Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Recording in progress. Recording is in  progress. Welcome to the January 22nd,   2026 meeting of the planning board. Call the  meeting to order. And Frank, I'm going to ask   you to sit for Ryan and Logan, if you could sit  for Paul. And the city manager will be joining   us. She is anticipating being a little bit late as  she is. So, we'll get We'll get started. Um, first   item on the agenda is required by law. We need  election of uh officers for chair and vice chair. I'll if I might make a motion to vote that uh  Rick Chilman continues as chair. Second. I can   second. All those in favor? I oppose. Thank you.  I'd also make the motion that Tony Kopiello stays   on as vice chair. Second. Second. All those in  favor? I. Any opposed? Congratulations. You can   stay in your jobs. Thank goodness. We have uh so  we have three sets of minutes and we received a   letter this evening from Tom Morgan. I don't  know if folks have had a chance to read it. He   was here before everyone. Uh all I know about that  is I did attend that September 16th meeting which   was not a sitewalk but it was a meeting with the  master plan consultants. We held it in front of   um the North Church at Market Square and it was  posted my understanding checking with staff. So   that's a factual error. I'll leave it to the  board what you'd like to do. He's suggesting   we not adopt those minutes but we have three  sets. So, whatever the board's pleasure, we just accept the letter and place it on file.  Okay. We have two other sets of minutes, too. So,   well, no, for the minutes themselves, he's talking  about the letter. The letters because at city  

council, we usually just accept them and place  them on file. But considering there's no factual   error, I know it was noticed. It was a public  hearing. Anyone could have shown up. I was not   there myself, but um I'm sure anyone could have  shown up. I don't see a reason why it wasn't a   secret meeting. It was not in anyway. It was in  the middle of Market Square. Could I make a motion   to accept all meetings? Meeting minutes all three.  You just did, right? Second. Any discussion? All   those in favor? I I I. Any opposed? And was  that a motion to place the letter on file? It   was. Does that Did that have a second? Second.  Second. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? We   have determination of completeness uh site plan  review request of Ralph 1912 LLC as honor for   property at 175 Fleet Street. Requesting site  plan review approval for the addition of two   new food services structures with associated site  improvements. This property is an assessor's map   117 lot 8 and lies within character district 5.  I'm going to go through these. Uh, next one is   request of Colia and Enterprises LLC as owner for  property at 1980 Woodbury Avenue requesting site   plan review approval for the redevelopment of the  site to include 5,500 square feet of convenience   store and six fueling islands and associated site  improvements. That property is on assessor's map   239 lot 11 is in the gateway corridor G1 district.  Request of PNF Trust of 2013 and 282 Middle Street   LLC as owners for property located 84 Pleasant  Street and 266 to 278 State Street. the floorless   building requesting site plan review approval  that includes merging four lots and redevelopment   of the site to include remodeling of existing  structures and new construction to mimic the   former Times building and a new structure on the  corner of State and Pleasant Street. This includes   17 dwelling units, a retail commercial restaurant  space in the ground floor and 17 parking spaces   in a car storage system with associated site  improvements. That property is on map 107,  

lot 7780 and lies in the character district 4  historic and downtown overlay districts. Have a   motion to accept those applications as complete.  Second. Any discussion? All those in favor? I.   Any opposed? Accepted. We have public hearings  for the members of the public. Our rules on the   public hearings. We have uh presentation by the  proponent. Questions by planning board members.   Public comment for against the application.  Provide your name and address for the record.   If you wish to speak during the public comment  period, second or third round, you must speak   during the first round. All comments are directed  to me. The first round is three minutes up to   three minutes oral comment only. The second round,  if you if we need it, is maximum of five minutes   and a presentation is allowed if you need it.  And the third round again if needed is a maximum   of five minutes or comment only. At the close of  that hearing is closed and the board takes action. First item on the first hearing we have is  request of Perkins Quaka Joint Revocable Trust   is owner for property at 224 Broad Street, unit 3,  requesting a wetland conditional use permit from   section 10101750 for the replacement and expansion  of existing 192T sun room and the demolition of   a 26qt rear deck with new construction for  a 384t addition to the existing sun room,   a new 367 1/2qt rear deck and regrading of a  portion of the site including a retaining wall,   stone drip edge and under drain for  storm water control, replacement of   the existing lawn with a micro clover seed  mix and a planning plant. This property is   on assessor's map 131 lot 133 and lies in  the general residence A or GR district. Who   is here to present this application? Hi,  good evening chair Rebecca Perkins Quoka.

My address is 224 Broad Street. Um  and honorable members of the board,   I was before you last year to present  exactly the same application. There have   been absolutely no changes to this application.  Um for those of you who may know me personally,   this has been a very busy year and we forgot  to resubmit prior to the expiration of the   permit in August. And so here we are in  front of you essentially asking for an   extension which we did through a reapplication  so that we can have time to pursue this permit.   There have been no changes to what you approved.  Thank you. Any questions of the applicant? Your hand up. I guess not. I thought you  had your hand up. If there are no questions,   I'll open the public hearing. Is there anybody   here or on Zoom who wishes to speak  to, for, or against this application? Nobody on Zoom. Last call. Anybody here or  on Zoom wish to speak too   for against this application? I'm  going to close the public hearing. I'd make a motion we vote to find the conditional  use permit application meets the requirements set   forth in section 10.1017.50 of the ordinance  and adopt the findings of effect as presented.   Second. Any discussion? All those in favor?  I. Any opposed? And then I make a motion we   vote to grant the conditional use permit with  the following uh enclosed uh 2.1 stipulation   that's in the memo. Second. Any discussion? All  those in favor? I. Any opposed? Motion carries.   Thank you very much. With the request of John G  LLC as owner for property at 14 Market Square,  

requesting a conditional use permit from section  10112.14 to allow zero parking spaces where four   are required. This property is on assess map 107  lot 29 and lies on the character district for   CD5 downtown overlay and historic districts. Who  is here to present this application? Thank you,   Mr. Chairman. John Shaggman from Haley Ward  representing John Galt LLC tonight. Um, with me   is Tracy Kak, project architect. As mentioned,  the property is located at map 107, lot 29,   14 Market Square. We're here to ask for a parking  conditional use permit under section 10.12.14. Zero parking spaces where four are required.  The project is the conversion of some office   space into apartments. The conversion causes  eight required parking spaces where there   aren't requirements for office space in the DoD.  Four space DoD deduction means we're asking for   four parking spaces where eight would be required.  There's no room on the site for any parking. It's   a building in the urban core uh right at Market  Square. We performed a parking demand analysis and that uh demand analysis was based on  converting the 9,212 feet of office space   into seven dwelling units. The proponent Mark  McNav is here. The demand analysis was presented   to the technical advisory committee and approved.  Included in your package is that demand analysis   and it shows that we are actually causing a  demand reduction of eight spaces as a result  

of this conversion. The planning board can grant  this relief requested. The criteria is listed in   your package in the cover letter. I could go  through it if you'd like, but essentially the   criteria revolves around the fact that we are  decreasing parking demand and that this site   is in the urban core and is close to parking  opportunities. The supporting plans and show   uh floor plans, elevations, which if you want  to put them up, the project architect could   speak to. But that's our presentation, keeping  it brief, and we're here to answer any questions.   We request that you approve this tonight.  Thank you. Questions for the applicant. No questions the applicant. We're  going to open the public hearing.   Is there anyone here or on Zoom who'd like  to speak to or against this application? One more call. Anybody here on Zoom wish  to speak too far against this application? Our readings have really dropped. No one's  on Zoom. Apparently going to close the   public hearing. Did you want to speak during the  public hearing? Close public hearing. Mr. Chair,   I just want to recognize that we did receive  a letter um and with the subject matter if not   directly related to this property. Um just  just in case the letter writer is watching,   we did receive it. Yes, I saw that. Thank  you. With that, I guess I'll make a motion.

Um vote to find the conditional use permit  application meets the requirements set forth   section 10.1112.14 of the ordinance and  adopt the findings of fact as presented.   Second discussion. Yes, Bill. I'd like to just  understand the principles that we apply in these   cases. Uh that I think we're all in agreement  that parking is in short supply downtown.   I think we're also all in agreement that  a building that is downtown, you know,   you you can't dig out the basement and put  parking under it. So there's, you know,   really no practical approach to that. Uh but  and and this would at least on paper uh reduce   the demand, the theoretical demand from what  it is to what it would be. But the reality is   that we're we keep adding parking requirements  downtown in small increments and and I don't I   don't know to me I don't understand how we can do  that. Uh it's not in conformance with the co with   the requirement and it's um it's putting more  burden in an area that's overburdened already.   I do understand why, you know, the practicality of  not being able to add parking within an existing   building downtown. Uh but that but that's a  uniform, you know, problem and and I'd just like   to be sure that we apply a consistent principle to  everybody that comes forward with this kind of a   proposition in the downtown area and that we not  just do it yes here and no there. So if I could   understand the principle that we're applying,  I'd be a lot better off. I can I can start with   a response to that. I think the the criteria are  in the applicant's letter. He set them out set  

them forth and offered to go through them, which  he didn't do, which I actually appreciative that   he didn't. Uh but they are there. I think this is  a bigger question that we've addressed with the   downtown parking study that was completed about a  year or so ago and also with the recommendation of   the capital improvements plan recently to put  a $3 million placeholder for the next parking   garage which public parking garage which um ties  into the parking study recommendation that was   adopted I believe by council uh that said that  downtown parking should be treated as public   infrastructure and not to be treated treated as  private. Um, problem with private parking in a   downtown mixed-use environment is it ends up being  dedicated for one use with one set of times of day   as opposed to shared public parking which gets  more consolidated use. It takes up less land. So,   that's part of the rationale for it. If you  feel that there's one of these criteria that   the applicant hasn't addressed properly, you  know, say so. But that's that's the 30,000 foot   view. I certainly appreciate the impracticality  of having it every individual piece of land have   its own parking and the the beneficial aspect  of consolidating that parking into one place   and having it be designed for that purpose.  Um I'm just uncomfortable with continuously   adding downtown. uh if if the answer is yes for  this then I I can't distinguish you know for the   next you know five people that come in with  comparable proposals nor should you if it's a   comparable proposal it should be treated the  same way and you know the other thing that   the benefit of the public parking is the revenue  stream that that generates for the city which is  

significant so that's another part of the puzzle  if anybody else wants to jump in Please feel free. Any other questions or is there  a concept of of of requiring   uh proof of uh contracting with other with  parking in other locations? We did that. Sorry,   we tried it. We did that with 238 Deer Street  and uh it was not necessarily carried through   in an effective way. 238 Deer Street was 14  units, 14 micro units or 17 micro units. Uh   where we stipulated that they needed to identify  at least 14 offsite assigned parking spaces for   those residential units. Um they did, but  then they were ended up being those units   ended up being for sale. So the manner in  which it was carried out did not really   follow through to the stipulation as it was  written. But um in other cases we have not any other discussion all those in favor I I any opposed no that's  one of one nay in the just to be clear we were   voting on the findings of fact exactly right so  I don't know if anybody wants to revisit their   vote wasn't the vote on conditional use permit.  It was saying, do we have all the information? I would vote in that case. I would like to change  the vote to yes, if I can do that. Actually,   wasn't the motion for 10? It was for the  finding facts. Findings fact. Okay. So,   that's that's we moved on. We now have  the findings of fact. All right. Vote  

to grant the conditioning you use  permit as presented. Second. Now,   discussion on that, which we already  just had. Anything further on that? All those in favor? I I. Any opposed?  No. Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. Next item is request of Kobe Enterprises  LLC for property at 1980 Woodbury Avenue   requesting site plan review approval. 250  McKinley. 250 McKinley. First book today. You're jumping ahead. I'm sorry. Getting ahead of  myself here. Professor Christopher J and Rachel   Deile as owners for property at 250 Mckenley a  Mc Kenley Road requesting wetland condition use   permit from section 101750. The demolition of  existing sun room and deck and the addition of   two new sets of landings and stairs as well as  concrete pad for an AC unit all within the 100   foot wetland buffer. This application reduces 224  square feet of impervious area through demolition   while introducing approximately 48 square feet of  new impervious. In total, this project will result   in a net loss of 176 square feet of impervious  within the wetland buffer. This profit assesses   map 250 lot 117 is in single residence B or SRB  district. Who is here to present this application?   My name is Chris Dele. I'm the property owner at  250 McKinley. And I promise the next applicants   I go quick. Um we are uh in the middle of  a renovation and we're proposing removing   the sun room up the back of our property uh and  the deck and replacing the two smaller egresses   um and a small concrete pad poured to support  those egresses as well as a small six foot   uh six square foot pad for our air conditioning.  Um the overall effect as you mentioned was a is   a a net gain in and to the uh 176 square  feet um to the impact of the wetlands and  

uh our properties around 8,000 square foot  of our 9,000 foot property. It sits within   the wetland buffer on Ellen Park. It's basically  all swamp. Uh the adjoining wetlands is about six   acres of wetlands. Um as part of prior projects  in that backyard where this work is being done,   uh we've done substantial uh grading. We've  added a lot of native plantings. um and a lot of   mitigations. We have rain gardens, BMS, uh swailes  to slow any of the um the water that would go into   the wetlands. And we did that voluntarily just as  part of our backyard and we appeared before the   commissions before to do that. Uh and additional  projects that we've done including driveway in the   front which doesn't go to the wetland. We've  actually put rain gardens there too knowing   that essentially water flows to storm drains that  flows to wetlands. So we're very conscious about   protecting the wetlands. This is a give back as  part of our project to continue that spirit uh   with a small ask to to put some stuff back so  that we can get out of our house to enjoy our   patio on the backyard. With that, I'll take any  questions. Thank you. Questions of the applicant. Going to open the public hearing. Anybody   here on Zoom wishes to speak to  four against this application? Last call. and close the public hearing. Vote to find that the conditional youth permit  application meets the requirements set forth   in section 10101750 of the ordinance and  adopt the findings of fact as presented.   Second discussion. All those in favor.  Any opposed? Motion carries. Move to grant   the conditions permit with the following  condition 2.1 outlined in the staff memo.   Second discussion. I just think it's a  pretty easy review for us. Reduction in   the use of the and the setback. So overall a net  improvement. Not much else to talk about. Very  

