City of Portsmouth, New Hampshire Planning Board, 27 Jan 2022

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: 1.27.2022 Planning Board

Description

1.27.2022 Planning Board

A

All right welcome everybody. Okay, I'm gonna call the january 27th meeting of the planning board to.

A

Order peter brits the acting planning director and for the first uh order of business. I I would make.

A

A motion um for election of officers take take a most of elected officers uh right here. um I.

B

Would like to make a motion that we uh elect corey clark as chairman and rick chillman, as vice chair.

C

I'll second, that and I'll speak to that. If I'm allowed, um I I would like to just uh state a few.

B

Words that I have uh formulated corey clark joined the planning board in june 2017 as an alternate.

B

Member and he was then reappointed and promoted to full-time voting member last year by the former.

B

Mayor rick beckstead, as the chief engineering and construction engineer at new hampshire department.

B

Of environmental services, mr clark has the skills and the background needed to chair the planning.

B

Board moving forward in his time on the planning board, mr clark has demonstrated that he has the.

B

Ability and experience to support the many new members on the planning board his ability to.

B

Listen and thoughtful respond and thoughtfully respond to questions of fellow board members.

B

Has shown me he is ready for this new role and if you vote for him tonight, he will prove that.

B

To everyone, rick chelman joined the planning board almost a year ago, although his tenure.

B

Has not been very long, he has shown himself to be knowledgeable in board matters and would be.

B

A good and supportive vice chair, thank you, okay, so we have a motion and a second any discussion.

A

um I I I would just like to I do I I press this thing right. You don't have to press it. You just.

B

Have to talk to me, I would just like to say that um it's actually very difficult for me to vote.

D

On this I'm brand new, this is my first night. I don't know all of the people on the planning.

D

Board- and I feel like there needs to be a better process around us having a chance to share our.

D

Bios with each other I get a chance of who wants to be a chair and a vice chair and have that kind.

D

Of like informed discussion, which I can't have at this moment, so I just wanted to state that.

A

Okay, thank you. Anybody else can we add an additional nomination for chair. um We have a.

A

Motion on the floor so we'll have to deal with that motion and then um on to the next motion.

A

No any other discussion, but there's no other question. I'm gonna have to call the question.

A

With um a roll call vote, because we have a planning board member who's attending.

A

um Via zoom and um I have a list here of members, I.

A

That was interesting. Oh oh did he want to add a discussion. I'm sorry, mr hewitt.

A

Would you like to add to the discussion before we take the vote.

A

uh No, I'm also for the vote. Okay, I'm going to do a roll call vote.

A

So all those in favor say aye and we'll start with peter harris.

A

Okay, rick uh rick chalman, no ray pizzulo; yes, karen canard, yes,.

A

Beth moreau, yes, corey clark, yes, jane bagala, no.

A

Greg mahara, no okay, so that is oh sorry, jim hewitt! Oh no I'll have you on my list. Okay,.

A

Okay, so that is one two three four yeses and one two, three four five no's. So the motion fails.

A

So I'll entertain another motion, mr harris I'd like to make a notion that.

E

Rick shellman be the chair and corey.

E

Clark, sorry, I asked my name b vice chair: do we do we have a second second second by mr.

A

Mohanna any discussion on this motion. Would you like to speak to your motion? Sure um I've.

E

Been on the planning board for a year actually started at the same time, rick did and quickly.

E

Learned to understand his knowledge and background.

E

To um his engineering background and knowledge of our our planning board other planning boards, how.

E

The statute works uh with our regulations and it's been a very helpful experience for me in getting.

E

To know- and I feel that's helpful leadership needed leadership- that we uh need going forward.

A

Anybody else like to speak to that motion. Oh mr harris have your hand raised.

C

You mean, mr uh well, I'm sorry, mr hewitt. Excuse me I'm sorry that was good.

F

Oh, I'm sorry is my hand being shown raised, it is now it is, but that's okay. We can.

A

Just I'm just new to this zoom stuff, I'm sorry, but is my hand being shown up or down right now.

A

It is being shown and raised. We I think we have to lower it. I think that the producer can do that.

A

um But if you're not getting it, I'm going to lower it, so it should be lowered down we'll.

A

Try to keep an eye on it, it's a long way from us to see too so just speak up. If you have something.

A

To say too so, don't hit, we don't see your hand. Okay, my hand should be down right now: yep, okay,.

A

Okay, anybody else all right, then I'll call the question, um mr harris. Yes, mr chairman, yes.

A

Mr pizzulo, yes, city manager, canard, yes, councillor moreau! No, mr clark, yes, miss pagala! No, mr mohanna.

C

Yes, so I have one two three, four, five: six yeses. Oh sorry, mr hewitt. uh Yes.

A

Good thing: I'm not the chair, okay, so we have, it looks like we have a new chair and vice chair.

A

Congratulations so I'm going to pass the gavel, because that was my only official.

A

Duty in terms of chair tonight to mr chairman, would you like you want here, do you want to move.

A

This is, or I can pass this over to you if it doesn't make any difference I'll just stay here.

G

Doesn't matter, I thought they're supposed to sit near the panic button.

B

Now you're gonna have to press it. I'm gonna.

G

Thank you, and despite the fact that that was not an immediate vote, I think we're all going to.

G

Be working well together and I did speak to corey earlier. I look forward to working with him, as vice.

G

Chair and, of course, the rest of the board members as well, so I believe we have the minutes.

G

To review first from the last two meetings, where not all members tonight were present.

G

I don't know if any of you reviewed the videos or have comments based on that.

G

We're ready for uh comments I'll. First, we need a motion, so how about I make.

B

A motion to approve the minutes from the december meeting. Second.

G

There's more motion corey with a second any discussion.

G

I'll just note that uh purview is one word.

G

With a u after the p other than that, I didn't see anything. So uh we have a motion. Second to approve.

G

The minutes for both meetings beth was that your motion for both yes all december in meetings.

G

All those in favor, mr, mr chairman, all votes need to be by probably call because.

G

I'm sorry, that's right! I'm gonna! I'm gonna! Do that! Yes, please, okay! um So this is a.

A

This is a vote for both uh december 16th and december 30th minutes. Mr hewitt uh abstain.

A

Was that an eye, I abstain, abstain! Okay! Thank you. Okay, uh mr harris. Yes, mr chailman. Yes, here.

A

Mr pizzulo, yes, miss canard, yes, city manager, canards, that's right, counselor, moreo! Yes,.

A

Mr clark, yes, miss pagala. I abstain, mr mahana, yes and mr hewitt abstained. Okay, so that motion passes.

G

Thank you. um We have a request to postpone request with monarch, village llc applicant.

G

For on behalf of navisha hospitality, llc for property of 3, 35, 48 road, first lafayette, road.

G

Mr chairman, we may have a subdivision review. First, it looks like the subdivision is first and.

A

Actually, mr chairman, if I could call your attention to a letter, um I don't know if you want.

A

To go through the postponements first for people that might be here for applications, but we have.

B

To pull those out of order in a vote, usually you have to pull them out of order. That's a good point.

A

um We had it, we got a late letter from um 77 meredith and then we also have.

A

The request to postpone on 3400 lafayette road.

A

325 little harbor for the for the wetland conditional use permit.

A

um And 38 58 lafayette road would it be appropriate to make a motion to suspend the rules.

C

To vote to postpone all of those items pull those out. Can we do that? We would need that. There's.

B

A group vote yeah all right. I would make that motion. Second. Second, let me just correct it. I said.

A

So to be 3548 lafayette road, we need a roll call vote. Unfortunately yep sorry peter. I know.

A

So let me just clarify this is a motion to postpone 77 meredith. This is the monarch.

A

Village or 3548 lafayette, road, 3400, lafayette road, um and I thought there was one more that's it. Okay,.

A

325 325 little harbor road wetland initially used for me.

A

Okay, so I'm gonna take a roll call vote. Mr hewitt.

A

Yes, mr harris, yes, mr chairman, yes, mr pizzulo, yes, deputy manager, canard, yes, councillor moreau, yes,.

A

Mr clark, yes, ms pagala, yes, mr mohanna, yes, okay, the anonymous motion passes.

G

Okay, now we are back to determination for completeness of subdivision review.

G

Exactly correct now we our motion was that roll call was just to suspend the.

B

Rules which we had you're right and now we need the motion to actually um sorry.

C

The ones that he mentioned and we take a roll called over that then we can move on sorry. So.

A

Now the vote is to postpone those meetings after we took it out of order, so I'm going to take a.

A

Second, roll call vote, mr hewitt. Yes, mr harris. Yes, mr chalman, yes, mr pizzulo, yes, city manager, canard.

C

Yes, city councilor moreau; yes, mr clark, yes, miss pagala! Yes, mr mohanna, yes, okay, thank you. Counselor.

G

Determination of completeness subdivision review, which I believe is the next item on the agenda.

G

Request for austin repair renovation, llc for property at 27, shaw, road.

B

Mr chairman, I'd make a motion that we vote to determine that the application is.

B

Complete according to our subdivision rules and regulations. Second, second moved and seconded.

G

Any discussion roll call vote. Mr hewitt, yes, mr harris. Yes, mr chairman, yes, mr pizzulo,.

