the second two floors. So that home would be used in that area. And then the third style home would just be a a ranch style home and again having a garage just like the other ones. So we've submitted a site plan, existing conditions plan, condominium plan. Um, so that condominium plan gets re sent into the attorney general's office and reviewed um and then recorded and that will call out all easements to the city, what the limited common areas are for each home and the square footage of each home. And then we submitted the utility plan uh profile and grading and drainage and also calls out for our storm water

management. uh to point out where our storm water management is. There is currently in the front of the site there is a large uh storm water area that was built by the constructed by the city of Keen. We're going to utilize that and make it larger on each side of the driveway with the driveway in the middle dividing it. uh collecting with catch basins on site outleting to these storm water ponds and then utilizing a outlet structure tied in back into the municipal storm water where it does currently. Um and then in the back as I mentioned there's there's a level spreader out back which collects water just from that last unit and the last driveway turnaround there. So overall there will be a reduction in the in the two 10 and 25 and 50-year storm events um as submitted in our storm water management report. And just to show the revised landscaping plan. So this was submitted after after the conservation commission meeting where we had initially just plantings along the frontage here. Um, we've added street trees throughout the street area and then there was uh already some screening around the transformer. So, there'll be two transformers on site. And then we added down by the wetland impact buffer area was the silky dog woods and the uh pollinator friendly mix down at where the impact is to the storm water buffer. Um there is a screening fence as that's required as part of the cottage court overlay. So we're within 10 feet of an abuing property. There will be a home. So there is a vinyl fence um running along this this boundary here between that and the abuing property.

The wetland for the surface water conditional use permit that's back in this area here. I do want to point out that that that wetland complex is formed and fed by um storm water runoff from Route 9. So that was initially owned by the DOT and that portion of the property was conveyed to the applicant this year. Um so this wetland um albeit you know is is a it it's uh impacted and absolutely receives waters from impervious areas. currently it definitely gets salt off of the highway and everything else. Um we do not foresee since we directed all of our storm water to the front other than a small portion. We do not foresee our small impact which is uh does not include structures into that wetland impact as being um a monumental impact to that wetland's function. Um so that's the overall application. I would like to open up to questions now.

Thank you. Uh board members have questions for Mr. Nunan. Uh I have a question about uh the what you were just talking about. So all the storm water uh and the drainage all of the uh all the water that's runoff is going to go to the to Elm Street to the front of the property.

Correct. Probably 95% of it. There is a small portion that goes from this roof runoff um and this last turnaround piece right here goes down to the storm water management system that's in that impact and that was really driven by uh I don't remember on the sidewalk it it goes up and ramps from Elm Street to the high point in the back of the property here. So our our high point is right at the end of the road. So we're taking everything that direction other than just the very end where it where it turns down. Um so a minor amount goes to that and it will be on the surface or under the ground or

Yeah. So what runs down to towards wetland will be over the ground and then it goes into a level spreader which is a small basin detains water slightly and then it spills out and it it spreads out that flow so you don't get a channelized flow down to the wetland. So it it stops sediment sediments from traveling down that that slope and eroding it. And then the remainder of the site is all going to the front towards where there's storm water management currently. And we're going to modify, make it larger um on each side of the proposed driveway. And then there's a outlet structure with basically an orifice at each height to allow the different level of storms to build up and slowly release. Um, I'd also like to point out when talking to our surveyors when they when they were out and and pulling manhole covers and catch basin data down here, there is a substantial amount of sediment that's in the uh catch basins and into the culverts that are in those structures. I know it's been mentioned when we did uh other projects in the nearby abudding area and properties about uh storm water and flooding and back. I think really the existing system needs to be maintained. In tying into those uh infrastructure projects, so there's a catch basin that we're going to be tying into. We'll absolutely call out is that those pipes are flushed and cleaned out and the catch basins are cleaned out. And I think that'll substantially help a lot of the the storm water problems that are there now currently. Um so I just want to point that out. There there is a deficiency right now with maintenance on on that end of the infrastructure. All right, that's good to know. Thank you. Other questions,

Mayor Khan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Wanted to further ask about the elevations uh along the street where the catch basins are proposed. Can you turn on your microphone, please?

Sure enough. Uh yeah. So I wanted to ask about the catch basins along Elm Street and the change of elevation that there is. It's just a perception, but but from the site visit uh it seemed like the lower points of uh the elevations are uh I guess it's to the south of Timberlane Drive. as opposed to north. I guess it's it's an awkward corner there to to determine that. At any rate, the top portion of the Yeah. So, I think I heard you say that uh you're directing the flow to the catch basins to the left of that drawing and and then to the left of Timberlane.

Correct. So, uh, currently everything drains from the north to the south, um, and then ultimately drains along the curb line and is picked up by the municipal catch basins in Elm Street. Um, the driveway for the existing home is is over here. Yeah.

Uh, with the proposed road, we're going to be over here. Um, and ultimately we're directing our catch basins into the basin here that's going to be larger. And then down to our proposed catch basins here. These will be tied together with culverts tying this p small pond to this small pond. And then a structure here that has an outlet structure that will tie into the catch basin. Currently, that's just an open 12-in pipe. And that is uh has sediment as well in this 12-in pipe. So, there's just a 12-in pipe that allows that on-site flow and whatever comes down timber lane and comes into the into the property as well drains into this front area and ties into the municipal. So, if I can continue.

Yeah, please do. So, what you're describing there is that the flow to the top of the drawing uh [clears throat] that in that direction. Yeah. Everything's flowing this direction. It's not tied into uh the city's storm.

No, it it is. There's a 12-in existing culvert on the just off the property um in the in the rightway here, but it it drains this existing storm water area that's at the front of the subject property. Drains into this 12-in culvert into the catch basin zone by the city and then draining down this way following Elm Street. We will continue to tie into that same catch basin in in the city street. Um, however, not being a 12-in pipe, it'll be a smaller orifice. So, they drill holes in into the uh concrete structure that allows smaller amounts of water to to go out and it regulates the water elevation in the pond on each side.

And what happens to the flow uh to the bottom part of the drawing? So everything not not there. I I meant along Elm Street along here. Yeah, because that's not detailed on the drawing.

Yeah. So [clears throat] going to go to our existing conditions that has a little larger area. Um, but Timberlane Drive here is is draining this direction and you're basically almost where this existing driveway is is where it starts to to drain the other direction on Elm Street. Um, so just before you get to Timberlane Drive and the and the existing driveway is about where you're getting a break in elevation going to to the west versus to the east. Does does that answer the question?

