Planning Board - Regular Meeting

you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Good evening, everyone. The hour of 6.30 p.m. having arrived, I will call to order this regular meeting of the planning board. This meeting is being broadcast live on the City of Keene YouTube channel. The video will also be available for streaming on the city's website and is posted on the website by the end of the next business day, barring any technical difficulties. 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 home page 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 roll?

David Bergeron.

Here.

Harold Farrington.

Here.

Michael Hafer.

Here.

Roberta Mastrogiovanni.

Here.

Kenneth Cost.

Here.

Andrew Madison. Jay Kahn. Counselor Molly Ellis. Here. Stefan Mayhew. Tammy Adams. And Joseph Cochevera.

And I think if I'm not mistaken, these are all regular members tonight, so we're good to go.

Thank you. OK.

So first item on our agenda. Is the. The minutes from April 27th last meeting April 27th, 2026. I'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes of April 27.

I would like to move to approve a minute from the meeting of April 27th, 2026. Second. Second.

Thank you, Mr. Coste. Any questions, comments, or changes to the minutes? Seeing none, I will call the vote. All those in favor of approving the minutes of April 27th? Any opposed? Okay. Minutes are approved. OK, next up is a final vote on conditional approvals. This is a standing agenda item and as a matter of practice, the board will issue a final vote on all conditionally approved plans after all of the conditions precedent have been met. This final vote will be the final approval and will start the 30 day appeal clock. May asked staff if there are any applications tonight ready for final approval.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is Megan Fortson, planner. We do have one application that's ready for final approval this evening. It's PB-2024-20, which is for an earth excavation permit major amendment and a hillside protection conditional use permit for two properties at 21 and 57 Route 9. There were six conditions precedent that needed to be met, including the owner's signature appearing on the plan sets, the submittal of five full-sized paper copies and a digital copy of the final plan set, the submittal of a security to cover the cost of sedimentation and erosion control measures, stormwater management and reclamation for the first permit period of work to be completed, payment for all outstanding third-party consultant fees, the submittal of all required state and federal permits, and the addition of the approval numbers on the plan sets, and the addition of all waivers and conditional use permits with approval numbers added to the final plan set. The applicant has met all of those conditions precedents, so staff recommends that you issue final approval.

Thank you, Miss Fortson. Do we have a motion then for final approval?

I'd like to issue a motion for final approval for PB-2024.

Second. Thank you, Mr. Cost. Any discussion or comments? Okay. Seeing none, we'll proceed with the vote. All those in favor of the final approval of the earth excavation conditional use permit? Any opposed? Okay. The final approval is issued.

Was that a unanimous vote? Yes, it was.

Thank you. Yep. Yep. Any others? Ms. Fortson?

No, Mr. Chair, just that one for this evening.

Okay, great. I don't believe we have any boundary line adjustments tonight, nor any continued public hearings. So we'll move forthwith into public hearings for tonight's meeting. The first public hearing is PB26-10, Habitat for Humanity Duplex, a Cottage Court Conditional Use Permit. Applicant SVE Associates, on behalf of owner Monadnock Habitat for Humanity, proposes to construct a 1,364 square foot duplex at the property located at 0 Grove Street. Tax map plat number 585-057-000. The parcel is approximately .11 acres and is located in the residential preservation district. The staff have a recommendation for completeness of this application.

Thank you Mister chair, this is Megan Fortson planner at the applicant has requested exemptions from submitting a drainage report traffic analysis and soil analysis letting staff have made the preliminary determination that granting the requested exemptions would have no bearing on the merits of the application and recommends that the board accept the application as complete.

Thank you miss Fortson. I'll entertain a motion for completeness of the application.

I'd like to move to seek that application as complete.

Thank you. Mr. Koss, second. Thank you. Any discussion of completeness? All right, let's move to the vote then. All those in favor of accepting the motion moving to consider the application complete, please indicate. Any opposed? The application is considered complete. Alright, at this time I would like to invite the applicant to present.

My name is Liza Sargent from SVE Associates. I'm here to represent Habitat for Humanity. This application is for a duplex. The current facility is almost entirely paved. It's a parking lot. Currently, there are jersey barriers at the entrance to prevent people from driving, cutting corners, and whatnot. Community, excuse me, Cityside is to the north, Hunter Knights is off to the northeast, and there's various other residences along the south, east, and west. This is the proposed development with the duplex more or less in the center of the parcel. Two separate entrances for each unit. A proposed shed in the corner for mechanical and garden storage. The rest of what was formerly asphalt would be green space. And there will be municipal water and sewer connections. Bill, do you want to add anything about the architecture?

William Holtz, architect with Bensonwood Unity Homes. The duplex structure has two entry points, one from a driveway from Water Street, the other from a driveway from Grove Street. we've adjusted the shape of the building to conform to the unique sort of somewhat constrained aspect of the lot and have shifted the two units they're slightly offset from each other it creates a private entry for each unit a private driveway for each unit making it feel a little bit more like you have your own personal space when you approach the house that shift in in the buildings also the hardship of that sort of we took as an opportunity to break up the architecture to have a small gable set within a larger gable of the whole structure and break down the physical scale of the building a little bit make it a little more pleasing and a little bit more in the context of the neighborhood the Grove Street neighborhood that is primarily single-family two-family and maybe occasional three-family houses the building is the duplex sited at the corner of Grove and Water is kind of in a transitional zone between the apartment building I forget the the name of it, and the Hundred Nights structures that are both located on Water Street and the more residential aspect in historical context neighborhood of Grove Street. And so the duplex kind of is in this transitional space between multifamily housing and single family housing. And it feels like a duplex fits kind of well in there in that transition. There are a couple of We've shown on the elevation a couple different finishes on the exterior. Because the project, oh, thank you, yeah. A couple different finishes on the front elevation. some of these finishes haven't yet been completely defined and we're trying to retain hang on to some freedom for habitat for humanity this project is still kind of evolving we hope to utilize volunteer labor we hope habitat hopes to be able to solicit perhaps donations or benefit, um, to help, uh, pay for the project. And so the exact definition of exactly what those finishes are and exactly how they'll be done and whether they're done on site or done in a, um, a combination of offsite construction at Benson woods facility here in Keene or a combination of both, both onsite and offsite. And so, um, excuse me for not being able to define this exactly but I wanted to show more of a palette of potential of what this might be because we we want the house definitely to the duplex to fit within the neighborhood context and fit with the other structures that are in there but we still want to maintain a little bit of wiggle room to figure this out as we go and have the freedom to do to do the right thing for the project Any questions about exterior finishes or architecture or any aspect of the building?

And it's vinyl?

Probably. It may be. It's likely to be vinyl. It's possible that it may be fiber cement. It might be some other kind of exterior composite. But located in a configuration of, pretty much as shown here a combination of vertical siding appearance and horizontal siding appearance so somewhat traditional in in that in those exterior finishes but we're looking for low maintenance we're looking for a good neighborhood context good aesthetic but also affordability and so there's some embedded competing ideals in that scenario but we hope to you know choose the middle path that strikes the right balance between all of those Anything else?

Yeah. Ms. Sargent, are you completed as well? Or do you have more?

I'm happy to answer any questions. No, that's fine.

We'll move to that. I just want to make sure you had your chance to have your say. So at this time, I will open it up to questions for the board, questions for the applicant.

Yes. As far as the type of materials In the colors, you're kind of flexible. You don't really care one way or the other as far as which colors you use, or is there a difference as far as?

I think we do care. Definitely, we do care. But it's more about a matter of it being a little premature to actually choose and finalize a color. And so the intent here was just to show three scenarios of how it might be from a light color to a medium color to a darker color, and depending upon material availability and final choice.

So if you decide if something else comes up and it doesn't fit any of these scenarios, then you would be willing to come back to us? Or how would that work?

Either I guess we'd have to come back to the board or perhaps leave it up to staff, like some of the site development decisions get made, sort of driveway adjustments or things like that. It really depends on what the board is most comfortable with.

OK.

Mr. Costa, do you have a question?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a really nice project. A couple of things you keep saying, both presenters, about fitting into the context of the neighborhood. I recall from maybe another presentation, you took some effort to line the water street side anyway with the rest of the houses on water street so it continues that nice line of houses which are really i think important in a day you know in this kind of a neighborhood um so yeah from all of that i think it fits the site right it fits the neighborhood really really well i did have are these the parking drives are they tandem parking or two quarters i i think it says 12 feet but i can't quite read it

yep they're 12 feet wide and they come in from whoops wrong so the cars would park tandem one behind it if you have two cars yes in order to get two cars in there yes they would be one in front of the other and the driveways are 12 feet wide okay thank you

I just want to add that, for the record, I don't believe there's any regional impact for this application.

Thank you. I have a quick question. I guess probably not tenants is probably the wrong term, but you have folks lined up already for these, or that's still to be decided?

Michael, you want to step up? They probably want to know who you are.

So I'm Michael Conway with Habitat for Humanity, and we have a process. People apply. We have received applications, but we have not narrowed down the applications and actually selected the families that will own each unit in this duplex.

Thank you. You're welcome. Any other questions? Mr. Cost?

So the owners, there'd be two families. It'll be a condominium, I think I read.

Yes, in order to accommodate joint ownership, we will have a condominium document. And they will own the lot in common and their individual units individually.

Thank you. You're welcome. Yeah, we're good. At this time, I'd like to invite staff to provide their review.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is Megan Fortson, planner. I think both of the applicants did a really good job explaining the proposal at large and sort of the location of the property within its existing neighborhood. So I'm just going to quickly take you through the Cottage Court standards that are applicable to the application, as well as the site development standards. One neat thing that I thought that I would mention is that the parcel, it's been vacant for almost 40 years at this point, over 40 years. It's been paved. And as Ms. Sargent said, it's pretty much stem to stern with pavement right now with some jersey barriers. So it is quite the eyesore. Back in the day, so pre-1980s, it used to be the parking lot for a shoe factory that was located across the street where city side housing is now located, which is apartments. The site itself is surrounded by quite a density, a variety of density when it comes to residential uses as well as a few commercial uses. The parcel is about a tenth of an acre and it is located in the residential preservation district. So the only way to get a second residential unit in that district is through the cottage court process You could do an accessory dwelling unit if one of the units was going to be owner occupied But in this case where they're both going to be individually owned They're going through the cottage court process So staff don't have any recommendations regarding regional impact. We don't think that the project is going to impact that great of an area and In terms of the cottage court criteria, again, as Mr. Cost had asked, it is going to be a single property that gets condo-ized and managed by a condominium association. So planning staff do recommend that as one of your conditions of approval, you include an item related to the submittal of draft condo documents, as well as any other legal instruments that would be necessary to be created as part of the application. In terms of how the proposal complies with the dimensional standards for the residential preservation district our cottage court standards have a little bit of a caveat and they say that you can site your building closer to the road if there's an established building line that's already closer to the road than what's allowed in the underlying zoning district. So because this is a corner lot, typically it would be held to a 15 foot front setback requirement and a 20 foot side setback requirement. Ms. Sargent submitted a setback exhibit that should have been included as part of your packet showing that the average setback for the corner is gonna be just over 12 feet. And then for the front setback it was going to be Just over 13 feet. So again for the front setback They typically have to have a 15 foot front setback where they're proposing 13 feet And a 20 foot side setback where 12 feet is proposed But again, this is based off of an exhibit that she submitted showing the average building setbacks along Water Street and Grove Street and The applicant did have to seek a variance from the zoning board and that was for the rear setback just because the structure is encroaching into the rear setback along the southern property line on the western side and that was granted by the zoning board. In terms of the dwelling unit sizes, so the cottage court standards allow for a max 900 square foot footprint per unit. And so the applicant is proposing a 576 square foot footprint per unit. So that complies with the standard. You can have up to a 1,250 square foot gross floor area. And the applicant is proposing about 1,152 square feet per unit. So both of those standards are complied with, parking again, maximum of one per bedroom, minimum of one per unit. So the driveways that are proposed can accommodate roughly one to two cars per driveway, which complies with the standards. Building separation will be addressed as part of the building permit process. And then for driveways, there's going to be two curb cuts, one along Water Street and one along Grove Street. They both comply with the requirements and the land development code for street access permits. And we have had the applicants add a note to the plan stating that any future modification to either of those driveways can be reviewed by the city engineer's office. If that plan is not on the note, then they have to come back to the planning board any time they want to make a change to their driveway. We just want to make sure we cover that base. So that standard appears to be met. Um, and then in regards to, uh, screening the project narrative States that the proposed two story duplex is not more intense than the adjacent building types. So they are not proposing any screening. Um, if you look at Google street view imagery in that neighborhood, there's plenty of buildings around the site that are two plus stories in height. So this doesn't really stand out as being more intense in terms of the architecture than what's already there. And then in terms of architectural guidelines, think that that was already very well addressed by the applicant they're not proposing a specific color scheme as part of the application but really what you as the board are more so reviewing is the design of the building when eventually if and when a building permit is submitted in the future planning staff will review that building permit to make sure what was submitted complies with what was approved by you as the board you do have a specific site development standard related to architecture and visual appearance So say if they were proposing bubblegum pink siding that would be a red flag for staff and we would have them either change that color to something that would comply with the cottage core and the site development standards or they would have to come back to the board to seek relief for using a visually aggressive color. So I think something to keep in mind because again you are the ones that have to make a determination in regards to that standard. I'll quickly take you through the site development standards. Impervious surface is going to be reduced on the site from 95% to 60%. Stormwater currently sheet flows to the catch basins along Water Street and Grove Street, and following redevelopment of the site, the stormwater is either going to infiltrate on the new green space or sheet flow to the existing catch basin, so that standard is met. For sediment and erosion control, there are going to be some catch basin, great inlet filters, and straw wattle or silt fencing installed around the perimeter of the parcel during construction. So that standard appears to be met. For snow storage and removal, for the proposed conditions plan, they do show two snow storage areas on the south and west of the building. And then if necessary, excess snow will be removed from the site. So that standard is met. There's no landscaping proposed to be installed, and it's not required to be installed because it's a two-unit building. For screening, there's two compressors that are going to be installed adjacent to the entry stairs for each unit. And they're going to be screened from view using wooden fencing, which can be seen in the proposed elevations. So that standard appears to be met. For lighting, again, because it's a two-family residence, that standard is not applicable. And then for sewer and water, the city engineer has felt that the proposed calculations and utility plans that were submitted by the applicant are sufficient. So that standard is met. Traffic and access management, because it's two units, there's not really a significant traffic impact expected. And then for filling and excavation, the grade of the site is going to be slightly lifted a little bit from you know 472 to 473 feet above elevation and then will drain um but nothing that's significant nothing that's going to really significantly impact the site there's no surface waters or wetlands no hazardous or toxic materials no concerns about noise um So I think that that's all of your site development standards. For conditions of approval, we have recommended four conditions precedent, which are your standard owner's signature on the plans, submittal of five full-size paper copies, submittal of an updated proposed conditions plan with the ZBA approval number, and then the submittal of the draft legal documentation that I was talking about. And then only one condition subsequent is recommended, which is the submittal of recorded copies of any legal instruments that are applicable to the application since it's a condo. So I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you for coming along on my thrill ride.

Any questions for Ms. Fortson? I just want to test my understanding. Twenty one point eight in the staff in the staff report in our packet. It says An update did you you said the engineering department has now? Reviewed a revised plan.