straightforward. Well presented. Yep. All those  in favor. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Find my place again. Request of Ralph 1912  LLC as owner for property at 175 Fleet Street.   Requesting site plan review approval for the  addition of two new food service structures   with associated site improvements. This  property is on assessor's map 117 lot 8   and is in the character district 5 the downtown  overlay district and the historic district who   is here to present this application. Thank you  Mr. Chairman, members of the board. John Changen   from Haley Wood representing Ralph 1912 LLC. With  me here tonight is Mark McNab, project proponent,   Tracy Kak, project architect, and Terrence Parker,  project landscape architect. It's tax map 117,   lot 8, 175 Fleet Street, known as the Gillies  Restaurant. We're here for site plan approval   to install two new food service structures on  the lot. Perform some renovations to the Gillies   uh existing site structure including bathrooms and  as mentioned two takeout restaurants. Some site   improvements are going to include a trash area,  seating on site, improvements to landscaping,   additional bike racks. Your package includes some  great renderings of the visual impact of this,   which the HTC approved at the January 7th  meeting. a proposed license area agreement   and plan as there's some synergies here because  of the proximity to the parking garage uh of this   site and land that is controlled by the city.  There's a green building statement and lighting  

specs all in your package. going through the  plan set. We could Peter, we got a cover sheet,   standard boundary survey, uh site plan, and a  few things to point out here on the site plan.   As mentioned, the proponent is going to create a  trash fenced in trash area here, which is a little   northwest of the property line on property that  is adjacent to the high handover parking garage   and is not really utilized by the city. But in  a license, the applicant would like to create a   trash storage area. It would be gated off. There'd  be key fob entry and it would be available to   businesses in the area to use. There's landscaping  improvements u in the back here. There's a an   existing landscape area, but we are making it  more robust and uh replanting it. putting in some   temporary planters here that would be summertime  only, but putting a landscape area in front of   the Gillies restaurant and a landscape area  in front of this food truck uh food uh takeout   restaurant, excuse me. This is the second takeout  restaurant. So, those are the two new structures. The next sheet is the landscape plan showing uh  future surface treatments. The project is tied   into the look and feel of Newbury Way. You may  recall a lot of members were here for the 115   Congress project where the applicant is going  to introduce some site elements to Newbury Way.   This project is going to begin that construction  in this area and take that form and content and  

bring it onto the Gilly site. Next slide,  floor plans. Then we have next elevations. Next, some other views of the  proposed takeout restaurants. Next, some site renderings. Next, and I'd like  to leave this leave it here at this slide. This shows uh a really nice uh night view  rendering of uh what this would look like at   night. Hopefully, it will be a night destination  as it has been in the past. It'll be much safer   and offer a variety of foods. Also in the set, but  we don't need to look at them are the utility is a   utility plan. That plan has been approved by  the technical advisory committee uh for uh   connections to the city utilities. And there's  a plan showing the new way offsite improvements.   At this stage with this project, it's only the  improvements on the Gillies uh at adjacent to   the Gilly site in Newbury Way. But we're showing  Newbury Way being lowered to its future elevation   as a part of this particular project. So that can  kick off the future project there and do a lot of   the pre-sight work as a part of this project.  This proposal went to the technical advisory   committee. They recommended approval on December  3rd subject to seven conditions of approval   and the staff memo that you have in your packet  correctly identifies those conditions of approval   that are appropriate to bring forward with your  approval here tonight which we ask for. Other   members of the team are here if you should have  any other questions. Um I'll keep the presentation   short and answer any questions you might have.  Questions of the applicant. Yes, Tony. Um, John,  

can you describe the lighting on site and any  and any um there any cameras, security cameras?   I can't answer the security camera question, but  u the light visual shows you it's it's a lot of   sort of set building mounted lights and then  uh in the adjacent new way there's going to be   um catinary wire supported uh circular lights.  I'm more concerned about the restroom area and the   alleyway kind of formation between the existing  I'll call it the garage edition if we've been   around here long enough. You know what I mean? The  Yeah. Yeah. The garage addition and the and the   restrooms. Yeah. I I would imagine uh that's going  to be the same level of illumination that you see   here on the front side of the Gilly restaurant.  I I don't think it's depicted in this exhibit,   but the lighting, forgive me, here is the  same on the back. But Tracy can speak to that.   She's coming up here to the podium. Sure. Just to  clarify, all four sides of all structures will be   illuminated with recess set down lighting. There  are also on the back of the restroom edition,   there are recessed vertical sconces uh in the  corner boards to to provide additional light   uh at all levels. Um there there won't be any  dark spots. We're illuminating it for safety.   So did I hear just just sconces on the back? Uh  there is perimeter linear LED uh down lighting   that um emanates out from the sophets on all  structures and additionally there are vertical  

linear lights on the corners that shine out. I  would I'm used to seeing and maybe it's been a   it's been eliminated as a requirement and unaware  of me. used to seeing a kind of a lumen's plan   um with lighting on the site and is that something  that has been removed as a requirement for the   city? Um no, it's not it's it is a requirement.  It's not been removed. Not been removed.   I just this this area has a history um  and we we're obviously have a lot of   um transitional um pedestrian going in and out  of the garage coming up and down the the new   alleyway. I think overall this is fantastic. I  just have some sensitivity about the um creating   a vulnerable location. Okay. So, no, the lighting  requirements have have not been eliminated in   this particular application. We provided the night  illumination exhibit the rendering. Um previously   Newbury Way had a full lumen's plan um and u that  showed that the applicant is making that safe   uh right right now it's it's not safe and it  wasn't hasn't been safe uh but it will be much   safer. So the new way alley is a separate part  of the 1 through 15 Congress approval that did   have all of those. I guess if it's a concern,  we would ask that you just ask us to create a   lumen's plan that could be reviewed by city staff.  Um yeah, that's fair. And then a followup to that,   um is this considered a public restroom or is it  their restaurant restroom? Will it be advertised?  

Um, so I don't think there'll be a sign in Market  Square saying restroom here, but it's a food court   uh type of arrangement. So the public is welcome  to walk on and and and use the facility. Got it.   Yep. They're not going to I guess it's maybe  outside of our purview, but they're not going   to have to go inside and get a key or something.  Oh, the applicant is saying no. So they won't   be required to go to the kiosk and get a key to  use it and locked when the restaurant's closed.   Absolutely. Yes. Yep. Thank you. Mhm. Yes. Um  a couple questions. So the between the garage   entrance and the side of the existing building  where you're putting all the trash receptacles in   that area. Am I right that that's I see the fences  and the gates, but will that be will you prevent   the uh general public from being able to get into  that area? So basically they can access back where   the bathrooms are, but not where that is. Is  that way it's meant to be? Yes. Um thank you for   blowing it up, Peter. Yeah. So, the fencing comes  here right to the building and then uh the access   to the bike racks are part of the public access  and then there's fencing here that closes it off   in the back, but otherwise you can walk around to  get to the bathrooms through the site. And then   my only other question is as we anticipate the  the possibility of almost 12 inches of snow this   coming Sunday night, that makes you want to think  about, you know, how you plan on dealing with   snow on this site because it doesn't look like  other than that landscape area in the back, there   doesn't seem like there's a lot of places that you  could get rid of it if it's going to be open year   round. So, if you could just tell us a little bit  more about that. Sure. Um, luckily the development   team is used to downtown uh maintenance and they  have a full maintenance team and I would imagine  

there'll be a lot of uh total removal of snow at  this particular location when you get that big a   storm. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Andrew, this  is a really well done package. The renderings were   really helpful. Um, you mentioned and alluded  to the ADA uh, accommodation for Newberry Way.   Is the pad where Gillies currently is and the  new bathrooms and circulation on that parcel   going to be ADA compliant as well? The bathrooms  that are proposed uh, in the back edition. Yes.   are going to be uh the takeout restaurants are  but there's no change proposed to the existing   access to Gillies. Yeah. Just making sure that  generally speaking ADA individuals can access   the site from Fleet Street once transformed  from the newly created Newberry way and then   once they're on the site they'll have Yes.  Yeah. So there is uh less than 2% slope access coming from new reway here uh at  grade access here and here. So   it is accessible from the surroundings.  Absolutely. Yep. And then my only other   comment was sort of in relation to the  bathroom question about public usage.   Um, I totally empathize not wanting  to broadcast it to the public world,   but generally speaking, having some way signs  either on an arm on Fleet Street, just um,   marketing and highlighting the two new restaurants  and certainly what it is you're creating,   I think would be an awesome exposure opportunity  as Fleet Street is redone. Uh you don't have to  

put public bathroom access by any stretch  of the imagination, but uh wayfinding signs   we've seen around town become fairly helpful. So,  however, we can do that too. Good idea. Thank you. Bill and then Joe, would you talk a little more  about the cameras? I know uh Tony asked them. You   didn't have an answer on that. I'm sorry. I'm not  aware. I would let somebody else in the team. So,   u there there isn't going to be cameras. It  will not be. No, it will not be. No, it'll   be well lit and and maintained and uh something  of an attractive nuisance. Well, I'm sure that   if it came to be, it would be done, but at this  juncture in the first initial uh development plan,   it's not anticipated to to be a problem that  needs that solution. That's not saying that that   solution would not be available if the problem was  identified. Does that make sense to you? Uh, no.   I don't understand what you just said. We're not  proposing cameras now, but if it turns out that   cameras are needed, they'll be put up. Given the  given the site plan and the improvements you're   proposing, I don't see a huge need for cameras. If  you choose to put cameras up, that's decision of   the applicant in my mind, you know. Um, can I just  make a comment around that? Let's keep in mind   that the back side of that building now there's  people actually with windows on that building   that can actually see down into this area. So,  it's going to be a lot more visible and I think   we're forgetting about the changes to the adjacent  building as well. So, we should remember that. If   if I may continue the conversation. Sure. I don't  know what time um the future closing date of this   will be. But it may be that this area has becomes  known as having a public restroom and you know  

you're out late at night downtown. Oh, you know  going to go behind Gillies there's restrooms there   and then all of a sudden the restrooms are locked.  So is this the place where everybody goes and   privately urinates at 2 o'clock in the morning, 3  o'clock in the morning where yeah, there's windows   above but most people are going to be asleep.  So, it just seems like a place that's ripe for,   you know, a period of night where, you know, not  going to have a lot of eyeballs on it. It's it's   hidden. Um, and there's a lot of activity very  close to it. And so, I just feel like it needs a   little bit more thought and in my opinion on  that that one region, like a motion sensor. I think that's a lighting question more than  a camera question and uh in my mind anyway,   you know, I think I think the lighting they've  addressed it in a certain extent it maybe could   be bolstered somewhat. You know, that the back  area is going to be a little bit especially late   at night, early in the morning, you know,  sort of a a hangup, but there's plenty of   places downtown for the uh the errant person  who wants to uh do their business, so to speak.   So, are you advertising? I hope not. Um, yeah, Mr.  Chairman. Well, we don't have the public hearing   is over. If I No, I don't believe we haven't  had it yet. We haven't had it. Okay. Please,   please help. I'd like to respond if it's okay.  Okay. I think we have to take into account what's   there now and what this developer is going to do  to this area. What's there now is an attractive   nuisance. This is part of a grand scheme to make  this a pedestrian-friendly and safe area. So,   I think we should embrace that and vote to  move this along. And motion sensor lighting   is a great idea. I agree that presently we're at  the five yard line and and you're bringing it to  

the one yard line. I just want to bring it, you  know, make a touchdown. Um Joe and then Frank.   Um a lot of my questions have been answered. I I  don't see it written anywhere in the application.   And I know there's licensing agreements to be  had. Um I want to make sure that there's no   um I've been to a lot of venues like this in other  cities. They're very exciting. They're they're   wonderful. Uh as this one will be. Um typically  there's um it's very common that there's music at   venues like this. I just want to be on the record  that there will not be music amplified music on on   this site. Um it does not mix well with downtown  residential properties. um hasn't in the past and   I'm sure it won't in the future if it's abused.  Um the renderings are wonderful. It it the it's   um it's a very fair weather uh use depicted here.  I'm wondering if the applicant had considered um   any kind of shading, you know, fabric stretching  between I would imagine sitting in the full heat   in the sun there. It's a very open sunny spot.  It might be overwhelmingly hot. I don't know if   um and it's you're not asking for it now, but it  might be something you consider in the future.   Um, go ahead. Yeah, if you can go to the landscape  plan, Peter. I think it depicts um tables which   could have umbrellas. It's a good point, you  know. Yep. The other comments have been answered   already. The hours of the restrooms and the snow  management and the garbage management. Those have   been answered. Thank you. All right. Um, just  a kind of a clarifi clarifying question on the   bathroom discussion. Would the outside lights be  totally turned off after the restaurant's closed? The developer says no. No,  it's going to be kept safe. You mentioned that the uh the grading for Newbury  Way is going to begin here. And with those grades,  