I I think so. But again, it's there's some perception that the there's a natural flow to the east as you described it uh from that side of the lot. Yeah. Mhm. [clears throat]

Right. So, the existing curb cut and driveway come in on this this far corner. That will no longer exist. So the water flows there will still run down the road um as it does now down to this low point here below Route 9, the Route 9 bridge. So that doesn't change. What what changes is we're capturing the water from because where the existing driveway is that you come in now is now going to be a lot lower in elevation. That'll that'll be the the ponded area. So basically everything from over here, what's on the street will continue to flow down. What's on the property is is flowing into this basin here,

a catch basin that runs to the east. I should the storm water pond. So I should So there's a there's a storm water pond here. That's the the detention basin. Um so that's lom seated um finished in grass, but that's that's an excavated pond area. So this will be this will be much lower in elevation than the existing driveway condition today. So now we're taking this this water going this way with it. Yeah. The city street elevation does not change. It'll still break and and drain to the east and drain to the west.

Yeah. I'm sure if there's an issue that neighbors will tell us

other questions master Giovani. So you indicated that there was a lot of sedimentation buildup already there now and is that just is where is that coming from and will this project you know create more sedimentation and if the city isn't staying on top of maybe it currently you know what would the concern be with not only the runoff but the sedimentation that will occur which is already apparently you know, getting backed up.

Yeah. So, this infrastructure is fairly old. Um, what it means is it's probably come from sanding of winter streets and everything else. So, the city for the most part, DPW goes around and vacuums out a lot of the catch basins and and flushes the pipes a lot in the downtown area, but um some areas don't always get the those the maintenance care that they do in the downtown areas. So that existing sediment is likely coming from sanding salting operations during the winter. Um if you have any runoff from large storm events if it took some of the lom off of a lot and it drains into it. So in the catch basins that are in the city street that's where our surveyors go out and they they measured down to get the inverts of the pipe how deep the pipe is in the ground. That's where they took p pictures and um said you know there was a lot of sediment in these structures coming down Elm Street. Um, in the future, it would be less certainly off of this property's impact because there won't be a large 12-in pipe directly into that catch basin. It'll be an outlet structure which has a sump in it. So, um, your pipe is at a higher elevation and then the bottom of that catch basin is deeper to allow sediment to build up in it. This then has an homeowners associ association that gets a inspection and maintenance manual as part of that storm order and submittal to for your review and that goes to the city engineer that gets recorded as part of the AG office u condominium plan. That means that the HOA has to follow that INM manual and annually clean out the basins, clean out the pipes that are in the purview of the property. So in the future there's much more maintenance than a residential home on it and that it's documented and they have they have to maintain that as part of their utility.

Thanks. That's good to know. Mr. John, if you could maybe describe to us um the current condition of the lot and how the water sort of flows currently and then how this project is going to sort of change that. Um because I I know you you said that uh the 5, 10, and the 25 year storm events, you're going to capture more of that water on site. Um, I think that would go a long way for everybody in the room.

Certainly. Um, so currently the high point of the site is is to the south of the existing home. So the the existing home is here. This is the high point of the property. So water drains from that high point towards Elm Street towards Route 9 towards the wetland and towards the abuing the Butters property. In our proposed condition, we're taking this high point that gets lowered and everything is pitched down towards Elm Street. So, we're capturing more from this high point. Less water is coming back to this back portion of the property and we're capturing it along the backs of the [clears throat] the homes to the west. So, we have a drainage swale. So that high point on this plan is is right in in this area here. Still

we now have our proposed high point back here much further. So we're taking more water directing it to this end. All this grading is pitching towards the road, our proposed road and down. We're capturing it with catch basins here, here, and then outletting to this basin and then catch basins picking up the front of the building. Um, and then along here it's it's sheet floating doing sheet flowing doing the same thing towards the proposed roadway towards the front. The backs of these homes here, there's a swale along the fence line and the property line that's directing water down here and capturing it. So, we're capturing it on each property line here and here. And then this is the high point capturing it down the center line of the on each side of the road to to these storm water basins. and our storm water management report that was submitted and reviewed by the city engineer um outlines that on what areas it is saying the existing condition versus the proposed condition. How how are you capturing more water and how are you um mitigating that storm water to reduce it in the post development so that it either matches or is under the existing condition of storm water flow. John, I probably should know this, but the interior road, the Elm Elmide Court, that's a public road.

No. No. Okay. The Elmide Road and driveways will be owned by the homeowners owners association. Okay.

Um, the only thing that'll be owned by the city would be the water and sewer infrastructure. So there would end up being on the condo plan an easement plan following the installed water and sewer infrastructure. So we have water and sewer for the most part coming down and following the roadway coming in here. Um so there there would be an easement following the infrastructure here that's then um recorded and and given to the city so the city can always get to these water and sewer mains and maintain them in the future. Okay. Other questions?

All right. Thank you. Thank you. Oh, Mr. Mr. Newton. John, another question if I can. Uh the I'm just looking at your low point in the center of the property. There's a 520 foot elevation with a house. This this is on the left side of the drawing. Yeah. Right. Yep. 520 in here. Yep. Uh it's that's this contour here. Yep. It's a little higher up, but yeah, it's at the back side of the

second house on that side. Go to the left most. Yeah. Okay. That I see this here. Yeah. Yep. So, this 520 contour on these homes is coming up. This is indicating a a swale. It's a ditch line. So, between these homes is a ditch line. And then following the fence line and property line here is a ditch line down to the storm water basin in the front on this side. So where's that one that I was asking about? Where does that pitch to or just retention?

Correct. So that this flows from here to here and follows this well down to here and then is detained in this area. So it's that 520 there is supposed to drain back to the swale at the back. Correct. So this is the 520 contour coming around behind these homes. This is the 518 contour. This is the 516. So as it comes out here, the 520 comes up this a little bit. So you're pitching this way towards That's your intent. It maybe Okay. I I understand what you're saying. just a looks pretty flat. [clears throat] I understand your intent.

Yeah, it starts pitching steeper down right behind these these buildings. Um, this is flatter. This is a probably about a 1% swale behind here. So, right at that 520 is where it starts getting steeper going down.

I understand your intent. Just Okay. Some of the numbers look a little different than that. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you very much. Y um so I'll invite staff to provide their comments at this time.

