Planning Board - Regular Meeting

okay hello everyone and welcome to the june 2nd 2026 meeting of the litchfield planning board will everyone please stand for the pledge of allegiance i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all Okay, next up, we have roll call of members present. Jared O'Connell, chair. Travis Tucker, vice chair. Russell Blanchett, member.

Diane Flansky, selectman's representative.

Jesse Ngo, member.

Letha Riley, member.

And today we have Jamie Carr from the NRPC here, but not our planning board administrator tonight. So next up is public input on non-agenda items. Would any members of the public wish to come forward and comment on something that's not on our agenda? Seeing none, so close public input. We only have one item on our agenda tonight, or one main item on the agenda tonight, and that is a subdivision application to convert existing duplexes on tax map 3, lot 29-1 and 29-2 into four condominium units. The addresses would remain 1 and 3 Talent Road on lot 29-1 and 5 and 7 Talent Road on lot 29-2. Owner of record is K&M Developers LLC. Is the applicant present? And would you like to introduce yourself?

Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the board. My name is Pete Madsen, project manager at Keech Nordstrom Associates in Bedford. I'm here tonight to represent the owner and applicant K&M Developers. Last time I was in front of you guys, I think I see some new faces, but we're here in March of last year, 2025, to do the actual subdivision for the two properties here. That obviously was completed. Work has been done out there. The units are now constructed, and the owner and developer is looking to convert them to condos. Therefore, we need subdivision approval from you folks. Really not a lot on this one. I think it's pretty straightforward. I have some condo plans to show you guys if you want, if you're curious. We have condo docs, declaration, everything required there, covenants, all that stuff, which should be included in your packet. So really just here to answer any questions that you guys may have. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. So first, we have to accept the application as complete. So, Jay, do you know if all the fees have been paid? Yes. Yeah, all of the requirements met?

Yes.

Okay. In that case, would someone like to make a motion to accept the subdivision plan as complete?

So moved.

Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor of accepting the application, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, abstain. Motion passes one, two, three, four, six, zero, zero. Okay. So yeah, next up, anyone have any questions for the applicant? Or for Jay?

I was just going to say, just maybe the applicant could just kind of walk through. I think for a lot of people are probably not familiar with a condominium conveyance on a property like this. So I'll just kick it off. So the lots that were approved previously remain the same. There's really no change. But under state law, a condominium conveyance is technically considered a subdivision. So it's actually not something that we address specifically in our regulations. So all of the other subdivision requirements really don't come into play. The plan does reference the prior subdivision approval, but it is required by statute that they receive approval from the planning board before you file with the state. So as noted, the plans include the declaration of condominium that was submitted along with the application as well as the bylaws because there will have to be directors it's comprised of just the owners of each and and maybe you could walk through the plans but they essentially the conveyance would include what's known as limited common area which is the parts the portions of the lots most of the lots which would be dedicated to the use of each individual unit exclusively and then common area so I know if you want to kind of Elaborate?

Yeah, no, Jay, that was pretty well put. Happy to answer any questions you guys have on the plans themselves, but yeah, Jay summed it up pretty perfectly there.

So the utilities, septic systems, etc., would all be common land.

So the land remains yours, but the condos are put upon them, so the land is still maintained by you, or...?

By us, you're saying that, no, so these are going to be sold individually, and then the...

Including the land?

Yes.

Yes.

Okay. Yeah, so all the documents specify who's responsible and how that works to make it so that even though two people own different parts of the same building on the same lot... It's like snowdrops.

I'll just point this out. We have a leach field up here, which is common.

Same thing on this lot. Leach field is common.

But the individual tanks are on either side to be maintained by each owner of each condominium or each unit.

And then as Jay was saying, the limited common areas are kind of spelled out here and what certain things go, you know, HVAC unit is called out for a certain limited common area as it is like a deck on the back of each unit. So that's all spelled out in those documents as well.