A

Yes, city manager, canard, yes, councillor moreau; yes, mr clark, yes, ms gala, yes, mr mohanna, yes,.

G

I believe the next item is uh sagamore creek.

G

Llc property at 960, sagamore island, requesting site plan approval, I'd, make a motion that we've.

B

Determined that the application is complete according to the site plan, review regulations.

B

I'll second moved and seconded roll call vote. Mr hewitt, yes,.

A

Mr harris, yes, mr chalman, yes, mr pizillo, yes, city manager, canard, yes, councillor, moreau.

C

Yes, mr clark, yes, ms bagala, yes, mr mahana, yes missed. Oh, I got mr good okay. Can you get unanimous.

C

Around to four c c yep, of course, public hearings build business.

G

We're now on to the request of gregory moreau and amanda morrow owners and daryl moreau applicant.

G

For property at 137 northwest street requesting a wetlands conditional use permit under section.

G

10.1017 of the landing ordinance to impact 5062 square feet of wetland buffer and 45 square feet.

G

Of tidal wetland proposed new home and existing turnaround is partially in the 100 foot, tidal.

G

Buffer zone in the north mill pond, in addition to the new home the applicant, is proposing to.

G

Remove an existing gravel turnaround and install a new paved parking apron for city vehicles to.

G

Turn around this new turnaround is the city pump station and the city pump station are all within a.

G

New easement, in addition, there is plans to upgrade the stormwater outfall to protect against erosion.

G

Property sean assessors map, 122, lot 2 and lies in the general residence gra district.

G

And historic district who is here to speak and fair this application, if I might just say one.

B

Thing before it starts in case anyone wonders I am not in any way. Do I even know daryl moreau.

B

Or am I related to him just in case anyone wondered since we have the same last name.

B

I just want to pick that part of the record never met him. Don't know him thanks. Thank you.

F

Thank you, mr chairman, members of the planning board, john chagman from ambit engineering.

F

Representing the applicant here tonight, who is with us also tim phoenix from hopeful phoenix.

F

Gourmet roberts is here on his behalf. Also, I don't know if we're going to get the plans.

F

Up on the board, but we did appear at the december meeting to the board and owing to the fact that.

F

This board has a lot of new members. I guess I'll go through and go through. The plan set.

F

And make a presentation sort of from the start, and then we can go over what happened last month and.

F

Move on so the project is on northwest street. There was a long skinny lot.

F

On the left, as you came down northwest street and the application next page included.

F

A subdivision of that lot, so the first set the first plan in the plan set is the subdivision.

F

Plan it shows the existing house on the west end. Northwest street is on the south.

F

And the bypass is on the north on the west end, there's an existing.

F

Structure and that structure is going to remain on the lot.

F

To the to the west, then traveling east there's a section of that lot, that is in a dedicated.

F

Easement, the city when the bypass bridge was being reconstructed, took an opportunity to put in.

F

A water main connection that looped and went under the property, so they secured an easement for that.

F

Then the close to that easement is the property line separating the two lots. The lot on the east.

F

Side is predominantly vacant, but there is a city sewer pump station at the west end of that lot.

F

And a gravel turnaround that has sort of grown in as it's sort of shown up over time as a.

F

Convenience- and it is entirely on the applicant's property, so this plan shows the creation of.

F

As a part of the subdivision, an easement permanent easement that.

F

We uh it's detailed here in a blow up. That's the water line easement in the blow up.

F

The area of the pump station easement is shown in detail on the bottom, so there's.

F

An area that is dedicated to the maintenance of that station and then.

F

Due to the turnaround, the gravel turnaround being eliminated, the city requested in the.

F

Applicant agreed to create a turnaround easement, so that will allow for the continued use of their.

F

Property as a turnaround I'll be in a different configuration, the plan shows a proposed turnout.

F

So that being a dead end, it allows for city maintenance of the road as far as snow plowing.

F

Goes they have a place to turn around and maintains that function? The next sheet.

F

Is the existing conditions plan that shows you, the topography? The site is.

F

Adjacent to northwest street and on the south side of northwest street, the north mill pond.

F

Is present so the site has proximity to that resource. That's why we're here for conditional.

F

Use permit, as the 100 foot buffer line is in this location, as shown on the plan. Generally, the.

F

Topography comes from the bypass which is higher in elevation than this lot. You can see the bypass.

F

Slope here holding up the road, but then the lot generally slopes from west to east.

F

Going down an elevation currently, there is a catch basin and piped outfall directly to the mill pond.

F

That handles runoff in that lower eastern section of northwest street.

F

The next sheet in the set is a subdivision site plan and, as a part of the subdivision of the law,.

F

The applicant wanted to show, and throughout this process of subdivision.

F

They included potential development on the subdivided lot and this plan shows in detail.

F

A lot too, of development, which is going to consist of a single family residence.

F

And the removal of the gravel turn around replacing with a paved.

F

Turnout and some buffer plantings in that area, the project went to the portsmouth board of adjustment.

F

For a number of variances one being the lot width, so there was a because the lot is long.

F

And skinny they needed a variance because you have a requirement for 100 foot lot depth that.

F

Variance was granted, and also there were variances that were granted for the placement of the house.

F

On that lot, specifically a three foot front yard and a six and a half foot rear yard. The next sheet.

F

Shows erosion, control and grading, so this does highlight the 100 foot, tidal buffer, which is the.

F

Impacts in there require conditional use permit, which is what we're here tonight for.

F

Shows the setbacks to the structure over 80 feet. It shows the grading that will be accomplished.

F

Not much change here on the area. That's going to be replaced back to a natural state.

F

Some grading here to.

F

Accommodate the level house that's being constructed, so some grading to get back.

F

Down to the grade, it shows some grading at the entrance stairs and the driveway the next sheet.

F

Shows, and that sheet also showed the erosion control measures, the silt fence, silt sock other.

F

Necessary requirements: this is the utility plan. The site is on a city street, which has utilities.

F

So there's a sewer line in the street there's a water line in the street. There's overhead electric.

F

In the street, all existing now- and this shows the service connections to the building the next sheet.

F

Is the initial use permit plan and I think.

F

Unless there is a question about the um what we're proposing here in the general sense, I would like.

F

To go back to a presentation about the conditional use permit, um as I mentioned, we were here.

F

In november november 18th we appeared before the board and at that meeting the subdivision.

F

Approval was granted, so the lot has received planning board approval and is subdivided.

F

The planning board at that meeting had some concerns and questions and suggestions.

F

And we're here tonight, having made some revisions to the plan to address those.

F

The application actually has been revised over time. It started out with an impervious impact of.

F

About 1600 plus square feet that was reduced by moving the garage to the west side of the house.

F

To about 1400 square feet and the current plan shows an impact of only 978 square feet.

F

Of impervious surface, the structure was moved further to the west. Another 18 feet.

F

To reduce the impact at as a result of feedback from the planning board, the most important part.

F

Of that ability to do that change was turning the garage doors to the front along northwest street.

F

That was a good suggestion. Previously the doors were on the west side and there was need for.

F

Turning movement and avoidance of a telephone pole and some fire fire hydrant, so moving that.

F

Allowed us to push the structure 18 feet to the west, it helped reduce the impervious surface.

F

Overall, because we didn't need to have additional pavement on that east side to access the garage.

F

In addition, the applicant agreed to reduce the width of the building, so we couldn't push it to.

F

The west, without making the building skinnier and the applicant agreed to make the building skinnier.

F

So we also made some changes to the plan that was desired previously to get to where we are tonight.

F

As you know, the conditional use permit process requires that we meet the criteria contained in.

F

The ports of zoning ordinance, so I'm going to go through that and discuss the criteria and how this.

F

Project meets the criteria. The first is that the land is reasonably suited to the proposed use.

F

So this use being a single family residence is in a residential zone.

F

The street that fronts, the lot has the required utilities to serve the proposed residents and.

F

Our plans show how the placement and grading of this proposed house will work with the land next.

F

Criteria is that there is no location outside of the wetland buffer that is feasible or reasonable.

F

The lot narrows, as you go to the west and the placement of the structure currently shown.

F

Is as far west as possible, given the setback relief granted by the zba, the eba granted.

F

Relief for a three foot front yard and a six and a half foot rear yard. We are showing.

F

A revised garage that is 22 feet, deep, which is the minimum.

F

Standard garage size and that has been placed where the three foot and the six and a half foot.

F

Distances meet, so it is impossible to move it anymore to the west and have that reasonably sized.

F

Garage which is actually small, the majority of the structure, as you can see by the blue.

F

This is the part of the structure that is in the hundred foot buffer.

F

And the white is the part of the structure that is out of the buffer. The majority of the structure is located outside of the wetland buffer, so.

F

We would submit that there is no location that we can move this to be further outside the buffer.

F

The next criteria is that there will be no adverse impacts on the wetland functions and.

F

Values and surrounding properties. The plan that we're proposing is going to remove about 200 2 000.

F

Square feet of existing gravel from the wetland buffer. So if you look at the orange on this plan,.

F

This orange is all within the buffer. It's two thousand square feet of gravel non-vegetarian.