Okay. Evan Clemens, planner, deputy zoning administrator. Um just in regards to um your comments, Mr. Mayor, uh velocity is also a factor when dealing with uh with storm water. So it's kind of a balance between uh uh an appropriate slope to to get the water to channel and not have it be so fast that it actually erodess and then uh goes out the other side of your detention basin. So, um the subject property is a uh 2.3 acre lot located on Elm Street directly adjacent to Route 9 across from the entrance Timberlane Drive. Uh the property is developed within a historic single family redesence once owned by the Sadaki family and is located about 650 ft northwest of the Fuller School. The rear portion of the lot, which was formerly part of the rightway of the Franklin Pierce Highway, Route 9, is forested and contains a small area of wetland um and historic stone walls to delineate portions of the rear property boundaries. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing house and redevelop the property into a cottagec court condominium development with 18 single family dwellings. surface water protection conditional use permit uh is requested for uh approximately 400400 square feet of wetland buffer impact to the 30-foot buffer. Uh the application was referred to the conference information commission for review and recommendation and a memo of the conservation commission's fighting should be included in your packet. That meeting was on the 15th of December. uh staff has made a preliminary evaluation that this project does not appear to have the potential for regional impact. The board will need to make a uh final determination on that. Um as the applicant discussed discussed

in regards to the surface water protection standards, um there is an estimated 1435 square ft of impact to the 30-foot buffer. Uh the applicant has noted that the intent is to maximize the development of the site under the cottage court overlay um and is uh avoiding or reducing grading uh within the 30-foot buffer only to what is absolutely necessary to achieve the proposed development. The applicant has stated in their narrative uh that there are no direct impacts to the surface water system with this proposal. Um at the time detailed information related to the the condition of um the surface water uh was not submitted. Um however um based on the New Hampshire wildlife action plan, the site is not located within a tier one, tier 2, or tier three um habitat area. Um, as discussed at the uh um the site visit with the conservation commission, the wetland most likely was created um when the Franklin Pierce Highway was uh put uh was installed in the 70s. Um and then subsequent runoff uh from that uh imperous surface is what's created this wetland. Uh at the time of this staff report, there was a potential to reduce that uh surface water buffer from 30 feet to 10 feet. As the applicant said, they're no longer seeking that request. They're just seeking approval for the 1400 square ft of proposed impact to the buffer itself. In regards to the cottage court standards, um the applicant proposes three unit types. Types one and two are proposed to be 1365 square ft of gross floor area and type three is proposed to be 895 square ft of gross floor area. This

gives the development sitewide average of all units in the development at,248 square feet of gross floor areas. All three building types have a footprint of 895 square ft and it appears that this standard has been met. U in regards to parking, uh each dwelling unit is required to have a minimum of one parking space. Each uh uh dwelling is proposed to have one parking space at the garage as well as an additional space in the driveway. So that standard has been met. Uh in regards to building separation, the applicant has stated that the two closest buildings in the development are 10 ft apart. Um and uh the project will meet all required building and fire codes when it comes to actual um building permits and site development. And it appears that that standard has been met. Uh for the driveways, the individual unit driveways are proposed to be approximately 9 ft wide and 18 feet long. Turnarounds have been provided throughout the site so that vehicles are able to re reorient themselves as needed and will not need to perform any risky uh backing up maneuvers uh to navigate through the site. That standard appears to be met. Um there is no true road being pro uh proposed with this application. Um it is a private driveway. Um, this this driveway is going to be uh 20 feet wide in most locations except for a bumpout to 20 feet wide to accommodate a shared uh mailbox area near the uh the entrance to the site uh to accommodate a quick turnaround for postal uh service employees as well as people coming and pulling off to the side to check their mailbox without blocking uh the driveway itself. Uh the common drive is proposed to be

constructed to city standards and will use Cape Cod style burming curbing as described. Uh hammerheads are proposed to facilitate navigation of larger and emergency vehicles and a truck turning plan uh was submitted and reviewed by the city engineer showing that a city fire truck and a delivery truck were able to safely navigate through the site. That standard appears to be met. In regards to screening, the applicant states in their narrative, a vegetative buffer is proposed along the frontage of the development. There's also existing vegetation along the northern property line that will be maintained. Um, and then there's an existing fence along the southern property line as well that will also be maintained. Since this development is single family dwellings in a neighborhood with a predominantly single family development pattern, additional screening due to an increased intensity of use that is required u in the cottage court ordinance is not required for this particular project and it appears that this standard has been met. Okay, for the site development standards, we have picked apart drainage pretty significantly. So, I'm just going to say um that it has uh been corroborated and reviewed by the city engineer in addition to everything that Mr. Nunan just said and that standard appears to be met for sediment and erosion control. Um a uh stabilized construction entrance will be employed as well as silt fencing, catch basin, silt socks um uh and any other additional as needed uh temporary erosion control measures will be utilized during construction. Uh slopes will be permanently stabilized with vegetation, stone rip wrap and stone check dams um and erosion control matting as needed. Uh this standard appears to be met. snow storage and removal. The applicant states that the

snow will be stored on site along the driveway and adjacent to the residential drives. Uh snow storage areas are identified on the plan adjacent to the main entrance next to unit one and along the end of the driveway adjacent to unit 13. That standard appears to be met. Um landscaping plan shows the installation of a selection of shrubs and trees along Elm Street. Uh the narrative also notes that future owners will of uh the individual condos will be able to install their own lab landscaping. Uh the proposed landscaping includes nine roodendrrons, six dogwood shrubs, eight winterberry shrubs, four hawworm trees, one maple tree, and a partridge and a pear tree. Forgive me, t the season and all that. Um in addition um after consultation with the conservation commission, additional plantings are proposed. Um as shown on the revised landscaping plan and not at the moment enumerated by me in my staff report. I apologize. Um but that does appear that this standard has been met. Uh we just I feel like we just talked about screening um before. So the the screening is the same as what I just mentioned earlier. Uh that's going to be met for the lighting standard. Um the lighting plan shows the installation of full cutoff wall-mounted light fixtures on the garages of each unit. The proposed lights will have a color temperature of 3,000 Kelvin and a color rendering index of 90. Uh the development does not propose any driveway or parking lot lighting. So this standard is met. Water and sewer is going to be municipal with um new infrastructure installed by the uh developer and then taken over uh by the city once operational.

[snorts] Uh in regards to traffic and access management, a single street access point is proposed near the center of the frontage north of the Timberlane Drive intersection. The main drive will be 20 ft wide driveway and is approximately 300 ft long and ends in a 50- foot long hammerhead turnaround. Additional driveway spurs are proposed to provide access to individual units with turnaround space to allow vehicles to orient uh in an appropriate direction so they can leave safely. Um a traffic uh manual trip generation estimate was supplied uh by the applicant. Uh [snorts] the units are considered to be single family uh dwellings with an estimated weekday AM peak hour of 14 vehicle trips and an estimated weekday PM hour of 18 vehicle trips for the whole project. Um the estimated uh trip generation falls below the threshold of 50 peak hour trips or 100 trips per day. That would require a full traffic study. Uh and the applicant uh based on this information uh has stated that the development is not expected to diminish the capacity or the safety of Elm Street. And it appears that this standard has been met for filling and excavation. The applicant states in their narrative that the development will require both filling and excavation on different portions of the site. It's going to be how they do that regrading, right? A little bit of cuts and fills. Uh material on site will be utilized whenever possible. Additional select material will need to be brought on site and stockpiled as needed. Um a truck route plan is not required on this project. Site has direct access uh from Court Street uh via Elm Street. So this standard appears to be met. Uh we talked about surface waters and wetlands uh with the conditional use permit. The proposal is only for the impact of the buffer, not the reduction.