Yeah find that acceptable Yes, so the city engineer we got revised materials and it's a very quick turnaround time between you when we get the revised materials And we have to send your packet out and so we've gone back and forth with Miss sergeant and Brian drew off who was the city engineer was good with her updated plans and

All right, thank you.

Yes.

Mr. Coste? Thank you. I'm not sure if it's a question for, well, whoever could answer. But it's really, it's not a lot of lawn, but there's a lot of lawn around the building, which is nice. But I'm wondering if there's a way maybe for habitat to think about something in that area for the drainage and water runoff to be more like a, rain garden or something else that could be built into the site so that it would reduce the runoff. It would also probably be, we're trying to get away from lawns, lawns, and lawns in the city, and lots trying to be Bee City. So anyway, it's just a thought, if that's a possibility. I don't know what that means in terms of maintenance, but just keep it in mind that that would be a really nice addition to that corner if it could be that kind of perennial rain garden type of thing that absorbs water. And I think we're trying to do that in the city more and more, so.

Mr. Chair, may I?

Yes, please.

Thank you. So yeah, that would definitely be a discussion that would need to happen with the applicant because you're talking a little bit more engineering and some more cost for their project to design something that's more of an infiltration basin or something like that. If that's what your definition of a rain garden is, which is kind of what my definition is. Landscaping isn't shown on the plan because Under normal circumstances, a two-family use would be exempt from the planning review process altogether. But because of the district that this is located in, that's why it's coming before you. So I assume that there will be landscaping installed. That's not shown on the plan. But that will really be up to the two property owners. So I think definitely it's worth asking Mr. Conway and Ms. Sargent if they're amenable to something like that. But it is an additional expense.

I certainly don't want to suggest things that would make this more expensive and harder to build, but if it's something that's doable and within budget, it could be a really nice – I mean, there's so much about this project that's sustainable and energy efficient. That would just be another nice thing to have that would demonstrate that and something we could point to for other developments. Thank you.

The in the opening part of your staff report, you list a few. Questions maybe or requirements that engineering had. They don't seem to all. Some are related to looks like drainage, but. Are these all? Taken care of or they included in the. Require in the. Conditions.

So yeah, I apologize. I should have addressed that when I went through everything. But yeah, everything has either been addressed by the applicant through the updated plans that were submitted, or it's just something that was sort of an FYI that was included by the city engineer. You know, like prior to the issuance of the CO, they're going to have to submit a request to get an address and everything like that. So yeah, all of the engineering comments are all set. So there's no condition related to the submittal of updated plans to the satisfaction of the city engineer.

Okay, thank you. Ms. Master Giovanni.

So on the setbacks, it's saying that normally a rear setback is a 20 foot required, and they're proposing a 15 foot. And then on a side, it's usually a 20 foot, and they're proposing a 10 foot. What is that being backed up to? Is it someone's property? Does it matter that they're proposing a smaller setback?

So for the two setbacks, because it's a corner lot, the frontage is measured using the shortest distance along the public right-of-way. So this is the front of the parcel, this is the rear, and then we have two side setbacks. The cottage court standards allow for that flexibility along the road frontage if other properties are closer to the road. So that's how we have the 13-foot setback here and the 12-foot setback here.

So just to the road, basically.

Yeah, just to the road. And then here, where there's the 20-foot rear setback, there's this little triangle of the building that's going to be in the 20-foot setback. So they went to the zoning board and requested a reduced setback for that part of the building. Thank you.

Mr. Hafer? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm curious about, on the schematic, on the plan, the lot looks large, and you look at the Google Earth photo, and it looks tiny. I'm curious about the sidewalk, the right-of-way, how will the building, particularly on the Grove Street side, does the city have to improve curbing there? Is that part of the project? I think this might be the... most urban project that I've been a part of in terms of its setting in my time on the board. So I'm just a little bit unfamiliar with how things like that get included or excluded in plan and permitting processes.

Yes. So if I may, along the Grove Street side of the property, I don't know if you recall, but I want to say it was probably either early this year or last year, the planning board had to vote to amend the right of way along Grove Street because the city actually gave a portion of the Grove Street right of way back to Habitat for Humanity. So that made the law a little bit bigger. I don't believe that there's any sidewalk proposed along that side of the property. And then in terms of the Water Street side, any impacts that are made to city sidewalks that are existing or the construction of any new sidewalks have to be done to city standards. So yes, any, to be honest, I don't really recall if that section of sidewalk is probably existing. I'm sure that it is. But if they impact it, yes, it has to be reconstructed to city standards.

Thank you, Ms. Fortson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Now I'm going to open up for the public. May I see a show of hands if anyone in the audience would like to comment or have questions about the project? Just one? Great. Two? All right. So you raised your hand first, ma'am. I invite you to come forward, please.

Good evening. My name is Michelle Chalice. I am a Keene City resident at 25 Beach Street and a city councilor. I am less familiar or not familiar yet with the Cottage Court zoning code. I did not hear any, so I will ask two questions and you can tell me whether they're relevant or not. I did not hear any reference to exterior lighting, whether any exterior lighting fixtures are downlit only to meet dark sky suggestions or requirements.

question one excellent thank you may I ask a second That's on one page in the drawing set.

Okay. No, no, no. Your answer is fine. That's fine. Number two, energy efficiency. Mr. Costa, I heard you mention fabulous energy efficiency. I didn't hear that discussed at all in the review. Is this a policy of habitat for – by the way, I'm thrilled to have another habitat for humanity structure in our city. Just delighted. I'm sorry I meant to start with that. Energy efficiency, is that due to Habitat for Humanity standards? Is it due to Benson Woods standards? And what are they? Can you explain to someone who isn't familiar with what you may be doing? Sure.

Go ahead.

Yeah, please. But you're going to need a microphone. Yep.

We consider this to be certainly better than William Holtz, H-O-L-T-Z, architect with Bensonwood Unity Homes. Yes, we're envisioning this to be a high-performance building. The walls are approximately 12 inches thick, triple glazed. windows, higher than code minimum standards in terms of both energy efficiency and building performance, insulation levels, as well as building tightness. And so there probably also will be internal heat recovery ventilation system in each building. So, you know, we're sort of looking to have these be state of the art within the constraints of affordability. And so those same sort of competing ideals of not making the building overperforming but certainly far better than than code code minimum requirements and so like i said the walls are twelve inches thick and that was one of the things that actually made our building a little bigger than we wanted it to be in order to have the interior square footage work for a three-bedroom house that that wasn't compromised on the inside that we kind of grew a little bit because of that that wall thickness Made one of those that one of the variances that we went to the zoning board for that that rear yard set back in the shape of the building was also kind of driven a little quite a bit by trying to meet energy performance standards that that we want.

Thank you. Sir, if you would like to come up.

My name is Carl Babbitt. I live on 152 Carroll Street in Keene, New Hampshire. I'm here specifically for that issue on Carroll Street. But I am a proud owner of a Habitat for Humanity house. And what I did, you mentioned about water runoff. I live on Carroll Street, and there's a lot of water runoff in there. I put on my driveway, I put a little bit of 8-inch drain, which now helps feed all my perennial garden, so I don't have to water nothing. When it rains, it goes right down into my drain, and it goes into my garden. But I own half of it. I've been owning it for 15 years. I've helped build two of them. While both of them went to Troy, I've helped build mine. As far as the installation thing, I can speak standard for what I'm holding on. When they came in and did my house, Hampshire came in spray-foamed. They insulated it, they put all new wiring in, and my house is energy efficient to the point where I pretty much have a radiant floor heating, so I pretty much have a really low thing. And I'll tell you one thing. If it hadn't been for Habitat for Manly, I would not own a house in Keene, New Hampshire, because I wouldn't be able to afford the property taxes. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? I am going to close the public portion of the meeting. And at this point we'll move on to our deliberation and we'll start that with a motion on this request.

i would like to move to approve pb-26-10 as shown on the plan set identified as proposed duplex at zero grove street key new hampshire prepared by sve associates at a scale of one inch equals 10 feet on march 31st 2026 and last revised on may 22nd 2026 and the and in the elevations identified as monadnock habitat for humanity at zero grove street key new hampshire prepared by benson wood unity homes at varying scales on march 23rd 2026 and last revised on may 6 2026 with the following conditions First, prior to the final approval and signature of the plans by the Planning Board Chair, the following conditions, President, shall be met. A, owner signature appears on the plans. B, submittal of five full-size paper copies and flattened PDF version of the final plan set and elevations. C. Submittal of an updated proposed condition plan with the ZBA approval number listed. D. Submittal of a draft written documentation of any easements and or other necessary legal instruments required for this application. which shall be subject to review by the city attorney and two subsequent to final approval and signature of the plans by the planning board chair the submittal of recorded easements and or any other legal instruments necessary for this application to the community development department thank you i'll second that thank you mr cost okay um

Questions, comments, opinions? Councillor Ellis.

Thank you. Excuse me. I think it's really exciting to have two new units on a parcel that's been vacant for 40 years. I think that's excellent. So well done on squeezing it in there.

i walk by that corner quite a lot and so it's going to be great to have two homeowners in the neighborhood and it's it's just the the way the project from what I understand is being designed the energy efficiency I heard even words like almost passive house that very very sort of efficient kind of building and so this is all exciting and hopefully it's an example for how to do good projects in the future so thank you Mr Bergeron now would be appropriate time to mention the regional impact

OK. I will say that I don't believe there's any regional impact for this project.

Thank you. And from my from my perspective, I'm a big fan of Habitat for Humanity. It's certainly it's nice when cities efforts to change the code to allow for these cottage court developments to increase the available housing units and in this case to increase some density in a in a Well built out area. So I think it's a great a great intersection of a company committed to building housing and to the city Being able to facilitate that so I'm very much in favor of this project.

I

Okay. Are there other comments? If not, let's, we do have a motion on the table and we can proceed to the vote. All those in favor of approval and the opposed. Okay. So PB 26 dash 10 is approved. Thank you very much. We'll give the next applicant a moment to get their stuff boarded up.

Thank you.

Yeah, give it a second. We do have a couple things to go through before we get to you, but you can stay there. You can stay there if you'd like.

It seems to be a long meeting.

Possibly, yeah. okay our next uh next application is pb-26-9 froling energy site modifications major site plan applicant and owner 560 main street llc proposes to create two curb cuts on manchester street demolish an existing 590 square foot building Replace the siding on the principal building and improve an existing gravel area at 20 and 37 Manchester Street. Tax map platz numbers 114-012-000 and 114-003-000. The parcels are located in the commerce and industrial districts. Okay. So I'd like to ask staff if they have a recommendation for completeness.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Evan Clements, Planner Zoning Administrator. The applicant has requested an exemption from submitting a lighting plan, elevations, and all technical reports. After reviewing the exemption requests, staff has made the determination that granting these exemptions would have no bearings on the merit of the application and recommend that the board accept it as complete.

Thank you, Mr. Clements. I'll entertain a motion for completeness at this time.

I'd like to move to accept the application as complete.

Thank you. I'll continue. I'll second. Thank you, Mr. Cost. Any discussion of completeness of the application? So we can move into a vote. All those in favor of considering the application complete? Any opposed? Okay. Application is deemed to be complete. At this time, I'd like to ask the applicant to present. Thank you for your patience. Yeah, you need the green light on.

There you go. My name is Mark Froehling. I'm the owner of 560 Main Street LLC and also occupy the property with another company called Froehling Energy, where we sell... Renewable energy services and boilers and such things but we we do business on the site and we have recently recently purchased this property and it did not have access from Manchester Street we had an address called Manchester Street, but no access and so Also was two properties when we purchased it and we have gone through the Proceedings to join the two properties which they are now legally joint and it's now one property known as 37a and so that is completed and we've worked with a planning board here and to complete the application and hope to have our driveway in there soon. In addition, there's a few other things. pull this along. We also asked for joining the two properties because we own 20 Manchester Street. It's I think an 8 or 10 acre lot out here. And we operate our business in here. And then we just recently moved our offices into what everybody knows as the old tire warehouse, tire warehouse number one. And so we're proposing to make a little connecting path in between the two properties. And that actually was a little bit challenging technically, but we worked with the city to overcome those challenges. And so now we're just trying to formalize it all to have access through this new driveway and comply with all the legalities of the project. And also when you buy property, you have to kind of bring it up to certain standards with drainage and impervious conditions and things like that.

Yeah.

So when we are, I meant to say one more thing. Manchester Street is actually a fairly small street. And you cannot take a tractor trailer around. So we're really looking for small car access for employee access for this. And maybe the UPS trucks or FedEx trucks go down there. So we're looking for access for those kind of small vehicles, not for tractor trailers. They would surely get stuck right here on this first corner. And we do have a right-of-way through Main Street. We more or less have a right-of-way through the tire warehouse so tractor trailers can access the property from there. And there's enough room with this new design to turn around. So that all works.

Okay. So I would like to see if any board members have questions for Mr. Froehling.

Mr. Coste Thank you Can you just maybe just with your finger again just point where the new access driveway road?

Is gonna go Yeah, the new access is actually right across The street from there's a the last house on the right-hand side Don Amor lives here and she has a driveway there and so it's actually aligned with that driveway and Let me just see here if I can . It might be a little bit hard to tell, but this is the last house, second to last house. And then it's visually aligned with that driveway. So one garage would be facing our driveway.

And that's where the main yard.

And then, of course, there's the employed parking lot right adjacent to that. And that is a parking lot right now. There was an old shed on it. You can kind of see the outlines of that. That was demolished. And this is the path between the two properties. So we can not enter through the neighborhood, drive out. It just makes sense to have the conjoint properties.