F

Surface that will be removed from the wetland buffer and replaced with buffer plantings and soil.

F

So that is going to improve the functions and values of the adjacent resource being.

F

The north mill pawn, which is what we're trying to protect and what we're talking about here when we.

F

Talk about functions and values. Additionally, the project is proposing at the applicant's expense to.

F

Improve the outfall from this catch basin that drains the north side of the road.

F

Currently, that outfall is experiencing some erosion, it's eroding right at the salt marsh edge.

F

And what we're proposing to do? It's also cut back the bank and we're proposing to cut back the pipe.

F

To meet the bank and shore up the area where the water comes out of the pipe, so that erosion.

F

Problem will be will cease to exist. So that's going to improve the functions and values.

F

Of the site, as it relates to the wetland, because currently it's eroding salt marsh.

F

The next criteria is that the alteration of the natural vegetative state will occur only to the.

F

Extent necessary to achieve the goals and um the alteration of the natural vegetated state.

F

Is that a hard stop or something? Okay?.

F

So it's kind of the reverse here. Actually you know the the vegetative state is being altered.

F

To come back to vegetation.

F

There's limited grading on this side, so we've designed the way the structure fits the topography.

F

So that we don't have a lot of grading outside the edge of the house, there's a limited amount of tree.

F

And it's actually a very um impacted by uh invasives, but.

F

There's a very limited amount of vegetation that will be removed.

F

And we've designed this, so we only are removing what is necessary to be able to place the house.

F

On the site, the next criteria is that the alternative is the alternative with the least.

F

Impact to the environment, and if we could go to the next sheet.

F

That helps to show that this alternative is going to be an improvement.

F

To the buffer and we're not talking about an impact to the resource, we're talking about.

F

Impacts in the buffer, you are allowed to approve impacts to the buffer as a part of a conditional.

F

Use permit application, you are allowed to approve them and the criteria that we're talking about.

F

Is the balancing act between what the applicant wishes to do on the property and.

F

What you can allow without impacting the resource so.

F

I would say that if you look at this plan- and you can see the mill pond comes up.

F

It comes very close to an existing paved public street sewer, pump station and gravel area. The.

F

Gravel area is going to be restored to its natural vegetated state. That's going to provide for.

F

Filtration and treatment of runoff coming down the slopes before it gets to the resource. If you.

F

Look at the placement of the house: it is behind a structure that is much closer to the resource and.

F

There's another structure here which is being remodeled that got permits to be remodeled.

F

That is much closer to the resource. There are docks in the resource. I would submit that this.

F

F

No impact to the resource and is the least impacting alternative, given.

F

Placing the house on the subdivided law certainly going to be better than that existing situation.

F

And the last criteria for conditional use permit grant is that any.

F

Areas in the vegetated buffer strip will be returned to a natural state.

F

To the extent feasible- and this is this- is an important criteria, not as much for this project.

F

But when you have projects that are proposing to go into the buffer to do some construction.

F

Put in a pipeline, etc, etc that the buffer be restored as much as possible.

F

In this case, we can say emphatically that, yes, we are restoring a wetland buffer, 2, 000 square feet.

F

As a part of this uh project, where we're asking for an impact, a permanent impact to the buffer.

F

Of only 978 square feet, so on balance we would meet that criteria. Also, at this point, I'm going.

F

To unless you have any quick questions for me, I do want to have attorney phoenix, make a presentation.

G

Any questions for john.

C

Jane, yes, um could you just talk about the flood hazard of this property because you're.

D

Talking about that area that would drain into the salt marsh better, but that's due to runoff, etc.

D

What about the danger of the house to flood hazard from the tidal north mill pond sure.

F

So as a part of the um package or in the package, we put the flood hazard line, as you may be aware,.

F

The city did enact a change, the ordinance that takes the flood hazard line and adds two feet.

F

To that, the proposed house is outside of both the flood hazard line and the two foot height.

F

Extension so, based on those two things, the house has no bearing or impact on the flood hazard area.

F

Does that answer the question yes and then my other question is.

D

If you made the house smaller, you could reduce that blue section of impact to.

D

The wetland buffer, couldn't you well the the criteria that we're talking about here and.

F

Excuse me for a second.

F

There's no location outside of the wetland buffer that is feasible or reasonable.

F

I think that what we're showing here is a reasonably sized structure.

F

And it's already been made smaller a number of times.

F

Through this process and what's the square footage of just the house,.

F

The footprint of the house is 1491 square feet.

D

It still looks bigger than the house, that's on the on the north mill pond side of that.

D

Street between them um you're talking about this structure here this one yeah.

F

That that might visually present. But if you look at this part of the house and compare it.

F

They're very similar in size, this picture does not depict the fact that this house traded this.

F

Hard driveway for a garage, so there's now a garage structure in the buffer. There.

F

So when you look at it in that respect, I think they're very similar in size. Thank you. Yep.

G

Miss murrah, um I'm just curious, mr shagnan, are you going to be digging.

B

Down and putting a basement in this or not um I'll, let the builder answer that question.

F

Yeah yeah, that's wise, yeah, it's just going to be a crawl space. Thank you.

G

I have one question: if nobody else does.

G

John, did you get a new any new variances for setbacks since the last time you were here.

F

No, we have not uh gone to. We received variances for the project and we're going forward with the.

F

Variances that we received so if, if the idea, if you tried to push the building farther to the left,.

G

Or southwest that would require new variances yes to if you maintain the same size structure,.

G

Correct: it's only a three foot setback in the front and a six and a half in the rear. At the.

F

Base of a steep slope, so it's getting to be sort of the limit of constructability, but.

F

I'm gonna: let attorney phoenix talk more about that. Okay, anything else from for john. Thank you.

H

Thank you, john. uh Mr chairman, members of the board, I'm tim phoenix from hopeful phoenix wilmington.

H

Roberts you'll be happy to hear that I don't have a whole lot to say because john said everything.

H

Pretty much that I was going to say in the first place, the only thing I would.

H

um Add to what john said in in response to chair chailman's uh comments is that we don't think it.

H

Is necessary or reasonable to slide the house further west and go back and seek variances.

H

Variances are are not particularly easy to get um we've. We got these. I think we're asking this.

H

Board to consider this application on balance um the fact that the board approved the subdivision.

H

Suggests that a home can be built on this lot and when you compare what's being done here with the.

H

Significant uh over, I think it's over 50 percent reduction in impervious within the buffer.

H

And re-establishment of buffer plantings, etc, together with the fixing of the outfall.

H

And the preparing, at the city's request of an area for their trucks, to turn around when they're.

H

Plowing and what have you it doesn't make sense to require us to go back and seek another variance.

H

I'm no expert on it, but I took my my scale on my copy of the reduced size plans and measured.

H

How far would you have to get go west to get the entire building outside of the buffer.

H

And by my calculation, by the by the time you got to where you hit the property line, a small.

H

Part of the building would still be in the buffer, and then you couldn't walk around your own house.

H

Without going off the off the off the lot, so, given that we're preparing providing all this benefit.

H

And there's been no suggestion by anyone that I've heard that what that this project is going.

H

To be harmful to the resource, I don't see the purpose of it uh also, as john said it, this has.

H

To be looked at or we ask you to look at it in the context of the surrounding area, as john mentioned.

H

This isn't in a vacuum where a home is being built right along the water. We have the the traveled.

H

Public street, to all the houses there with cars going up up and down at all the time we have a.

H

Number of houses closer yet to the water, um with a boat docks, and what have you and, of course we have.

H

The use of the mill pond in the surrounding areas by boats that are creating um dropping.

H

Gas oil etc into the resource already and that's a fact of life. That's part of part of life and.

H

I know we're trying to to make things better over time with conservation-minded efforts, but.

H

We think that we have met those efforts, at least to the extent that it's reasonable, and that is the.

H

The um the test- I would just turn to the staff memo on this uh john's gone through all of the.

H

Requirements but the the final note uh comment on it is please note that the plans as presented to.

H

The planning board reflect significant changes to the ones originally presented to the conservation.

H

Commission in november, I would also point out that, just to give you a little history of how.

H

This thing started and we've been involved since the beginning, because as usual and is required, you.

H

Can't get to the planning board until you get your zoning relief. We originally had a duplex.

H

Intended that was not received very well, so a single family of about 1920 square.

H

Feet was proposed that was significantly that was reduced to under 1700 square feet.

H

And now has been reduced further unto under 1500 square feet and, as john mentioned over around 2000.

H

Square feet of impervious within the buffer is now under a thousand uh a 50 percent or greater.

H

Reduction and as he also mentioned, we've moved the house 18 feet to the west and made it.

H

Skinnier as he put it, so we think that we've undertaken reasonable efforts to gain the approval.

H

Of this board for this project, particularly under circumstances where at least I've heard.

H

No one say that this an area of roof, if you will the corner of the house in the buffer, is.

H

Going to harm the wetland, given the removal of the impervious surface and its restoration to.

H

Plantings, that's all I have to add. Unless you have questions which we'd be happy to answer.

I

Mr um thank you attorney phoenix uh just like you. You brought up the conservation commission meeting.

I

In november, just a couple of questions, I know there were a couple of motions that were made.