it's going to be about a it's like a six, seven,  or eight foot cut. Are you stopping at the end of   this property for now? And no, this if you want  to pull up the planet profile. Th this project is   um a part of this project is going to be lowering  the grade in in Newbury Way as shown on the planet   profile. So I I misunderstood. I thought you  said you were stopping with this. This just   you're starting with this property, but it's  going to continue through. Yeah. Sorry if if   I if you misunderstood. What I was saying is that  the improvements to the finished grade will will   be a part of this project, but the the uh work  to lower the grade and do all the exploratory   work to accomplish the lowering is a part of this  project. And then secondary to that is coming back   to complete the 115 Congress project and put  in the finished materials. So it it's it isn't   it isn't related to this project, but just so I  understand it, you'll lower the grade adjacent to   the property, which you have to do, and then you  continue lowering the grade. You probably close   this off for a while while you're figuring things  out with utilities and other things that have to   be worked out before you do finish grades. Is  that It'll kind of be a two-step process. The   first step associated with this is lowering the  grade and then it will be treated with an asphalt   material. Construction will probably commence  on some of the adjacency buildings and then at   the right time it will be repurposed with utility  installations and finished surfaces. So it's kind   of a three-step. Okay. But so the initial question  there won't be a a stop with a a vertical drop off   that has to be No, it won't it will be a smooth  grade. Okay. There will be probably a stop though  

because it'll be a construction zone. Pedestrians  won't be able to walk through but there won't be a   cliff to fall off if they happen to wander through  at night. Correct. Yes. Yes. Absolutely. Yep. And   the only other question I had, the one of the  plans say public access on the way stations and   the other is semi-public and you mentioned key  fobs. How how does that work? Who gets the key   fobs? Is that something that'll be part of your  license with the city? Absolutely. I think it   would be intended for u businesses in the general  area. Uh right now there's a dumpster that is in   Newbury Way that uh this would replace that.  So that's one of the things that is necessary   to do to repurpose Newbury Way to a pedestrian  corridor is to is to get rid of that dumpster   that's there now. And that services the uh 115  Congress building. So those trash functions would   be moved to here. There's uh some changes to the  Fleet Street businesses recently. Uh there was a   business that was there that's not there anymore  that would have benefited from this and they'd be   open to use it, but it would be up to the council  in the approval process to decide that methodology   of how the businesses get to uh access the space  because it is city property. Assuming that works   out though, this would be trash for this property,  the adjacent property that's losing its dumpster,   and then whatever else is left over  for other people. Correct. Okay. My comment on the signs, Andrew, I I think  the architecture provides a better than a   sign for people walking by uh and driving by.  I I personally wouldn't see a need for a sign,   but Okay. It's up to Well, you don't have to  cave. I mean, that's just my my opinion. So,  

whatever you guys want to do on that. Yes, Joe.  Um, I should have asked a little bit more about   the trash pickup and where the truck might go.  The truck isn't sitting in Fleet Street while the   um totes are being wheeled to it. Is it is the  truck able to get off the street onto the site   to manage the the um trash containers? Is it  backing into where the double doors are? No.   The truck would be it's going to be a two-lane  uh fleet street is two lane one each way. So yes,   there would be an interruption just like there is  when the city does pick up in the downtown. Yeah,   that's my concern. It's awful. Is Fleet  Street not going to be changed? If I may,   right, it will be changed. It's the  the reconfiguration will have wider   sidewalks in one lane. One lane. One way. I  think it was something to be managed. Okay. So the totes are wheeled out to Fleet Street. Yes. While the truck sits in the street. Yes.  Are there specific hours that that's   allowed or It happens pretty early. I know  the dumpster immediately across the street,   the restaurant immediately across the street.  The dumpsters are emptied at 3 in the morning.   pull the bottles and they smash. They're they're  loud. They're extremely loud and the residences   in the area are pulling their hair out. So,  it's important to know how how this will impact   um I like the idea of how the trash is being  managed, but it comes with it comes with the   inconvenience of having to empty all of  those totes in a very central area. Um well, it's I think you're it's good that  the city manager is hearing  

your concerns because I think there'll  be discussion at the city council. So,   I thank you for bringing that up. Thank  you. Any other questions of the applicant? Thank you. It's it's quite a plan.  It's a nice plan and open the public   hearing. Does anybody here or on Zoom wish  to speak too far against this application? We're on a roll tonight. Last  call. Anybody here or on Zoom   wishes to speak to or against this application? Nobody on Zoom. Going to close the public hearing. If you're amenable, I'll make a motion for  findings of fact. Uh vote to find that the   site plan application meets the requirements set  forth in the site plan regulation section 2.9   evaluation criteria and adopt the findings effect  as presented. Second discussion on the findings.   All those in favor. Any opposed? Motion carries.  Uh vote to grant the site plan approval with   the following conditions. Uh I want to read them  because I I think we might want to add to them and   make sure that these don't need to be modified.  uh conditions to be satisfied subsequent to final   approval of site plan but prior to the issuance  of building permit or the commen commencement of   any site work or construction activity 2.1 is it  okay that I read them yes you may read them uh if   applicable any easement plans and deeds for which  a city is a grant or grantee shall be reviewed and   approved by the planning and legal departments  and accepted by city council site plan 2.2 Two,   the site plan and any easement plans and deeds  shall be recorded on the registry of deeds by   the city or deemed appropriate by the planning  department. 2.3 All the work and improvements   proposed on the city property, garbage totes,  bike racks, and landscape will required will   require city council approval. 2.4 The two kiosks  will need to be individually individually licensed  

per health department requirements. 2.5 Any  fencing as required by the liquor commission   or use used to divide the site is required to go  to the HDC. 2.6 Six, a shoring plan stamped by a   structural engineer shall be provided to ensure  that there are no undermining of any structure   along Newbury Way. 2.7 A construction management  mitigation plan CMMP required. The applicant   shall prepare a CMMP for review and approval  of the city's legal and planning departments   unless the city staff determines that such a  plan is not needed. I I would like to add to   that list and maybe others would as well. Um  2.8 Eight would be that the applicant submit a   um lighting plan showing um lumens particularly in  the in the rear area between the restroom and the   um the rear of the property. Um and that the  the amount of illumination satisfies uh the   um department staff um for uh safety that the  lighting back there I'll call it also part of 2.8   that the lighting in that area be  maintained after hours of the business   um um in all periods of darkness. I  don't if there's better language for   that. I think you get the gist of it. Um  2.9 hours. Uh 2.9 um no uh outdoor music. No amplified. No amplified outdoor music. Um I  don't know. I I had a note we have did we want to   discuss the trash? We want to leave that to city  council. I don't know if there's language in our   current um rules that at least limit the hours  of trash removal. This is a high con potentially   a high concentration of a lot of waste. It could  take 40 minutes or more to empty these and deal   with them. You could just have a you know a lot of  people live in the immediate area including this   development will have people living there too.  I would think it's something you could address  

in the license agreement that provision rather  than rather than which means we don't address it. That's all I have for my motion. I second  discussion on we have seven pre-written   two two additions. Can I make a suggestion that  the lighting one goes under the first section?   So they would submit that before they get a  building permit. So we have the lighting plan   to review. That's fine. So that would be you'd  have 2.1 through 2.5 under the first section and   then 2.67 8 and 9 under the second section. By  the motion maker the intent of the lighting is   just to provide adequate illumination in the rear  area of the building. And I don't care about the   lumen so long as it's adequate. Yeah. My staff  approves it. I wouldn't know a lumen hit me in   the head. So I had a Yes, Andrew. And on 2.3, all  work and improvements proposed on city property,   garbage, totes, bike racks, and landscaping  will require city council approval. Uh the   city manager just sort of clarified that  in the licensing agreements. Is that better   to say all work and improvements or business  conducted proposed on city property? So that   just all-encompassing of future interaction  with that city property because the trash is   there and has to go out and in out and in or is  that stipulated in the license agreement put to   consider the hours of removal in the agreement?  Yeah. Yes. What I was getting at is yes. In fact,   if Fleet Street is one way, um that's  and then you have a trash truck there,   that's not work or an improvement, but  it's a business conducted on that street,  

so it's on city property. So, I don't know if  that would be included in a license agreement.   It is something that would be included.  Perfect. The other question I had was on 2.5,   any fencing as required by the liquor commission  or used to divide the site is required to go to   the HTC. Um, any fencing required by the liquor  commission may not be permanent to the site. So,   are we going to make them go to HCC to  use non-permanent fencing? Does it say   permanent fencing? Any permanent? It just says any  fencing. It says any fencing. So, for example, um,   Toscana downtown where Breaking New Grounds was.  Now, they'll put up a black rail fence and that's   temporary. I don't know if they had to go to HCC  to do that. They do. Pretty sure they do. Okay. That's it. You good with that? Okay. Well, those  fences are actually listed in our outdoor dining   policy. What types of fences allowed is in our  outdoor dining ordinance now? Right. It's an   ordinance now. If this is private property or is  that included in outdoor dining? I believe no,   they're not. Which is why it would have to go to  the DHDC then. Sounds like it's going to the HC if I could just speak to the motion. Um, this is a  a lot of people in this community care about this   property, the history of the structure on it. I  mean, think we all know it. No one needs to state   it here. Um, I also believe that it's probably  a business that is difficult to maintain. Um,   you know, they're not selling high margin  items there. Um, and so I see this as an   overall improvement to the city, giving  that property uh um a breath of fresh air.   So overall, I think it's a a big positive and  appreciate the work that's been put into it.

Thank you. Any other comments? So we have motion. Does everybody understand  the motion the way Peter split it? The   conditions rather. All those in favor? I I Any  opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. Now we're Woodbury, right? Yeah. Next item is  a request of Colia Enterprises LLC as owner for   property at 1980 Woodbury Avenue. We're requesting  site plan review approval for the redevelopment of   the site to include 5,500 square ft of convenience  store with six fueling islands and associated site   improvements. This property is on assessor map  239 lot 11 in the gateway corridor G1 district.   I will say that there was a notice problem with  this application. So, there will actually be a a   second public hearing, an actual public hearing  with full notice. But since this was noticed,   and there may be people here on Zoom who wish to  make a comment, I'm prepared and would like to   accept public comment if there is any to be given  as well as presentation back and forth with the   applicant so the applicant can have the benefit  of the board's, you know, review of the project   and voting. No vote. Not tonight because it's not  a public hearing. There was there was a notice   problem. Got it. Um, so who is here to present  this application? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name   is uh Chris Rice with TFAN. I'm here on behalf of  the owner and applicant, Colia Enterprises. And   and just sorry to interrupt, but are you okay with  that? What the way I just laid it out? Yes. Yes,   we understand the issue that occurred. Uh, but  we thought it was still a good opportunity if the   board's willing for us to just receive feedback,  get some answer any questions and comments. And if   there are isn't any butter questions or comments,  we're happy to answer. Please go ahead. Sorry to   interrupt. Uh if it's okay with the board, I just  have a couple handouts which match what you have,   but it might be easier for you to look at them  on the screen, but if you'd like to hold back,  

it was the same thing we all have. We have  on our screens locally. So this was the back   of this that just shows one of the recently  completed if you want to see. Can you just   repeat that for the microphone? And Chris, I  can hand them out. Yeah, we can hand them out. Thank you. As I as I mentioned, the only the  only added item in what I just handed out,   I believe, is I included a photo of one of the  recently completed stores just so you can get   a flavor for what the store looks like at  the end of completion. They do take great   pride in their stores and the aesthetics of the  properties that they that they own and maintain. I think we're ready. All right. Well, thank you,  Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Appreciate the   opportunity to present tonight. Uh, with me this  evening is Michael Gazdako and and Jay Hall from   Colia Enterprises. Uh, Jason Cook who's with TF  Moran. Um, Eric Simpson who is their environmental   consultant as well as their sound sound study  consultant. And we have attorney Chris Dresser   with us as well who's legal representation for the  project and uh was with us through the variance   application process. Uh we're here this evening  to present a site plan application uh to redevelop   the existing gas station that's currently located  at 1980 Woodbury A. It's at the intersection of   Woodbury A and Gling Road. Um as you noted uh due  to a noticing issue, we will be back before you on   February 19th uh for the hopefully the vote in the  the public hearing portion. But again, we did want   to take the opportunity just to see if there's any  feedback or questions and comments that we could   address tonight. Um I've handed out just some  packets for your use. It includes it's a copy   of the existing conditions plan, uh an aerial plan  just to help look at it from a 30,000 foot view, a   colored site plan, and a photo of their Nasha site  which opened a few years ago. Existing site is  

tax map 239 lot 11. Uh it's 1980 Woodbury A. It's  approximately 888 acres in size and it's located   in the Gateway Quarter G1 mixed residential  district. Uh it currently contains an existing   gas station and convenience store. The existing uh  convenience store is about 1,800 square feet and   that has a also an existing fueling canopy which  consists of eight dispenser islands for a total   of 16 fueling stations. Uh we're proposing  to redevelop the site which uh consists of   demolishing all the existing structures on site uh  building a new one-story 5500t convenience store   uh that will also include a new fueling canopy.  That new fueling canopy will have six dispenser   islands for a total of 12 fueling stations. So  basically the convenience store got a little bit   larger, but there's four less fueling stations  than what currently exists today. Uh we have 16   parking spaces are required by code. Uh we have  27 which includes the 12 that we're counting   at the pumps. Uh there's 10 parking spaces at  in the front of the building and then there's   five off to the side or the southern portion  of the site. If you're looking at the plan,   uh we did receive four variances from the zoning  board of approval in July of 2025. Uh we're happy   to go through those in detail if the board wishes.  Uh we did present this project conceptually to   the planning board. I think it was in either late  2024 or early 2025. Uh the major change from what   you may have seen then to now is that the prior  iteration did have a drive-through component that   has since been removed. So there's no drive-thru  associated with this project. Uh in addition,   we did go before TAC technical advisory committee  a few times. We went once as a work session and   then I believe we had two formal sessions. Um, at  one of those meetings, uh, timing worked out very   well where Severino was doing some utility work  in, uh, Woodbury A to avoid us having to go into   Woodbury a after they were complete. We worked  with DPW and city staff to get the utility work   done in advance. So, that that piece is taken care  of should uh, should the project move forward. Um,  