Uh the board will need to decide whether to regrant uh that conditional use permit. Uh hazardous and toxic materials. The applicant states that there will be no hazardous or toxic materials associated with the site. [clears throat] This has been met. Uh the applicant states regarding noise that the proposed development will generate an amount of noise typical with a typical with a residential development that appears to be met. um architectural and visual appearance. The applicant states in their narrative that the units are proposed to be two and three-bedroom single family residential dwellings of various heights ranging from 32 1/2 ft to just under 22 feet. The colors will be, and I quote, neutral tones that fit in the surrounding neighborhoods. The [snorts] applicant further states that the homes are designed to fit into the cottage style and include two-story capes, drive under garage capes, and one-story ranches. Um, all mostly typical in a New England vernacular style. Um so you will need to uh determine whether the uh the cottage court architectural guidelines um have been adequate adequately followed with this application in regards to the visual appearance of the proposed dwellings. Um, I feel like I'm forgetting something, but I don't think I am. Um, in regards to the motion, uh, it does appear to be a lot. However, um, they are fairly routine requests. Uh, so, uh, subsequent, excuse me, precedent to final approval. Uh we will need uh the owner's signature on various plans. Submittal of uh various plans,

submitt of a security in the form and amount acceptable to the community development director to cover the cost of landscaping, sediment and erosion control measures and asbuilt plans. submittal of draft written documentation of the required utility easements and any other necessary legal instruments required for this application uh which uh shall be subject to review by the city attorney and then subsequent to final approval uh prior to the commencement of site work. Um, the community development department will be notified when all erosion control measures have been installed and the 30-foot surface water buffer is flagged by a surveyor licensed in the state of New Hampshire uh to inspect those measures uh prior to the beginning of site work. Uh submitt of recorded utility easements and other legal instruments necessary for this application to the community development department. Um, just we're looking for copies of the recorded documents with the recording stamp on it, not like further review before they get recorded. Um, the applicant shall obtain final acceptance uh for the new the utilities from the city uh from city council following the completion of all that work. Following um the initial install of all required plantings, uh the community development department shall be contacted to perform an initial landscaping inspection to ensure that they have been installed in compliance with the approved plan. [snorts] And then one year after the installation of those landscapings, we're going to come out and look at it again and make sure that they're all still in good health and uh viable.

I think that's all I have, Mr. Chairman. I'd be happy to answer any questions at this time. Thank you, Mr. Clemens. Uh, questions for staff. Mayor Khan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so uh just wanted to pursue options related to uh some historic value to this property.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That is what I was forgetting. Um, so the Sataki family did reach out to you if I'm correct and through you um the community development staff were uh notified of the situation. Um uh this evening I did pass on um Miss Haywood's uh email address to Mr. Nunan uh explaining to him that uh the Sataki family would like to be in in contact with the property owner to talk about the future of that house. Um the the city does have a a demolition review committee and a a demolition delay ordinance in place that this property would be subject to. Um when uh uh if and when the the the home is slated to be demolished, a demolition permit is required to be submitted. Um the demolition review committee is then activated uh which is a subsection of the heritage commission. They uh they go out, they document the property. Um they do an initial evaluation to to kind of gauge the historical significance of the property. Um if they deem it to be of uh historical significance, I was about to say significant historical significance, um they can delay the ordinance uh excuse me, the demolition for 30 days uh to perform additional uh review of the property and also bring the the owner uh to the table, if you will, to discuss potential alternatives to demolishing the property. Um at the end of those 30 days uh the demolition permit is either then issued or uh is withdrawn by the applicant. Uh the the city cannot uh in totality prevent the demolition

but uh we can attempt to negotiate on the behalf of um the historical resource. Um, so there is some discussion of of getting the the research done on this property uh a little bit earlier to get more time to really dig into this. Um, it is also my understanding that there is a fair amount of information on this property already at the historical society. Um, but that's just about all I know with this. So does that necessitate any uh further comment from the board if relative to the execution of uh the documentation the exploration of alternatives uh to demolition? Um I don't believe so. Um that is all already baked into city ordinance. So, that will take place um uh regardless of the action of this board, assuming approval. Um if the board doesn't approve this application tonight, I'm not sure the owner is going to tear his own house down anyway. Um but but that that will all happen there. There's no need to um to set a condition of approval related to to all those turning wheels.

Yeah. On a different point, mayor. Sure. Mr.

So we do have this letter from the conservation commission. Uh and do you there's clearly a response to that I think in the uh from Fieldstone. Uh do you feel that the points raised, the questions [clears throat] and concerns raised by the conservation commission have been addressed adequately uh since those recommendations were issued? I believe so. Uh I believe um as this board is well aware of the the buffer reduction request clearly states that um extraordinary measures need to be uh proposed to warrant the the buffer reduction which um would take place across the entire property. Um and the conservation commission is very hesitant to use that particular mechanism. um a sightspecific uh impact to the buffer that is um designed and um any additional change or increase to to that proposed impact would require coming back to you for further review I I believe is a a much more appropriate and sort of targeted uh amount of relief as opposed to a a blanket reduction. ction uh which may lead to future impacts that we wouldn't be aware of. Um, I also agree with uh and appreciate the applicant's swift response to accommodate the um the native plantings and um the additional um landscaping that is proposed uh to accommodate the

um the conservation commission's concerned concerns uh specifically the proposed uh trees um which I think are are they dog woods, John? Uh there's silky dog woods, hawthorns as the street trees are hawthorns and red maples.

Okay. Um the the the additional plant trees plantings are um very thirsty trees. So they will further reduce the amount of of water um on this site in a um a very natural sort of mitigation strategy and and the conditional use permit is an appropriate way for addressing what is needed to substitute for the buffer reduction. I agree. Um it it is it is woven seamlessly into this overall site plan application and approval. Um so it would um it it it comes it comes with the the overall plan and uh these the specific sort of pinch point related to this area uh has received additional scrutiny from the city engineer planning staff the conservation commission. Um and uh they the conservation commission does appear to be in support of the proposed impact with the articulated additional mitigation strategies that the applicant has incorporated into this plan.

Okay. And Mr. Chairman, just wanted to say that no that that the letter that I received from uh that I forwarded that would uh community development staff uh came from uh the descendants of the last Native American family uh residing in Keane. So that's that the reason to raise questions about the historic significance of that home relates

was the connection to this house. They've this is where they the house that they occupied. Okay. From like sometime in the 1800s to uh 1993 or whenever Mr. Driski acquired the property. Okay. Well, yeah, that certainly deserves some attention um to see if there are options to demolition. Yeah. I mean, or if nothing else, you know, some video recording of it, you know,

I I don't know. I don't know what I don't know what anything costs, but moving it would probably be pretty costly. It sounds like to me it sounds like the questions been answered by staff in terms of the process. We we should proceed with with our the business before us and and uh other processes will take over at the right time. Right. I agree. Other questions for uh Mr. Clemens? Uh I have a question on page 68 figure three. just just sort of my mathematical mind. Uh so these are all the same footprint.