I

At that meeting um regards to poorest pavement in the city turnaround area.

I

Shrubs being kept clear in that turnaround area um would would the uh does the applicant.

I

Have any concerns with either one of those stipulations if this was to move forward.

H

I guess john wants to answer that question: okay, perfect.

H

I'm happy that he does. Thank you. Thank you. uh Yes, uh remember clark, so the plans were revised. If you.

F

Go back one sheet, originally the buffer plantings were situated here above I guess we got to go back.

F

Another sheet: sorry, they were situated above whoop, one more sill, sorry and still another one.

F

There we go. Thank you, so the buffer plantings were situated uh sort of over here and some of them.

F

Were uh situated here, uh northwest of the turnout and obviously you're going to be plowing some snow.

F

There so for the long term, health of the buffer plantings, they were moved away and extended here.

F

We actually added more buffer plants than made the buffer area bigger than what was on that plant.

F

In regards to the porous pavement, uh I know that you will appreciate this. We looked at the design.

F

And given the proximity of the ground to the the the the mill pond, it's only at elevation, nine.

F

So, to put that porous pavement in, we were actually going to have to under drain it.

F

To the catch basin, for it to really function well and then you're sort of balancing the oh.

F

Well, now we're putting maybe something right into the ground water um so, uh and I assume that catch.

I

Basin just goes right to north mill pond correct correct, but we are going to add a hood to it.

F

We're going to put in a snout so that it's going to help deal with surface runoff oils and such so.

F

It's going to improve that situation so putting the poorest payment there we're not opposed to it.

F

But on balance, I'm not sure it's the right thing to do. Given the proximity to the water table and.

F

The resource sure um one more question sherman. uh As far as the this wasn't on the original.

I

um November, one of the stipulations, but would the applicant be opposed to using uh north northeast.

I

Organic farming association management practices on this property in regards to landscapes, yeah.

F

That was brought up by the uh the conservation commission and I'm I'm happy to tell you that.

F

We wholeheartedly uh accepted in there. uh If you look at the detail sheet.

F

um This the seating specifications talk about it, there's a note on this plan that says to use those.

F

uh So we're there 100 excellent. Thank you, john. Okay. Any other board questions.

G

Here we have a public comment of people speaking too far against the application.

G

First round, those speaking for the application.

G

Anybody here to speak against the application, anybody on zoom.

A

Is our handout? You have somebody on zoom, they need to state their name and address.

C

In there, when they come around, this is kendra florida, I'm at 30 pine street. um I was not.

B

Aware of this on the agenda actually, but I'm I'm really curious about building this close to tidal.

D

Water, when we know the seas are rising, how does this plan line up with the maps of where the seas.

B

Will rise in portsmouth, it seems like north male pond is going to just come to that house.

G

Yes, john, would you like to answer that sure that I think the city has done a great job in recognizing.

F

uh Sea level rise and that's why you adopted the ordinance about the extended flood hazard zone.

F

And so the house being out of that zone limits, that's impact the impact that sea level rise.

F

Will have on this structure, hopefully that answers the question. Thank you, and that was my.

G

Mistake I shouldn't have asked you to answer that question. So um any other comments by lady on zoom.

A

No other hands raised no other hands.

G

Any second round speakers or against.

G

Third round speakers.

G

I'm going to close the public hearing.

G

What's the board's pleasure.

I

Mr chairman, I'll make a motion that we vote to grant conditional use permit as presented.

I

Second, second, would you like to speak to the motion sure yeah I most certainly will you know.

I

As as it was clear in the presentation you know, this has been before several times.

I

Or not before us, but before the city boards, um you know, starting with the.

I

Conservation, commission- and they, you know they requested that the applicant move things back.

I

They did, um I think at least once, if not twice, and while it didn't pass the conservation commission.

I

It still came to uh came to the planning board and at that time it was uh a different plan.

I

It was, you know, had the um turn around driveway. Everything was shifted much more into the buffer.

I

And um I think we had a you know a good discussion at that point in time um on trying to really shift.

I

This as much as possible out outside, um and so I think, the I think the applicant has done that.

I

They've, um you know they went through the different criteria. Certainly um you know it.

I

Is being built within the wetland buffer, however, given the current site out there, we have a gravel.

I

Turnaround area with no storm water treatment whatsoever. That's uh you know, running into.

I

Running into north mill pond, you know issues with the catch basin out there and everything else. I.

I

Think this this uh this application, while it does have a new structure, is an overall improvement.

I

For the north mill pond, and certainly trying to enhance or make the storm water coming off,.

I

That site better for the pond overall, and so with that I will be supporting the application.

G

Thank you. I have one question for uh peter brits.

B

Based off of since you spent a lot of time with conservation, commission.

B

Based off of their discussions on this project- and I apologize- I wasn't actually.

B

At the november 18th meeting, but um do you feel like some of the changes that have been made.

B

Since that meeting, since since they've seen it and since the planning board requested, are they.

B

Moving in the direction that some of those votes might have changed, I would say I would say they.

A

Certainly are moving in the direction um they were, they saw the buffer planting, so they were pleased.

A

About that, um but they the improvements they've made to that the reduction of the footprint.

A

So they have addressed some of them for sure, and then I have another question. I'm not quite sure.

B

Whether you or possibly, attorney sullivan, might be able to answer. Are we allowed in our approvals.

B

To be able to restrict them from coming back before us to ask for any more.

B

Paver area or structures within the buffer for the specific lot.

A

I don't know if we've done that before believe it or not. I can't remember the only restriction I know I'm aware of is we have an exemption for if you want to expand.

A

A property in the buffer and that exemption's limited um they track it over time. So you can't.

A

Keep coming back for an expansion, I'm not aware of any um restrictions in the ordinance.

A

Anyway, that you could put up okay, based on, as I understand the state law, we have three options. We.

G

Can approve, deny or approve with conditions that could be a condition now I don't know if that's.

G

I've not seen that condition, but it definitely would fall under that category.

B

Okay, thank you.

G

We have corey's motion in a second any amendments to the motion board ready to vote on it.

I

Is that a stipulation you'd like to add death.

B

If we're allowed to add it, I certainly I mean what was this? What would you do.

B

I'm trying to figure out how to word it in my head and I still haven't, come up with a good one. So.

B

um No further impact yeah yeah uh yeah we'd make a stipulation there'd, be no further impact.

B

For this specific lot in the wetland buffer, that's a good way to put it yes, I would like.

B

To request that that might be part of it, we have a proposed amendment. Is there.

G

Do you accept the enemy? I accept the amendment. We have a motion, a second an.

G

Amendment to the motion and the second to the amendment, any other discussion.

A

Roll call vote, mr mr hewitt yeah, I'm gonna extend abstain on this one. Okay, one abstention.

A

Mr harris, yes, mr chalman, yes, mr pizzulo, yes, city manager, canard, yes, councillor moreau! Yes, mr clark.

A

Yes, mr gala, yes, mr mahana, yes, okay, it's unanimous except for one extension essentially say, passes.

C

We have a chair issue, yeah, that's all right!.

E

Oh that's here another one: we've had some chair issues. Every meeting.

B

Musical chairs, thanks, I think, if I'm keeping track- and I may not be so- please feel free to jump in.

G

I believe we're on to public hearings, new business. Yes, 27 shaw. Yes, I'm a.

G

Request of austin repair and renovation llc is owner for property at 27 shaw, requesting.

G

Preliminary and final subdivision approval to subdivide one existing lot with 57 354 square feet.

G

Lot area 230 feet of street footage on shaw, road and 127 feet of frontage on walker, bungalow road.

G

Into two lots as follows: to propose lot, one with 34 205 square feet of light area and 230 feet of.

G

Street frontage on shaw road proposed lot: 2 with 23 149 square feet of lot area and 127 feet.

G

Of frontage walker, bungalow road property is shown on the assessor's map. 223 lot 18.

G

And is located in the single residence b district, who is here to speak in favor of this application.

G

Chairman uh joe cornady jones and beach engineers here representing clyde logue, who is in the the.

J

Audience um clyde's the new, proud owner of 27 shaw road and he would like to basically.

J

Subdivide one frontage lot off of walker bungalow road, which is on the north side of the property.

J

The existing house would stay on a conforming lot meeting all the setbacks. The new lot would have.

J

Adequate frontage lot area and a new driveway off of walker, bungalow.

J

The this area, as you are well aware, is proposed to have cities sewer sometime in the near future.

J

So we have requested a a waiver for not having on-site sewage disposal on the lot.

J

Mr logue would would be uh like to build a put a holding tank on the property until he can tie into.

J

The sewer and the site required no variances for this subdivision. There's no there's no wetlands on.

J

Site- and it's fairly, I think, straightforward- for a two lot subdivision all I have.

I

This chance, um the plan shows a uh six inch pvc from from the end of uh cliff road, even.

I

Though it's not really the road right there kind coming under the stone wall is that.

I

Drainage from the property is there any flow adjustment that needs to be um drafted for that.

J

It's a we did not find a the end to it. It was coming into the catch basin.

J

And we think it's just an under drain: okay of some sort, there's a low spot right. There.

A

Mr chair, if, if I might there's a there, was a call today about that pipe and.