we have addressed all the other TAC comments that  we received and at the December 2nd TAC meeting,   they voted to recommend that the planning board  recommend approval of this project. Um we have   a we we didn't supply a lighting plan as part  of our application package. Uh we also supplied   a landscape plan which calls for 12 proposed  trees on site and approximately 145 shrub and   flower plantings throughout the site. Um we also  included a uh traffic memorandum. Uh there's not a   very big difference in traffic given that it's an  existing gas station going to a proposed. Most of   uh the traffic's already on the road uh due to  the increased size of the convenience store. The   traffic memorandum basically states that there's  four new trips uh per hour added to the roadway   network as a result of this project. Uh but just  to keep in mind that the latest DOT figures uh   there's basically around 11,500 trips per day on  this roadway. So it's a very insignificant amount.   It's within the range of day day-to-day excuse me  dayto-day variations in traffic patterns. You know   you could have seven cars on one on the road one  day and five cars another day on the roadway. So,   uh, it's a very minimal impact on traffic. Uh, the  site is currently serviced by municipal sewer and   water as well as gas and electrical service. The  new facility will also be serviced by those same   utilities. Um, and from a storm water perspective,  uh, there's no existing storm water treatment   measures on site. There are a couple catch basins.  Basically, all the runoff from the site just goes   into the catch basins and those tie into the  city system. Uh we have proposed a storm water   management plan which includes pre-treatment,  treatment and detention of storm water prior to   releasing it back into the city system. Uh we have  reduced or matched all the peak rates of runoff   uh and volumes uh and we meet all the city  regulations uh from a site plan regulation   standpoint and storm water treatment standpoint.  Um we don't have any waiver requests as part of   this application. There's no wetland or buffer  impacts. We feel this will be a major improvement   to what currently exists and uh we're happy to  answer any questions or comments that the board  

may have. Questions and comments. Yeah. Um what  must be a very frustrating thing for you right   now is the amount of people that cut through the  lot to avoid the light when there's a backup.   I didn't know if your if your layout it almost it  almost makes it easier to do that because you're   no longer driving beneath a canopy or through  um or through um you know a gas fueling lane.   And the way you have the um the curb cut at that  sweep angle there makes it really easy to shoot in   there. I I don't know if it's something that you  all experience. I've I've seen it a lot when I   when you know a lot all of us drive over there. Um  I can ask Kobe if they've noticed any operational   issues from that regard. I can say that the  the curb cuts pretty match pretty much match   what's currently there. Although the one that  is on Gausing Road has been reduced in width.   So it's narrower than what currently exists, but  we did have to keep it a certain width to allow   u for emergency vehicle access and the fueling  the fueling trucks. So we were somewhat limited   to how much we could do, but we did skinny  that that throat up. I think you've got Hi,   Michael Gasto. I'm the director of construction  for Colia Enterprises. Um, right now we currently   own the site, but we don't operate it. Uh, we  lease it to a third party. Um, their lease ends   uh early in the spring, and we we wish to uh raise  and rebuild this. Um, as Chris mentioned, it's   it's kind of difficult to skinny down any more  than it is right now because of our our business   uh relies on having a tractor trailer coming in to  fuel our product delivery, you know, once a day or   once every other day. Um, we will keep an eye on  it. Uh, we operate all of the stores that we build   um with our own employees, so it'll be an active  area for us. Good. Thank you. As long as you're  

aware, it's a people do really they can speed  through there very quickly. Just be aware of that.   And I I've seen it other locations, so it doesn't  surprise me that you say that. Thank you. And then   the only other question I had was um the um both  the lighting impact and the height of the fencing   along the Force Housing Authority uh complex.  Um I see you're replacing it's a new fence 8 ft   high. Correct. Correct. It's uh it's not really a  replacement. There's an existing sixoot fence, but   that is on their property. Okay. We're proposing  a new eight foot stockate fence on our side along   with additional plantings to try to add some uh  screening and and buffering in that area. So,   we have a number of I think they're mission  arrives along that whole side which are pretty   dense and you know thick and you're round buffer.  So, and then um just the absence of high lighting   that might shine over into people's windows. It  would be nice to to know that we're not Yes, we   don't have any lighting on actually on that side  of the building. I think there's one overhead.   There's a door at the lower left corner of the  building as you're looking at the plan, but that's   just really an emergency exit overhead door, but  it's downcast, so there's there's really no light   going to that section of the site. Can you pull  up the lighting plan? Uh, it is part of the site   plans if you have access to Thank you. Those are  my questions. Andrew, you've done a nice job uh   rellandscaping this property, which I'm sure the  uh housing authority appreciates, and it'll also   look beautiful. Um, and so generally with this is  more found on like a wetland buffer or any sort of   sensitive land, but with a gas station and this  being uh a hight traffic area, I'm wondering if   you have a plan for snow storage and snow removal,  um, you know, for whatever reason, or I get it,   but gas stations generally don't have a bunch  of snow buildup. So, I'm wondering if you have  

some sort of plan, strategy, approach. Do you  want to take that? Yeah, I can take it. Again,   Michael from Colia Enterprises. Um, this is a site  similar to many of our other sites where there's   not a lot of room for snow storage. So, mainly  we we would end up trucking out snow. We our   our snowplow vendor would be trucking out. We're  generally we're allowed 24/7 store. Um, so we're   we're always paying attention to the amount. Yeah,  exactly. We're always there and um safety and   access is always very important to us or you know  our business doesn't run. Yeah. More than anything   just you have that white striping up in the upper  right hand corner of the plan set. Uh that's uh   that's for truck fueling. Um so that needs to be  clear all too. Yeah. That's not snow storage in   the in the front corner of our building. And um  again, we we maintain our sites um with a with a   great deal of of care because um you know, we want  them to look good for for the foreseeable future.   Sounds great. I apologize for not mentioning  earlier, but as part of the plan, we al are   also providing an 8 foot wide sidewalk along and  Woodbury. There is a section along Gling Road now,   but it's six feet wide, plus or minus depending  on where you are. And on the Woodbury side, the   sidewalk kind of dies between the two curb cuts,  if you will. There is a a lane there to walk in,   but it's really adjacent to the travel way.  So, this this really uh addresses that item and   creates a a sidewalk path along the perimeter of  the property. And then we've also added a sidewalk   and a bike rack. And I'll just walk up to the  screen to help show you the path. Don't touch it.   Don't touch the screen. just so that somebody can  walk that way up and around and get through the   site without having to walk all the way around.  You're showing a two-way I just have a question   quick. You're showing a two-way access adjacent to  uh Woodbury like the what the northbound section  

right next to. How's how are vehicles getting  in there? Where are they coming from? Where are   they going to? That seems uh I'm sorry. the the  northbound curb cut is actually a right in is   is a no not the curb cut right adjacent to your  fueling stations just to the right you're showing   northbound and southbound arrows. Yes. So who's  going northbound? Uh that's inner circulation   not in case somebody is at a pump needs to get  somewhere else or decides to go from the pumps and   then go into the convenience store. Not somebody  coming turning left off Woodbury coming in. No,   no, that's just inter inter sight movements, if  you will, to allow vehicles to maneuver in the   site. But the only exit onto Woodbury is at the  southerntherly entrance, southerntherly curb cut,   where the stop stop bar is right where your  cursor is. And there is no left out of the   site at either curb cut because there's a median  island on both sides. Yeah, I know. It just seems   like that's asking for people to get kind of  trapped with a having to make another loop.   Just wondering why you why you ended up there, but it's it's identical to the um circulation  on the opposite corner at Cumberland Farms   actually. It's it's it's two-way all around  that entire fueling island, right? Which yes,   which is pretty standard, I think, just really  for sight maneuverability within the site,   but getting out onto the road. Okay, you've  answered it. I expect you had your hand up. Um   I well at least one question. So on the entrance  and exit that you have onto Gling Road. I know you   have a sign here that will be no left turns which  of course they can't because there's a median   there. But I sometimes find that because we have  this at the end of one of our streets here locally   and no one listens to what they can't do but they  might listen to what they can do. Can we say right  

turn only versus no lefthand turn? I know that  might sound like a lot, but I'm trying to think   that when people are told what what they can do,  they might listen more so than what they can't   do. We could certainly add a sign at that at that  Gauslin Road exit that just says right turn only   for clarity. That would be great. Yes. Bill, is  there any consideration of bus stops in that area?   There is a bus stop. There's a bus stop on one  right before the station on Gling on the Newington   side. Okay. I think it's on the Portsouth side.  Just Well, there's one on either side. Depends on   which direction you're going. Eastbound's on our  side. I think there are bus stops, more than one   in the in the area. And does does this design have  any impact on the bus stops? Yep. Tony, um can   you pull up the lighting plan? Um I was reading  your lighting plan wrong. Um, I guess because it   looks to me there's there's some blue elements  at spacing going off the rear of the building,   but I heard you just say there's no lighting  back there. Chris, just if you can go over there,   but just take the take the um mic, handheld mic.  Yeah, there's also a pointer that you can use if you can get it out. Was that turned on or  anything? Is it automatic? Um maybe on the   bottom there button. Try it. Try it now. Yeah.  Y uh we're at 0 to point it depends where you   look along the property line. There are some  just sconces along the back which I think is   more just decorative lighting and they're lowle  mounting height. I believe they're 8 ft mounting  

height. Um so they are shining down. There is  lighting on the back. That's what I'm apolog. Okay. Yeah, there's there's a normal wall pack  by the exit um door which is just something that   shines down. Um, and then along the back there  is just some decorative lighting just because   uh if it's completely dark, we find that to  be a dangerous situation. Agreed. That's why   I wanted to get the clarification. I apologize  for any confusion. No problem. Any other any   other questions or comments? Yes, Andrew.  Another clerical question on our staff memo   noting that the ZBA voted to uh or excuse  me the BOA voted to deny variances four,   five, seven, eight, and nine. Uh do we know if  those were reconciled and corrected, eliminated,   changed in any way? Yes, those were um the  drive-through went away. Yeah. And then um   the signage went away. The signage they brought  into compliance. Okay. Sorry if I missed that   measurement. I don't know. Those requests are no  longer applicable. I guess if that Right. Say that   again. They're no longer applicable requests.  That's why those ones were Got it. Got it. And   you'll be going to the ZBA between now and the  next planning board meeting. If we will due to   the same uh noticing issue, we did get our ZBA  approval, but we are going back on the 18th.   uh for the two abutters in Newington that were not  noticed just to have the opportunity to comment   and then we'll be back before you the following  night for the formal public hearing from the  

site. Assuming all goes well. Assuming all goes  well. Yes. Okay. Any other questions of the board? Well, did you have anything else  you wanted to share with us? No.   We appreciate your time and uh  see you next month hopefully.   Well, I'm going to see if there is anybody here  or on Zoom who wishes to provide a comment. Anybody on Zoom? Okay. Thank  you very much. I guess we'll   see you next month. Have a good night. Thank you. We have request of PNF Trust of 2013 and 282  Middle Street LLC as owners for property at 84   Pleasant Street and 266278 State Street, Floros  Building. Excuse me. Requesting site plan review   approval that includes merging four lots and  redevelopment of the site to include remodeling of   existing structures and new construction to mimic  the former Times building with a new structure on   the corner of State Street and Pleasant Street.  proposal includes 17 dwelling units, retail   commercial restaurant space in the ground floor,  and 17 parking spaces in a car storage system and   associated site improvements. This propertyy's  on assessor map 107, lot 77-80 and lies in   character district 4 historic and downtown overlay  districts who is here to present this application.   Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the planning  board. John Changen from Haley Ward representing   PNF Trust and 282 Middle Street LLC. With me here  tonight uh is Chris Mulligan, project uh attorney,   Michael Keane, project architect, and Amos  Blanchard, a construction manager. As mentioned,   tax map 107, lots 77 through 80. It's 84 Pleasant  Street and 266 to 278 State Street. So, four lots   are being merged and the combined lots are being  redeveloped. The project consists of 17 dwelling  

units with retail, commercial, and restaurant on  the first floor. This has been a long road since   the devastating fire of 2017 uh that uh removed a  portion of the block still visible. So hopefully   this is the road to constructing a beautiful  building at this site. The Times building was   demolished in 2024 and the rebuild consists of a  building on that corner that's a facim facility of the Times building. Thank you, Michael. Uh and  infill for the rest of it. There's some demolition   of 84 uh Pleasant Street. The zoning is CD4 and  the site conforms with most of the zoning, but   uh there were variances asked for and granted for  some building coverage, open space, some glazing,   some height, and percentage of ground floor use  as residential. The board of adjustment approved   those on November 19th of 2024. Vehicles  will access the site. Parking is required.   17 provided is 17. The site is going to be  hosting a unique parking interior lift system   that will provide this parking and storage.  Uh we did talk about that when we came to the   planning board for the uh concept portion of  this and that remains the same. Information   in your packet about that system as well as  turning movement diagrams for the access to   those parking spaces is included. The site has  pedestrian access on three sides, State Street,   Pleasant Street, and Church Street. Bicycle  storage has been provided and the site is on   city water and sewer. TAC approval has  been obtained for those utilities. The  