Other questions? Okay, thank you very much. So at this time I'll invite staff to provide their comments.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Evan Clements, planner, zoning administrator. So before I get into it, I just want to kind of lay the land. So we've got 20 Manchester Street, which is the Froehling Energy. existing operation that we all know. And then the two warehouses are 37 A and B Manchester Street. So I'm gonna be discussing these two separate parcels kind of back and forth. And then Mr. Froehling also mentioned the small shed that has since been demolished. That was 53 Manchester Street. That small parcel has since been merged to 37. Manchester Street. So that parcel no longer exists. It's part of 37. So we are really just talking about 20 Manchester, 37 Manchester, and their relationship kind of operating as one unit, for lack of a better way to put it. So the first parcel, 20 Manchester Street, is 9.9 acres in size, contains the Froehling Energy operation. The parcel is located directly south of New Hampshire 101 at the end of Manchester Street and is located in the Industrial Zoning District. Access to the site is from Main Street via a 40 foot wide easement that connects to the west end of Manchester Street. The second subject parcel at 37 Manchester Street is about two acres in size and contains two existing warehouse buildings and also is accessed from that easement over the adjacent property of 492 and then there is Both parcels are owned by Froehling Energy and is utilized together and separately. This site plan is designed to update the existing Froehling Energy site by formalizing the operation over both parcels. including this one-way cross-access site drive, new street access for 37 Manchester Street with parking area, building facade refresh, as well as identifying some outdoor rental storage areas on 20 Manchester Street to rent to tenants for outside storage. And then lastly, this site plan is eliminating phase two of the 20 Manchester Street original site plan as that's no longer needed with the incorporation of 37 Manchester Street. Regarding regional impact, 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 that final determination. I'm just going to get right into the site development standards. For drainage, the applicant states that the existing drainage pattern is not going to be altered. There are proposed changes to 37 Manchester Street to reduce the amount of impervious surface on the site. And so the applicant is anticipating a increase in infiltration throughout the property and is expecting a net decrease in runoff from the property. The standard appears to be met. For the new parking area that's proposed with the site plan, there are some erosion-controlled measures, including silt fencing and straw wattles proposed around the perimeter of that working area. However, the terrain is very flat there, so it's sort of an extra precaution, but is unlikely to have any dramatic runoff or erosion due to that work. So that standard has been met. For snow storage and removal, there are several identified areas on the plan. So that has been met. In regards to landscaping, Section 944 of the Land Development Code requires that any parking area visible from the public right-of-way be screened with a perimeter landscape area as depicted in Figure 2 of the staff report. That's just taken right from the Land Development Code itself. And then section 945 requires one tree for every 10 parking spaces. The applicant is proposing to install five American sycamore trees around this new parking area, as well as a six foot stockade fence. And then the applicant is requesting that the planning board approve this alternative screening design, which is technically allowed in section 944 of the land development code. Due to the location of the parking area in relation to the existing residential neighborhood, even though it's all zoned industrial and commerce, it is an existing residential neighborhood. Staff is recommending that the board consider whether the applicant's proposal for screening is sufficient or if additional landscaping or other screening measures may be necessary to screen this new parking area from Manchester Street. So you'll need to make that determination. So no new lighting is proposed for the application. The new parking area is not proposed to be illuminated in any way. So that standard does not apply. For sewer and water, there's no proposed changes to the water sewer connections for either parcel. That doesn't apply. Traffic and access management, the applicant is proposing to install a 20 foot wide street access on Manchester Street where the former 53 Manchester House shed was located uh... As Mr. Foling stated, the anticipated use of the street access is for passenger vehicles and occasional box truck deliveries. Due to the narrow width of Manchester Street, larger trucks will continue to use the easement over 492 Main to access the properties. And then a truck turning exhibit was submitted with this application to show that the Keene Fire Ladder Truck could actually still navigate through this area and the site if needed. A 12-foot-wide connector between these both parcels is proposed to provide one-way access between the site. The access way is designed to conform with the requirements of Section 942 of the Land Development Code. The applicant states that this internal access should reduce the traffic on Manchester Street associated with the Froehling Energy operation transiting between the two parcels. This standard does appear to be met. No significant earthwork or filling or excavation is proposed with this application. Definitely not enough to rise to needing a large truck plan related to moving that material around the neighborhoods. Also considering the easement access to Main Street, then with access to 101, even if it did, they have a clear access to major highways. So that standard is met. In regards to surface waters and wetlands, there's no wetlands on 37 Manchester Street. And there's no work really proposed on 20 Manchester Street where some wetlands do exist. So the standard is not applicable. Excuse me. Same thing with hazardous, toxic materials. No hazardous or toxic materials are proposed for this application. For noise, there's no proposed changes to the operation of either parcel. And so the applicant is anticipating an existing consistent noise pattern common to industrial and commercial zoning districts. And then also with the highway immediately adjacent to both parcels, there is an ambient undertone of existing noise. For architectural and visual appearance, the applicant is proposing some minor facade changes to 37A by replacing the existing painted steel siding with vertical wood siding as shown on kind of a picture rendering that was included in the packet. with no additional changes to the site proposed. So I would say make a determination whether that meets the architectural guidelines, but it's a pretty minor change and it's not incorporating any aggressive colors or material types that aren't already traditional throughout the city. So it's pretty standard. The last thing I will go through is the conditions of approval regarding the precedent conditions. It's not anything you haven't seen before. So owner's signature on the plans, submittal of five full-size copies, a flattened PDF of the final plan set, and submittal of the security to cover the costs of landscaping and erosion sedimentation control in a form and amount acceptable to the community development director. Subsequent to final approval we've got sediment and erosion control being inspected prior to work beginning. are two customary landscaping inspections, one at the time of installation and one year later to make sure that they take. And then the last one that I do actually want to bring to your attention, there is a construction trailer that has been recently placed on 20 Manchester Street that was inadvertently installed within the side yard setback of that property. It has been identified by staff and the owner. And staff intends to work with the owner to move that trailer out of. The setback, so that the site can then be conforming with zoning staff. really didn't feel like it was worth stopping this application over. That being said, we wanted to just add a little bit of Connection to this application with ensuring that that work being done and so that's what this condition is Which is before any of the security for the landscaping or the erosion control can be returned to the applicant That trailer needs to be confirmed that it has been moved out of the setback So that's all I have mr. Chairman I'd be happy to answer any questions at this time Thank You mr. Clements questions for staff

I have one just to help my understanding of the new parking area and the proposed trees and stockade fence. Do you have access to page 61 of the packet?

No. Not part of you.

It just seems like a good picture to kind of point out where the parking is. Mary to the rescue.

I have access to page 61 of the packet. So what is your question, Mr. Chairman?

I'm just trying to understand where the new parking area is and where the stockade fence is. It looks like I can see the tree symbols. That is where the new parking is going.

Yes, and you can actually see the parking stalls kind of depicted there.

Mr. Chair this is Mary Brenner senior planner one thing that we noticed as we were reviewing this application is that the parking lot standards in article 9 for all parking lots require that perimeter of landscaping around as the screening however there's an option for an alternative to be approved by the Planning Board and so that's why we flagged this for you tonight

the screening that's proposed is not the landscaping that's required in Article 9 but rather a six foot tall stockade fence No I understand that I was just trying to in my mind clarify where on the property it was My recommendation Mr. Chairman would be to look at I think page 59 it's a sheet C1 of the plan set

and it's also lies a sergeant SVD associates this is 37 that's route 101 this is the proposed parking and the fence around this is Manchester Street I don't know if I answered your question or not but so the fencing is

It's kind of hard to read the detail. It's all along Manchester Street. Is it also between the abutting property?

Yes.

OK. All right. Thanks. I understand it now. Thank you. Other questions? Thank you, Mr. Clements. And thank you, Ms. Brenner, for your technical assistance. Let me just ask if there's anyone here from the public who wish to comment on this application. Just raise your hand, please. Seeing none, I will open and close the public comment portion. And we'll move on to deliberation, which will start with a motion. Do we need to deal with the screening separately or just include that as?

It's not a waiver request. It's basically Article 9 is in the zoning ordinance, but it delegates to the planning board the authority to approve a site plan that doesn't follow those regulations to the letter as long as the board feels that the spirit and intent of those regulations have been met. The design with the eight-foot depth of multi-tiered landscaping is appropriate in maybe some locations, such as the downtown. They're a little more pedestrian activity. Some of our peripheral industrial areas, maybe not so much. But it'll be up to the board to determine.

like I mentioned earlier that there is a serious contextual component to this being the residential neighborhood as well okay thank you so the short answer is no we don't need if we yes it does not it does not need a separate motion I apologize thank you all right so at this time I'll entertain a motion

I would like to move to approve PB-26-9 as shown on the plan set prepared by SVE associates at variable scales prepared on March 30th 2026 and last revised on May 7th 2026 with the following conditions first prior to the final approval and signature of the plans by the planning board chair the following condition conditions precedent shall be met A owner signature appears on the plans B submittal of five full-sized paper copies and flattened PDF version of the final plan set C submittal of a security to cover the cost of landscaping and erosion sedimentation control in a form and amount accepted acceptable to the community development director and second subsequent to the final approval and signature of the plans by the Planning Board chair the following conditions shall be met a prior to the commencement of site work all sediment and erosion control measures shall be installed and inspected by the community development director or their designee b following the installation of landscaping the community development department shall be contacted to perform an initial landscaping inspection one year following the installation of all landscaping the Community Development Department shall be contacted to perform a final landscaping inspection and prior to the release of any financial security the construction trailer located in the side yard setback of rental area number two shall be moved out of the setback and verified by Community Development staff thank you I get a second please

Thank you. All right. Comments? Questions? Opinions? Any opinions regarding the screening alternate proposal? Mr. Hafer?

Yeah, it's certainly a complicated corner of our city here. Fascinating looking at all the plans and boundary lines in here. But I think the stockade fence, to me, feels like a nice solution for the property of Butters there. I think perhaps better than... a traditional three-tiered greenway type of a screening. So to my eye, or to my opinion, it meets the spirit of providing screening from the abutters there. So I don't have any concern, do not have any concerns with that aspect. Thank you. Nor others of the proposal.

Mr. Pergeron.

I'd say that I agree with that, and I think being the nature of the facility and being a commercial facility, I think it gives it a good screening that's going to be reliably there all the time, and I think it's a good application for it in this location.

Thank you. Any regional impact?

I'll say no. Mr. Bergeron?

Probably better if you just, like, say it in a full sentence for the minutes taker.

No, I don't believe there's any regional impact with this application. All right. Thank you very much.

OK, I think we're ready to move to a vote. So. This is. PB 26 dash 9. All those in favor of approval. Any opposed? PB 26 dash 9 is approved. Thank you, Miss throwing. Okay, next up is a public hearing for application PB26-11, GMS parking lot expansion, major site plan, and surface water protection conditional use permit. Applicant Fieldstone Land Consultants, on behalf of owner GMS Realty LLP, proposes to expand the rear parking lot and install stormwater management infrastructure within the 30-foot surface water buffer on the lot at 30 Production Avenue. The property is approximately 3.1 acres and is in the industrial district. At this time, I'll ask staff if they have a recommendation for completeness of the application.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is Megan Fortson, planner. The applicant has requested exemptions from submitting a landscaping plan, lighting plan, elevations and renderings, a traffic analysis, soil analysis, historic evaluation, architectural and visual appearance analysis, and a screening analysis. 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, Ms. Fortson. May I get a motion for completeness?

I would like to move to see this application as complete.

Second.

And Ken Cost, I second that.

Thank you, Mr. Cost. Any discussion regarding completeness? All right, let's vote. Do you have a question, Mr. Cost?

Yeah, I just do have a question because it's going to talk about stormwater management, which I guess does get involved in landscaping to some extent. So do we hear about that at some point? Because we're saying it's complete, but they're not addressing that. So I'm a little trying to figure it out.

Yes, if I may, Mr. Chair. So there is still landscaping information on the plans. It's just not a separate.

landscaping plan yeah okay are you comfortable voting at this time okay so uh all those in favor of completeness any opposed all right application is deemed complete so i will invite uh invite the i have the fieldstone to present

Thank you, Mr. Chair. John Noonan from Fieldstone Land Consultants on behalf of GMS Realty, who is the owner of the building at 30 to 42 Production Avenue. I'm going to walk through the plan set. I think that's a little easier. So the existing condition on this project was they have a lot of issues with trucks unloading. So this is at the end of Production Ave. Granite State electrical is on this end of the building fast and all on this end They have access off of production. I have on each end of the building. This is a access here to the rear of the building and An access that's shared by the abutting property and the subject lot here That is provided by an easement. There's an existing easement for that crossing of each property business parking is all along the front here for customers to all of the units and They have tractor trailers and box trucks that deliver to the rear of the building. And the issue was, when our client came to us, was they have issues with unloading of trucks, not enough parking for employees. So they run out of, there's 25 parking spaces along the front edge of the building. Based on customers, deliveries, and employee parking, they don't have enough parking. And then the third one is out back is, Really, it used to be a lot of gravels with some pavement out back. The trucks and traffic out back has made it basically a mud pit on one end of the parking lot. Grades are varying from 8% to 5%. It's very uneven back here, making it difficult for trucks to unload, and then also have cars for employees parking back there. So ultimately, they're looking to expand the parking lot, entirely pave the rear parking lot, so expanding it varies in depth, but a little over 22 feet. Um, so we're showing is an additional 24 parking spaces at the rear, um, 12 on this end, the 12 on this end kind of just spread out for what would be for employee parking and then raising the grade at the back here and making this more of a level 2% grade. So the pavement would pitch at 2% across. There would be designated concrete dolly pads. So that's where the tractor trailer would sit when they unload. So really improving their truck traffic access back here. And then also providing that additional parking for employees. As part of the the issue with it being pretty mucky back here and wanting to expand we're proposing a Rain garden following the entirety of the improved parking lot along this edge here With that we encroach the 30-foot wetland setback. So we're the surface water setback and is all along this edge here. So in order to construct the rain garden along that area and improve the drainage, we're impacting the buffer along this area. We're not impacting the wetland resource itself. So we've held that as our limit of disturbance. So we basically have our proposed tree line following just off of that wetland line to the rear of the lot here. There is an easement for the city of Keene to access the rear of the lot. and basically through that entire wetland. That's due to the tax ditch system. So as you're aware, this area, Production Ave, I mean, this whole area of Keene is drained by the tax ditch system. So there's a ditchway that goes along the rear of the lot here. The center line of that ditch defines the rear of the lot. And the city public works department has an easement to go in there, dredge, and maintain those ditch lines. So we are not impacting that wetland. However, we're impacting the easement, the offset encroachment for that wetland resource. Um, as mentioned, so we didn't submit a landscape plan. However, we have two trees in order to meet our tree requirement for the parking spaces. So we, we placed one tree over by the 12 spaces here and one tree over towards the limit of parking spaces over here. We were showing a bike rack, typical of the landscaping plan and a new concrete pad for propane tanks. So there's currently four propane tanks at the rear of the site. They're being relocated, actually replaced. Those are going to be on a concrete pad that will be elevated one foot above the floodplain. So this area in the rear does have the 100-year floodplain encroaching, basically following the wetland. So we've made our parking lot a tenth higher, so it's just a little bit higher than that 100-year floodplain. And the spillway for our rain garden is at the 100-year floodplain. So basically any storm under a 100-year storm event would be held in the rain garden. Um, and as part of the rain garden, there's also planting. So there's a planting schedule with our detail for the rain garden on, uh, approved species that are native species to New Hampshire. And these are basically the detail and the plantings come from the UNH suggestions for the stormwater manual for New Hampshire.

Um, so that is included in our plans.

Um, So overall, it's the improvement. There is no improvements to the building or changes to the building. All lighting is the same as what's the existing condition. We're ultimately paving and expanding this in the rear. We went to do a site walk with Conservation Commission and met with the Conservation Commission at their meeting at their direction. They're asking for specific these two trees to be different than what we have shown on the plans Our clients willing to change the two species to what was suggested by the Conservation Commission One of the other items Was when we did the site walk there's actually three large trees that are right behind the proposed propane tank area. And it was suggested if we could maintain those trees. So we're going to revise where basically our berm is for next to the rain garden in that area to maintain the three trees that are existing in addition to still planting the other two trees that we show. So although not a separate landscaping plan, there is landscaping proposed. Overall, that's the gist of it, is the additional 24 spaces, paving, and creating that rain garden to the rear to improve drainage. And also just to point out, the existing Condition does not have any drainage or any type of stormwater management system at all. Everything just sheet flows off of the payment directly directly into the wetland. Setback and also the wetland resource itself, so this will improve what's there currently.

Thank you. Questions for Mr Noonan. So obviously you did see the Conservation Commission's recommendations. We're just seeing them tonight. As you mentioned, two that you're okay with, but there are a total of five.

Yes, our client was okay with the conditions or recommendations by the Conservation Commission, with only one being the porous asphalt. So they asked if we could do porous asphalt in the rear. Looking more at the soils that are there, and truck traffic in that rear, it's really not going to be an area to utilize porous asphalt. It would likely fail pretty quickly. It is wetland hydric soils that are in that entire area.

It looks like planning may not have included that one in the proposed motion, though.