A

I I can't prove this, but I can represent with a budding property who may be.

A

Present, I'm not sure um at the meeting, but we'll speak at the public comment, I'm sure, but their.

A

Their statement was that that pipe is a outflow from a stream that starts further up the street.

A

And on heavy rain events discharges a lot of water, so I think just wanted to raise awareness.

A

About that, so that they would capture that and understand it, discharges onto this discharges.

A

Onto this property from further up the street, a few properties away, actually okay crosses under.

A

One property completely underground and it's daylighted two properties up. Where is the pipe.

A

On the plan, because so folks can follow it's at the end of the what's represented as cliff road.

G

I know that I wanted people, oh yeah, so it's a tinder cliff road. It's the.

G

Upper left part of the plan for those folks trying to follow this.

G

Councilman merrell, um could you talk a little bit more about what the storage tank, because.

B

I mean you're clearly planning on building before the sewer connection's, possibly going.

B

To be there, because that could be some time so could you explain exactly what it is you're doing.

B

Or what it's going to be, how it's going to work and yeah? Is it above ground underground? What is.

B

Yes, more details, so the um there would be a 2500 gallon holding tank, which is basically.

J

A um a very large septic tank that would be put in the ground. The tank has alarms.

J

For when it gets starts to reach its capacity and it would have to be pumped out- and it's not.

J

Uncommon, um you know in a situation like this, where you have pending sewer coming to the site.

J

It's going to take a while before the house is built and occupied and actually using the holding.

J

Tank so there's some, we still have to go through any conditions: the board grants we have to get.

J

State approval for a holding tank and there's other residents out there that are in the same.

J

Holding tank scenario right now, waiting for sewer to come along.

J

And so it's it's pretty common in a situation like this and.

J

And it would um would be installed and operated by uh you know used by the owner, so it would be.

B

Underground and there'd be no leach field or anything like that associated with it.

B

Okay, thank you for your question uh yeah. um So this property is in zoning.

D

In the zone srb, which is supposed to be 15, 000 square feet, 100 foot frontage, but then.

D

Also 40 open space, so if this is divided, does the existing house end up with 40 open space on its.

D

Smaller property, it does I'm trying to find the uh the calculation.

J

Yes, the the remaining lot would be 0.7 acres.

J

That's about 30 000 square feet.

J

If we do have the calculation on the.

J

But with is you can tell the only the driveways are quite small on the property and we have the.

J

Just the house and we would meet the we can add that calculation. I don't have that on.

J

The plan right now, but we can provide that as a condition. Thank you and if we had to, we would.

J

I don't think we're gonna have to come back or move the lot line to beat that.

J

That did not come up previously. I apologize.

G

Any other board questions.

K

Sorry I just wanted a couple questions. A couple of comments. One was the.

K

The issue of the sewer, if the, uh if there was no sewer yet in the street they'd.

K

They still would need to have uh des new hampshire dds approval for the holden tank.

K

Prior to a building permit, that's in the condition that we have listed here, yeah.

K

And then the other. The other comment I do have would be the um this before the engineer um on the.

K

Rain garden, I didn't notice, I didn't see any detail.

K

Design details for the for the rain guard either dimensionally depth or anything like that.

K

Sizing requirements- and I think they should be- I would probably make a recommendation that.

K

That would be added to the plan later if they can't provide them right now.

K

And also, typically, a rain garden would have an overflow structure where, if the.

K

If it got too high, the elevation of the other of the uh of the storm water and the in the.

K

In the rain garden, it wouldn't over top into the street, would go into the overflow and then.

K

They're, the cash basin they could probably connect to so I'd like to see those details added so.

K

I don't know if that's something we looked at, um we we did. Yes, there's a catch basin, basically.

J

Right in the uh the edge of the rain garden and the rain garden would be approximately six inches.

J

Lower than the in the rim of the catch basin and then the if the uh rain garden was to fill up, then.

J

Exactly what you said would be the the typically like to see a structure in the rain garden.

K

An overflow structure just in case that catch basin got clogged up or anything, you'd have a pipe.

K

Connection to that, to that catch basin with a riser, yes, exactly if that's something that.

K

Not only often is done, we can certainly add that okay.

G

So what you're, what you're saying, I think, as I understand it, instead of just a typical.

G

You're looking for something specific to the site with elevations or yes right now, it'd.

K

Be difficult to um to really construct that rain garden without dimensions and elevations.

K

So I'd like to see those details also probably like I said if I can entertain a.

K

Condition later on the vote, something to that effect.

G

Any other board questions.

G

All right since this is a I have a question, I assume the proposed lot.

G

Will have a single family residence on it? Yes, three-bedroom home, if it's three-bedroom, yes,.

G

So that'll require pumping. Every week roughly, uh I mean the um with three bedroom homes. The.

J

Des says that you know you use 150 gallons per day per bedroom right, which I think is.

J

How you're getting that math, but the the reality of that flow is quite exaggerated.

J

uh You know it's it's more common to be more, you know closer to 70 gallons per day per bedroom.

J

If you're using all the bedrooms, um you know so I think I think it'd be much less than that. I don't.

J

Know if all the bedrooms would be full, um you know so probably even much less frequent than.

J

You know maybe every once a month, maybe once occupied depends on how much you use the laundry.

G

Of course, big parties clyde throws and things like that, but uh do you have.

G

Have you done a holding tank in the city before I've not done one in this city now.

K

Right, they're, awesome: okay, is there a procedure? The staff have a procedure for that.

A

Not that I'm aware of, I think it would be a des approval process, just like a septic.

J

Safe yeah, it's similar to approving a septic system, similar application and review by the state.

G

Of that process process, but yeah it's also depending on the future sewer we're going.

K

To hopefully award that bid very soon, so that would play into their decision making. uh Okay.

G

I guess that's it for the board or any other.

G

Any of the members of your team presenting or is it nope just me, sir.

G

Open it up for public comment, um first round speakers.

G

There any zoom comments on this one yeah. Is there a zoom comment on this.

A

Miss lloyd, you can go ahead.

L

Good evening, everyone, I hope you can end up here. I need- and yes and your address, please it is 45.

L

Cliff road, we also back on walker bungalow, I'd like to start with saying thank you.

L

Very much for bringing this to everyone's attention, I'm the one that called up and.

L

Talked to peter about the pvc pipe we've lived at this address for 21 years.

L

We're lucky enough to be one of the ones that was uh able to talk to some of the original owners of.

L

The houses in this neighborhood it was developed in the 1950s and when we moved in there were still.

L

Some residents that had built their own houses in the 1950s, so we got a lot of history as to.

L

How it got developed so, as peter had mentioned the pvc pipe that is shown on page six of the packet.

L

In the top left corner, where the non-existent paper cliff road is that six inch pipe is the.

L

End the terminus open air terminus to what was originally a complete stream system currently.

L

It is in piping system in the next property that is north of this proposed new lot.

L

The next lot, beyond that going north is actually our property, and we are.

L

The only one that still has the actual original natural stream that goes through our backyard.

L

It also does continue in piping, underneath the two further north properties, and these all these.

L

Properties are on the west side of walker bungalow, and it is not connected to the pond. Interestingly,.

L

That's on walker bungalow, so this whole stream flows, south and open air terminates at this.

L

Property during any heavy rains, this stream ends up blasting out of that pipe, a six-inch pipe as.

L

Solid water and blast out at about three to four feet out from this pipe. It does end up.

L

Flooding that back of the yard and therefore I don't know that anyone's done any evaluation.

L

For whether that is actually technically wetlands, but it is a continuous stream that is almost.

L

Always a wet stream and is always flowing all the way through these yards and down that embankment.

L

Of the backyard of this proposed lot, so I would like to project and recommend and suggest.

L

That there needs to be some level of evaluation to double check and determine whether that is.

L

Considered to be wetlands, because all of this neighborhood is a very wet uh neighborhood.

L

The water level is very close to the surface of the ground.

L

And all if you've ever walked through the woods that go between walker, bungalow and martin college.

L

All of that back there is all wetlands, even though it's all forests, so this whole area.

L

Is very delicate in wetlands and I believe this property that is being suggested to be.

L

A new separate lot that they're building a house on probably also does contain wetlands.

G

Thank you any other comments by zoom or members of the audience.

A

Not on zoom, not on zoom any other 2 4 against the application.

G

Second round speakers, what that would include zoom again anybody, no zoom.

G

Sure do you want to speak again second round? Yes, please! Yes, please! So it's sheridan, lloyd,.

L

45 cliff road, the one additional stipulation beyond just having an evaluation of wetlands.

L

On this property, I would also like a stipulation that at no point in time can that uh pipe be.

L

Blocked and or plugged, or any other way of eliminating the ability for the stream to continue.

L

Doing it flowing the way it has flowed for it's been decades, like I said, we've been there for over.

L

20 years- and it's been there well beyond that, you know being in the piping system that it is if this.

L

Ends up being eliminated or plugged or anything else, it's going to end up creating tremendous.

L

Problems of of flooding in multiple properties north of this proposed new lot. Thank you.

G

Thank you any other second round speakers, zoom or otherwise.

G

Third round speakers.

G

No more hands on zoom.