roof drainage is going to be collected and  treated with downspout filters. And they'll   be building mounted lights as um that will  light the building up and also the adjacencies. The architectural elements of the uh plans are  shown on sheets PB1 to PB8. There's renderings   of facades. There's a corners that the HDC  wanted at the top of the building that will   require a license from the city of Portsouth  because it projects over the imaginary property   line extended. HCC approval was granted on  August 6, 2025 for the U building design. So   going with the plans, sorry Peter, back to the  start. The first is a standard boundary survey and then the next sheet is the license plan. So  this sheet shows those cornis licenses and has   notes about some other licenses which I'll talk  about later. Then we show an orthopoto plan,   a view, current view from camera above, a uh  existing conditions plan, a demolition plan,   and the site plan. So, stopping at  the site plan briefly, this shows the   um parking location of those parking  uh carousels, so to speak. So, access   off a church street turning in and then in the  packet it shows the automotion uh parking deck,   which provides for more parking in the same  space by shuffling cars up and down. And  

then the 17th space is this uh ADA uh parking  space with the appropriate aisles and access. The architectural plans are next and we'll just  leave it at this plan for now if you could Peter.   Um and then um if the board wants to go through  those in more detail, Michael Keane is here to   take you through them and answer any questions.  Additionally, that the utilities plan is later in   the set and those are all TAC approved. There's an  off-site electrical uh services plan. This project   needs to draw from the surrounding area to provide  electrical service to the building. So, they're   going down to uh Court Street on the other side  of Pleasant from a transformer that was put in for   the 93 Pleasant Street project uh conduit over to  this site. And the transformer is being tucked in.   Um a portion of the lot which has building over  two stories high, but is a is a cavernous space   that is available and uh approved by Eversource.  And then the conduit continues down Church Street   across State Street and ties into the circuit that  is behind the 16 Congress building. That's what   that plan shows. U then there's a uh roof drain  plan and there is a lighting plan with lumens in   this uh set. the building uh the lights are all  building mounted and u the packet also shows our   draft licenses. So the licenses from the city  council will be required for opening of the  

transformer doors. Uh usually the transformers are  situated back of sidewalk so they don't interrupt   the flow of traffic. So that's kind of something  here that needs a license. We're proposing some   gas some ballards to protect the gas entrance on  Church Street, but the Ballard location is in the   city right away. And then the affforementioned  roof corners. So there's draft licenses that will   have to be approved by the council for those  items. Also in your package are the lighting   details, the drainage operation and maintenance  plan, average grade calculations. And in the   process of the approval, the technical advisory  committee, one of the neighbors asked about the   noise and level of noise that would be generated  by the on-site transformer. So the development   team engaged a sound engineer to do a study which  is in your packet. And um the project went to TAC.   Uh TAC recommends approval at the December 2nd,  2025 meeting. And the staff memo that you have   correctly identifies the proper conditions  of approval that carry forward. And we have   no objections to any of those. That's that's my  presentation. Uh if there's a desire to speak to   other members of the team, let us know. We're here  to answer any questions. We seek your approval   tonight. Thank you. Questions to the applicant  team. Yes. Tony, um, is there any plan for EV   charging inside the building and the parking  area? Um, you want to answer that, Michael? Good evening. For the record, my name is Michael  Keane. I'm project architect. the um the parking   rack system has the a availability of having EV  charging at every station. So we will we will be  

providing some we don't know whether it'll be  every space yet or not. Um but it is available   at every space in each location. The um I imagine  since you went to TAC that's been discussed with   the fire chief. It wasn't specifically brought up.  My thought process is and and I'm an EV owner. I'm   I'm a fan of the product, is that you're taking um  there's been a lot of discussions in incidents of   late, a lot being a relative term, of of these  things catching on fire and the difficulty to   put a fire out with an EV. And I'm thinking of  these things elevated connected to a charger,   the the firefighting capability of such thing.  Have we have we created a scenario? I'm just   feeling it up. This just came to me. It did. It  didn't come up in TAC. I'm sure it'll come up   in permitting. It didn't come up in the EV. The  EV charging did not come up in TAC specifically,   but your second sentence was I'm sure it will  come up when we go for a building permit. Yeah.   Okay. Yes. Can you regarding the parking,  can you explain to me how we're getting 17   spots? I know there's some stacked and I  sort of remember a conversation about it,   but if you could just remind us a little bit more,  that would be really helpful. Yeah. So, the um the three spaces you see here are sort  of layered with tic-tac-toe. Three high,   which would be nine. But there always has to be a  space open. So, you get eight and eight. And then   the one that's the standalone 88 the six the 17.  Yep. Okay. Yeah, the math's working in my head   now. Thank you. Okay. Yeah, there's one less that  one has to always be open to be able to shuffle,  

right, Joe? Um I was uh and still am very excited  about the parking concept. Um I I do have concerns   with uh specifically position three entry  the turning diagram. It's almost comical.   Yeah. What it takes to get into the It requires a  professional driver. I mean it's the the tolerance   is you're coming up you're you're showing what the  vehicle has to do just to get into the spot. Um,   and you're assuming a very specific sized vehicle  with an axle in a very particular location. And   um, I'm sure you've already done this, but I  have to ask a question. have have if if you   just went one or two feet in every direction,  I I would imagine you would greatly relieve   um what is now a incredibly complicated. Could  you go to the position number three entry? The   bottom right hand corner shows what the You  see what I mean? There's it's it's like a   fourpoint turn. These will be owners, correct?  These are owners who are going to get used to   doing this. I I imagine um right yeah there's  no doubt that you have a point there and the um developer engaged a parker walker consultants  a parking consultant to to assist with this and   there were adjustments made to uh orientations  and aisle widths and so on and so forth through   the TAC process. Yeah, this was presented to  the city technical advisory committee and your   uh traffic engineer uh did say the same thing in  a sense but also that it shows that it works and   some people welcome to downtown tight living  you got to make a lot of and again don't get  

my question don't misinterpret I want this to  succeed this is very interesting I um the car   could be a smaller car too yeah it does assume  a right now it's a it's assuming a 17 17 foot   are. Yeah. Um Yeah. And it will be I think the  the what you said is very true. This this is   not public parking. It's owner parking.  So people will be used to what they have   to do. Yeah. Yeah. I want I want to see more  of this, but I I I would hope that in future   designs it would be more efficient. It would  be a lot easier to get in and out. But still   a very clever solution. I like it. I would  just hate to be the one assigned to position   three. Thank you. That's all. Maybe three cards  assigned to position. Got to learn to back in. You're next. Andrew after Logan. Go ahead.  Thanks. I had a couple quick questions on   the uh the transformer. The the noise study here  is pretty helpful. Um two questions though. One,   when we're referring to the transformer doors,  are we referring to the fence outside of it or   the transformer door itself? The door itself. So  or or the fence too. So the the project team is   in the later stages of if we can get through  this approval there may be some opportunities   to work it further. Whatever is done in that  space needs an HDC HTC update. So it may be   a sliding gate might work. Okay. That was my  following question. Yeah. But I think if I'm   not mistaken the door itself also comes out. the  transformer door. Is that meant to go? Is it more   the gate or the door? I'm sorry. I don't know  the exact It looks on the plan both do. Yeah,   it might be both. Um, if the transformer  doors are open to the 180 or 130°ree position,   they'll be on site. They won't be in other than  as they're opening cross over the property line,  

but they'd be resting on site. It would be  the the protective gate in front of it. And   we're looking right now. are showing just sort  of a a two-door gate operation. Um that would   stick out quite a bit. We're looking at two  options. One would be a a biffold situation.   So we'd cut that encroachment in half. Or if  um Ever Source will allow us not to have the   entire width open and available to them, then we  could have a sliding gate option so we wouldn't   have to come out of the city property at all for  that. Uh yeah, best of luck with the utility. Um,   and uh, second question, which may  completely negate my first one, though,   it looks like there's a decorative iron fence  there, which with respect to noise is doing   basically nothing to mask anything. I I assume  the HDC would have something to say, but was   there any consideration given to something more  solid that would further reduce? We're downtown,   so a transformer, I don't think it's going to do  much noise-wise, but was there any consideration   given to something more solid? Obviously, it would  have to be pretty solid to reduce the noise any,   but was that discussed at all? It wasn't. Again,  we're um sort of referring to the utility and air   flow around the transformer and that cool. Thanks.  And just as a reminder that the the sound study is   only for the exterior noise. So as you get inside  the building surrounding there, there's going to   be even a further drop off in in the noise  in there. So the perceived noise within the   building is going to be even less than what we're  showing in the sound study. Of course. Thanks. Three questions hopefully very quick. The  trash and recycling, are those going to be   brought out to the sidewalk? Yes. Or Church  Street pickup. Church church street. Yeah. Uh   the two parking spaces outside, not part  of your project, but the street spaces,   the excuse me, the city spaces, um do those  inhibit the view coming out of the garage?

Uh was this address attack? There was there  was discussed attack. Yeah. The spaces   um the was kind of a department of public works  was they redid the street and then we told them   the spaces were there and they said really? Yeah.  Don't know that they were expecting them to be   back there but they are there. Uh I'm not sure  that it's going to be a problem. Uh the traffic   engineer looked at the turning movements. It  was a question in the first hack meeting and   the the design speeds are basically so slow that  yesing racetrack back there. But just as someone   is coming out of the garage and almost exclusively  trying to get themselves out of the garage at this   point looking left, the cars are coming from the  right. I don't know if that produces any issue. I don't think it will. It wasn't brought up as a  as a problem in the technical advisory committee.   I am bringing it up now. I You're bringing it up  now. So So I can't I don't think it would be a   problem. I think there would be an opportunity  to hang a mirror off the building if if people   perceived that there was. Third question  and last question is delivery vehicles.   Uh, as we've talked about at  Nauseium on this board, uh,   turns out people get things delivered  every single day, Amazon, UPS,   etc. Where are those going? How are those going  to be directed about this site? I'm not saying   that it's entirely your responsibility to find  a lane to do that, but maybe a suggestion or   some sort of dedicated area to do so would be very  helpful. We can go back to the site plan, Peter. I think the answer to the question  is that it already exists uh in the  

up in this area. This is a I believe uh  provides temporary loading. So is that   going to remain? Is that going to remain? I  kind of thought that was a temporary thing,   but what's that? I I thought that that  striping was temporary while this site   was fenced off and other that I believe that's  necessary that you can't pull cars further out   because vehicles especially trucks turning  right from state from state onto Pleasant   would would be impeded. So I don't I think that's  a permanent uh lane dividerish striped area. Okay. It is a loading zone now. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.  Yeah. Yeah. Okay. What's going on, folks? I have a question. Okay. Those two spots behind  the building, C3. The two spots behind the   building, the the notation about them being moved.  Are are those public spaces? Yes. Yes. They're pay   for spaces. Yes. Pay for spaces. Meter spaces.  They're metered. Oh, they Well, they're It's not   I don't think it's metered. I think it's a pay  sign, you know. Well, it used to be metered. I'm   sorry. By the app. What do you mean by the time?  So, there's an This is an app metered only space.   This is a pay for spa. This is public parking that  you have to pay to park at. Yep. And apologize to   the chair. That's we were trying to figure out  what's going on back there. But but we did we   did notice that you're actually relocating one  of the one of the spots is getting relocated to   address Andrew's concern about access to the trash  room. That one of the spots is getting moved. Yes.   As it turns out, the new building has a door there  that would open up into a parking space. So, we're  

just showing restriping that with a dedicated We  thought we just discovered the only free downtown   parking. Not true. Not true. But when it was first  striped, it was it was free for a little bit,   but then the sign went up quickly. They were on  it. Yeah. I guess to complete my thought from five   minutes ago, um, and sort of to whomever had asked  it about the size of the car, I'm kind of drawing   a line in terms of marketability versus my site  plan approval. and somebody that is going to be   moving into this unit for rent, for ownership,  whatever it might be, is just going to have to   consider that. And so that's their consideration  as a consumer, not necessarily my consideration as   to the functionality of this garage. If they want  to have this type of garage and it works, then   I'm comfortable with that. Everyone else after  the fact is sort of up to their own valition. Very true. Any other questions, comments? If not, I'm going to open the  public hearing. Okay. Is anybody   here or on Zoom wishes to speak  to four against this application? Somebody on Zoom. Oh, we have a few people.  Anyone on Zoom like to speak? Raise your hand. On this application? Yes. Uh, go ahead, Barbara.  Jenny. Hi. Um, this is Barbara Jenny from Working   Stiff Properties. We're a director of butter at  92 and 94 Pleasant Street. Um, I did send a letter   uh into the planning board. Um, so you  would have it. Um, did you all get that? Believe you don't see that. I looked at  4:30. I didn't see it from the comments.