I believe all of the Conservation Commission recommendations they're shown on pages two and three inside that dotted line area It's H submittal of a revised site plan to show pervious pavement for the 24 proposed new parking spaces

All right.

And you're saying you're... That's the only one that we wouldn't agree to because it just wouldn't fit there. It would fail, likely, if constructed that way.

Okay. Yeah, just wanted to be clear about that. Mr. Cost? Thank you.

so this is i mean it's interesting because there's a 30 foot surface water buffer and you're encroaching on it but you're also i guess i'm asking this kind of a design making this a rain garden and following the conservation commission's recommendations of what is planted and all um I mean, in your sense, is that improving the ability of this buffer area to sort of protect the wetland as it was before? So even though we're building in or doing something in it, it seems to me you're improving it by creating this rain garden.

Correct. That was our design intent was to ultimately achieve both our client's goals but also protect the wetland resource itself. So we didn't impact anything into the wetland. The rain garden will improve the quality of the stormwater runoff, so we're treating the water and also detaining it in that shallow basin that's there. Where there's nothing now, it just currently flows directly into that wetland.

All right, I profess my ignorance. What is a tax ditch?

The tax ditch system was multiple ditches throughout the city that originally, I believe, taxes were collected for to create the ditches that would be maintained by the city to drain Keene. Ash Swamp Brook is one of them. In this entire area, it follows Route 10, basically starting behind Home Depot, crossing through that area to ultimately drain a lot of the area of Keene and they're maintained or were the intent was to be maintained by the city so public works would go in and dredge and clean them out periodically as they've done like along Griff Road was probably the most recent one where they went through Water Street along you know where the Beaver Brook runs those were all itemized as like tax ditch areas where They were ultimately graded and maintained by the city, and the city holds rights to go onto the properties following those and an easement to maintain them.

Okay, thank you. Yeah, so there's no technical term. It's just an ownership and responsibility. Okay, thank you. Any other questions? Mr. Hayford.

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair. So I had the benefit of being able to look up tax ditch via my friend Google, so I was able to answer that question. But is it... Is water seasonal? Is there flowing water there? Is it only in flooding situations where there's water running through that area? How would you describe the condition of? In this subject area, there's water all the time in that.

I would say the majority of the tack stitches I know of in Keene, and Dave Bergeron is very familiar with them, I would say most of them hold water or flow water year-round.

Okay, great. Thank you for that info, and I think Ken's comments, not that it's deliberate, I'll say it for deliberation. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, thank you, Mr. Norton. This time I'll invite staff to provide comments.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is Megan Fortson Planner again. So I think Mr. Noonan did a very thorough job of explaining the proposal. So in an attempt to be brief, again, I'm going to take you through the site development standards. Just to give you a little bit of information, the reason why this proposal comes before you is because the installation of any drainage structures Within a surface water buffer whether it's 30 feet or 75 feet in length is something that meets the threshold to Require this the middle of a surface water protection conditional use permit which requires your review Additionally just the amount of impervious surface that's being added which is like roughly 30,000 feet Is also another trigger that brings the project up to the level of needing to be reviewed by the Planning Board In terms of regional impact again staff did not feel that there was the potential for regional impact But a final determination will need to be made by the board the only staff comments that we received on this application were that Engineering staff is requesting that the start of construction be coordinated with their office so that they can come out and do maintenance on the tack stitch At the same time as the work is happening on this project so that there's less impact to that area so that's not a recommended condition of approval or anything like that, but just sort of an FYI and a request that the City engineering department has made of the applicant and they've agreed to that For Article 11, those are where all of your surface water protection standards live. And the first one is related to the relocation of the proposed use or activity. So again, the applicant is proposing to almost double their proposed number of parking spaces from 25 in the front to a total of 49, so it's gonna be 24 in the back. just to resolve existing drainage issues, accommodate additional employee parking, and then also to help facilitate truck deliveries that happen to two of the three tenant spaces that are in the building. The narrative states that the rain garden was designed to be narrow and long to minimize impacts to the surface water buffer and ensure that the wetlands would not be impacted by stormwater runoff. The detention area is at a lower elevation to receive stormwater and provide storage space for stormwater and floodwaters in the area, which is relatively flat. Then in terms of adverse impacts, which is item number 2 C in the staff report The narrative states that runoff from the parking lot will be directed to the rain garden and treated by an amended soil layer and rain garden plantings Any water that flows over from this area is going to be treated to ensure that direct runoff From the paved areas does not flow directly into the wetland Silt fencing is going to be installed along the eastern boundary of the proposed rain garden to protect the actual wetland resource during the course of construction and then any disturbed areas are going to be planted and seeded following construction for stabilization purposes so we do recommend that you include a condition of approval related to the flagging and inspection of that surface water buffer prior to the commencement of site work we also Does somebody happen to have their cell phone on?

The president has the best information available.

I guess I will continue on then. Okay. I'm not crazy in this sense. That's good to know. But yes, there were five recommendations made by the Conservation Commission just to kind of quickly run through those with you. One was the submittal of a revised site plan that shows the installation of one three-inch caliper American linden tree and one three-inch caliper swamp white oak in place of the proposed red maple trees that are currently shown on the plan. The second was the addition of a note on the plan stating that the best management practices described in an NHDOT publication shall be utilized during construction. And then this is the middle of a new design for the rain garden that preserves three mature trees on the north end of the site, which were previously proposed to be removed. And then the last two are this middle of a salt reduction plan that includes operation protocols such as pre-wetting and all of these other items just related to reducing the amount of salt or other Unwanted chemicals that could go into the rain garden and then the last one was the submittal of a revised site plan showing that pervious pavement Which again we have discussed Miss Brenner is our Conservation Commission staff liaison and she did discuss these items with mr. Noonan and that was the only Recommended condition that the applicant was hesitant to agree to So that was the Conservation Commission's review of the application and I'm going to try to skip over a lot of these things because I feel like Mr. Noonan did a great job explaining everything. The applicant did, going through your site development standards, in relation to snow storage and removal, the applicant does show a snow storage area at the southeastern corner of the parking area. And they have also added a note to the plan stating that no snow can be pushed into or stored within the 30-foot surface water buffer. which is a requirement in your site development standards. For landscaping, again, that will most likely change. So planning staff do recommend that you include a condition of approval related to this in the middle of a security for sediment and erosion control and landscaping, as well as conditions related to us performing initial and final landscaping inspections to ensure the health of all plantings. Um, for screening, typically a parking lot like this would require screening from any adjacent properties or the public rights of way. But because this is behind a building and there's farmland behind adjacent to it, it's not of concern. Um, there's no new lighting proposed to be installed surface, uh, sewer and water are not proposed to be changed. Um, traffic and access management. There's no new traffic that's going to be generated only improvements to existing traffic circulation on the site. And then there is going to be some filling and excavation, but not enough that it really warrants a truck roof, submittal, or anything like that. And then no hazardous and toxic materials, no noise. And then, as Mr. Newton had mentioned, no changes to the actual exterior of the building or front part of the site. So aside from the Conservation Commission's recommended conditions, the other recommended conditions are pretty boilerplate. It's the owner's signatures. submittal of the five paper copies of the plans, submittal of the security, and then subsequent to final approval, the inspection and flagging of that 30-foot surface water buffer, and then the initial and final landscaping inspections. So I know I went through that rather quickly. I'm happy to clarify if you have any questions.

Thank you, Ms. Fortson. Questions for staff? Mr. Hafer.

Mr. Chair, the existing, if I'm looking at the plans, almost everything is gravel existing. Is that considered impervious to our standards?

So we do consider gravel to be impervious, yeah.

Thank you.

Yep.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Okay, again, I'll try, still a lot of folks in the audience, just a show of hands for anyone who would like to comment on this proposal. Just Ms. Chalice, please. Or I should say, Councilor Chalice, sorry.

Again, Michelle Chalice, 25 Beach Street. I speak now as an environmental landscape educator and designer, former four-year landscape architect. I have heard the entire testimony. I have been part of the Conservation Commission's discussions. And I just want to make the comment, we live in a bowl. Keene is a bowl geographically, we know that. But I am saddened by these types of developments. We have attached tax ditch system that we rely upon to not flood that requires some heinous management practices against the beavers who are doing their best to properly management manage water resources and incremental additional paved developments like this immediately adjacent to that tax ditch system. I think you will remember that this very narrow rain garden has a spillway so that as soon as this sheet water runs off and reaches a certain point, that runoff of all of those contaminants, salt, sand, petroleum products, will go right into that tack stitch. That said, as soon as that water rises to a certain point, the tack stitch water is going to come back the other way as well. personally would wish that the request was made for a schedule of maintaining that tax ditch to remove sediment on a regular schedule so that that very narrow to the extent that can we can accommodate this huge amount of runoff and will be managed as best as we can. Without ongoing management, the silt will fill in and this will be a moot, certainly not a rain garden, although I really appreciate the fact that plants are being called out, the UNH specifies for this use. So I do not know the process that would potentially have that request be properly submitted. But I caution us. Do we actually need as many parking spaces for the employees? I understand the radius turning, but we are continually doing more damage with this amount of pavement next to these water resources. And I I'm no longer part of the planning department. I do have the ability to make these comments and a plea for our greater environment. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? All right, I'll close the public portion now. And we will proceed to deliberation.

So we'll

Let's address the Let's address the Conservation Commission's recommendations right up front. So there are five. The applicant indicated that he was fine with four of them, but he was not fine with H, the pervious pavement that we're discussing. So I'd like to... I'd like to hear some discussion about whether we include this or don't include it in the conditions. I'd like to hear some opinions on this. Mr. Bergeron?

I guess I'd like to start by saying I've been involved in some projects where there's been some areas of previous pavement used in the past. Some have worked well, others have failed, and part of the reasons why they have failed in the past is in situations especially like this with this heavy truck traffic, Pervious pavement is not really strong enough to maintain, to hold up under heavy, constant truck traffic. It's kind of, you know, regular pavement is compacted and it's solid. Pervious pavement is just as it is, it's full, it's honeycombed, it's full of holes, and it has a weak surface, and it can be compressed, it can break apart. In this area, I would, agree with, I think, Mr. Noonan at this point to say that I don't think it's a good location for that pervious pavement because of that, because of the fact that it's not well, it doesn't hold up well under truck traffic.

Thank you. Anyone else like to weigh in on this? Mr. Coste?

Maybe just to follow up on Councilor Chalice's comment about this, if we could have that discussion about the amount of pavement or if there's any way to reduce it without impacting the operation and movement of trucks, just to see if there is a way to pull back a little bit on the amount of paved surface that's gonna add to the runoff. So I don't know if that's a discussion addressing that to the applicant to the applicant.

Keeping in mind the counselors comments putting you on the spot but I don't know if there's any opportunity for redesign at this point.

I think so in meeting with our client trying to maximize meeting the parking increasing truck turning and truck being able to back up to the loading docks. I don't think we want... I know they would tell me they would not want to shorten this up because they're trying to keep enough traffic both ways and then allow for backing up both tractor trailers to these docks. So I would like to move forward with just as the plan is, um, whereas we're accepting the other items recommended by the conservation commission. Um, we met with them. They, they provided those recommendations. I would like to move forward with the plan that we have.

Mr.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to mention, since I was part of the site visit, and my understanding from talking to the applicant at the Conservation Commission site visit is that that parking in front gets filled up pretty quickly by customers, and so they're having a hard time finding enough parking spaces for their employees. um so just anecdotally it sounds like the parking spaces would be very beneficial for their operation um i do want to just note that you know the conservation commission when we went out to the site you know there were a few like really big beautiful trees and they asked the applicant to redesign already to save those and the applicant was willing to do that um so they've already gone through a revision to accommodate uh the conservation commission's wishes um so i think from staff's view um i'm not sure how they could meet their objectives while reducing the pavement unfortunately um so yeah i just wanted to say that thank you councilor ellis

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think this is probably for staff. I'm not sure if anyone here knows the answer, but is there any system now for maintaining those ditches? Are they still maintained?

I was just looking this up a second ago and I believe that it's it's called stormwater channel maintenance program or something in our operation budget But yes, it is a part of the ongoing operation. So the city does maintain I believe the main activities are the vegetation management because if the city doesn't come through and cut the vegetation fairly regularly It'll fill in really quickly. But then as councillor Chalice mentioned there's also dredging and other activities that go along with that Mr. Pergeron

I think I just wanted to mention that I thought that, you know, as I guess I know this building and I've been out behind it in the past and I know that there's a problem there and I think that What they're proposing is a much better solution than what exists today. And even though they're maybe expanding into buffer right now, there is no stormwater control. Like Mr. Noonan said, there is no stormwater control out there at all. This, I think, is, from what I can tell, I think is going to be better than what's out there right now. When they do this, if they do this, I think it's going to improve the existing situations out there because right now everything runs off the parking lot with no stormwater management into the ditch, into the wetlands. So I think this will help control that somewhat.

Ms. Boster, do you have a?

So in terms of the tax ditch that collects additional runoff, what have you, and its proximity to the project, I mean, valid point to suggest that that ditch should be checked regularly obviously but especially in following up on this project like perhaps part of the motion should be a follow-up to see if it is impacting that type of ditch you know something if it isn't already being done on a regular basis but if in fact it does impact that ditch then what would happen I'm curious You know that's that's a city responsibility as I understand it so we're not going to make it a condition for the applicant Right the city engineer so Brian Ruoff had asked and requested

that when they do this work, if this project was approved and they move forward, that they work in conjunction with public works because public works would like to take advantage of this area is being impacted. You're going to have erosion control measures up. Can we then cut across and get to the tax ditch and maintain it at that time? So the city is planning on when this work is being done is the same time going in and impacting that same area and cleaning out the ditchway and would be vegetation control if there's sedimentation in there they would dredge that so that is in the works if this is approved is is working with public works and letting them know when this is started so they can they can do their work of maintenance at the same time mr hafer yes thank you mr chair um uh echoing some of the comments i think this uh

project represents the permitting process, the good parts of the permitting process. We have a sort of ad hoc large expanse of impervious surface now that we're going to be approving or voting on to approve, you know, bringing it up to modern standards, modern grading, probably reducing velocity of sheet flow in some cases into a rain garden. I think we see this as a win for actually improving the environment in the area over what the existing conditions are. happy to, in terms of letter H of the proposed motion, I think we, I would suggest we take at word Mr. Noonan's assessment that that pervious payment is not an appropriate application of that material in this location and proceed without including that in our motion. go back to my environmental learning on ABCs of environmentalism is don't do something twice when you can do it once. And the only thing worse would be having to put in two applications of pervious payment there. So I think we're best off using the engineer's recommendation there for materials.

Thank you. I don't mean to put you on the spot, Mr. Noonan, but the The gravel is impervious and the pavement is how much larger of an area? Do you know?

We're probably coming, I mean, it's probably five feet at this end. It varies in depth how far we're going back. I mean, between... Expanding five feet off of the existing edge of gravel and up to probably 24 feet at the most at the most area May I mr.

Chair you were wondering like what the square footage is of pavement that's being added so currently this site has about 80% which is about fifty six thousand eight hundred and ninety three square feet and It looks like they're proposing 87,386 square feet, but that doesn't make sense.

Max impervious cover to 80%.

80% is what you can have, but you're proposing to go up to 64.3% of impervious surface.

Which is the 87,000?

Yeah.

The existing is not the 80%. That's how much existing impervious. asphalt building and concrete for that, which is 56,000. And we're proposing up to 87,000. About 30,000 square feet additional.