Um all three are yes. So so obviously the uh the twotory one is much deeper I believe. Unless they're not to scale. So these were snips taken from the elevation uh drawings that were submitted. There are also floor plan drawings. Um the the calculations don't include the garages. Okay. So footprint doesn't include garage. Yes. And gross floor area.

Yeah. It's Yes. It's the the garages and porches are are pulled out of that. Okay. Great. Okay. Thank you. That was just my curiosity. [clears throat] Any other questions? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Clemens. So, at this time, we still have quite a few people in the audience. Can we just see a show of hands of the folks who would like to comment on this proposal? two. Did you see Sarah?

Yep. Okay. So, I I don't think we need any uh any ownorous uh time restrictions if we have just two. So, I'd invite uh invite you to come forward and uh provide your comments. [clears throat] Hi, I'm uh I'm Is this on?

Can't tell. Okay. I'm Gary Bautell from 280 Elm Street and I have uh I have some questions about the the amount of of um traffic that might be created by this uh this proposal. If there are going to be 18 units with up to two vehicles for each unit, it seems to me that the that the figure given for the amount of daily trips out of the property is ex extremely low. Because if these units are going to have two or three bedrooms, they're most likely going to have children who create a few trips a day themselves. So my point is that I think a an actual traffic study is necessary for this because it will impact the intersection with Court Street which is already at certain times of the day dangerous and it could could create enough traffic that it could create a danger outside of Fuller School And eventually that traffic will flow by my house or part of it will. It'll be a little closer to Court Street. So most of the traffic may go that way. But any additional traffic coming down my portion of Elm Street

where people tend to speed anyhow would endanger the kids that live in the neighborhood. So I I just my my point generally is about about the tra the traffic impact and that I think it needs to be studied a little further than I I don't believe the 14 trips a day figure at all. It sounds to me like it could easily approach 50 trips a day. [clears throat]

Just from the number of vehicles and the number of units, it just seems natural that there's going to be a lot more traffic than has been so far indicated. I don't want to speak for the applicant, but there are a lot of details in the uh in the application and there was Well, I just going in the morning at Russia. I'm just going about what was was said. It's like, you know, it's councelor Emmy.

We don't know. We don't know what any of these any of these new neighbors may be doing as far as, you know, going to work in the morning, coming home in the evening. We don't we really don't we can't assume that it's going to be less than 20 trips a day. It just seems to me with that many units and up to like 30 parking for up to 36 cars that there's just bound to be quite a bit more traffic created by this. Just to clarify, it's 14 trips in the peak hour

of the morning peak hour. Peak morning hour and it's 18 in the peak hour of the evening. It's not 14 for the day. That's where the 14 came from. Actually, to your point, it's not 14 for the day. Yeah, it's 32. But if there's 18 units and there's two cars and both people are working, that figure is still remarkably low. That I can't speak to. That's based on the traffic engineer tables that Yeah. Yeah. I think it needs more study. That's all I'm I'm saying.

Why don't I Why don't I give Mr. and non a chance to uh see if there's additional information that he has already. Thank you. Okay,

John Nan, Fieldstone Lane Consultants. Um so as Mr. Remy uh clarified it, it is a peak hour. So you have the AM is 14 trips in the morning is the highest volume that you would get based on the IT tables that are um presented for calculating and estimating on traffic. Uh 18 vehicle trips was the peak PM. So it doesn't mean that all 18 units have their one person coming home at at that one time. It means that though if there is 36 cars, it could be spread out over, you know, the PM hours. So you don't have everyone coming home in an exact same hour. It's spread out. So your peak is the most volume you have at one point in time. Um so the afternoon being the the return from work, you have 18 vehicles is the most at one point and then it spreads out over that that bell curve of how they perceive traffic um showing up and going to work. So um it that is not the the total volume for

Yeah. Do you have any indication of the like a daily volume?

Didn't mean to. We did not include a total uh daily. I just know that we we had put that um talking to the traffic engineer that it he said it was under 100 under vehicles. So the the peak hour is a 50 vehicles as your peak hour trigger for a full traffic report and a and 100 for daily. So it was under the hundred. So ultimately the traffic engineer tells us you know if you're under the what threshold is in order for us to provide you a report past that point. Okay. Thank you.

I do know that the um Timberlane Drive one so across the street when we did that one um that had more units 36 units. We we did trigger that and it that was two years ago roughly when we got that approval. So, we did a traffic report, a full traffic report at that time using DOT and went down Elm Street um and then Elm Street, Court Street as the intersection. And that was the city engineer requesting those two directions and areas of um connection points. And there was no disruption with with that project with much more homes disrupting the or inhibiting the function of either Court Street or Elm Street at that time. All right. Thank you.

Please come on. I'm going to stand if that's okay. Of course. Great. Because if I sit anymore after a long day at that working doing this, I don't think I'll make it through my own speech. So, I submitted Sarah Bazani 464 Elm Street. I submitted a letter of concern to the planning board um about a week ago. I didn't see it in the packet for you guys to read. So, I'm not sure that you actually have seen it yet. With that being said, I don't want to read the whole thing because I don't think you all want to spend your late hours with me. So, I will try to highlight. We did receive a copy of

you did. Okay. It just wasn't printed. Okay. I'm going to move it down.

I'm short, so yeah, angle it perfectly. Okay. So, I won't, as I said, I won't address every part of it. I just want to highlight a few things. Um, I'll start with I'll start with some of the concerns around the impervious surface. So, I indicated in the letter that the plan will create 80 thou plus or minus 80,000 additional square feet of impervious surface, reducing the trees, the grass, all that. So impervious surface being anyone that doesn't know that is the hard surfaces. So I I know that that doesn't require a New Hampshire dees alteration of train permit. However, you combine that with some of the issues in other developments in the area. I'm starting to have some serious concerns about how that impacts people around me when individual developments are just under those numbers. we keep compounding these things and my property is being affected by it. I'll talk more about that later. So, that's one of my concerns. Another concern, the wetland buffer reduction, I feel like we sort of started to address that. The extraordinary mitigation part I didn't agree with. It seems like we have a bit of a solution there except for the fact that there still needs to be one, which there doesn't. Um there still is not an extraordinary measure indicating there has to be. Extraordinary to me would be much more important than the additional house that they said on the site uh site visit that there would only need to be one less without that. So if that's not the case, perhaps I misheard that, but that's what they said in the walkth through. And so if that's the case, why why are we doing that part of it? The screening and neighborhood character. So the proximity of the new buildings to existing residences and the adequacy of screening measures are of great concern