So with the line that goes down this center that says OK on this side is limited common era area for this lot of the size limit a common area for this lot except for these utility things which are common and then the building facade which is common.

Yeah, it excluding the the leach field which is shared between both.

You have any questions.

Yeah, what happens when the leach field goes? How does that process work?

There should be things in there to talk about maintenance, who's responsible, if it's, I don't know exactly how it's spelled out there, but there's maintenance in there that addresses that.

And there's the board of directors from both of the units that would have to decide on an investment. to improve it, as well as presumably the roof or something like that that would go. It would fall to the association of two owners. That's funny. It's only two.

Yeah. The wording definitely feels like the same level of formality as a big condo association.

But it could be more. More than the two that there are. All right.

Yeah, I think it says the owners. So if two people own a unit, then each unit, there'd be four people. Okay.

So yeah, on the planning board portal, we have the submittal package, which has all of the technicalities, including the narrative and the declaration of condominium. So yeah, that's where everything's spelled out.

And should you get to the point of a motion, I think one motion would suffice, but it is two separate plans.

Okay. So if we do one motion, we'd probably have to say 4, 1, 3, 5, and 7, Talent Road. Right. And tax map lot 3, lots 29-1 and 29-2. You scan documents you can't search.

Yeah, you've got to go through all of them.

Yeah. I'm assuming this might be the section that would talk about the requirements for a leech field that says common expenses in addition to the statutory meeting were appropriate to the context hereafter. Common expenses shall also mean and include those assessments and expenses necessary to Operate the property for the mutual benefit of all owners. Said common expenses shall include but will not be limited to improvements of said common areas and expenses associated with maintenance, replacement, snow removal, insurance, and landscaping on the common areas, all of which shall be the joint responsibility of the members of the unit owners association. It shall also mean maintenance, repair, and improvements of limited common areas, which are the responsibility of the association in the first instance, even though an individual owner may ultimately be reliable for such expenses.

Okay, so as I see it, then there's, there's two condo declarations, really, right?

Yeah, there's one for each. And they're probably identical, except for the reference.

Yeah.

Okay. Could you explain how it works with the the responsibility of the association versus individual owners for the limited common areas?

In regards to anything specific or like just like what?

Like obviously each person has their own side and each person might want to make him like do things to each side right and it basically says that it could be Each individual unit owner may be liable for such expenses, but is the responsibility of the association in the first instance what types of things would fall under this and

Can you point out where that is, actually?

That is page two of the submittal definition C. OK.

In order to put my attorney pants on, I guess, here tonight. . So are you saying maintenance, repair, and improvements of limited common areas? That's what you're reading? Okay. Yeah, go right ahead. You're the developer, so you know this better than I do.

Manny Sousa for K&M Developers. How are you guys today? Thank you very much for your time. So what it's basically saying there is, in concept of these... The two unit owners, because it's a two unit building, they are responsible for their own cost walls in, which is basically the inside of the home. Anything that happens with the inside of the home, outside on maintenance, it's kind of working out together. Let's say one of them had children, the other one didn't, and they hit a baseball through the window. it's not the association's responsibility. There's a working out there. But that wording in there also is because you can expand these units there is area that they could do sunrooms or whatever and that is written in there in the legal way that nobody understands it to say uh let's say they put unit one puts a sunroom on unit two doesn't have it or you uh number three doesn't have it the expenses will if the the square footage expands the expenses will be prorated for that part of it and um Vice versa. Roofs go, they're in it together, they've got to work it out. If the leach field goes, they've got to work it together. So everything walls in is very well explained because it's your unit, you take it. The walls out part of it, anything that is to keep it weather tight or could affect the other condominium owners... while being in their unit, that now comes together. Unless it's a problem that's produced, is the word I'm looking for, or from owner misuse or anything like that. So there's a gray area in there. And we've done a bunch of these. And this was written back through the attorney because the finance companies, as they were getting to underwriting, wanted different wording in the bylaws. So these have been adjusted over time. And it's kind of to meet the financing regulations of what they're looking for, and the insurance companies, because they get a common policy on the building itself. And then they get contents insurance for their own inside part of it also. So it's, again, legal jargon, however you want to call it. And I'm not an attorney, but I've been with them for a long time. And this is all kind of adapted and evolved along the way as we've done these. And this is, it meets like all the FHA standards for their first-time buyers and all that stuff. That meets all their requirements for underwriting so that it can get done.