Okay. I was told to send it to planning instead  of sending it through the form because it was a   better way to do it. Okay. Well, I'm here  now. Um I wanted to make sure you all knew   uh this project has obviously been before um all  the land use boards um the second time around. Um,   and one of the things that's never come up, and  I've written about it before, and it's still   yet to be addressed by the applicant or any  of the land use boards, is the fact that the   um the back uh facade of 84 Pleasant, which is  the contiguous townhouse, 2 hours, still exists,   and it was uh sort of enveloped by the CMU edition  in the 1950s, but it's in there. Um, and the HTC   didn't ask about it. Nobody's asked about it,  but it's in there. And the city does have some   rules about what to do when there's a, you know, a  proposed demolition of a historic facade. And I'd   like that to be on the record. I would like it to  be addressed. Um, I would like to make sure that,   um, the appropriate steps are taken um to that  for public notice, for people to be able to see   it. Um, you can see it. Um there there was once  a window that now has a piece of plywood covering   it up. Um maybe that was the idea was to get light  in there and you could could see it. I don't know.   But maybe somebody at some point even though they  built that ugly CMU edition uh realized that they   should try to preserve the original building  somehow. Um the applicant has already let the   Times building um go demolition by neglect and the  city has just you know said oh well about that.   Um, I would at least like the the public to know  that this part of the the townhouse exists. These   are really interesting town houses that were  built after the great fire. Um, so I'd like   you all to know that it's in there. I'd like you  all to see it um and take a moment to see it. Um,  

it's too bad that it was never um brought to the  attention of the land use boards. U maybe there   could have been some brainstorming to preserve uh  the town houses as they were. They were three uh   row houses. Um, if you do any research at  the Aanam, there were some pretty interesting   residents there. Um, maybe there were even  some uh uh more um efficient means for this   um elaborate parking. Um if they had if they  decided to restore the townhouse as it was,   they would have had some open space to per perhaps  enter through and have just a regular parking lot   uh very safe underground um without any of the  worries by the fire chief of fire suppression   and getting cars out and people out out and that  kind of thing. Um so I'd like I would like that   acknowledged by this planning board, some board  that would be really great. Um, I'd also want   to let the planning board know that we did have a  conversation with the architect um and their team   um that we uh are perfectly willing to cooperate  um with the developer on the common wall um that   CMU wall. Um the developer for some reason thought  that they had to keep that wall because um uh our   L that sort of shed L is attached to it. Um we're  certainly willing to work with them. So that giant   wall is is not as you know horrible as it has to  be. Um it's it's uh as you know we've fought the   height of that. Um and for some reason the ZBA  approved that even though it wasn't necessary. Um   and I know that HTC does care that it they try to  put some kind of brick facing on there but if they   put the brick facing on the CMU wall that would be  encroaching into our property. Um, so we we talked   about that with the architect and he thought maybe  the solution was just to come down to the height   of our L. Uh, it looks in the drawings there. He's  just come down to the height of the top of the  

um the solar hot water panels which is really  uh not an attractive solution in my opinion. So,   just for the record, we are willing to work  with them uh certainly not at our expense,   but um to try to make that happen so that uh they  can take down that entire wall and rebuild a wall   within their property line um that meets um  HDC requirements that can be just not a giant   ugly that beep Barbara was your first three  minutes. I don't know if you're almost done   or if you're Okay, I'm almost done. But just, you  know, trying to get the point out there that um uh   we we are open to communication and cooperation,  which has not been so great to date. Um and uh   we would appreciate again the board's addressing  the historic nature of what's inside that CMU wall   that's covering up uh the original building and  make sure that appropriate measures are taken to   uh notify the public that it's there and document  it. Thank you. Is anybody else on Zoom or here? No other hands have been raised. Yeah. Um I I appreciate the comments from um the  person who just called in. Um I also appreciate   when I go to the renderings I see on um the  the aerial view the fact that that cornice as   it wraps a corner of the historic building  facing Pleasant Street is is completely ex   exposed now. So there's an opportunity for some  restoration on that end of the building on the   clapboarded end of that building. Of course,  the CMU portion is completely enveloped, but   um the higher value is is seeing that townhouse  turn the corner and this this development stays   away from that rather than go right up to  the and cover that wall up completely. I  

think that's going to be very successful there.  It will require some restoration on that side   of the building. I don't know if the project  is taking responsibility for that or not, but at least we will see. We will see that. We will  see that end of the building. We'll see the gable   end of that building one way or another. We're  we're in the midst of a public hearing. Yeah. So,   I just wanted to address her concerns.  They're good concerns and and Okay. noted. Um,   anybody else wish to speak first round?  If anybody wishes to speak at all,   which includes the applicants, you have to  speak now. I'm going to ask for a second   round. There's nobody wishes to speak in the  first round. Okay. Any second round speakers on Zoom or here? Raise your hand if you're on  Zoom. If you wish to speak, just uh Mr. Chairman, if you didn't speak in the  first round. I didn't speak in the first round.   I don't think so. I asked you to um I would  It's the board's pleasure. Is this a question   or a clarifying comment? I was just going to say  since you're going to close the public hearing,   if you had any questions for the  architect, please ask him now so he   can answer. That's what we do before the  public hearing. There were no questions,   which was good. Okay. Yeah. Thank you,  John. I'm going to close the public hearing and we may proceed with the deliberations  regarding finding effect. Um motion to   vote to find the site plan application meets  the requirements set forth in the site plan  

regulation section 2.9 evaluation criteria and  adopt the findings to fact as presented. Second   discussion. All those in favor? I. Any opposed?  Motion carries. Uh motion vote to grant site   plan approval with the following conditions  in addition to the original conditions of   approval stated in the later decision letter  of decision, excuse me, dated February 16,   2023. These conditions to be satisfied subsequent  to final approval of site plan but prior to the   issuance of building permit of the commencement  of any site work or construction activity. Um   I'm just going to state them, call them out by  number 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 four and 2.5 and 2.5   2.6 then conditions to be satisfied subsequent  to commencement of site work and construction   activity but prior to release of shy bond of  certificate of occupancy is 2.6 six as in the um is there a second? Second discussion. Can  I make a correction just in that first part   of the motion that reference to that letter  decision is shouldn't be there. So it just   should be the following conditions. Well, uh  the maker of the motion modifies the motion   to remove the section about the letter of  decision. Thank you. Second. Now discussion.   uh choosing to mention it now and not necessarily  in a formal discussion with the applicant,   but seems like a good roof to have some solar  panels on because it's entirely flat. I don't know   what the uh requirement or the solar professional  that we have here would recommend, but does seem   like a great use of a green building tactic.  So, it' be nice to see any other discussion. Um, I just like to based off of having the  comments that we had regarding, you know,  

the look of the building and whatnot that  this board doesn't have the control of the   look. That's the HDC. So, when they're talking  about, you know, restorations of and windows and   to keeping the history of it, that's that's  not under our purview. That's under the HTC.   And I just wanted to make that extremely clear as  all. Good point. Thank you. Any other discussion?   Um yeah, just to further that point, um it's  really challenging at a a budding when we have   zero lot lines and you have abing properties,  you know, by building code, you're not allowed   to have windows, you know, for obvious reasons  that your your adjacent building might someday   be built up blocking those windows. And so we have  some historic buildings downtown that are zero lot   line with windows and you know hopefully the um  the adjacent buildings don't get built taller but   this in a new building as this is is some of the  issues I think are centered around that that fire   proofing that or um the code for fire um supp uh  wording is losing my mind resistance. Yeah, the   fire resistance rating of that wall is part of an  issue I think that was addressed by the the um the   uh public member and so but I think that they're  they're achieving it the best way they can. Um   this has been I don't think anybody would have  expected nine years after the fire to be finally   at this point of maybe getting the building going  there. So um it's been a long torturous path. I'm   just glad to see it finally coming to the the  end of design and the start of construction   soon. Agree with that. Any other discussion?  All those in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries. Yes, please. One does. Okay. Yeah,  

I agree with that. I already took  mine. Sorry. I'll have a short break.

reconvene the meeting. Uh the next item we may  or may not have a person here for Maria Concept   Bkaya and Ralph Minderhow his owners 65 onx.  Is there anybody here for this application? Next is a preliminary. Do we need to make a motion  to move it or just automatically get continued. I   would we have to why don't we move to continue  to the next I'll make that motion. Second. Any   discussion? All those in favor? I. Any opposed?  Continued. Great. We just move right along.   Preliminary conceptual consultation request  of Reagan Electric Co. as owner for property   94 Langden and 98 Cornwall Street requesting  preliminary consultation for site plan review   properties on assessors map 139 lots 1 to 8 and  lies in the mixeduse residential or MRB district.   who is here to present this application. Can I say  something first? As in a butter, I'm not going to   speak. If you want me to sit down, I will. You  can sit there and be quiet if you want. Okay,   I'll just I just want to make that clear. I  live on Langden Street. Right. No passing notes.   That's right. Just want to make I don't want to  zip. Thank you. Good evening. Alex Monister on   behalf of Chimber Builders. I'm joined by Sean  Toby of Haley Ward, who's our civil engineer,   and Shauna Samis from Chimberg as well. So, we're  pleased to be here tonight to talk to you about   uh 94 Langden and 98 Cornwall Street, the existing  Reagan Electric building, which many of you,   I'm sure, are familiar with. Our proposal is  to merge those two lots and create three new   single family uh detached homes. Once the parcel  is merged, it'll be about 25,000 square feet.   With the redevelopment, our intention is to  take up uh the existing pavement as well as   the buildings that are on site and take those  down and put the three new single family homes   off of one shared driveway. Doing that will allow  us to have a lot more green space around the site,  

make it more conforming, and also hopefully  create a really nice residential feel over there   uh adjacent to the existing residential  properties that are on Langden Street. Um,   it does allow us also to reduce the impervious  by about 5,000 square feet on the site. Um,   and just in general bring it in accordance with  stormwater regulations and lot line setbacks   and things like that. As a point of clarity, we  do need a variance. We have submitted to be on   the zoning board of adjustment. We have 88 feet  of frontage on Langden Street where 100 feet is   required. We intended to be on the zoning board  last night, but because they had a full agenda,   we got pushed to the 27th. So, we were hoping to  have heard from the zoning board before we came   to the planning board. Unfortunately,  we don't have their guidance yet. Uh,   but we're still looking forward to getting  feedback from you all about the site design.   This is still preliminary at this point. So, we  have some additional details to provide you as we   move forward with the application assuming that  we get that variance and we have a project here   including landscape and and other design elements  like that. The property is served by P public   water and sewer and so our intention is to have  all three homes connected to that and I'm happy to   answer any specific questions that you all have.  Thank you. Questions of the applicant comments   on the site plan? Not you're not in the wetland  buffer. We are not impacting the wetland buffer. there any hazardous materials on the site?  Um, we have done some on-site investigations   and we need to do some additional site testing  to determine uh if it is determined that there   are materials then we are not intending on  doing full foundations here and we would   obviously take the necessary precautions when  uh removing materials and stabilizing the site.  

Yes, sir. Um, just to be clear, you're not  intending to do like a full foundation in   general or is that conditional on finding  more or finding hazardous materials? Yeah,   based on the water tables on I I don't think that  we will do found full foundations in any scenario,   but we can definitely uh get more detail on  that as we move forward with the full design   for you. Andrew, was there a consideration to  make this one building with more units? Um,   that was not a consideration that we considered.  I, you know, this property was listed publicly   for sale. I'm sure that there are other people who  considered doing something like that. But for us,   the best redevelopment of the site to be in  congruence with the existing neighborhood feel,   um, the other single family homes on site, we  felt like this was the best use of the site. in a similar direction. Uh could you have  an ADU there as well as the three units?   So these are three detached single family  homes on one lot. They're not on their own   lot line. So I don't believe that there could  be additional ADUs on the site. That's correct. Um what is the 250 foot dees shoreland water  quality protection line? What restrictions do you   have with that? Yeah, so we we can be within the  250 foot buffer of the shoreland. Um there are,   you know, as the shoreland buffer progresses,  there are different requirements between 100 and   then 150 and 250 ft. And so when we impact that  generally we have to pay a fee and get a permit.

That's just a state. That's correct. I just have one more comment. Um earlier tonight  we ironically saw a very similar style site as   this. It was at 224 Broad Street and uh that is  an existing three unit HOA. Um where it's a more   horizontal pres presentation to the street front  on Broad Street. Um sort of like you have here   on Langden and then it's a very long driveway much  like you have here. those units are attached which   was where my head initially went just by due to  scale and massing and overall site consumption.   Um I don't know if connecting these buildings  while still having them as uh single family   style structures if you will even though they're  condo. What was the design I guess genesis? Sure.   I think in general our preference is to when  we can, you know, the site dictates what we   can do. Often times there are site constraints  that require us to push them together. Um, in   this site it's sort of a unique shape. It has that  like you mentioned the long but it also, you know,   as you come to the far end on the left hand side,  sort of juts in. It just felt like that made the   most amount of sense and to give some green space  in between the buildings where we could. I don't   think that there would be a great advantage in  this particular site to connecting them. You   might get a little bit more green space on either  side, but I think having those corridors of green   space in between the buildings. Additionally, you  can see we have where we have the three parking   spaces that right now the whole entire site at  this point is buildings and and concrete. And so   we're restoring a lot of the site to create  more green space. And so I think in general   um creating that green barrier around the site  is a a big public benefit to that neighborhood  

and and to the you know environment in  that area. Does Cornwall Street not have   a view corridor easement or language? I was  just looking that up and I think it does. I think it's Dover Cab. Yeah. Do you know that?  Yeah, that section of I don't know that um that   section of Cornwall Street is not a city street,  which is why we need the frontage variant. So,   when we first considered the site, we thought  we would be good to go because we had frontage   on both Cornwall and Langden. Uh turns  out that that is a paper street. We we   cannot take city frontage from Cornwall. So,  I don't know if in that section of Cornwall   where that's not a city. Do you know what  I'm referencing? A view corridor. Yes. Okay. So that's a question we can follow up  and it might it might need that that   house might need to shift a little but  we can follow up outside of this. It's   pretty tight. That house would have to change  dimensions to fit that. Yeah, that if there's   a view corridor down Cornwall then that house  would have to change significantly for sure. Yes, Tony. Um, I'm thinking about the  neighborhood. Is trash removal going to   be by a third party service. It's not going to  be city trash removal. Yeah, there'll be a condo   association, an HOA here and they'll they'll  contract trash removal. Are there other condo   associations in that area of the neighborhood?  I'm just the the impact seems slight to add these   three houses here, but now you have a maybe a  large vehicle, you know, coming down here and I I   don't I don't know how you is it like they wheel a  trash barrel to the end of the street. I don't see   a dumpster unless I'm missing it. Yeah, this would  be, you know, some sort of collection where they  