to me. And in section 1021472, we talk about the effect of screening to preserve neighborhood character and privacy. The words condo and the word single family were used interchangeably here tonight. That's a concern to me. Are we talking about the same single family home that I live in where I can't see other people or are we talking about condos where you don't own the land around you? I don't want to say one or the other cuz I don't know. It's not my plan. But you've all used them interchangeably tonight. And so I disagree that it is the same. I I I would say that it does not it does not indicate that it's the same if we're using the word condominium style and single family home in the same conversation. Lighting and privacy. I have some comments about that. I think I'll see those a little bit later on. So, I will table that one. Drainage and storm water management. I can't talk enough about it. Um it's not going to be just this development. It's going to be every other one. So again, compounding developments two years and two days, well, two years and less, okay, two days less than two years ago. December 19th, right? So we had water in our basement and I'm not talking like a few drops. It poured into our basement for the first time in the years we've owned it. It's 2007 is when I purchased it. So the first time and it just didn't stop coming in. There's no indication anything's changed. We had the city come out. We had our people go in. We have done we did everything we could do to figure out where that's coming from. I know the answer was something has changed. Okay, great. So, we just keep looking for those answers. And again, I'll I'll mention the compounding developments create this issue for me and my home and I continue to live there and love that property so much, but I'm certain that I cannot keep up with that. If we if we continue to

build around me, I'm just going to float down the ash wheel. Like, this is just getting ridiculous for me. the traffic and safety concerns like Gary mentioned. So, a compounding development. So, we have that one like possibly being built. We have, you know, do phases of Timberlane Drive. We add this 18. I mean, it's hard to it's hard enough to back out of my driveway. the vehicles, the children, the biking, the the the across the street where they are on those trails and they come biking down, there's just a lot of activity. And so, yes, I do have concerns about it. Um, I do think that we should really look into making sure that that number is adequate. And I understand that these things are not specifically needed if you fall within the exact ordinance, but it also when you keep doing it bit by bit, it adds up and creates an issue for me and for others. So filling excavation and noise I I have a lot of concerns about how that will go for me but I will I will deal with that at a later date because again I don't want to keep you here until tomorrow. Uh consistency. So we look at taking a piece of land and subdivided in this case but we look at breaking that off and building. We want more housing. We want more housing. I I understand that, but we have actually declined other apps for people that have owned their own land with nobody in sight for things like storm and water management. This is a concern for me that we're going to build a house 20 ft off of the garage that I own after, and I'll mention this a little bit, after we cared for that property for quite a long time. I have a concern about that for sure. And just an emotional pull on your heart

strength is that yeah, we bought the house in August '07. And I was told by my realer that I owned up to the rock on the hill. I didn't know anything else. So that's what I took care of. And maybe a year later, I said to Paul Driski, the owner of the property, I said, "Hey, you want me to just mow two more passes by that because I'm already taking care of mine goes halfway up the hill." At that point, he did not indicate to me that that I I didn't know otherwise. So, that's that's on me. I didn't know otherwise. I continued to take care of that land, pay for it, um professionally cared for it, tick repellent, seeding, all of that four years, and then randomly we get a text 18 months ago, just shy of a of a 20-year imminent domain issue, right? Just shy of that, we get a text that says, "Please don't mow the field this year. There needs to be a clear separation. It's very confusing. I'm not saying that we own the land. I'm not saying that. I'm just saying the ambiguity of it all creates an issue for me. And I don't understand how we got from let's develop a couple of houses to 18 single family or condos depending on who wants to use that language in my backyard. That if you read the letter indicates what we've used it for for years to come. So, I appreciate your listening to me, you listening to me, and um thank you all.

Thank you. Would anyone else like to comment? [clears throat]

Hello. Uh Chris Debriski, 153 Jordan Road. Um, I'd just like to say I think the city invested a lot of time and resources into developing the cottage court zoning changes um to help ease the burden of housing in the city and the state. And I'd like to see, you know, uh, this get passed to get more developments and more projects like this going to, you know, create more housing and more opportunities for for people to live in their own homes. That's all. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? All right. Seeing none, I'm going to close the public portion of the meeting and proceed to deliberation. So, at this point, I will entertain a motion. I would like to move to approve PB2025-29 as shown on the plan set identified as Elmside Cottage Court Housing prepared by Fieldstone Land Consultants PLLC at 1 in= 30 ft on November 14th, 2025 and last revised on December 16, 2025 with the following conditions. First, prior to final approval and signature of the plans by the planning board chair, the following conditions shall be met. Owner signature appears on the title page, condo site plan, and master site plan. Four, submittal of five full-size paper copies of the plan set, including elevations and a digital copy of the final plan set. Five, submittal of a security in a form of an amount acceptable to the community development director to cover the cost of landscaping, sediment, and erosion control measures and asbuilt plans. Six, submittal of a draft, written documentation of the required utility easements and any other necessary legal instruments required for this application, which will be subject to review by the city attorney. and two, subsequent to final approval and signature of the final plans by the planning board chair, the following

additions shall be met. A, prior to the commencement of site work, the community development department shall be notified when all erosion control measures have been installed and the 30foot surface water buffer is flagged by a surveyor licensed in the state of New Hampshire. Community development staff shall inspect the erosion control measures and wetland flagging to ensure compliance with approved plans and all city of Keen regulations. And B, submittal of recorded utility easements and any other legal instruments necessary for the application to the community development department. C, the applicant shall obtain final acceptance of the new utilities from Keen City Council following the completion of all infrastructure construction. and D. Following the initial installation of plantings, the community development department shall be contacted to perform an initial landscaping inspection to ensure compliance with the approved landscaping plan and all city of Keen regulations. And e one year after the installation of landscaping, the community development department shall be contacted to perform a final landscaping inspection to ensure that all plantings are in good health.

Thank you. And I hope just note the uh uh items 3, four, five, and six are really 1 A, 1 B, 1 C, 1 D. So there just a typo in the the printed motion. Yes, Mr. Chair. Thank you for clarifying. Okay. So I'll ask for a second at this time. I'll second. Thank you, Mr. Mayhew. Okay. discussion, opinions, Mr. Councelor Remy.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, just a comment and there was a question about the condo language. So, condo isn't necessarily meaning that they're all attached. They can be a detached condo situation. It's just a legal entity that basically means there's shared maintenance requirements. So, that's not necessarily It can be a condo and single family homes. It's just you don't there's shared maintenance like cleaning out the swailes and the drainage things like they described. Um I think the city engineer and our uh and the applicants engineer um so our engineer and the applicants engineer sorry um both say that we're this will improve the flow of water off of the property and I think the uh staff commented that you know we want to balance the the rate at which it flows because I think the [clears throat] mayor brought up a good point of it's pretty flat but I think we don't want it to go too fast and drill a hole through basically or dill a trench down through there if it's moving too fast. So, I think uh I have to trust the engineers on that one that they they know what they're talking about and that they um if they say the water flow improve, I'm not a hydraologist. We don't have Andrew here, so I have to trust them. Um and the traffic study, I think, was another call out and it met our requirements. If we want to change our requirements, then we can, but that's not part of this application. They met our requirements for what we asked for for that. Um I don't think there's regional impact from it. I think it's a a good example of use of cottage court. I know it's tough to, you know, having the neighborhood change next to homes, so that's always challenging for folks. So, um, but I think it is a good example of how to use it. Um, and I do I'm going to ask for a roll call just to make sure we don't get any surprises for when we do take a vote. Um, I'm giving you that heads up now in case you have to do something. But um yeah, I just want to remind folks if they do plan to vote no, they need to state why they're voting no just so that we don't

end up with something that is confusing for the applicant and they don't know what to do to address it next time. So that's my general feedback. Fair enough. Thank you. Other comments, Mr. Hayer?