And Mr. Chair, an image that might be helpful in the staff report for this, there's a figure two, which is in page 73 of your packet. It's a little hard to see, but it shows the existing tree line, I believe. so you can kind of get a sense of where the existing gravel ends because it pretty much goes up to i think the tree line yeah so if you just want to visually see where it that might be easier so the bold line shows the proposed edge of tree line and then the more faded one shows the existing okay thank you didn't mean to put you on the spot with that

Okay, so, Mr. Bergeron? Okay, thank you. So could we just vote whether to include it or not, or just, Ms. Fortson?

Yes, Mr. Chair. So since nobody has read a motion yet, if you have kind of made a decision as a group that that's not an item you want to include, you can just have someone read the motion without that item on it. OK. Yeah.

All right. I don't want to be presumptuous, but is that the consensus that we could move forward without condition H? No, because we just thought the whole discussion we just had, whether it's, you know, yeah, it's not repetitive. It's just it's not going to work in this lot.

Mr. Cost? I just want to make sure I understand the H, which is the pervious pavement. I just read it again, and it's not for the whole parking lot, not for the whole paved area, drive lanes or anything. It's saying for the 24 proposed spaces. Is that what they were suggesting, just where the cars park? So just the line spaces would be pervious. Yes.

Yes the person from the Conservation Commission that made this suggestion clarified that it would only be the parking stalls I think the concern about the soils underneath is still valid I'll look to the engineer for more information on that The soils underneath wouldn't support a pervious concrete or porous asphalt

But, yeah, we understood it as just being the parking area, not the entire asphalt area. But we don't think it's a good location for it.

Okay.

Yeah, I'm sorry, Councilor Chalice, but the public portion is closed. So you had your shot. Okay. Yep. Thank you. All right. Well, why don't we make the motion and disregard H when you read it?

Yep. i'd like to move to approve pb-26-11 as shown on the plan set identified as site development plans green mountain electric supply prepared by fieldstone land consultants pllc at a scale of one inch equals 40 feet on April 17th 2026 and last revised on May 11 2026 with the following conditions first prior to the final approval and signature of the plans by the Planning Board chair the following condition precedent shall be met A, owner's signature appears on the plan. B, submittal of five full-size paper copies and a flattened PDF version of the final plans. C, submittal of a security to cover the cost of erosion and sediment control measures as built plans, landscaping, and a conservation seed mix in a form of and amount acceptable to the community development director. The Conservation Commission's recommendations are D, submittal of a revised site plan that shows the installation of one three-inch caliper American linden tree and one three-inch caliper swamp white oak in place of the two proposed red maple trees. E, addition of a note to the plan stating the best management practices described in NHDOT's publication best management practices for the control of invasive and noxious plant species 2018 shall be utilized during construction F submittal of a new design for the rain garden that preserves the three mature trees on the north end of the site g submittal of a salt reduction plan that includes operational protocols such as pre-wetting plowing prior to de-icing plowing snow away from the wetland buffer monitoring of pavement surface temperatures etc for the rear parking area and two subsequent to final approval and signature of the plans by the planning board chair the following conditions shall be met a prior to the commencement of site work the community development department shall be notified when all erosion control measures and tree protection fencing has been installed and the 30-foot service water buffer is flagged by a surveyor licensed in the state of new hampshire community development staff shall inspect these measures to ensure compliance with the approved plans in all city of keene regulations B following the installation of landscaping the Community Development Department shall be contacted to perform an initial inspection and C one year following the installation of all landscaping the Community Development Department shall be contacted to perform a final inspection Second Mr. Hafer I'll second Thank you Second the motion Mike Hafer

Questions, comments, opinions? Mr. Coste.

All right. reminds me a little bit of the conversation we had once about traffic and cars and each development you know there's 10 cars here on the road and that one next one up has 20 cars and that has 30 but none of them meet a threshold where you start to worry about it but you get these cumulative impacts and all sudden it's a mess and so at some point when do we as the city start to think about as I think as a shell cheese word incremental or maybe it was cumulative cumulative impacts of all of these developments on our really fragile wetland system and buffer system. Because it seems like we approve these projects and lots of people are project by project, it doesn't seem that terrible. But at some point, we are making the situation worse from a water storm, water runoff kind of a situation. So nothing to do here, but it would be nice to start thinking about that in a more holistic way because these all do add up. And at some point, we're going to run out of room for water. Thank you.

Other comments? Okay. Let's proceed to the vote. So all those in favor of approval of PB2611 for the GMS parking lot site plan and surface water conditional use permit indicate approval. Any opposed? All right. Proposal is approved. Thank you. Okay we're going to flip-flop on the agenda and we are going to do number five before number four. It's the chair's prerogative at this point. So we're going to go to the The next public hearing is PB26-13, George Street Cottage Court Conditional Use Permit. So applicant A. Eli Leno, on behalf of owner New Hampshire Home Buyers LLC, proposes to convert a detached garage into a dwelling unit on the single-family property located at 135 George Street. TMP number 534-002-000. The property is approximately 0.26 acres and is in the low density district. Hold on one second, Mr. Leno. We got to do the completeness part first.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Evan Clements, Planner Zoning Administrator. The applicant has requested exemptions from submitting a grading plan, landscaping plan, lighting plan, and all technical reports. Staff has made the preliminary determination that granting these exemptions have no bearings on the merit of the application and recommend the board accept it as complete.

Thank you, Mr. Clements. We have a motion.

I'd like to move to accept this application as complete. Second.

Second. Thank you, Mr. Bergeron. Any discussion of completeness? Let's call the vote. All those in favor of completeness? Okay. Any opposed? Application is complete. All right. Now you're on, Mr. Leno.

Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. My name is Eli Leno. I'm an attorney with Bernstein Scherr. and for what it's worth, a 2001 graduate of Keene Middle School back when it was still over here. I'm joined by Jim Cardello, who is the a joint venture with the owner and an applicant here tonight here for a conditional use permit under the new cottage court ordinance. And again, I want to thank staff before we get into this, where Mr. Cardello was looking at ways to improve this property, which had a garage, 400-foot garage, square-foot garage listed in poor condition by the assessor and a house listed as a C-minus condition by the city assessor. About how we could improve this property understanding that there is the missing middle and housing throughout New Hampshire, but in Cheshire County as well So mr. Clements suggested that we look into the cottage court So in replacing this 480 square foot garage, which was really rotted to the core We're proposing a 1200 square foot building 400 foot of garage 800 square feet of housing on a single story and The plan is to condominiumize the two buildings, so two units, two opportunities for single-family housing ownership for two new families in Keene. And the location of the property, it's slightly further deeper into the lot than the existing garage was. Because in that location, we're able to meet all setback requirements and avoid a trip to the zoning board on this. And I think it fits better with the zoning to understandably have it be within the setbacks and not overcrowding any other neighbor. So throughout the first three applications before you, it seems like staff goes through a number of the criteria from section 21 and 17. Would you like me to go through the application or how is that best handled?

Typically, I think it works best if you just kind of give an overview and any kind of salient points you would like to raise.

Yeah, I think those really are our selling points is that this is not more intrusive on the neighborhood than building an ADU. But of course, by doing it this way, we have the opportunity for unrelated parties to own these two basically starter homes at this point. The current house is being listed in the low 300,000s, and I don't know what the new house will be. Obviously, it depends on input costs, et cetera, but the goal is to keep these at an affordable, generally market rate affordable price. Happy to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you. Questions for the applicant?

Mr. Hafer. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The existing home stays and it's improved?

Yes, so actually it's been fully renovated to the studs. It looks beautiful.

Okay, so that part's already done. Exactly. This is specifically about the garage. Thank you.

Yeah, I've avoided George Street. It's a mess right now. I'm well aware of that. Other questions? Okay. Thank you. All right, great. Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Evan Clements, Planner Zoning Administrator. This is probably very straightforward. Subject property is an existing 0.26 acre residential lot located on the south side of George Street between Charles Street to the east and Sullivan Street to the west. The property contains an existing roughly 800 square foot single family residence and driveway. This house was built in 1905 and is legally nonconforming. in regards to the front and side setbacks. The property also used to contain a detached garage that has been recently demolished and in poor location. Poor condition, excuse me. Properties in the low density district adjacent to single family uses to the north and the west, a duplex to the east, and forested cemetery land to the south. As the applicant just described, they are seeking a Cottage Court conditional use permit to place a second detached single family residence on the property within the approximate location of that detached garage that was demolished. However, they are shifting it slightly over so that it will conform to all dimensional requirements of the low density district. Staff does not believe that this application rises to the threshold of regional impact. I'm going to blaze through the cottage court criteria here. So it's permitted single family dwelling in table 17-1 for low density. So that standard's been met. The development is proposed to remain a single parcel with the addition of the second dwelling unit to then both dwellings will be condomized. and then sold independently. That standard has been met. The proposed building footprint and gross floor area of the dwelling unit is approximately 804 square feet. The building footprint is calculated excluding the garage and porches, and the unit size is calculated excluding garages. Since the proposed porches are covered but not enclosed by walls, these are also excluded from the unit size calculation, so this standard has been met. Each parking, each unit will have at least one exterior parking space as demonstrated on the proposed conditions plan, that standard is met. For building separation, each building is more than five feet, that standard is met. Driveways, both units are going to utilize existing driveways and site access points that are on the property. No new street access or driveways are proposed. This standard is met for screening. The single family residence does not ride to the threshold of a greater intensity to the surrounding uses. So no additional screening is required. This standard is met. And then for the architectural guidelines, the applicant is proposing a single story cottage style bungalow that appears to utilize traditional building materials and architectural practices common throughout the city. You will need to determine if that standard is met. If you are inclined to approve this application this evening, it is ready for final approval. The only requirement was to have signed copies of the proposed conditions plan signed by the owner which has been taken care of so the conditions are just subsequent to final approval related to site work for the development of the residence and then a submittal of the recorded easements or other legal instruments like the condo plan and CC, the covenants titles and restrictions associated with the condoization just to be included within the project folder of this application. That's all I have, Mr. Chairman. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Clements. Questions for staff? Okay, as with the other ones just raise your hand if you are here to comment on this Councillor chalice

I just want to say that I know these are difficult, it's difficult to have changes to our neighborhoods. I live in this neighborhood and I am really pleased, I'm sorry, that we are finding ways to create more small places for people of more moderate means to be able to have a roof over their head with minimal environmental impact, such as this site plan shows. I appreciate the creativity and time that it's taken to go through this entire process to create this additional place for people to live in my neighborhood, and I want to express my support.

Thank you. Anyone else? Okay, I'm going to close the public portion. I always love to bang the gavel. And at this time I will entertain a motion.

i would move to grant final approval for pb-26-13 as shown on the plans prepared by associated designs inc at a scale of quarter inch equals one foot on january 21st 2026 and on the plans prepared by smith and popis sorry pops bacill land surveying company plc at a scale of one inch equals 10 feet on may 2nd 2026 with the following conditions subsequent to final approval and signature of the plans by the planning board chair One, prior to the commencement of the site work, the erosion and sediment control measures shall be inspected by the Community Development Department to ensure compliance with this application and all city of Keene regulations. And two, submit a level of recorded easement and or any other legal instruments necessary for this application to the Community Development Department.

Second.

Second. Thank you, Councillor Ellis.

Okay. Comments? Mr. Bergeron.

I'd just like to add that I don't believe this proposal has any potential for regional impact.

Thank you. Councillor Ellis.

I think that this looks like an excellent plan it looks like a very attractive new home and I think it's great that that the rotten garage is gone and it'll be replaced by a nice new home I'm sorry but the public portion I closed so we're not having any more at this time

Other comments? Yeah, I too think it's a great use of the cottage court opportunity and it could have been a good spot for an ADU but that other requirement for an ADU is one of the units is owner occupied so it's not the case here but so cottage court helps fit that in and this is a nice to be a project that does fit the missing middle. You know, it's above rental and less than average home, really, at this point. So I am in favor. So with that, I will call the vote. All those in favor of PB26-13... Any opposed? OK. PB 2613 is approved. Thank you, gentlemen. OK. I'm just going to get up and get some water while you're setting up, Mr. Nooner. Okay, we have one final public hearing. It is PB-26-12, Elm Carroll Cottage Court. Major site plan and cottage court conditional use permit. applicant Fieldstone Land Consultants on behalf of owner Nuevo Transfers LLC proposes to construct four townhouse style multifamily buildings with a total of 14 units. The property is approximately .75 acres and is in the medium density district. So we will start. Staff have recommendation for completeness.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is Megan Fortson, planner. The applicant has requested exemptions from submitting a traffic analysis, soil analysis, historic evaluation, architecture and visual appearance analysis, and a screening analysis. Planning staff have reviewed the exemptions and recommend that the board accept the application as complete.

Thank you. I will entertain a motion for completeness.

I'd like to move to accept this motion as complete.

Thank you. Second? Second. Thank you, Mr. Bergeron. Any discussion of completeness? Seeing none, I will call the vote. All those in favor of PB 26-12, completeness? Any opposed? Okay. Proposal is 26-12 is deemed complete. Mr. Noonan, I'll turn it over to you at this time.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. John Noonan with Fieldstone Land Consultants here on behalf of Nuevo Transfers, LLC. We had submitted an application for utilizing the Cottage Court Overlay District. I'm going to walk through the plans just to

Somewhat quick.