G

I guess not, I'm not no sorry no more hands on soon. Should I ask you peter, I don't know how to ask the.

A

Question about jim um well, the the producer and beverly are both keeping an eye out so.

A

They're: okay, if they they'll tell us if there is, but you want to be a public speaker, joe no.

J

I just wanted to answer that question or answer that comment respond to that comment, uh uh not.

G

You're not actually supposed to respond to the comments they can only as a member of the public.

B

They can speak during the public session just now as a member of the public. Okay.

J

I can wait till the close, the public if you want well. No, we know before that the public public.

G

Hearing is about to get close, so this is your chance all right. The only thing I would like to.

J

Say is, we did have go environmental services go out to the property early on, they walked, they.

J

Walked the property verified that there were no no areas of the property that actually.

J

Contained wetlands that qualified with the three criteria for wetlands and we could.

J

We'd be happy to have a condition that they stamped the the plan. The final plan that gets.

J

Recorded we do have a note on the plan that talks about no wetlands being observed on the premises.

J

If you'd like.

G

Note 12, yes,.

G

Okay, any other third round speakers, zoom or otherwise.

G

And close the public hearing open it to the board. What's your pleasure, mr chairman, I'll.

I

Make a motion that we vote to approve the waiver request for section uh six? No, I'm sorry 11.11.

I

Of the subdivision regulations, sorry 6.11 of the subdivision regulations.

B

I

And I guess I'll just comment on that. um You know, while.

I

A holding tank is not ideal. I do think in this instance, where there is a future.

I

Sewer connection that's going to be made, um hopefully sooner rather than later.

I

I think um I think that that is, um that is feasible for this lot. Also, the fact that this.

I

Will have to go through nhcs subsurface review in order to uh to get that holding tank in there. So.

G

So that's that aspect of it any other comments about that.

A

Do you it's possible, you could do both if you take separate, we got to.

A

Do them separately yeah we're going to do waivers yeah? Oh okay, do you have to have a.

B

Two-Thirds vote on a waiver- okay, all right, so roll call vote on that on the waiver request.

A

On the waiver request, so that the motion was to grant the waiver from section uh 6.11, 6.11.

A

So everyone's having trouble with that number jim hewitt, uh yes peter harris.

A

Yes, mr chalman, yes, mr pazzullo, yes, mr council, uh city manager, canard sorry how to practice. Yes,.

A

There moreo yes, mr clark, yes, miss bagala! Yes, mr mohanna, yes, okay. That motion is unanimous.

E

Go ahead, mr chairman I'll make emotionally vote to approve preliminary and final.

I

Subdivision with the following stipulations: a through f, but I would also like to add.

I

Another stipulation that uh 40 open space shall be maintained on the existing and proposed lots.

I

Another stipulation that um you want to show the calculation for the existing law for the 40, so.

I

Calculations on the on the plans on the plan, so the plans shall include.

I

The calculation for the 40 percent open space on both the existing proposed lots.

I

Add rain garden details to plant set that include a riser overflow structure.

I

And I will also I don't know if this should be a stipulation or not, but uh you know we'll see what.

I

The second goes, but uh the applicant shall work with the city on a flowage easement for that pipe.

I

Coming out, because the this, the applicant's not going to have to grant the city um some sort of.

I

Flowage easement, if it's technically part of the city's stormwater system, which I don't know but.

I

It basically needs to get resolved in one minute or another, so um I think that's a good starting.

I

Spot to get the conversation going between the applicant and the city on how to deal with that.

I

Flow to provide a flow adjustment, if necessary, yeah yeah have it evaluated and determine if it.

B

Needs one: is there a second one? Can I make a comment? Well, do we need? Did we get a second? I.

B

I was the second you did. Second it okay, I'd like to add to that. If I possibly can that's one second.

C

That's what I was going to do note number 15 rick that you were mentioning says existing lot. 18.

C

Shall provide a flow of rights drainage each month to benefit lot 18-1 in order to manage runoff.

B

Yeah, but we're also talking a flowage easement for the city if it's a city's pipe, not just for.

B

The adjacent lot, I think, I think the site is generally grading down uphill down the top to.

G

The bottom and so that's to cover for the new lot. But I think what is being discussed is that.

G

Mysterious pipe that comes in from cliff road right, so I think there are two issues: okay,.

G

Is that yeah that's correct, yeah.

B

uh Including um yeah, so is to add to sort of the drainage piece. I think that it needs to be.

B

A stipulation that it is truly determined the ownership of that pipe and whether or not and.

B

That any drainage that needs to be continued is definitely that they'll do that work in order to.

B

Make sure that that flow is not only not stopped, but if it needs additional piping or whatever.

B

Additional that done and that the plans are indeed stamped as to whether wetland determination.

B

That's the one extra yep. I agree all right. My only question about it. Do we know it's a city.

G

Runoff yeah, so it needs to be determined. um My question would be, and beth you'd certainly.

G

Know about this, if it's been running on this property for a great many years, it may be.

G

A prescriptive easement, that's developed by somebody somewhere over this property.

B

I think attorney sullivan could speak to that even better.

B

Yes, wake up. You couldn't hear the question because of the masks and everything um we're.

B

Talking about whether or not the pipe that runs under what used to be cliff.

B

Road, whether or not that city owned, whether or not we know it's city owned and whether.

B

Or not, um there needs to be easements for it. uh I heard that part I do know. I do not know.

M

This is the first I've heard of this application, so if we put in stipulations for.

B

That determination to be made and reasons to be granted is that enough to cover that's enough. Okay,.

E

Makes sense to me so it may not be the city, then it would be a determination of the origin of the.

G

Water flow and a resolution of easement rights that be a yep. That would be fair to say yes,.

G

Okay, any yes right! I just like to add one other thing to the rain garden concerns um as far as.

K

Maintenance of that rain garden, typically on many other projects, we we typically require the owner.

K

To be responsible for the maintenance of that rain garden in perpetuity, and usually it's put in the.

K

Deed, so that any future owner would know that the rain garden needs to be maintained and and.

K

Not removed also I'd like to add that, thank you. So the plan will be recorded at the registry or would.

A

A note on the plan cover that yes, yeah, okay, okay, as long as it's on notice of the registry. Yes, okay,.

G

So that rain garden would actually be servicing part of the new lot as well. Yes, yes, it would.

A

And I I noticed that corey made the motion about an overflow structure.

A

For the rain garden, did you want to add design details to that? Did that.

I

So peter you just adding that recommendation with the note on the plans to that.

I

Stipulation raise yeah, yes, okay, that works for me, so that was a an amendment to the motion.

G

And the original motion and seconder are okay with that yep yep, any other board.

G

We do have already a condition for def approval on this holding tank correct. Yes,.

B

That would be letter e.

G

Okay, I think uh I think we're ready for another roll call. Okay, mr hewitt. Yes,.

A

Mr harris, yes, mr chairman, yes, mr priscilla, yes, city manager, canard, yes, ms moreau.

A

Yes, mr clerk, yes, mr gala, yes, mr mahana, yes, okay, motion passes.

G

I believe the next item on the agenda is monarch, village. Nope, that's possible, postponed.

G

I didn't put a check mark beside it: sagamore corner yeah, sagamore, corner 55c and d. Mr chairman.

C

If I can, can I make a motion to consider 5c and d to be discussed together and voted on separately.

A

Any discussion you ready roll call, mr hewitt. Yes, mr harris! Yes, mr chalmers, yes, mr missoula, yes.

A

Current city manager, canard, yes, councillor, moreau; yes, mr clark, yes, mr gala yeah, mr mohanna. Yes,.

G

So we have uh items five c and d on the agenda for.

G

960 sagamore avenue I'll, let the applicant describe it since we've already jumped in.

N

Thank you, mr chair members of the board. My name is francis bruton, I'm with brutan and beraby in dover.

N

um For those who haven't seen me or met me, you may hear other people refer to me as fx. That's two.

N

Letters so francis xavier, so just in case you hear that that's me with me tonight is the applicant.

N

Eric cates is here and he's a principal at sagamore corner llc, as well as eric weinrib.

N

Who will come up and give you a little bit more of the details of the project and robbie woodburn is.

N

Here as well- and she is here in case- you have any questions with respect to the landscaping.

N

That you'll see on the plans or um so, um as you may be aware, this is a project that um is really.

N

A renovation or a tear down of the what was the golden egg, which also had some other uses to it.

N

As you may know, the golden egg is placed fairly close to sagamore avenue.

N

And in fact, the people using that facility were often parked in the right of way.

N

So one of the things that this plan does is obviously alleviate. Not only that.

N

But some buildings that are obviously in a little bit of disrepair and it also dresses up the back.

N

Side of that property, which is also a concern for the neighbors, with respect to its appearance and.

N

You know rodents and things of that nature, so, in any event,.

N

We look at it as a very positive change for the area.

N

The lawn is uh in the rmb zone and right now it contains a significant amount of impervious.

N

Surface, given the building configuration and the existing pavement on the on the lot.

N

The uh also the lot also lacks uh significant drainage mitigation features uh and again I.

N

Mentioned there's dumpsters and debris and and whatnot in the in the back of the lot. The lot's.