would put it in, you know, the bin on the wheels  and wheel it to whether they would wheel it to   uh, you know, Langden or to their driveways  and someone would come down is sort of to be   determined. We can certainly explore that further.  I think we need to get our variance and then we   can get into some of those specific site details  and also as um, Mr. Simone has pointed out earlier   in the evening, I was outside listening, there  will be Amazon trucks coming down. So certainly   there will be a residential related impact for  three homes. They still um get Amazon packages   and have their trash picked up just like all  of you do. So um but yes, yeah, those will   be considerations. Yeah. Again, I I don't know if  you there was an applicant earlier or a discussion   about garbage pickup at 3:00 a.m. You know, if it  was city service, that's not going to happen. Yes.   Public service sometimes might like it's 5:30  a.m. in our neighborhood. Waste management also   does toters for HOAs all the time, which Yeah.  So just just where my thought was going on it.   I feel very comfortable saying that we will not  hire someone who will pick up trash at 3:00 a.m. any other feed. Yes. But is this discussion  suggesting I'm sorry if I missed it. Is it   not depending in any way on curb pickup? We're  not suggesting that garbage pickup from the   city couldn't occur here as well at the street.  Right. It's a city road. I mean I don't see why   not. Yeah. Okay. Usually I my understanding is  when you usually do these developments, you have   to take care of all the maintenance yourself.  That was my understanding. I could be wrong. I don't know. How does garbage work, Peter? Tell  us. I don't know. That's a That's a service that   the city provides. Here's the question for the  applicant. Tell us how the trash will work.   Yeah. So, I I think it's an option, right? So  generally in a site this small where the public   street is right there, these people are not  going to be bringing their trash very far in   order to have city pickup. If you tell me that  they can't have city pickup for some reason,  

then we will contract somebody. Otherwise,  likely they will bring their garbage to   Langden Street and uh the city will pick it  up. Just it needs to be addressed because if   you if they end up having one of the large  trash trucks coming down the private street,   it's going to be hard to turn around. So probably  back up which creates backup beepers. So you know   that whole thing just figure that detail out.  We certainly work. Thank you. Any other is   the width of the driveway 20 ft. Thank you. I  think what you'll find is the city truck won't   go down into the development. It'll pick it up  curbside. I think he's thinking about a private   truck. Yeah. Got it. Yeah. And so sometimes in  these private developments when they are more   expansive than this um we contract somebody  because we don't want them to have to pull   the trash all the way to the nearest public  street. But in this scenario we're talking   about 100 ft. So I think they will probably  just do that. I'm confident you can address   it just I am too. You'll come up with answers  to that. Any other feedback for the applicant? Peter still looking about the view corridor. Yeah,   I said we'd follow you if you follow. There is  one on Cornwall. It's just what's the status of   that that street. We won't answer it tonight.  We won't answer it tonight. Okay. Peter knows   how to get a hold of me. Luckily for Peter.  Well, thank you. All right. Thanks so much. We have request of Hill handover  group LLC as owner for property 181   Hill Street requesting preliminary  consultation for site plan review.   This property is on assessor's map 125  lot 14 in the character district 4 L1.

4L1. Okay. Yes. CD4L1. Who's here to present  this application? Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman,   members of the board. Uh Derek Durban, the  attorney uh for the owner of the property.   Hill handover Group LLC. Uh the sole member of  Hill Hanover Group LLC I believe is on Zoom. Um   may want to say a couple words um at some point  after I'm done. Um I also have Mark Gianini and   uh Richard Dardens from Portsouth Architects  here. um they intend to I believe present   after I give you sort of like a highlevel  overview of the property existing conditions   and what's proposed for the site. Uh Jeff  Sabin's also here to answer any questions.   He is the property manager for the for the  property. Um just from JPK properties. Um, so,   uh, the property at 181 Hill Street is a 16,127  square foot lot. Um, it's got three separate   two-story multifamily buildings on it as you see  on the site plan. Um, each contains four units,   so there's 12 units on the property total. Um, as  you noted, the property does lie within the CD4L1   zoning district. Uh but you'll also notice if you  look at the city GIS that it's bordered um to the   north and west um by the CD5 zoning district. Um  the property I I know you're all familiar with   Hill Street and sort of what it's surrounded by,  but it's surrounded by um a pretty diverse mixture   of uses primarily um I would say medium to higher  density residential uses, but also some commercial   uses as you get um closer to the downtown side of  the property. Uh it's bounded um on three sides by   different streets. Um Hill Street to the north, uh  Hannover Street to the south, and Autumn Drive to  

the east. The portion of Hill Street that borders  the property is privately owned. Um uh half of   that um basically to the center line um from um  the the buildings that you're looking at is owned   by Hill Hannover Group LLC. Then the other side  of it, the northern side of the street is owned   um by the owner of the Foundry uh place property.  Um so it is kind of a unique situation with that   particular street. Um the city does do trash  and recycling pickup for Hill Street. Um but it   doesn't actually maintain the street. Um so it's  one of those unique um situations in the city that   there's a couple other examples around. Uh in  its existing condition, the property does have   24 parking spaces associated with it. Um there are  10 surface spaces that are situated either along   Hill Street or between the existing buildings. Um  and then uniquely there's another 14 spaces that   are located within the Foundry Place garage. And  that's per a three-way agreement between um the   owner of this property, the owner of the Foundry  Place property, and the city. Um the buildings   uh on this property were um at least per the city  assessing records were originally constructed in   1850. Um as you can imagine um over the course of  time the buildings have um fallen into some level   of disrepair. Um they're they're basically in in  need of a either a very substantial um renovation   or um or as is being proposed here basically um to  be demolished and reconstructed which is the more   um finance financially feasible and practical  approach to um dealing with the buildings. Um,   so what is proposed is a redevelopment  of the property to include three  

uh single three-story buildings. Um, I'm I'm  sorry, one single three-story building with 18   um residential units in it. The building  would contain 23 subterranean parking spaces   um in addition to uh retaining the 14 existing  spaces in the Foundry Place um building. Uh despite the increase um in density that's  proposed for the site, um the project would in   uh the open space of the property would increase  from what exists. Um also improve upon the   existing parking situation. Um likely removing  some vehicles from the street. The property is   non-conforming in multiple respects in its  current condition. Um and what is proposed   will probably require similar relief um from the  zoning board. So there is that um step that would   need to be taken obviously before um it makes  its way back here assuming that's successful. So   um I I think that's probably the biggest  elephant in the room is that um it's probably   the the density that's proposed here um being  over what is allowable on the site. Um, so but   I would submit to the at least to this board that  the height, massing, and density of the building   is consistent with the spirit and intent of CD4  L1 zoning. Uh, which really is to encourage a a   step down or a stepping down um between the CD5  zoning district and um the buildings within it,   particularly um you have Foundry Place to the  north with 51 condominium units. And then as you   transition over to the G GRC district, so you've  got Foundry Place on the one side, four stories,   51 units, and then you've got GRC, which is a  higher density zoning district, but um lower um   height restrictions. So this kind of falls in in  between um in between the two. Um so uh with that  

um you know I think this does provide a unique  opportunity for the city to add more housing in an   um existing basically developed area um without  increasing any um demand I guess parking demand on   um anything that's um offsite um you know and  obviously there's a desire to add multifamily   um housing to the city um it's certainly something  that's been encouraged by the master plan in the   past. Some certainly something state legislature  and the city is encouraging now. So, um believe   it's a it's a it's a good good project, a good  opportunity for the city. And with that, I would   uh turn it over to Mark if he has any comments  on the architectural detail, technical detail   associated with the property. Also, Corey Belden  here. I forgot to introduce him as he walked in   um just a couple minutes ago, but um Corey  obviously from Altus Engineering who can um go   through um any of the plan sheets with you and any  of the technical detail. So, thank you. Thank you. Excuse me. Good evening. Mark Jenny from Partsouth  Architects. Um Derek really did a good job giving   a pretty um comprehensive summary of the project  as we see it. Um it is a unique a unique lot as he   mentioned. We kind of feel it's transitional  where it's located based on zoning. Um as he   mentioned you've got we border CD5 to the north.  So you have larger buildings there. Um and we also   have zoning allows for four stories along Hill  Street. So, the back of our property actually has   the ability to have at least a portion of it um be  four stories if if we wanted. We're not currently   proposing that at the time. Uh the condo building  uh just to the left or the east of the or west of  

the building is already three stories. uh and you  can see in the upper left um image here uh we took   the city's uh 3D model and then we from public  record took other projects that have either been   um completed such as the foundry place and the  parking garage and then others that are proposed   such as across the street and also the Hinimman  um property you know just to give you a sense of   uh the development that's happened or is coming  um and to show you the scale of our project,   you know, as it relates to the others. So,  moving on to the next sheet. So, this is a   conceptual rendering looking, you know, from the  street view straight on. Uh as Derek mentioned,   you know, we're we're stepping this property  uh to try to keep the sizes and scale of the   building feeling residential. Um even though it  would be one of the larger buildings, you know,   in in this zone. Uh we're aligning EES with the  neighboring property to the left which is again   it's a three-story property and we're proposing  three stories for us and in this image you can   see you know some of the larger buildings in the  back. Moving on to the floor plans. Uh this is   the basement floor plan which would include  uh the garage parking underneath. So we have   17 parking spots where you'd enter from Autumn  Street on the right. That' be a two-way entrance.   sloping down from grade there. Uh grade itself on  this lot basically slopes the high point would be   the back corner of Hill Street and it kind of  slopes about five feet towards Autumn Street   uh both on Hill and Handover. The grade kind of  flows in the same direction. So we're using that   um in our favor to help uh get into the parking  garage without having to go down quite as far.  

So, we have 17 parking spots in there, two  entrances, one includes uh the stair towers,   one has the elevator in the front there. We also  have a large area designated for uh mechanical   spaces for the building as well as other services  such as um trash recycling and uh package delivery   and mail. Going up from the basement level, we  have uh the first through third floor plans are   all very similar uh in their current conceptual  phase. So we have six units that range from just   about uh just under 1,000 square feet to just  under 1,600 square ft. So these are um planned   to be a mix of one, two, and threebedroom  units. We haven't done layouts yet. Exactly. From there, uh they're just showing you  additional concept plans for the upper levels.   very similar. Uh here we have the site plan  similar to the basement level, but you can see   uh Hill Street to the north as as Derek was  mentioning. That's a private street. There's   also a 20 foot wide utility easement  on there. Half of it's on our property,   half of it's on the um foundry place property.  We're maintaining that and basically providing   uh six parking spaces including one that's  van accessible. uh parallel parking along the   street. This is uh similar to the current parking  configuration that's along Hill Street. Now again,   we'll be entering the parking garage from Autumn  Street and then um maintaining sidewalks along   handover and also proposing a sidewalk along  Autumn to get to those parking spots in the back.   Uh the next image and the final one uh is just  kind of um a blown up bird's eye view showing  

a lot in the surrounding community. You know,  obviously the as we've mentioned the larger   developments behind us uh in Hanover all nearby.  Um so again, we feel like it's a unique project.   It's kind of transitional uh between the different  zones and also the allowed building heights.   Um, and also just the size of the lot itself is  is larger than most of the lots along Handover   Street. So, uh, with that, we're Oh, I don't know.  Bruce, did you want to speak if you're on Zoom? Uh, and no, thanks for the opportunity. Just say  sorry I couldn't be there in person. I'm happy to   be available for questions and appreciate any  kind of feedback on on this design. One other,   you know, consideration that we've been given  is uh instead of the uh below ground parking on   sites, we have sufficient offsite with uh the  foundry place and some surface parking. That's   what we've been going back and forth a bit and  landed on on this proposal. But appreciate the   opportunity. Thank you. questions of  the development team. Yes. Um well,   I'm glad you landed on this proposal. I'm excited  by the um the way you're accommodating the parking   and I'm seeing that on sheet one of two. This  one? Yeah, it it looks as though we have the   opportunity to gain three street parking spaces  back as well. That's something the city could,   I imagine, do where you had curb cuts previously,  you're infilling the curb cuts. Yes. Sorry. A long   handover. Yes. A long handover. Yeah. Yep. Um  not to mention the um you know the six spaces   that are on your property on the back side. Um  there uh here we have a situation where we're   we have a lot of parking with this proposal  which is which is good and it's it's hidden  

very well and it's we did have a question about  parking regulations because I know there's some   uh with the state regulations there's some  change in parking counts. Is it going to be   one parking spot per unit? One per unit. Even if  it's above, doesn't matter the number of units,   right? Over 500 square feet, it'll be one one and  then 500 ft or less will be half a space. Okay. Yeah. So, we have enough parking on  site to accommodate that. And then   the 14 parking spots that are in Foundry Place  are really above and beyond what's required. Sounds like it. Yes. Uh Tony and then Bill. This  is just a conceptual conversation and I know this   is not inside the historic district. I I do feel  a little sense of loss and those buildings that   are there now. They're they're quite attractive.  They are they need some love, but they're they're   quite attractive. Um there really is a warm walk  down that street. Um it's not it's not jarring to   the pedestrian. the I would prefer this property  to keep the garage the way it is, but to separate   above grade three structures, even a minimal  distance of separation just to help help that   transition because when you when you lump them  all together like that, it's just it's a big mass.   You're adding a story and then you're tightening  them up. So, it's just it's just my thoughts.   I don't know if that's possible. I don't know if  you're going to get your your zoning variance. Um,   I think there could be something to achieve it  to break up the mass a little bit more and keep   the same number of units and get a little bit of  gap in there. That's it. Bill, you had your hand   up. Yeah. So, what's the traffic flow? Uh, when we  dealt with the 361 handover, there was apparently   an easement through some of their property that  belonged to the people that own this property. Uh,  