So overall, our location is to the west. We have Elm Street, Carroll Street on the east side, Spruce and High Street are further off of the page, but it is in that block. This is currently four lots undeveloped. There was a house many years ago. So our client has purchased and owns all four lots. They're looking to merge the lots into one lot. roughly three-quarters of an acre in size. Frontage is obviously on Elm and Carroll Street. So the proposal is for four buildings, a three-unit and a four-unit, and then mirrored on the other side of three and a four-unit. These would be a three-story high, 34 1⁄2 feet in height, so it's under the 35-foot maximum height for the building. The bottom floor, this is townhouse-style. Bottom floor is garage and mechanicals. then the upper two floors are living space we've provided parking space in front of each unit's garage and then the additional parking space would be in the garage as well so they can accommodate up to two cars per unit we're showing snow storage areas landscaped islands with that are curbed in between each unit and A drive access aisle of 24 feet in width that would connect between Elm and Carroll, allowing for traffic to break either way to either street, further reducing any impacts with traffic. There is five feet of separation between the buildings. So between each building and the architectural plans will, when submitted for building permit, will call out how those are gonna be fire rated walls and the construction materials to meet that five foot separation. Ultimately we centered everything on on the lot as best we could trying to fit everything kind of centered in the lot and then provided a fence along the northern and southern boundaries with stockade fences screening coming up to the back line of the building ultimately just to keep the backyard somewhat private from the street and We submitted a grading and drainage plan where we're utilizing, again, a rain garden design. So we're taking sheet flow, small pavement swales on either side of the drive aisle, coming down high point in the middle of the two buildings, coming down in a grass treatment swale off of the pavement to the backyard where there'll be very shallow so just one and a half feet deep rain garden there'll be plantings around this rain garden with tree with a mixture of shrubs and then we have trees that I'll get to that are along the frontage so ultimately this is providing both treatment with the grass swale back to the amended soil unlike the other application we have the ability to tie into infrastructure that's municipally owned here. So we are providing catch basin and under drain. So as the soil in the rain garden goes through a filter layer, there's then an under drain. So that under drain will take away treated water and in the smaller rainstorm events, or if there was ever water coming up from the seasonal high water, it would take that, treat it, run it to the catch basin. And then higher storm events would build up in the top section of the basin. And spill over into a grate in the catch basin and then ultimately is tied into the infrastructure of the city drainage So it's mirrored on both sides. So that's how grading and drainage is handled and We then provided a utility plan. So as required by Cottage Court, it has to tie into municipal sewer and water. We're doing so by connecting between Elm and Carroll. This will maintain pressure throughout the neighborhood and on site and also improve water quality where you have a looped water system. Sewer is going to be a single trunk line. with all the units tied into the sewer infrastructure with a pump station pumping up to a gravity manhole and tying into city infrastructure at this northeast corner. Electric will come off of the utility poles along the roadside, so we're showing two transformers, pad-mounted transformer, all utilities that are electrical or underground on site. utilities on site will be owned and maintained by a condominium association so these units are all condom condo eyes so ultimately utilities on site are owned and maintained by the condominium association however the city will be granted a blanket easement for utilities in case water or sewer was ever needed to be accessed by the city so that was at the request of brian ruff so we added that note those types of condominium documents that would call out that easement and also how ownership and maintenance is done on drainage all utilities on site water sewer electrical that will all be spelled out in condominium documents to come if approved and then because of the number of units this would also go to the state attorney general's office for review of those condominium documents landscaping plan So we provided trees in the middle of the parking areas. These are to meet our parking requirements for trees and then also provided additional Trees along the frontage of the streets and this is really to break up This was based on the steering committee and staffs recommendation. We originally had fencing so we had fencing along the entire boundary of the property However, we limited the fencing back to the corner of the rear of the building and then provided some trees and additional shrubs and ornamental trees along the frontage to kind of break up the massing of the larger building. So as these infill. And then, as mentioned before, we're showing our plantings in the back for the rain garden, very similar species to what we had on the other application. And these would provide treatment of stormwater. They would also absorb rainwater and smaller events. And also the landscaping along the frontage and all those trees obviously will absorb more groundwater. that is in the area. Initially for roof runoff, we are showing stone infiltration trenches around the building. Once those overflow, they would go into the rain gardens. Lighting, we basically just have wall mounted lights. These are full cutoff fixtures as shown here. So these are downcast. These meet dark compliance and providing light just within the driveway area. It's not out onto, there's no bleed out onto the street or within the middle part of the site. It's really just in the parking areas. And then we've provided erosion control details and notes. So that would be seeding, landscaping, erosion control notes, construction details where we're calling out what our pavement thickness is, drainage, curbing details, infiltration trenches, and the like, our sewer and water details. So we're going to have a pump station that is detailed here. And then water details to meet the city requirements. And then we've provided, so Tim Sampson, Sampson Architects, has done the design on the buildings. As stated, the height of the buildings would be under the 35 feet, would be 34 and 1 half feet in height. Basic layouts of what each unit will be. These are two bedroom units. Garage on the first floor with mechanicals. be a mixture so they have not picked out colors they're calling out as just a neutral colors they're going to look at all the different homes in the neighborhood and pick something similar for colors but ultimately it's vinyl siding vinyl trim and cedar shake but it's vinyl shake so this is ultimately what you're looking at from the the driveway so garage doors entry door with stairwells in between and then the rear of the buildings and then uh the these narrower ends would be what would face both carroll and elm street and then basic floor plans so the floor plans would be laid out as well and reviewed for the AG's office submission, so the Attorney General's office would review these as part of the condominium documents that are submitted. The city gets copied on those. And then ultimately, building heights, and we've included all of our calculations for how it meets the cottage court overlay, so we have about 1,100 gross square feet per unit, and the square footage is well under the 900 square foot footprint. I know I kind of ran through this quickly, but I can see we're going to have many comments and questions to answer. And I'd like to open it up to the board for questions. Thank you.

Questions for the applicant? I have a couple quick questions for you. Page 102, could be any page, but page 102, The entire area in between the buildings, on the inside of the buildings, that's paved?

Yes, the pavement is between, so these areas that are sticking out here are landscaped islands. Okay. And the entirety here is paved. Okay. Connected in between. Yeah, just wanted to. There's a driveway that is 22 feet in length, 10 feet in width, and then our landscaped islands are nine and a quarter feet in width and 22 feet in depth.

Okay, thanks. And on page 113, which are the elevations, what is the feature in between the windows? Is that an awning of some type?

There's a short roof here. This is siding that's set back between the units. This roof here is just a small cupboard over the doorway only.

No, I see that, but in between the 1st and 2nd floor windows.

Yeah, it's just a short roof. Short roof break up the massive. OK, alright alright just provide shade into those windows without OK. Just it's very similar over the the rear door to the backyard.

Yeah, just trying to understand. OK. Thank you other Mr cost.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I walked up Carroll Street and Elm. I do it a lot, walking dogs. That's what I do. And, you know, they're nice streets. They have pretty much you're walking by houses that are facing the street. Very traditional form for Keene. And I don't have any issues with townhouses, I think. Those are a wonderful way to get a lot of houses on a site. But can I just take a second and just read a couple of our standards, and just very quickly?

Are you having a question for the applicant?

Yeah, it is, and I'll get to it. I'm not sure how best to get to it, so I'll get to it. So under 2114, the intro, it says, the following standards govern visual and architectural character. of development of the city to ensure new and redeveloped buildings blend aesthetically with the city's historic character and a consistent with prevailing scale, orientation, and design of the city. And then there's a couple other little mentions here. All principal buildings located on lot shall be oriented towards the public right of way. And another one, orientation of structures on a site shall conform to parallel or orthogonal pattern in relation to the city pattern. And there's some more about parking. So what I'm getting at is when I look at this, it seems like, I mean, I really appreciate that it'll be 14 new units. that's fantastic and they'll be owned. But it looks like we're creating on a street, a city street, kind of almost a gated community. I mean, it's basically turned sideways from everything else on Carroll and Elm. And it just seems to me as you're walking and you're supposed to be a pedestrian walking on the street and enjoying it. All of a sudden you come to these fences and then a big driveway and a lot of parking. And I'm just wondering why the houses didn't go north and south. No. Yeah. North and south instead of east and west. Then they would have been on Carroll Street and Elm Street and the parking could have been behind them going north and south now maybe you've worked all through that and didn't fit in his water and you thought of all of that but i kind of like to hear that you know because it just seems very different than what we want to achieve in the city which is you know in our neighborhoods to to build things that kind of work with the rest of the neighborhood and the context and this doesn't do that so to answer the question yes we work through many iterations on layout on this

Absolutely looked at with the buildings running north-south We ended up with a lot more pavement in order to get a driveway connecting from each direction and then through the middle and Ultimately it worked out best was a central driveway so your court of the cottage court is basically the parking and everything in between and providing the landscaped area in between the buildings that are facing each other and the and the gabled roofs being towards the the street Um, not all houses in the area, you know, line up that, that direction. Um, you know, some have, you know, but ultimately the gabled roof is, is what's, uh, is facing the street. And then really the cottage court piece being the courtyard being the driveways coming together, um, and not having, you know, The other thing we had looked at was you have each driveway off of Elm and Carroll, but you wouldn't meet the driveway standards either because you'd have so many driveways too close together.

No, I was thinking the parking, I mean, if you looked at, have you looked at the parking being north and south behind the buildings? So there's a street, there's fronts of houses, townhouses. And then behind them is the parking. And I imagine it's fitting it and getting the driveways in. Maybe it would be one way instead of two ways. Enter on one street, exit on the other. I'm not going to play junior designer, but it just seems like we're creating a form here that's imposed in a neighborhood that's very different. Again, it's great to have housing. I'd like to... I think it's equally as important to think about the form and the context of the city as we start to do more and more and more projects. I understand cottage court houses around a court, but we see very few of them. In fact, this might be the only one because they come in other forms. It's difficult to lay out unless you have a rectangle. I don't know that the college court has to be a court.

We just approved one on Elm Street.

Yeah, but it's not houses around a court. It is, yeah. Well.

They don't face home street.

they face the internal driveway correct okay so but here I'm talking about these two streets and so I just want to bring that up and as we think about these and if it's not possible it's not possible and I'm not questioning the engineering it just seems like we're changing the street and creating something very different than we have anywhere else on Carroll and this part of Elm Street

Yeah, I know we went through multiple iterations on this, trying to fit everything. And this was ultimately the best solution for fitting everything, allowing stormwater drainage behind the buildings, and having a central driveway that was accessed between. But we did look at between the parking in the middle and buildings on the outer side. We also did parking and driveways facing Elm and Carroll. backyard in between, north-south. And it just did not fit as well. So this is how we ended up at this iteration.

Thank you. Mr. Hafer.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Almost a follow-up question. The fencing along the two streets, that's like the eight-foot stockade fencing along, you know, that runs parallel to Carroll and Elm. Is that to screening standards, or is that for a particular requirement? Correct.

Yeah, initially it was so in the cottage quarter it lists – fencing as screening if it's towards residential other residential neighborhoods, so we added that and then After review with staff and the steering committee we trimmed it back to be to the rear corner So it still provided privacy to the rear backyards of the units and then we replaced that by adding more landscaping along the city frontage of Elm and Carroll and

It seems like that, to your point, Ken, almost sounds like it's to our standards. It may be working against the concern of creating this gated community feel as well. But I understand it's there. There because the standards say it needs to be there. To your point, Ken, I'm wondering if it adds, if it's doing more harm than good in sort of adding to... an enclave sort of a feel to it. Thank you Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, may I quickly interject?

Yes, please.

Thank you. This is Megan Fortson. So Mary did just hand out an updated plan set. Again, I apologize. It's hard with these tight time frames where things get turned around. But yeah, so that, as Mr. Noonan said, that amount of fencing that's along Elm Street and Carroll Street has been reduced and replaced with landscaping. So that's just something to consider as part of the application. Yeah.

And Mr. Chair may I also jump in with just an observation to going back to Mr. Koss observation about the orientation towards the street or this development not being oriented towards the street in the past I can recall a few instances where the Planning Board sort of approved an alternative. In one instance, it was town homes on Pearl Street where the gable end was facing the road and there was no door facing the road. And so the planning board asked the applicant to put in landscaping in that instance. So that's why we recommended the landscaping here. however in other instances the board has required a secondary egress door so that even if it's not the main entrance or even a real entrance that there would still be the look and feel of a doorway facing the road this is not exactly a door but I know for example on West Street in the past and this is before my time the Planning Board required like a fake window facing the street so even though the upper story I think it's of the CVS building it's like a fully enclosed building they didn't want to have any windows but the Planning Board asked the applicant to put in like a fake window so from the road it looks it doesn't look out of place so I just want to throw that out there as some examples of how the board has worked with this issue in the past for your consideration hopefully that was helpful and not more confusing Thank you for that

Other questions? Yeah, I don't. I mean, obviously you follow that. I don't know if if you're amenable to some sort of side door or side window. But that's the basement, right?

Basically, yeah, garage and mechanicals there. I don't. I don't think it would. If that was gonna. Hold anything up, I'm sure the applicant would be willing to revise architectural to have either a window or a door placed on that level. The idea being really trying to make it look like that's the front facade of the building towards the street.

Seems like it would make some of the board members happy. Maybe all of them. Okay. Thank you. So I'm going to invite staff up at this time. Thank you, Mr. Norton.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is Megan Fortson again. Third time's the charm, I suppose. I'm going to actually very quickly go through this time. I think the other two times were jokes, but I'm going to actually very quickly go through. So again, these are four separate parcels proposed to be merged into one lot. That's approximately three quarters of an acre in size. Staff did not feel that the proposal had the potential for regional impact, but you will need to decide that as a board For departmental comments on the application the zoning administrator has requested that as a condition of approval the board include an item related to Pinning of the foundation corners just due to the close proximity of the building to the setbacks to ensure that there's no violation of the side yard setbacks the city engineer had very specific questions related to sewer and water utilities and all of those types of specifications that get included on the utility plan the applicant has submitted updated plans and those are comments have all been addressed to the satisfaction of the city engineer and in terms of building fire obviously once a building permit is submitted it's going to be reviewed for all necessarily all necessary building permit and life safety measures in compliance with those. Going into Article 17 of the Land Development Code, which is the Cottage Court criteria, the construction of duplexes and triplexes is allowed in the medium density district. through the issuance of a cottage court permit through the planning board. So that standard has been met. The four lots are proposed to be combined into one parcel through a voluntary merger. So we have included the completion of that voluntary merger as a recommended precedent condition of approval, as well as the submittal of condo association documents, because the property is going to be privately owned units managed by a common entity. So that standard appears to be met. In regards to dimensional standards, the proposal complies with all specific dimensional requirements outlined both in Article 17 as well as the medium density requirements that are outlined under the beginning part of the Land Development Code. So that standard is met. Each unit is gonna have an 1,100 square foot gross floor area where 1,250 square feet is required and a 616 square foot footprint where 900 square feet is required so that is met. They meet the parking requirements because one to two parking spaces are gonna be required per unit. So a minimum of 14 are proposed, a maximum of 28 could be accommodated through stacked parking, one vehicle in the garage and one in the driveway. For driveways, again, there's two driveways proposed, one along Elm Street, one along Carroll Street. Both are designed to accommodate two-way traffic. So that proposal complies with all necessary driveway standards. For the screening, again, you have your updated plan set in front of you, which shows landscaping along the east and west sides of the building in place of the six foot tall stocking fencing that was previously proposed, just to sort of soften the buffer between the buildings and the sidewalks that run on either side of that building. So you'll need to make a determination as to whether or not you feel like that meets your screening requirements because this is going to be a three-story almost 35 foot tall building whereas most of the buildings surrounding are one to two stories and residential in nature so that's um a conversation to be had during your deliberation for the application um and then let me see i apologize i'm just losing myself here um for the architectural guidelines um i think that mr newton described that it's going to be vinyl siding with a variety of designs including the Shake siding as well as just horizontal vinyl siding that's traditional Drainage there's going to be the rain gardens on the rear of each site so planning staff recommend that There'll be an inspection completed of those swales. Same thing with the sediment and erosion control. We recommend inspection of the erosion control measures prior to the commencement of site work. Snow storage and removal was explained by Mr. Noonan. There's two snow storage areas, and then snow will be removed from the site if there's excess. So that standard is met, um, for landscaping because of the number of parking spaces that are proposed. The applicant does have to provide, um, a perimeter landscape area, which is addressed under section 9.4 of the land development code. And so instead of following the strict requirements that are outlined under that section, which I'm not going to pretend to remember. It's a certain number. You have to have a certain depth for your landscaping island. You have to install a certain type of shrub every distance. He's proposed an alternative landscaping plan, which is what you see on the updated plan set. So you'll need to determine if that proposed landscaping meets the intent of the perimeter landscaping requirements. For screening, the only mechanical equipment on the site are going to be the two transformers along the right of way. And those are proposed to be screened with shrubs. All proposed light fixtures are going to comply with the lighting standards. They'll be full cut off with the appropriate color temperature and color rendering index. Sewer and water comments have been addressed by the city engineer through the submittal of updated plans, and we do recommend a condition of approval related to a security for the as-built plans. For traffic and access management, the applicant has stated that the anticipated traffic demand for the development is 81 vehicle trips on a weekday and 79.4 trips on a weekend day. For PM peak hours, 7.3 vehicle trips are expected and 6.2 trips are expected during the weekday morning hours. All of those figures were taken from the most recent edition of the Institute for Traffic Engineers manual, and the city engineer did not express any concerns about the estimates as part of his review of the application materials. For filling and excavation, there are going to be There's gonna be filling and excavation happening on the site, but not in excess of 50 vehicle trips of material entering or exiting. And any excavation within the public right-of-way will be reviewed by Public Works. There are no surface waters and wetlands, hazardous or toxic materials, excess noise expected. So those standards are all not applicable. And... All of the conditions of approval are your pretty boilerplate ones that I will not go through, but I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Ms. Fortson. Questions? Page 91. Did I miss it? You're waiting to hear back from the city engineer?