N

um Somewhat unique in that it is encumbered by basically a hundred foot wetland buffer.

N

And there's a very, very small portion of wetlands on the lot in the very rear, but again.

N

It kind of pushes everything forward. The plan is for a six unit.

N

Building this would be uh three two two bedroom condominium units in each of the second and third.

N

Floor the first floor would contain parking that would be enclosed and heated. We have a driveway.

N

Going down what is known as sagamore grove uh so that we can direct the traffic to that point.

N

And to the rear of the building and then there's an entrance way, obviously for the for the parking.

N

Underneath um the project has been through um a lot of review by the city, it's been through.

N

A technical advisory group- it's also been through the conservation commission as well as.

N

Extensive discussions with the planning staff as a result of those discussions.

N

We were able to come up with a plan that results in taking away 750 square feet of existing.

N

Impervious surface within the wetland buffer and getting down to zero, which I hope is.

N

Good for you to hear what we have remaining and what is subject to the conditional use permit.

N

Is in order to do the construction and and work with the drainage and and make this a better site.

N

We have about 1100 square feet of temporary disturbance in the wetland buffer and.

N

As a second aspect to that, we have a 10 foot by 10 foot patio, but it would be pervious, so it will.

N

Be a 10 foot by 10 foot patio basically to have something like a grill for the.

N

The people in the units to utilize that's in the wetland buffer to basically stay away from.

N

You know the parking activities and obviously stay away from sagamore avenue in the front.

N

So we're asking for that 10 foot by 10 foot area again with a pervious surface, underneath it.

N

So we originally came forward with a project at eight units.

N

And, as a result, we did get some a butter input and with working with the abutters.

N

We were able to come to a plan that resulted in six units and that also resulted in unanimous.

N

Support of those of butters who had approached us with any concern of the project, so you know.

N

It was a kind of a win-win-win project if you will. Hopefully you would agree with me on that.

N

um We worked again with the staff, with concom and tac to come up with a plan that we think.

N

You will appreciate and and approve, and um as one final note for me, uh all of the.

N

Conditions of approval that were set forth by staff are acceptable to the applicant and.

N

What I'm going to do now is I'm going to have eric come up and just go through the conditional.

N

Use criteria and then, if you have any questions of us, I'm happy to answer those. Thank you. Thank you.

O

I'll read the note for the record eric weinridge with altus engineering.

O

um Congratulations, mr chairman and new board nice to see some new faces and.

O

I'm very excited to see the direction it goes, and I don't know where mr hewitt is but hello.

O

um And it's always a little frustrating following an attorney because I think.

O

My entire presentation was what um fx had presented.

O

Do I get to control this at all, uh you get to point, but.

A

Beverly has this has the con? If you will so maybe she can change the slide, go one more one: more okay,.

O

So um just I think everyone in this room knows the site. It is the former golden age, 960 sagamore.

O

Avenue um but it really shows the proximity to sagamore creek on and the intersection.

O

Of sagamore, grove and uh and in the uh roadway- and you can also see on this plan, the aerial the.

O

Sea of pavement in front of the existing building go to the next one.

O

um As fx had mentioned on it's it's a pretty tired site, it's a really tired site. uh You can see the.

O

Back of the house in the lower on left hand corner where there's dumpsters there from when it was a.

O

Restaurant, the building isn't deteriorated there. It's a gravel parking lot that it's in a haphazard.

O

Condition on some of which the um of the that parking area that gravel parking area is in the.

O

Hundred foot buffer on in front, you can see the middle top that, as fx said, also that it's pavement.

O

That's you can't tell the difference between sagamore, road or avenue, and the parking lot and.

O

The right-of-way everyone backs into the street. It's it's a pretty restaurant's, not open right now,.

O

But it's a pretty unsafe area and if it were to continue in it current form, it would remain unsafe.

O

Go to the existing conditions plan. Thank you. So uh when we initially did the survey for this property.

O

um We were considering actually three parcel the corner, parcel the golden egg and then.

O

On the parcel up, 1b wentworth house road, it is um turned out we're just working on the golden.

O

Egg, that's why we, the survey, um indicates uh all three parcels as how do I hit the.

O

How do I highlight that the other way.

A

I think it's, the small button, try the big round button there we go. Oh wow.

O

So this corner right here is the.

O

uh Odd shape corner of the parcel, it's the only part portion of the parcel that is in the wetland.

O

But it has, because of that um is only you know, a small portion in the wetland, but it has that.

O

100 foot buffer, whether it was on our property or not, we would still have that wetland buffer.

O

Let's go to the existing the site plan. Please.

O

Thank you. So what we're proposing is to eliminate all that parking in front put a new six unit.

O

On building with access off of sagamore on with direct access into the basement for.

O

The residents for a covered parking area and then access internally up through the building.

O

For the resident on the outside, we have on five additional parking spaces for visitor parking.

O

Including a handicapped space outside for the visitors, as well as the handicapped space inside.

O

We're having permeable on pavement for the access way and the parking spaces with the.

O

Exception of the area where the handicapped parking is and the on I'll call it. The ramp.

O

So the access ways down into the garage and I'm in the right way for the surface parking.

O

The grading plan, if we could thank you.

O

So where did that come from? um As previously mentioned, the site is highly impervious. It's got.

O

Gravel in the back pavement all through the front and what we're doing is we're on enhancing it. On.

O

From a storm water management in every aspect possible, the rear of the site has the permeable.

O

Porous pavement so that we can infiltrate the uh the pavement and get treatment on in the area.

O

Adjacent to the wetland buffer, the on pavement, that is in the right of way now that's in front.

O

Of the site, that's all being removed and becoming um vegetated. So that's a reduction in pavement.

O

And then in front of the site, between the building on the property between the building and the.

O

Right away we're doing subsurface storm water treatment, then discharging into the catch basin.

O

Currently, the site, including the existing off.

O

Bought used pavement surfaces has approximately 25 000 square feet of impervia. There will be.

O

A reduction of 8 400 square feet and an effective impervious area of only 16 000.

O

We're going to be getting a proposed water service off of on sagamore ave with.

O

A separate domestic and fire protection and similar to the previous application.

O

uh We're going to be putting in a holding tank um as a temporary.

O

uh Measure until this uh sewer comes forward, however, with this and and this area is on.

O

What I understand- and mr pizzulo could speak to it, is that it's not part of the base bid.

O

For the sewer, that's out on the north side of sagamore creek, it's it's patter, an ad alternate.

O

And my understanding is that the city has, you know, can decide on doing that. It is part of the descent.

O

Consent decree and that it will eventually be on sort some point on, and I think that if they.

O

Decide to do it, the contractor has 150 days or so to complete the work. Our hope is that um we.

O

Don't expect to be online with this project until the spring of or summer early summer of 2023, so.

O

We're hoping, as we go forward, we're going to know which direction we're going. We don't want to build.

O

A holding tank, I don't think the city really wants us to build a holding tank, so we'll be.

O

What I'll say is more of a last-minute decision. We will get our approvals from des 4 holding tank.

O

But we're going to sit on building it until we know exactly where we are. We might be at.

O

A point where we have to put it in we'll put it in then we'll convert to the e1 pump system.

O

We have a very robust planting plan on.

O

The redevelopment, including wetland buffer enhancements and streetscape planting.

O

If you have any questions, robbie woodburn is here and speaking to the conditional use.

O

Permit the entire on explanation of the permit is in your packet, but I'll go through it briefly.

O

As mentioned, there's 400 square feet of wetlands on the site. um There's 13 650 square.

O

Feet of wetland and wetland buffer on the parcel, which is about 31.8 percent. However, uh there's.

O

Already 600 us seven hundred and sixty square feet of impervious disturbed areas on within the buffer.

O

uh When we're said and done, there'll be zero square feet of impervious in the buffer. We're.

O

Not disturbing any natural areas, what we're doing is we're doing some re-grading in these disturbed.

O

Areas and we're adding a 100 square foot 10 by 10 permeable patio for the grilling area.

O

For the people behind the property, this is located away from sagamore ave away from sagamore grove.

O

And because you're not allowed to have grills on your decks by code, we need to have a place.

O

We put it away from the building a little ways to allow people to enjoy that natural area and we're.

O

Putting it just that small area in the buffer, um so for the criteria the land is reasonably suited.

O

To the use on activity or alteration um we're improving it there's there is no alternative.

O

To site on everything outside the buffer and do the work we could leave the site as it is.

O

We're not going to we're going to make it better we're going to enhance the buffer we're going.

O

To have that 10 by 10 tourist patio and we're going to remove 760 square feet of parking area.

O

There will be no adverse impacts on the functions and values on, as it is now.

O

That gravel area provides no buffer in treatment, storm water treatment, we're going to be enhancing.

O

It we're going to be providing stormwater treatment, we're going to be adding landscape.

O

Landscaping, that's going to pick up the nutrients and we're going to be making it better in the.

O

Buffer, as well as on the other side, where the water run towards sagamore avenue and eventually.

O

To the creek, that area is also an enhancement, but not part of the conditional use permit.

O

Alteration of the natural vegetated state or manage woodland will occur to only the extent.