Yeah, I'm inclined to agree with uh much of much everything that Mike uh Mike shared. Um it does seem like a good use of the the new cottage court uh overlay um approach. Um you know our country is fac country and and state are facing a severe housing shortage and the idea of going from from one family to to what is it 17 uh potential is uh very appealing uh to me and then should be to the city of Keen uh as well. Um the the the building plans do not have a lot of detail in terms of surfaces uh etc. But I would say that architecturally they fit in with the uh expectations for cottage court style um development and so I think they're meeting uh the intention of the u the policies uh in that regard. So, um, that's my comments.

Thank you, Mr. Mayhe. Did you, uh, want to add something? Uh, I just wanted to say how I appreciate how this project supports the the first pillar for the updated master plan. Um this [clears throat] is one of the prime examples of how we fight the uh the missing middle housing and you know and give that opportunity to people to not buy their house their first house at 40 450. [clears throat] Thank you Mr. Mayor. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Thank you Mr. Chairman. Um so I appreciate the uh approach on housing. I think that is in fact what is a high priority for our city. Uh I think uh this is making a lot of use out of a small uh relatively small acreage uh given some of the other cottage court applications thinking of two that had significantly more uh acreage to achieve uh their goals. Um, but nonetheless, the the housing is a priority. Uh, I can see why this board would lean into that. Uh, I think what I hear in uh some of the testimony uh is uh the compounding impact uh is not studied. Uh and that that is That's something to for this board and the city to give some thought to. If there is 18 additional units here with the potential of 36 cars and there are uh 36 units on the other side of uh this same location. uh if both of those get built that's never going to get evaluated as a combination only singular. Uh so that's a I I don't know how to reconcile that with this request.

Uh but uh I think the next time we see a request on the street uh we're going to have to have a much more critical eye uh to traffic impact. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Rangel.

Yeah, thank you for bringing that up. I I also wanted to comment on the compounding um aspect of the two um developments. you know, I think that, you know, we have models to look at storm water management um and traffic, but for individual developments, you know, and so this one doesn't doesn't rise to the thresholds um for a traffic study. Uh it seems like the storm water management works out fine, but when you combine it with the other development on the other side of the street, we don't know what that's going to look like. We don't know, you know, exactly what that impact is going to be. And that does give me some pause about this development. Um, as well as the um the wetland uh buffer, you know, I know that they're asking for, you know, permission just to go into the wetland a little bit, but there was the comment that even just one less house would completely wipe away that that need. So, I do kind of question the number um as well. So, some things that kind of give me some pause with this application. I I have just one comment. So, on pages uh 105, 109, 113 in the packet are the basically black and white elevations, front elevations of each of the styles. Um, it's kind of hard to gauge visual appearance based on those. I mean, I my imagination is filling in all sorts of things, but I know on previous projects we had some better indication of materials, colors, etc. I don't know if that's something that's available or could be a condition here.

I'm just talking as from a process perspective, Mr. Clemens, what what you would think?

Yeah. So, the architectural guidelines are a little open-ended, a little vague. Um, and then these are also these are single family detached residential units where normally the city wouldn't regulate architectural style and color and and things like that if it was just one house on on one lot. Um the uh this may be a question for the applicant. Um in some condo association, homeowner associations, uh uh covenants documents, they dictate certain um uh exterior features to be uh remaining in in certain ways. Um, so I don't know if the applicant has has gotten that far in in sort of um curating an aesthetic of this neighborhood they're proposing. Um, that may be worth um seeing if the applicant respond to. Um just uh briefly, the architectural guidelines um sort of encourage uh um uh natural materials, structural expression, thicker walls, clear massing, simpler designs, um repetitive um uh architectural uh features. Thank you. um contextual materials, things like that. And I know um the the elevations don't call out necessarily um material choices. Um so um you you may um I know one of the conditions of approval is for submitt of

new plans including elevations. um if if that information is available um that may be provided. However, um they're not necessarily going to come back and have that conversation with you unless you would like to continue this application to to to collect that information. Um but I don't know, [clears throat] John, do you got anything for me? John Nun and Fieldstone Land Consultants. Um I think in the past we've had other I know in the past we've had other applications where we've submitted uh more detailed drawings and we've had a condition B to provide better um color renderings and call out materials. We've done that in the past as a condition. Um I would suggest I would like to see it move forward as a vote with that as just being as a condition that we provide those architectural details um as part of our final submission to the board.

So I guess suggesting it as a condition subsequent um we could do precedent. It's just a matter of do we want to do like a compliance hearing to actually evaluate those or are you just wanting them to be submitted so that we can see them ahead of time? Um because the the precedent condition isn't really going to give you a chance to to weigh in on them. Okay. Yeah. Yeah, I'm just just a little uh concerned because in the past we have made suggestions um which have resulted in changes to the architectural and visual appearance.

Um may I ask um are you thinking of another cottage court or um other applications? Other applications. Yeah. Okay. Yep. Um so certainly um moving really had another cottage court. Uh but we had one other cottage court that's kind of similar to this and it had color renderings. Yeah. Yeah. And so what I was just going to say is certainly moving forward staff now knows that this is the board's preference to have this additional information, right? Um so moving forward we can make sure to get that at the offset. Um it's it it's up to you all to decide I guess how value how required that information is to make your decision this evening. Mr. Hayer.

Yeah, I would to that to that point. I would based on the guidelines that we have in front of us, the 1754 architectural guidelines, I I don't feel having colored renderings would help me decide one way or another tonight. So, um although it'd be nice to have that in the future, I I don't see a need to uh add any any conditions to uh to our decision tonight based on that based on the drawings we've had the high the high level guidelines that we do have in terms of um you know narrow narrow to the frontage natural materials uh that we we did hear about color plans. Um, I think we I think this proposal is within our easier to approve column.

So, you're saying you don't have as creative an imagination as I have? I wanted to be an architect as a child. So, I won't say that, but um I think we the renderings we saw are are good for for this purpose. Okay, that seems to be a consensus. So, I think uh any other comments otherwise I'm going to move to a vote. Mr. Clemens, are we comfortable with the buffer impact for the conditional use permit with what they're proposing? Councelor Remy,

thank you, Mr. Chair. I generally am with the fact that they're installing the um the drainage system there I think is is helpful. Um it's better than it is today because right now the top of that hill drains all the way down there. The high the highway anything that hits the top of that hill drains all the way down there. Um now it'll just be those that little bit uh the roof and that uh end of the road there. So I think it's an improvement over current conditions. So I have a hard time saying no. because in theory if we didn't have them impede in the buffer they wouldn't have to improve the current conditions and it would stay where it is. So that's where like I I think it actually is a net improvement by impacting it because they don't they have to do something to make it better. Um so at least my that's my read.