Which item is that under? I'm sorry, I don't have the full packet in front of me.

It's Article 21, Section 2, the drainage.

Yeah, so updated plans were submitted. All comments from the city engineer that are mentioned in this report have been addressed.

Okay.

So the city engineer is all set with his review of the application.

Okay, thank you. Mr. Hafer.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So this will be condos? Is that the ownership?

Yes.

Yep. Comment about like excess snow must be removed from site in a heavy snow year like we had this past year. Does that become the responsibility of the condo association?

Yeah, kind of similar to waste removal. It's something that's going to have to be handled by the condo association. It's not the responsibility of the city.

Okay. Nor the builder. So essentially, they're not apartments. So a lot of the compliance to this sort of falls to the, I presume, the people that move in and form the condo association and the leadership of that group.

Yeah, and that's why we asked for the draft and the recorded condo documents and other legal instruments to be submitted as part of the application. Okay.

Thank you.

Ms. Fortin, do you know if there's an issue today with stormwater runoff in that area?

Not to my knowledge, but I would defer to the engineer. I mean, the sites are currently undeveloped, so it's just pretty much a three-quarter acre field with a curb cut or two along Elman Carroll Street. So it's going to be different if it is paved and if it has 14 new units on it, obviously. But I'm not currently aware of anything.

CHRISTIE WOOD.

Sorry, Mr. Chair. If the question was if there's been previous development, is that what the question was?

RICK MACLENNAN. No, no. I was just wondering if this particular area has been subject to some stormwater flooding.

Oh, yeah. So you can kind of see it in the drainage report that they submitted, but most of this site, the soils are what's called mucky peat. It's like the Searsport series and the Osipi series. The reason why I bring this up is because this site was previously owned by a different owner who had been planning to build a more traditional you know type of building for this area and actually he got a stop work order from the city because as they were drilling for the foundation the land was literally like it was like jello and so this site is not an easy site to develop so part of the one of the development constraints is that i believe they have to drive pilings for the foundation and they have to go down like something like 80 feet the engineer could probably tell you exactly but because of that it adds a lot to the cost of the project and so that's why they turned to the cottage court as an option so that's one of um so technically this is not wetlands but it is a very uh unique soil poorly drained site okay thank you miss fortin thank you mr chair

So a lot of folks are still here. May I see a show of hands of people who would like to comment? Okay. Well, why don't we just go from my left to my right. So, sir, if you'd.

Hi, Andy Holt, Forest Street. If I could just make a suggestion to the chair for the future, you might want to check with how many people are for each item, because having this earlier would have been great for all of us that are here. But I understand that's the chair's prerogative. So I live about a block from this proposed project. I'm regularly walking by and through it with my dog. It's been an ugly, empty lot for a while now, I think because of the issues that Mary brought up. So when I saw the sign about this project, I was ecstatic. And then seeing that it's 14 units was even more exciting. I think that's fantastic. It was more than I hoped for. There's a similarly sized lot about one block north that spans from Elm to Carroll, and it's just a single family house. It's a very nice house, but I think this application is a much better use of the space to be able to fit 14 units in there. It's really fantastic. And I think we're in a housing crisis, so addressing that with this sort of project is really helpful. And I think adding residents will add to the vitality of our neighborhood. Missing middle was brought up in the last one, not to be pedantic, but this is really the type of thing missing middle is referring to. It's not so much about cost, it's about the number of units per building, how we have so many single families. multi-condo apartment buildings, but these sorts of triplex, quadplex is really what is useful in addressing the housing crisis. I think seeing this here is really good. I agree with the staff assessments that the standards seem to be met. I had to comment on the parking minimums. The minimum required is 14 and the developer is choosing to do 28. So I think the city should keep this in mind as more evidence that parking mandates for minimums are at best unnecessary and at worst cause an excess burden on development and are a poor use of land. So I'd rather we have parking maximums in the city, but I understand that's outside the scope of this project. For this project, I'd certainly prefer they had fewer parking spots and less space. And that they relied on Elm Street for some of the units, which I think would help slow down some of the traffic that really blasts through there. But that's ultimately up to the developer. I think it should be left that way. I don't think the planning board should impose additional requirements there or changes. And I just hope that the new residents realize that it's an incredibly bikeable and walkable neighborhood and don't feel the need for 28 cars. I'd separately recommend that the city update that section of Elm Street with chicanes to calm traffic, but again, outside the scope of the project. For screening, I agree with the change to have softer landscaping as an option instead of fence. I don't think we should have this treated as like a separate walled off neighborhood to Mr. Cost's point. So I think having it more incorporated in the neighborhood visually is a good thing. And I did have that same concern with the architecture that Mr. Cost brought up. That's really the main thing that stood out to me as a problem. It bothered me that all the units face into the middle. I don't really like the idea of fake doors to improve the appearance, but what I've seen in many town communities is where the end units will have their doors open to the side, the front doors, so that instead of going all into the middle, those ones are a little bit different. And that would have them facing out towards Elm and Carroll, and I think it would help them feel a little bit more part of the neighborhood. And they're usually still close to the front of the building so that it's easy to access from the driveway from what I've seen. But again, I'm not a planner. End units also have that whole extra wall for more light through windows. And I could see a couple on the plans, but I think if you treat that wall more like the front of the building, not just with fake doors, but with the actual layout, it's better for the neighborhood feel and more attractive for the residents purchasing those end units as well. But all that said, I don't want that to be an issue that prevents this project from moving forward. I would just love if some adjustments are possible. But ultimately, I'll reiterate that this seems like a great project. You should approve it. We desperately need more housing. Adding 14 units here is, I think, a great step forward. And I look forward to seeing them built and replacing the ugly empty lot that's currently there. The more successfully complete cottage courts we can have, the more we'll be able to spur additional housing development. that we desperately need, so please approve this application. And I hope city staff will do everything they can to help them complete this project quickly. Thank you.

Thank you. I should have said this before, but I think with the number of people that are going to comment and the hour that it's the late in the hour, I would like to ask if you could hold your comments to about three minutes apiece, okay? Thanks. Can someone help me on the timing of that? Thank you.

Thank you for allowing me to address my justice. My name is Carl Babbitt. I live on 152 Carroll Street, which is two houses down from where this development is. When they first went in there and they cleared out our development, I wound up with a gray fox living in my house, in my shed, which I couldn't remove. But that's beside the point. My concern is... These houses are going to be condos. And we all know the city of Keene has a housing problem with people trying to find housing. That's why we got haunted nights. I went up today, took the day off, and went up to the planning upstairs and looked at the... I had somebody who was gracious enough to show me... Four houses are allowed in there, correct? Am I wrong in making that? Four houses are allowed in there. Like this past rainstorm we just had, if I didn't have that drain system in my driveway, it gets flooded out. Even the house next to me, the drains can't handle it. Number one, how is it going to impact on water and sewer pipes on that street? When it's just a heavy rainstorm, it overflows my drain. I got two drains. One in my yard and one connected to the sewer tube. And there's another one down there. And the house next to me, every time it rains, that cell gets flooded out. Okay? Rental versus own. All right? You already heard my thing. Traffic. Traffic on that street is unbearable. Thank God the police department has been knocking down and cutting down on the people flying down that street. Because there's a lot of kids. And what's the project time frame when it's getting done? Because, I mean, those are my four key points, make it short and sweet. Condos, that's my thing. I'm not a favorite. I'd rather see it be housing, rental, low-income housing for people who can afford housing so we're not 100 nights, we're not having people homeless. That's my point. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm Tia Zendower. I live on Elm Street. And we are that property that he's referring to. We built our home, and we have a backyard. And we had to maintain about a third, a quarter to a third of an acre of bare land requirement for the water. Penetration and I just don't see how 14 units is gonna fit on this really wet soggy Lot, which is actually quite a bit downhill from us So I love that there's more housing. I even don't mind that it's condos I just think that that's a lot of units on this space. I Really think they they should rethink then I'm sure that I know why they've done it because it it probably makes sense financially, but I just don't see how that land is going to support that So that's all I wanted to say. Thank you.

Thank you Hello Paige Taylor 125 Carroll Street, I live directly across the site and And I'm opposed to them building that many units. I think this neighborhood, it's some duplexes and single family houses. And to put in 14 units right there, it's going to be extremely different for what everybody who's lived there for a while is used to. So I think if you're... Voting yes with this, you're giving preference to someone who's new in town and not thinking of the people who have lived there for years. And so I'd like you to think of that. And for us that live there, there's so many little kids on the street. Some of the houses are owned single families. Some of them are rentals. And everybody goes for walks. Everybody's friendly. and there's this charm that Keene has with these little pockets of wooded areas and there's birds and bunnies and fireflies in June and it's just beautiful and I think I'd like to see the planning board consider in planning and building new houses like look at new fields that are available like the corner of Optical Avenue is a ton of land and there's you know, a lot of jobs right there. That would be great for workforce housing, opposed to taking these little spots of wooded places that we have and trying to cram in a lot of places. And for me, when I bought my place in 2019, that lot was all wooded. It was beautiful. Birds, bunnies. And then four or five years later, they came and took out all the trees, started the construction work, and bulldozed it all And my house was creaking and cracking and shaking during this whole process. And it's cost me $34,000 to fix it. I had Groundworks come in. They're a nationwide foundation company. And they came out. They saw that site. And he said, let me guess. Did this start when they started work here? I said, yes. My house had sunk. they had to install jacks throughout my whole basement. So I live on .3 acre. My house is up front towards Carroll Street and then the whole back is lawn and it's wooded trees and bushes and whatnot. So the house was severely damaged by the work, the construction, the bulldozing.

So to put in these huge units,

I can't imagine the continued problems I'm going to have with my home, so I'd like that to be considered. It's also really gonna add a lot of traffic with the people moving in and then think of deliveries and people visiting and coming and going, and that street already has a lot of traffic. So I'd like that considered, and I'd also like to consider Well, I guess I'm kind of a self-appointed like neighborhood watch. I've been trying to get the street better. Like when people play their music too loud or they're doing drugs on the street, I am the one that goes out and has words with them. And I've seen a big difference and a cut down on all of that type of, I'm going to say wild behavior. And it's, neighborhood has gotten better and i just am worried with you bringing in 14 units you know undoing where we're we as people who already live there trying to go and making it better and i think that sums it up for me thank you thank you

Good evening.

I'm Brian Miller.

My wife and I own 119 Carroll Street. We built it in 2004. It is just south, splitting. Our front yard would be the south end of theirs on the Carroll Street side, looking at it. I don't even know where to start. The whole cottage court word, the verbiage throws me off. It sounds really charming. And then I look at this project, the one that we were here a year ago, and they were requesting, given the parameters for building there, that they add another unit and make it a five-unit apartment complex. We all were in agreement. The square footage, not the individual lots, but square footage accommodated that. It would fit in in the neighborhood. Seemed like everything was good. And now we're here today talking about this project, You couldn't put another space in there. The parking, it's laughable that we're talking about how much extra parking they're giving. Drive down any of those streets on a Saturday when there's somebody having a birthday party. You have a birthday party in that place. Where's the cars gonna park? They're gonna be down the street. Five cars, there's not gonna be a space in there for anyone to park. That's just the tip of the iceberg. We're talking about adding in the culmination of these projects. Between behind Paige's house, you're going to have 160 feet. There's another one of these projects proposed right there. Seems like no one's remembered it. It was in the paper. I've asked about it. No one seems to know anything about it anymore. So these folks behind me are going to be sitting with 30 units where there would have possibly been eight at one time based on how the lots were subdivided. And people can love the idea of it. They're not living with the 30. They're not living with, they like privacy. These are three stories high. They're talking about building a fence for the first story, which is the garage. And now we're talking about taking that away. They're dwelling in the floors above it, looking down into the guy sitting in his backyard reading a book. It doesn't match any part of the neighborhood at all. And I get wanting to have more housing, but we don't have to do it at the people who lives there currently have invested at their expense. So someone else drives away with the riches. You're here to protect us, and I appreciate it, but that's not protecting us. That's only causing harm to all of us who are here. In the snow removal thing, that's a joke. plow across the street you think they're gonna have the snow in there removing it right in the middle of a snowstorm we get a foot of snow there's no place they've got that spot you look at that spot and didn't have somebody plow their snow in there on that given snowstorm day it isn't happening they're not they're moving it it's there that's gonna be a problem for everyone to move to be out in the street it's That's five pounds of stuff in a four-pound bag if I've ever seen it in my life. It can't be more obvious to anybody. We're calling this medium density, and it's far from medium density. Mobile home parks, campgrounds give you more space than that. They get five feet between the buildings. That's laughable. That's to fall into some compliance for this. This is crazy. You're not helping anybody there, at least not in my opinion. Thank you for your time, but man, you're not helping us.

Hello, Will Crotto, 104 Carroll Street, two houses down, closer to high. I'll start off by saying I do oppose this. I didn't know that there was a board on the site, but the lack of notice for the neighbors I found was alarming. I was not notified. I found out yesterday by my neighbor across the street. She had a letter. So the lack of notice about this to be prepared. I'll start with that. I know in years past, I'm friends with a current member of the conservation unit as well as a previous councilwoman that there have been efforts to put a park At that location and have continuously failed being it too wet Utilities is another big one. I just had my sewer line replaced Carroll Street sinking When that was dug up there was backfill coming in from the sewer line I'm gonna be 300 feet down from this place. I think it was 3,400 gallons a day are gonna be the estimated sewage usage and that's just gonna end up in my basement I already have issues with it now let alone with all this increased traffic As others have said, this building, this proposal does not mesh with the fabric of the neighborhood. It's far too large. I always joke that Carroll Street's a parking lot. It doesn't matter if you're going down at 6 in the morning on a Monday or 5 o'clock on a Saturday. It's half-lined with cars, so let alone having another 14 units, two people per, two cars, and heaven forbid a couple of them have some friends over. It's just going to be that much more unbearable. And I guess my last comment is there was a note about no more than 50 trucks worth of material are going to be hauled in or out. I'm curious if that includes the truckloads that they have already moved. Lots of crushed stone and gravel have been there over the course of a year. Material has been coming in and out of there. So I don't know if that was taken to effect, if that matters or not. But I don't think this would be good for the neighborhood. Housing is great, but I don't think this is it. Put a duplex there. So thank you.

Thank you.