Okay, thank you. And I'm just curious, so it doesn't really matter. Like, for a two-unit building like this, how big of a leach field ends up being put in for the shared units?

It's a six-bedroom leach field. And then they each have their own individual, I think, 1,500-gallon tanks. Nice.

I'm curious. Do we have any other of these in our town that you can think of?

Of the Condexes?

Well, that are like this.

This is the first time I've seen a condominium conveyance of a duplex come to us. There are several in Hudson that I'm familiar with.

We had the Condex within the last year. I don't remember it. That was... I can get you the address. That was...

This is very similar to a project, Jay, I know you're familiar with in Hudson that Manny worked on a few years back. Very, very similar thing. But that was, in that case you mentioned, you know, for larger developments, that was much larger than this.

The whole context theory is going away a little bit. And again, it's with the legal jargon and the underwriting and everything, they've all kind of wanted it to go towards condominiums. So in theory, it is a context, but it's being done as a condominium.

What would the legal difference be?

I'm not. I wish I had the answer for you.

I'm not. Terminology more than anything.

Yeah, yeah. All it is is just who's responsible for what.

Yeah. Yeah, Condex is just a shorthand because it's condo and duplex.

And Condex is in a lot of the old, and this is going back because I hadn't done them for years, but there was issues with it being, having nothing really common written to it. So if one side didn't take care of one side and the other did, one side of the unit would kind of go to the pits and the other one would be well kept. And this kind of gives everybody that buys into that building a say and some type of ground or ground to kind of make sure that their neighbor keeps up with their spot of it too so the according to this documents like the exterior and stuff like that that's shared responsibility so correct on a con on most contexts that wasn't written that way they drew a line down the middle of it this is your spot this is ours and then you when those were really popular you'd see people replacing half the roof and it wouldn't match and done so i think that in concept that's Kind of why they've gone over to condominiums and gotten to this point. I can't speak for it perfectly legal. I can build them upside down, but I don't know the legal jargon of it.

So the last context we had was on Juniper Court, right off of... That's right.

I forgot about that. That's right. I forgot about Juniper Court.

Yeah, so that was like a very offset one. Yeah. Yeah, so that's the last one that I recall. Yeah.

But these were built with the intention that you're fulfilling right now, is that correct?

Yes. Correct. What actually happened with this, and I think it's because we kind of copied the Hudson way, and it didn't necessarily work the same way as we did the approvals, and this kind of slipped through our cracks on the approvals, and now I'm getting to the point where I was going to go, because they're substantially complete, I was going to go, I got them all certified, and I was going to have my attorney go ahead and record these at the registry of deeds, and we kind of went through it, and they found that this slipped through the cracks. This actually should have been done.

Yeah, we could have done it at the same time.

At the same time as the original, because we didn't build these ever to rent them. They were always built to be sold. So in order to do that, you need to have that separate.

I'm guessing it's hard to find someone who wants to buy both units at the same time.

Yeah, yeah. I've actually, funny, I've had, lately I've had a couple families that were thinking of doing it.

Because I would skip this requirement.

No, you still probably, legality-wise, want to keep it separate anyways. Yeah, if one were to be sold separately at any point. Even if I was buying them as an investment to rent them, I would still want them separate for liability terms and all that stuff.

Okay, does anyone have any other questions for the applicant? If not, then we could conditionally approve it.

Is there any public input on this item?

Seeing none Anything else Okay, so in which case we could probably make a motion to conditionally approve it with these standard conditions of approval All right, I can give that a shot are we doing we're doing them all together I Anyone see a reason to do them separately?