Yeah, seeing some head nods on that. So, so yes, I think we are uh without voting um on that uh separately. I think we're comfortable with that. So, I think councelor suggested he would like to uh have a roll call vote for this item. I'm ready when you are, Mr. Chairman. Ready. Harold Ferington. Yes. Roberto Master Giovani. Yes. Mayor Jcon,

we can go either way with this. Um, Tough one. I did the roll call. Would you like us to come back to you, Mr. Mayor? Okay,

if you're willing to do that. Okay, up to you. Uh, Mike Remy, yes. Armando Rancho, no. Uh, Mike Hayer, yes. Stefan Mayu, yes. And Mayor Jay Khan, yes. Okay, that is 641 against. The motion passes.

All right, thank you. Okay. Let's go. All right, we're going to continue on with the rest of the meeting here. Um, next item on the agenda is staff updates. Um, Mr. comments. Any staff updates?

Um, oh, sorry.

It's okay. Um, Megan Forson, planner here. Um, last month when you updated or excuse me, adopted the changes to your rules of procedure in the site plan review thresholds, we forgot to have you sign the certificate of adoption. So, if you were at last month's meeting, please stop by and sign. I think that's going to be Harold, Mike Remy, Armando, and Mike Hayer. We'll have you sign. And then um we'll make sure that the few other people that were there which were Ryan Clancy, Ken, and uh Mr. Kos Kosa. Um we need at least five people to sign. So we have four of you tonight, and we'll see if we can get one of those other three people to sign as the fifth person. Um so if you can just stop by before the end of the meeting. That's the only staff update.

All right. Thank you. Anything else? Yeah, we're starting a new master plan project. No. Yeah. No, no, nothing. [laughter] Deja vu.

Um, well, we do have a couple members who are here tonight who are not going to be with us. uh this is their last meeting and I wanted to express my thank you to both of you for uh really being valuable contributors to this board and ultimately to the city and uh I really appreciate it. Uh you know I may have the microphone at the beginning and maybe at the end but uh I don't have a lot of the answers. So I'm glad we have folks like you. Uh, new business. Anyone have new business?

Mr. Chair, thank you. I would like to just let you all know that I'll be resigning from the planning board effective immediately. So, this will be my last meeting. I have an official email that has will I release on the way out, but just based on what's going on in my personal life, it just won't be a good fit anymore. And I hope you'll understand that that is the decision I've come to. But I won't be able to do this. Sorry to hear that. But

yeah, sorry to hear that. But thank you as well. Yeah, you've been uh a nice uh different perspective on a lot of these uh application discussions, and I appreciate that. I'd like to add that I think you've demonstrated that a person can come on to the board in in a two-year period uh rise to the level of a active participant. That's been encouraging to watch. Thank you. I appreciate that.

Okay. Well, that's a downer. Um new business. Other new business. I just wanted to throw out a couple things. I I don't know if uh folks are aware, but uh Southwest Region Planning um has I'll say quarterly what they call citizen planner roundts where they rotate around the area. I've been to a couple of them. I did not go to the last one. Um but I got the notes from the last one in October which was held in uh uh in Dublin. And they had a couple of interesting things I'll just toss out to you. One is called the CPacer. Uh the focus of the meeting was really on on solar and there's something called CPACER. It's uh um it's an effort it's an effort to uh kind of do a template for solar ordinances. So I guess you as I'm sure aware but looks pretty interesting. Um then when we did the actual roundt um Fitz William said they're implementing a workforce housing ordinance. So might be something to touch base and see what that what that means since I people from Fitz William people live in Fitz William and come work in Keen that's not an uncommon thing. Uh there'll be another meeting. I'll let you know as it comes closer. They haven't picked uh the the the time the date yet. So, okay. And then I had another one that I went to on December 12th that was uh put on by the state BEA as well as

there's a like a housing and social policy uh department now in St. Anselm College. And so they had a uh quite a few speakers. Um pretty interesting. Um so let me just rattle off a few things that they highlights from that one was the number one issue um as um is that towns and builders said was the minimum lot size. That's the biggest thing holding back housing.

So I know we've acted on that, but uh so just interesting data point. Um and then there's a bunch of other ones. There was a they had like a um a panel where they discussed a few things. Uh one was uh the city of Lebanon has built 2,000 multif family buildings in the past decade. So, I don't know what they're doing or obviously they have the uh Dartmouth Medical Center there, but that's a lot of building. Um [snorts]

I can confirm that the uh the deputy uh community development director in Lebanon doesn't sleep. So, uh [laughter] he's doing a lot.

Then they had a couple other people. Again, this was a panel. Uh our own Josh Man was there. He was basically talking about the innovative way that he uh um obtained funding for Roosevelt East and West. Um still not sure I understand, but [clears throat] he's he does. So, and that's good for the city. Uh there was a designer, an architect who took a very small lot size in NSHA um at Jackson Square and basically was smart infill design. um a building for $300 per square foot. Um which normally would have required a big boxy design, but she made it into two separate buildings and was able to get away with a single staircase each building.

I don't know.

Um and then the Manadnock Housing Alliance um is hiring a full-time staff person in January. So they were kind of an outgrowth of the Manadnock interfaith where uh Ken Cost was involved and they invol they very focused on housing and then I'm sure what you wanted to hear is a legislative update. So they they're looking at more than a hundred bills in play for the upcoming uh legislative session. And so many in fact that the new New Hampshire House has established a housing committee. So yeah, and then they also, and I think you guys are aware of this, but um the new New Hampshire zoning atlas they discussed as well, which is quite an interesting thing. It's a an interactive map which has zoning and water and sewer information on a single interactive uh computer site. So anyway, those are a couple of things I uh attended recently.

Uh Mr. Mr. Chair, can I just make one comment? Yes. Um, this is Megan Fors and Planner. So, I'm uh staff leazison for the energy and climate committee and I had that meeting this afternoon at 4:30 and they actually voted to recommend that city council amends the code of ordinances to include uh CPACER as a voluntary funding option. So, that's something that uh you might see coming out on council agendas at the start of the new year. Um, so that's something that they've discussed since it has to do with weatherization, resiliency projects, insulation, all of those types of energy efficiency things. Okay. Thanks for sharing that. Yeah.

All right. So, upcoming dates of interest, and they'll get us out of here in a second. The joint committee of planning board and PLLD, January 12th, 6:30. Planning board steering committee, January 13th at noon. planning board site visit January 21 8 a.m. I think the time and date to be confirmed or even if it's necessary. Uh and then uh finally the next meeting of this uh planning board January 26:30 p.m. in these chambers. Uh I think uh we'll pass over the uh more time items for this evening and move directly to adjournment. Thank you all.