Sorry, you're seeing a lot of me tonight. Michelle Chalice, 25 Beach. As you know, I'm a fan of increased density of smaller units. And we will see more of these types of proposals as we continue along in some of the most difficult parts of our city. The reason that this hasn't been developed in the past is because it is in a low area. Obviously, it's not in the floodplain, but we're seeing evidence of what the soils and the hydrology in general. And they're difficult decisions, right? How do we balance these issues? What I would like to say is it is, of course, possible to reorient the buildings themselves to be much more appropriate to the neighborhood if there is fewer units. So I can't imagine that anyone's requirement is for 14 units besides the developer who needs to make the numbers work. So sadly, I will have to say that I don't support this, even though I do want a great, huge, larger number of smaller units, because I don't feel that this reflects the hydrologic considerations and needs more study in terms of understanding what can be built there in a way that does, that acknowledges those circumstance, does not create a larger burden on the rest of the city by causing more problems. I agree that snow is not going to be reasonable and cottage means that buildings face into a green area as per Mr. Kost's point, this faces into parking. So too many units, bad circumstances in terms of hydrologic conditions that are not being acknowledged. Sadly, I have to disagree with the development.

Anyone else? OK, I will. Close the public portion at this time. And move to our deliberations. So let's start as we always do with a with emotion.

I would like to move to approve PV-26-12 as shown on the plan set identified as multifamily residential development tax map 536 lots 49 50 55 and 56 Elm City Commons prepared by fieldstone land consultants PLC at varying scales on April 17th, 2026 and last revised on May 19th, 2026 and in the elevations identified as city commons. Elm and Carroll streets Keene New Hampshire all three four three one prepared by Samson architects of varying scales on April 14th 2026 with the following conditions first prior to the final approval and signature of the plans by the planning board chair The following conditions, President, shall be met. A, owner's signature appears on the title page of proposed conditions plan. B, submittal of five full-size paper copies and flattened PDF versions of the final plan set and elevations. C, submittal of a recorded voluntary merger for the four subject parcels. D, submittal of a security to cover the cost of sediment and erosion control measures, landscaping, and as built plans in a form and amount acceptable to the community development director e submittal of draft written documentation of any easements and or or other necessary legal instruments required for this application which shall be subject to review by the city attorney and two subsequent to final approval and signature of the plans by the planning board chair the following conditions shall be met a prior to the commencement of the site worker pre-construction meeting will be scheduled with the community development staff b prior to the commencement of site work the erosion and sediment control measures shall be inspected by the community development department to ensure compliance with this application and all of keene regulations c prior to the installation of building foundations the building corner shall be pinned by a surveyor and inspected by community development staff to ensure compliance with the required setbacks d submittal of recorded easements and or any other legal instruments necessary for this application to the community development department e following the installation of landscaping the community development department shall be contacted to perform an initial inspection F one year following the installation of all landscaping the Community Development Department shall be contacted to perform a final landscaping inspection Second I'll second it I'll second Second Thank you Councillor Ellis all right so

Comments, opinions? Do we think that there's additional information that we need from the applicant? Councilor House?

I was going to say that I, thank you by the way, I live at the end of Carroll Street and I've walked by this area many times and it is just a big, Kind of barren spot right now. So I'm excited that there's a proposal and I think this I think this Project sounds wonderful. I I I had heard previously that Someone tried to do something there and was unable to because of the PD soil So I think this is really exciting if if we're sure that that it's feasible so so I I do wonder if we need more information. I'm, in general, very much in favor. I think it's great as someone who lives on that street. But I guess maybe it would be good to hear a little more information about the pylons and how effective that will be.

MR. Ms. Berner?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I think that the problem that the previous attempt ran into is that the piles or the pylons, whatever you call them, the cost of doing that was too high and it ended up costing more than they would be able to make from the project, especially with the cost of materials and everything going up so much. But doing the drilling for the piles and getting them down deep enough does allow for this to happen from a technical standpoint. I think the bigger issue was more financial, if that makes sense. And so that's how they build skyscrapers and things like that. the drilling deep down into the ground to make sure they get enough stability for the building. So anything's technically possible. It's just how much money it takes to do it, I think,

don't know if that answered your question yes thank you I think that does I was mostly just concerned that that this would be possible without creating like flooding and you know and stuff like that so I think as long as this is technologically feasible then then I think I'm in favor of this project

So, you know, I always support housing. I'm on a couple housing groups, and we're always trying to encourage housing. We know we need it. I do have some heartburn with this one, and I'm going to read something else. The purpose – this is from Cottage Court. The purpose of the Cottage Court Overlay District – is to promote infill development and redevelopment within existing neighborhoods that is built at a scale and character consistent with existing development patterns. This does not do that at all, really. And so I think it could be designed differently. I heard what the engineer said, but I I believe it could be. If the houses went north and south along Carroll and Elm, then there's seven houses on Carroll and seven houses on Elm. There's now 14 houses on the street, which could make it more palatable for people who live there. And the parking would be behind the buildings, so they wouldn't be looking into this big old parking lot. I think it could be worked differently. So I'm just having trouble with this. As a city, we do have to consider protecting sort of the urban design of our streets and of our neighborhoods. And as we're going to see more and more development, which we will, projects are going to come in that have nothing to do with what is here today. And I think you could have both. You could have housing and you could have developments that kind of meet and tie into our existing neighborhoods and don't create something brand new, that doesn't even exist here. So that's my struggle with this one.

Mr. Hafer. Thank you, Mr. Chair. A couple comments. The depth of the foundation here, does that require, I have some flashbacks to vibratory, are we impacting bedrock, are we driving piles, are we just digging deep sauna tubes, big, deep, fancy sauna tubes without any concerns the residents have around Impact it to neighboring properties around the depth of the foundation that's required here foundation technology That'd be that'd be one one comment in question. I have a couple others as well. I Didn't see any details necessarily skimming through the plans around that.

Yeah, so John Noonan fields own land consultants so the the owner has Hired a geotech engineer who has put together plans. That's how they ended up with their previous plan on costs and Um, where they did steel pilings, which, you know, basically rely on friction with the soil. You go deeper as needed. Um, there's different options, uh, such as geo pier where it's, it's stone and it, it, what it does is it compacts the soil horizontally versus vertically relying on friction. This has been, both options have been used in Keene in many different instances. Um, I remember, uh, At a previous employer, we were in a stone granite foundation building next to the Keene State Alumni building. They drove those pilings 200 feet. And this would be brought up in the building permit process. But what they can do is they'll go around, they'll put sensors on particularly stone foundations of homes nearby. And they'll monitor them when they're driving the pilings. The GeoPeer seems, from what I've seen, so in Railroad Square, the tallest buildings were done with steel pilings driven, again, about 200 feet in the ground. I think those were 220 feet or something like that, very, very deep in the ground. The senior building that's right next to the co-op, that was done with GeoPeer. That was the first one done in Keene. I worked on that project. And they only go 20 feet in the ground with the same – And we've seen other projects done in the area on the Geo Pier. So I think that's an option, too, is that'll come up in the foundation design and ultimately what they decide on doing. There are options out there. And, you know, going 80 feet is not crazy in Keene. Keene is a filled swamp, most of it. And there's a lot of soil. You're rarely hitting bedrock. You're relying on friction of those steel pylons just being driven in the ground.

And so if I may continue, Mr.

Chair. So concerns around impacts to other buildings. My house settles. I got to repaint and re-cock the bedroom because of whatever, just age. But the building process is when that can come up. The actual building permit process is where regulations around monitoring impacts such as vibrations would be the appropriate time to address those things. Correct.

I mean, that's generally, I think, when it's been handled in the past, from what I've seen.

Great. Thank you. Then, sorry, I just had one more to follow up with Mr. Koss' point. I think that this is the sort of, this is a cottage court style that I've seen in other cities as infill development. This one's a little bit interesting. It's got a street on both sides, but these are the sort of units that I've seen in other areas of the country. From an architectural standpoint, I guess I would agree that if I had any concerns, it would be the broad size of the units that are facing the streets. some sort of addressing the wall of that 30-foot expanse, breaking that up a little bit would be something that might allow it to fit in the neighborhood a little bit better. I don't know what our abilities to address that directly are, but I think that might go away to make it fit the scale of the neighborhood a bit better. Thank you, that's all.

Thank you.

Mr. Bergeron? uh... did basically the same points that i had you just mentioned i mean i was concerned about the the you know the piles in in in one neighborhood one neighborhood already expressed concern with work they've done on a lot before because of the type of soils that are out there and it affected her property and And I was concerned that that is something that needs to be done, is to make sure that before any work is done on that property that the abutting property owners have some type of assurance, like documenting what the current conditions are to make sure that there are no changes in their properties based on this work that's going to happen on this site. So basically, I think I'm talking about the same thing.

Thank you. Did you want to weigh in?

i mean it is it is hard with any neighborhood we've ever had to deal with with new development potentially coming in you know we don't want to disturb the feel of the neighborhood we really don't but you know that part of keene is a very dense area and it's zoned for growth and for more housing and you know so we are able to put more housing in there but we certainly don't want to do it in such a way that would damage any abutters of course if driving really deep piles in order to construct this development is the case then we definitely need to make sure that the abutters properties won't be damaged in the process. I like the development. It doesn't quite fit. And I agree that facing it differently would be probably more appealing but would be difficult to do with all the drives and and whatnot but i really you know that part of elm street it is kind of barren there's nothing really happening there it's kind of a eyesore so i would love to see it developed but i would you know like to consider the neighbors in the neighborhood and some of these suggestions should be considered.

Okay. Well, I heard serious concerns in I'll call it three areas. One is drainage. I think there's a significant detail in the application regarding drainage. I don't know if everyone's had a chance to look at that or if you believe it, but it is professional opinions regarding drainage. traffic again, there's information in in the application regarding traffic which the city engineer has Agreed with That doesn't mean there's never going to be any traffic or parking problems on either of those two streets and then this what last discussion we just had about the design of the the foundation if you will or whatever it is that's going to anchor understand that that may be dealt with in the building permit process it's not really part of the approval of the project however what is part of the approval of the project is what I'll kind of broadly call the design which is street-facing something, what that looks like or what it could look like, and also the number of units. I don't know if the 14 is a magic number for the financials or for the developer or not, but I think those are things that The design piece, those two areas that I mentioned, would lead me to want to continue this to next month. I don't know how others feel about that, but that would be my inclination. Councilor Ellis.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I had a thought before, less about continuing to next month, but just another thought to some of the points that some of the other members have raised. One thought was that Or one point was that this project may not fit in the context of the neighborhood, but there's another cottage court development going up on Elm Street. And so in a couple of years, this may fit the neighborhood. But secondly, I think this is really great that this is a project that That allows for more growth without having to demolish any existing homes, actually unlike the other Elm Street Cottage Court, you know, which... In the end, it made sense to have to remove that home when I get it, but I think this is an excellent use that doesn't take away from the beautiful homes in my neighborhood. It just adds in where there's, right now, kind of barren, ugly, empty lots. But as Master Giovanni said, I do think it's important to... Away the concerns of the butters and make sure that their property is not damaged. But I think this is a great opportunity to. Use empty lots and also. You know, we've been adding homes kind of little by little. I think this is also, you know, we want to continue doing what we're doing, but we're going to keep getting the same results of one new unit here, one new unit there, two units here. And I think this is an excellent opportunity to try something a little bolder and get kind of a good swath of units all in one go. Okay.

Okay. Mr. Hafer.

I'm not opposed to continuing. I think certainly to some degree, just based on the late hour, that may be the prudent thing to do. I think we'd be clear with our request of what additional information we'd want. Do we want to see revised elevations to address the seemingly shared concerns about the street view? Do we want an assessment of... 12 units versus 14. I mean, at some point, it's out of our jurisdiction to what's profitable and not profitable. We could find ourselves without a project without the right number of units. I don't know. I'm in favor of a continuance if we can provide some direction to some additional information that we are looking for.

Mr. Noonan, did we give you any direction?

Yes, I can certainly get something from our client on revising our elevations towards the street to make them more street facing, whether it's the doors or windows added on those gable ends. make it look more like a home or as was suggested earlier, add a door just on those end units. Their entrance is 100% on the gable end of the building into the garage versus the front and just change up those end unit ones. I think we can do that and work with the architect to change those. And then just an assessment on cost per unit is what we're looking at or make or break kind of numbers. I know our client ultimately said 14 is the number. But yeah, we can provide some type of assessment on what's the make or break on the numbers.

I think that's Mr. Hafer. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I mean, that's our challenge, right? Yeah, we can go to 12, but each unit's 15% cost more. So all of a sudden we're working against ourselves with affordable housing by reducing the units on the site. So there's, like all engineering, there's a trade-off. We could have one big beautiful house there for the right price, I'm sure. But to make it affordable in today's world, there's a density that we need to try to support. Our cottage court regulations do support this. It's within the guidelines that the city of Keene has provided. But maybe some sort of information about that or alternative configurations and why those, maybe trying to rule those out, the architectural sketches or design thinking that went into the current might be helpful as well just to help assure that we looked at all the options for the property. Yeah.

Mr. Coste. Thank you. I mean, for me, more time probably isn't going to help. A fake window on the side of a building doesn't do it for me. A real window. Well, a real window. A real door. I just think it's got... There has to be a creative, innovative way, even working with planning staff, to turn these north and south, to put the parking between the two north and south. You're really staying pretty far away from the north and south boundary setback, so we know there's room if you have to go longer for some reason. I don't know. I have this imagination that it doesn't have to be 24 feet wide. It could be one way, you know, go in on Carroll and out on Elm or in on Elm and out on Carroll to narrow up the paving and the driveway. And there's just lots of things possibly. And again, I'm certainly not being paid to design this and don't want to. But it just seems there should be a way to work with the neighborhood forms and the way buildings are, to have two buildings of four and three facing Carroll and facing Elm probably is a lot more palatable to people there. If we're not going to try to work on that, for me, I don't see there would be much difference a month from now.

just briefly I think that you know we're gonna definitely start seeing a lot more of these type of developments coming into the city and because these are like some of the beginning ones that we're dealing with we should take careful consideration with this one and we should sort of set a precedent of how we're gonna do it moving forward because it is important it is needed and we want them to fit in the neighborhoods we want everyone to be happy so i think asking for a little more time to figure it out makes perfect sense why don't we get a motion to continue to uh to the june meeting

You actually you currently have a motion on the floor that was seconded so I don't know if the folks who made that motion could withdraw it Procedural so you you would need to withdraw your current motion

so i would like to withdraw my motion pb-26-12 major site planning college court conditional use permit for elm street and carroll street um and ask for more time no just just withdraw just withdraw the motion for now we don't need to vote on that right

So you have to concur with that, Molly.

So I don't think we need to vote on the withdrawal, right? Good. All right. So let's have a motion to continue, please.

I would like to move to continue PB-26-12, the major site plan in Cottage Court. Conditional use permit to our next scheduled meeting on June? 22nd. June 22nd. 22nd.

Second. Second, all right. All in favor of continuing? Any opposed? Okay. Continue to next meeting. All right, let's whip through the rest of this agenda. Any other business? I don't see other business. What's other business?

That's just an agenda, like a holding spot in case there's something else we want to talk about, like the master plan or whatever. Yeah, okay, good. There are no staff updates.

No staff updates? Yeah. Any new business board members would like to bring to the floor? Alright. Upcoming dates of interest. The Joint Committee of the Planning Board and PLD will be meeting on June 8th at 6.30 PM in these chambers. Planning Board Steering Committee will be meeting June 9th at 12 noon. That's a zoom call. Planning Board site visit. Scheduled for June 17th, 8 AM. That will be confirmed based on the applications that we receive. And finally, the next meeting of the planning board will be June 22nd, 6.30 p.m. And I don't think we're going to go to any more time items because we have no more time. So I'm going to adjourn at 10.20. Yikes.

Thank you.