I don't see a reason to separate them out. So Mr. Chair, I move that we conditionally approve the subdivision application to convert the existing duplexes on tax map three, lot 29-1 and lot 29-2 into four condominium units. Addresses remain. one and three talent road on lot 29-1 and five and seven talent road on lot 29-2.

Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? We'll second. Okay, we have a second by Jesse. Any further discussion? All those in favor of conditionally approving the subdivision, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, abstain. Motion passes 6-0-0. Okay. Thank you, folks, for your time. Appreciate it. Have a great rest of your week. You as well. Good to see you. Next is committee reports. Do you have any committee reports?

Much, much. We've had a few results for the select board. We meet again on Monday. It's called for paperwork. I believe we have a non-conference that we're going to start before that. And then we're heading in. And the agenda can be found online. the town page. We've been working on the 250th celebration. The funding for that is complete. Most of the projects for that are complete and every household in Litchfield should have received a beautiful little flyer saying what was going to be going on to celebrate that during the month. There's four or five different events going on at different times. It's been enough to keep me busy.

Cool. Have there been any meetings that you've been in recently?

No, but we have our circumferential highway meeting on the 11th of June, I believe, right? Yep. I think it was Thursday night, if memory serves. And so we're a little off schedule to you folks at home that were expecting us the third Wednesday. It is not because we couldn't get a room. Seth?

No, we actually were waiting for our guest of honor. Oh, well, of course. There were some things that we discussed last meeting that we needed an expert in the field. Absolutely, absolutely.

And for you, we will wait. Thank you. Absolutely.

Wasn't a meeting without Jay this time. So that's all I got.

Thank you.

CIP met last night. Brief meeting. We're just kind of going over the CIP form for requests from departments. I think we're going to look at it over the next month, kind of make some decisions. If anybody has any input, feel free to email. I'll get it back there. Our next meeting will be, I believe, August the 3rd. And then I think we will also go through some requests that have been submitted them. So I'll have better update for you all then.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. I think that's it for committee reports. So next we have approved the May 19th, 2026 minutes. Has everyone had a chance to review them? I reviewed them, and I didn't see, I didn't notice any errors.

Yeah, same. They look good.

There's nothing that stood out to me.

You guys discussed a lot of stuff while I was gone. Don't worry, it's all coming back. Next meeting.

So yeah, we spent a lot of time discussing the proposal for the stormwater regulations. A lot of them are like, this doesn't really make sense for Litchfield, but they want us to do it, so we'll do it, even though it really won't change anything in real life. And Also considerations of should we narrow, should we allow like narrowing of roads and lowering the diameter of cul-de-sacs or not? Because it would potentially cause problems with emergency services and road agents. and also alternative pavements for sidewalks. And we determined that we should probably require a maintenance plan be approved by the road agent for a non-standard road type to be accepted.

And I will be meeting with the Internal Review Committee also on the 11th to discuss the MS4 stuff.

So no proposed amendments for the meeting. It was just me, Travis, Russ, and Jesse.

We lost power right before the meeting. So I wasn't able to quite make it here.

Okay. In that case, would someone like to make a motion to approve the May 19th, 2026 minutes? So moved. Okay, I have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. Okay, I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Okay, all those in favor of approving the May 19th, 2026 minutes of the planning board, please signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed? Abstained?

Abstained.

Motion passes 4-0-2. Okay. Any other business for this evening? I have nothing. Okay.

Short one.

Short one. Yeah, less than a half hour. Don't put the kids to bed. Yay!

Your wife would be happy about that.

Okay, in which case, would someone like to make a motion to adjourn? okay any further discussion all those in favor of adjourning please signify by saying aye aye opposed abstain motion passes 6-0 okay thank you for watching the plan board meeting and our next meeting will be the third Tuesday of the month

16th, right? Yes, 16th. Excellent. Okay, be there, be square. What do we have next time?