and then we've got Hill Street itself being  half one owner and half another owner. Uh,   how do you do maintenance? How do you do snow  plowing? Uh, where do cars come and go from? Well,   I can speak to the traffic flow at least. Um, if  we go to the site plan, um, I mean, starting on   Handover, which is a public way obviously is  one way going, you know, to the right of the,   uh, the page. Uh, Autumn Street is two  ways. So, at least for the proposed project,   uh, you know, you'd have the option of going, I  guess, to Hill Street or or Handover coming out   or the parking garage. Currently, Hill Street,  um, from Autumn to the left is private. Um,   right now, I believe there is some two-way  traffic. It's minimal the amount of traffic   just because of the the location and the the  density of of people driving through there.   Um there is an easement access easement and  Derek maybe you can speak better to this but   um from uh from this property as well as the condo  association to the left they both have an easement   to basically cross over the Hinimman property and  that is that easement will continue best I know   as far as um snow plowing and maintenance  I'm not sure what is done currently Okay. Yeah. Again, Derek Duran for the record. I just  got some clarification from Jeff on that. Um,   so BR U Hill Handover Group owned um where the  Foundry Place uh residences are now. Um so he   um Bruce Summer, owner of Hill Hanover Group,  maintain the entire street. Um now basically   what happens is um he maintains um his side of  Hill Street and Foundry Place maintains their  

they have two separate contractors basically  that m maintain um each side of the street. Um,   another unique situation. Um, they also  have their own contractors plowing. Um,   and there is to the best of my knowledge and  Jeff's no formal agreement, you know, for one   contractor to maintain it all. So, just the way  it sort of works out right now. And you do use   the easement across 361 Hanover. Um the only thing  I can say to that um is that I I do know that um   that access easement is in litigation right now.  I'm not handling that litigation. So um I just   know that it hasn't gone to any type of trial yet  and um and is and that access is being litigated.   I could tell you what I see from the title  records, but I but I I don't know how the court   will ultimately your plan is not dependent on that  on the outcome of that. That That's correct. Yeah. Andrew, um, previously, Attorney Durban stated  23 subterranean units and then you just stated   17 with six exterior and then in the site plan it  says 12. We want to keep you guessing. Mine was a   mistake. Got it. Uh, so it is 17 subterranean  units and six along uh Hill Street. Units or   spaces? I'm sorry. Spaces. You really want to keep  us guessing. Yeah, just as a summary on the design   review site plan on the right hand side it says  parking requirements the ratio can change and the   unit count has to change to then have an updated  calculation. Yes. Thank you. That's more for me,   too. Okay. I just got to make sure I'm with  everything. I just want to clear the record  

because I think it was stated earlier that the  property behind on Hill Street is CD5, but it's   not. It's CD4. So, I just want the Foundry Place,  the one that's between Hill Street and Foundry   Place on map geo. It might still be showing CD5,  but it is changed last fall. Oh, okay. I'm sorry.   Yes. Sorry. just because I was the one that  brought it forward to change it. Yeah. Having   a little artifact because 361 handover is also  now CD4. I just want to make sure that's clear. Any other feedback for the Yes, Frank. Uh  I'm just taking a look at um that first floor   um the parking garage, the trash recycle room.  It looks like um I'm looking at the property on   Google Maps now and there isn't a whole lot of  case where I I'm assuming that entrance is going   to be. Um how would the trash pickup be dealt  with? Would that be through the city and then   um would there be bins there that they'd be  individually brought out? That kind of thing.   I'm not sure if you've gotten that far ahead. Uh  we haven't really gotten that far ahead except for   allocating a space for it. I mean, typically  a building this size would probably have a   private pickup. So there would be either totes  or smaller dumpsters that are on casters have be   brought out when the truck came. And would there  be enough space on uh the side of the building   for like a sidewalk, unless I'm misreading  the plans? Yeah. So the intention is that   we would uh extend the sidewalk from handover  along Autumn Street. Uh and right now we're   showing it wrapping around Hill Street as well.  Okay, I see that now. Thank you. Anything else? Any other questions for us?  We're good. Thank you. Thank you.

City Council referrals. Um the historic district  map we've talked about, there's been quite a bit   of discussion between the last time this board  talked about it and tonight. I can tell you   that based on conversations I've had with the  chair of the HDC and also with staff, our re my   recommendation and the recommendation I'm getting  is to not act on that at this time and wait for   the master plan discussion on the topic. We've  gotten a lot of emails about it too. There was   a motion to second. Okay. Any any discussion? All  those in favor? Hi. Love that idea. Actually, uh,   Portsouth submarine and maritime zoning change in  Albore. Um, so they can do their I won't say what   they want to do. You can I'll let Peter explain  it. Well, they submitted a letter requesting   uh currently their zone single residence B. Um,  the use is not permitted. So they they originally   got a variance for the use and subsequently  when they have to do any expansions they have   to come back to the zoning board uh for variance  to expand the use. They've requested to be either   gateway one or gateway two. Um just looking  at where the adjacent gateway districts lie.   Gateway 2 would probably be more uh suitable for  this property because it's across Market Street on   um where the Connect Church is. Um and  so also museum in Gateway One um is not   permitted by right. So, another consideration  would be to make that a permitted use. Um, if the board felt that was appropriate, we  ready to make a recommendation to council  

tonight. Is that the idea or right, you would  make a recommendation? They they've referred   this to you for recommendation back. Just on the  resoning staff brought up the use um issue. Um,   currently in the G1 and G2, it requires a  special exception for a museum. So that's a   little less of a bar than a variance, but they  would still have to go to the zoning board. So your recommendation would  be gateway gateway two. Yes. I need to recuse myself from this  conversation. Submarine. My wife's on the board. Yes, Bill. So, one of the letters that  we have is from a neighbor that points   out that this is a about a residential  area that would be adversely affected   uh by the change. So, I understand properly. Okay. So, other um Properties that are owned  by not forprofits in our city are considered   civic districts. Um you know museums are  one of those the historic houses who are   considered museums. So why are we not looking at  some sort of civic district for this instead of   based off because it is a not for profofit is  it not? I mean has I'm assuming I'm not wrong   in that am I? Does anyone know? I don't know.  I don't know. It's private, right? Right. But   not for profofits are private. Yeah. No, I  they they claim in their letter they're a   nonprofit organization. That's what I thought  because um I just think I I feel like there's   something outside of what they're asking for that  might fit this because I do feel like if you're  

talking like Strawberry Bank or you know Moffet  Lighthouse, I mean any of these there a lot of um civic districts that we have these properties. So,   I guess I'm trying to figure out why  aren't we looking at that as a possibility. Anyone else agree with me, disagree  with me? It's a good question. Instead of trying to fit it into a district that  it probably shouldn't be in, why aren't we fitting   into a district it probably should have always  been in? Does anything in the civic district,   And I guess I was had the same questions looking  at this. Obviously, I I wasn't aware that previous   that museums required any special I don't think  people are worried about museums taking over   the city of Portsouth. I don't know what zoning  allows you to park a submarine. Um, so there we   all know that same thought. Yeah. I don't Is is  the district kind of Yeah. I mean, I don't know   how I'm trying to back solve a problem here that  I don't think there's an existing solution to.   It's it's similar to the quandry I always have  that we have a water park yet we don't have any   zoning that we there's not a district that we have  that allows a water park. So, I like water. There   are there are things that exist in our city that  actually don't fit into our current zoning. So is   the wonderant, but I feel like it's a not for-p  profofit. It's a museum. It's open to the public   even though it's private because, you know, the  city doesn't actually own all these civic things,   right? They're owned by their own separate not  for-p profofit organizations that run them and   keep them that way. So I just feel like we should  at least consider and research whether or not that   might be a more appropriate appropriate district  than changing it to a gateway district. Did they  

already commence their addition. Yes. Is it done?  Um I think it's close to being done if not if not   done. But I think they had permission to Right.  They got a variance. They got a variance. I was   merely going in the direction of are they doing  more that I I think they have future plans. Right. Gateway does include does I mean so close to so many other civic  districts that are in the downtown. I just   sort of was like it seemed to make sense  for me. Sounds like the distinction is the   location where it is decidedly in a gateway  type setting versus some of the other civic   uses. I think I don't think I'm speaking out  of school here. Aren't they proposing to do   some other commercial uses on the property  potentially? Potentially generate profit they're not for profofit they can generate  profit but it goes back into the not for   profit right every not for profofit can do that  so they sell tickets to go to Strawberry Bank you   have memberships you have is it more generate  revenue than generate profit if you generate   re revenue it goes back into the organization  that's all which you know which is a good thing   right we want we want this um to succeed. Um I I  think for India Butters I I think the assumption   that it's the assumption that it's going to have  a negative impact isn't necessarily fair. I think   um there are opportunities to review the  project at other levels. In other words,   it, you know, a development couldn't occur  here or a change couldn't occur here without  

any public comment at all or concerns being  heard, right? If if it was a gateway district   and they proposed additional development, let's  say it proposed a commercial use of some sort,   that would require site plan review, right?  Just like we've been doing all night. And   if ever there was a gateway, literally  gateway into the city, this location,   it certainly feels like a gateway to me.  This carve just that specific property kind of legitimizes its use  for decades as well. It's been just for comedy sake maybe if they didn't  come forward with this would this ever have   been addressed? Possibly not. and the city was  kind of like whatever they could seek variances,   you know, potentially in the cleanup of the zoning  map following the master plan. I would default to   both Joe's point and the chairman's point of  we'll have oversight at some point or another   and if they want to pursue more things then I  feel pretty confident that we will have some   sort of authority there. So should somebody want  to move to recommend gateway two? I mean I look   at like all the land farther down or farther east  on the north bypass and there's a lot of business   tricks there districts there that I think we  have sort of targeted as places to look at   being something other than business districts. So  um I I'm I don't have heartache against gateway.   I just asked the civic as a question for  discussion that maybe we should consider.

Will will a broader discussion come out  of the master plan on gateways and what   belongs in gateways? We're going to get into  that's we're gonna they're coming in March,   right? Yes. Yeah. they'll be here in March  to have a conversation with us about issues   like that. Um that's like the refinement of  the regulations is a next step, but to talk   about what we've got currently is is part of the  master plan for sure. It's like just like your   comment that other people haven't seen about  housing. We'll be talking about those things. So should this be held it, you know, given the ease with  which you can change zoning in a city,   I don't see that it's a problem to let these  people, you know, address their request. But part of their request though is also to  ask add museums to gateway. So I think   we have to consider whether or not that  should be done as well because right now   museums are not allowed in gateway I don't  believe. That requires a special exception. Which would be pretty easy to get.  Is that gateway one and two? Yes. Oh,   all right then. I I guess I'm fine with  not addressing that part. I thought they   were We could address that part, too. I  mean, we could make that recommendation, but the Supreme Court of Special exception are  usually pretty specific. Would they be able to   meet those Yeah, it's usually about noise and  traffic. And I was going to ask what the logic   was. What's the logic in not allowing museums  and gateway? I was wondering the same thing.   I think they probably allow them, but they want  to make sure they have a public hearing to make  

sure they fit in with the surroundings,  especially given the proximity to the   residential neighborhood. Right. Mr. Mr. Chair,  I'll vote to recommend the city council schedule   first reading to change the zoning from single  resident B to gateway 2 on map 209 lot 87 and and to accompany that vote to recommend the  city council schedule first reading to allow   museum as a permitted use in gateway one and  gateway 2. Second discussion. All those in   favor? I. Any opposed? Motion carries.  One recusal. No, make a submarine zone. Um, the next item is the gateway parcels that in  in November when you voted on this, there was one   property. It shows up at at it shows showed up as  two parcels in the staff memo, but that project   um they actually merged those lots, but in our GIS  it still shows up as two and they currently are   MRB. I can bring them up. Um it's property under  construction. Property under construction. Yeah,   they're the ones under construction. Yeah. And  so the the um before the planning board was to   either zone it to G1 or G2 and the board didn't  make a decision one or the other. So I just need   clarification on which before this goes to  council which what's adjacent? Gateway one is   adjacent and the closest gateway to would be at  the market basket then gateway one I would say.   I think I know this answer, but is one of those  more conforming to the project that's currently   under construction there? They're the same.  Yeah, probably about the same. Gateway one  

will not hurt them. Yeah, Mr. Chair. Yes. I vote  to recommend the city council change these two   parcels as depicted on the map to G1 and schedule  first reading on the proposed map amendments as   presented. Second. Any discussion? All those  in favor? Any opposed? Thank you. The only one.   Congress Street 21 Congress Street requesting a  one-year extension move. Second. Any discussion?   All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Motion  carries. I'm going to be really quick. The   only thing I mentioned the master plan. There was  some discussion in the newspaper and I talked to   our representative earlier this evening about  peace. I would ask the board for authority to   engage in a conversation about peace and report  back to the board about how and whether we should   consider having discussions with the PDA and  the city manager because city issues here   um about a possible change to the current  scheme of the PE's property and the PDA's   management of the non-air force portions of  that property. not airport portions of the site. Wonderful. But I want authorization. I  don't want to just do it. So authorized. I am authorized. So moved. Second. All those in  favor? I Okay, I'll do it and I'll report back. That we are ajourned. Thank you very much.