O

Necessary we're not at impacting any natural areas, it's all disturbed areas and- and I believe that.

O

This alternative is the least impacting where we're removing all this impervious area, adding.

O

The buffer and providing storm water treatment and all the natural areas within the vegetated buffer.

O

That we're disturbing will be returned to its natural state, and then we have a very significant.

O

Natural area between where we're working and the wetland buffer.

O

And I just want to you know summarize.

O

As fx said, this is a win-win for the city. It's we're improving storm water management, we're.

O

Improving buffer we're actually right now, they're the septic system is failed.

O

You know they've been uh pumping while it was open, but that that's really a moot point. There'll be no.

O

Cars backing out into the street anymore there'll be storm. Water treatment, there'll be less chance.

O

For contaminant entering the wetlands and surface waters by the removal of the dumpsters and the.

O

Commercial activities and there'll be less vehicles on a very busy street. Thank you.

G

uh Any questions for you, I'm here for questions at this point. Sorry, I just wanted to go home.

C

Eric one real, quick question, chuck clark, great great presentation, um the page, the old page, nate.

C

uh Labeled subservice sewage disposal system from the old egg that you put a.

C

Lot of annotations on including your new septic and everything it's great.

C

Every single tank on here you said what you were going to do about, but there is also an.

C

Existing 3 000 gallon concrete grease trap, that's yeah, all the built infrastructure will be removed.

O

um So that they'll be removed matter of fact, the septic system, anyone going down.

O

Sagamore grove drives over that it's a chambered system under that roadway.

O

Okay, so I don't you can go back to the existing conditions plan. I think it shows up yeah some.

J

Of them say to be pumped, filled and abandoned to be pump, filled, yeah they're not supposed to.

O

Be they're supposed to be pumped but they're supposed to be removed. Okay, sorry, thank you.

I

Discord, mr chairman, um a couple of uh questions couple of comments. You know first comment: I have.

I

Is um you know the electric vehicle charging in the basement? I think it's a great idea, so thank.

I

You um and correct me if I'm wrong, there's no aot requirement for this site right. That's that's!.

O

Correct we're under on the 50 000 square feet. Okay, um so thank you for doing the 15 additional.

I

Rainfall, I know um one thing I noticed in here and I'm just just for clarification purposes.

I

It looked like you used the 48 hour. Rainfall data rather than the 24 was.

I

That intentional, or is that just um I know those the table can get a little.

O

Tall, I'm gonna jump the cory on that because he did those drainage coats all right. Thanks.

A

Corey belden with altus engineering. um I think the intent is 24 hours so.

A

um But I can look at them. If the um are you looking at the uh the rainfall precipitation.

A

Table yeah, I was just looking at the the cornell data and it it it looked like when you.

C

I might have highlighted the wrong column, but the right numbers I are probably in the model. That's.

A

My my anticipation, okay, um just want to make sure that oh, but the the 24 hour, I believe, is.

A

Is the intent and what I believe is modeled for the study correct great. Thank you, um mr chairman.

I

Thank you all right. Thank you. uh One thing that I noticed as well in the landscape maintenance plan.

I

um You guys call out you know, requirements within the 250 foot shoreline um area which.

I

Is actually because of sagamore creek? Not because of this wetland, um you know you call out the the.

I

Slow release, um nitrogen for that yeah kind of the ironic thing I noticed is um that 250 foot line is.

I

Almost right on top of the 100 foot wetland buffer, so I guess my comment would be.

I

Would the applicant be willing just to call out you know the requirement of slow release.

I

Nitrogen on the entire site, sure, okay, great um and then my last question is just um I didn't notice.

I

Any sidewalk access along sagamore or you know, pedestrian crossing there or anything like that.

I

um Didn't know how, if that was discussed, you know the reasoning behind that.

O

That was something that we debated on. There is the sidewalk that is on the uh west side of sagamore.

O

And you know we work with tech and it wasn't something that they required and my my intuition.

O

Is that they're probably concerned with speed and on not a lot of people crossing there and what I.

O

Understand the term is that it would be more like a mid-block crossing which isn't a recommended.

O

Crossing and so just to bring that a little bit further forward, we do have a walkway coming out.

O

Of the front of the building, and that is not intended as a an everyday use that is actually.

O

Fire egress on access, but we had to have that walkway go just like we do on all our.

O

Other building go from the building out to the street, to a public way to allow people to leave.

O

But it's not where on there'll be deliveries on you know, ups or fedex or or any of those.

O

That will all be on to that rear entry, where the five spaces are. So we didn't believe that.

O

A sidewalk was, or crosswalk was necessary. Okay, I guess like off of uh so the the building to the.

I

North of sagamore grove- that also has a big curb cut correct. Or am I wrong on that because there's.

I

No sidewalk, there's no sidewalk that terminates at that corner of there is no. The sidewalk ends.

O

At the at the bridge right, um but I don't think it has a vision of a large um opening, but I believe.

O

That there's some sort of barricades in there that prevent a lot of access is that correct. Eric yeah.

O

It's off the top of my head. I I feel like it, it's a sea of openness, but I believe it's fairly.

O

Controlled on how you get in and out all right, I'm just trying to envision a way. You know people.

I

Living here walk downtown, that's all so. You know and safely get on to the bridge where.

I

The sidewalks are yeah, so I think that it just like it is today for the people.

O

On sagamore grove, they they'll wait for it to clear and then cross and go up the street okay.

G

Mr jane, do you have a question yeah um it? This is like just a genuine question. So am I reading this.

D

Correctly that there's a freshwater marsh on the property. No, it's just a freshwater wetland.

D

A freshwater wetland so can, can you just explain so that I can understand it about.

D

How it's not going to undergo further degradation.

O

I've very simple: how is it it's going to be enhanced, because, right now, in that wetland, buffer.

O

There's vehicular access, there's dumpsters, there's a propane tank, there's all sorts of.

O

Built infrastructure there and we're pulling all that out, so we're removing all that area. That is.

O

On impacted, creating a vegetated buffer and with enhanced planting, and the only thing that we're.

O

Putting in there as a permanent structure is a permeable patio, so of course it's going to going.

O

To be much better as far on the functions and values of that buffer, because there's less water.

O

Getting to it and there's less contaminated water getting to it, so there won't be any further infill.

D

Of that wetland is that correct, further influence but you're not going to build anything there or.

D

Degradate it during building is that right. So during construction we will be using the.

O

Temporary erosion control measures that are depicted on the plan, silt fences on and.

O

Silt socks along that edge of the construction to make sure that there's no degradation.

O

During construction of silt and transport, there'll be stabilized construction exit as it as.

O

Contractors leave the site, so there'll be no tracking of sediment, so we're doing absolutely.

O

The best we can to enhance it and and make sure that there is no degradation during or after.

O

Construction and then I had one other question, which is, I see, a very long maintenance checklist.

D

Particularly of the porous surface, um you know that goes into vacuuming that porous surface.

D

Surface yearly, I believe who who carries that out and how does the city know that that you.

D

Know in-depth maintenance checklist is in fact being carried out well, like most projects. There.

O

Is a reporting requirement back to the city, and the nice thing? Is that, as being a condominium.

O

There's actually an association that that will be part of their bylaws and their uh covenants right.

I

Any other camera. Thank you. um One thing I just just noticed um the the conservation commission.

I

Had a couple of additional stipulations, one being the applicant shall include signage.

I

To demonstrate delineation that there is a sensitive resource, wetland area beyond the.

I

10 by 10 patio and the second being along the existing stone wall, existing tree line.

I

Beyond the proposed patio, the applicant shall include a different additional buffer plantings.

I

And so those have both been added to the plant set. That's already before you great. Thank you.

G

I had one question eric the proposed conditions that I believe the attorney said you guys had.

G

Agreed to any easement plans and deeds for the city are to be approved by the planning and legal.

G

Department, all right, can you point those out are any required. I don't believe there's any easements.

O

Required at all, as a matter of fact, the the water line that discussed that uh in easement is.

O

It's not like some of the others, whereas actually it's a very long line and.

O

The the curb stops are at the property line, so I'm not sure if that will actually be required or not.

G

So it's a standard condition and just in case correct. Okay and one thing, this is not a critique.

G

But I'd like especially the new board members to understand, could you explain how you are adhering.

G

To the building height stipulation by creating a basically a building pad that does not conform.

G

With existing grade- and it's actually going to be built up a bit and how that works, so the.

O

Physical height of the building is 26 feet, five 26.5 feet high and the regulations as crafted.

O

It's the average grade around the building five feet out on. I think in a five foot in interval.

O

On going around the building as the finished grade, it's not based on the existing grade.

G

I understand that, but I don't know that the new board members do- and I.

G

Apologize, if folks don't hear this, I just think this relates to the conversation we've.

G

Been having about how our ordinance works- and I just want the board my members to understand that.

G

Because this building will be much higher than the existing grade in certain locations at its base.

G

And then, and again this isn't a critique. This is an explanation and then from that building.

G

Pad which is up in the air from existing grade is where the building height is measured from so.

G

Looking at it from the road what's out there today, you might think a building would be this high.

G

But it's actually going to be a little bit higher because you're going to make a level pad to build.

G

The building on is that that fair, absolutely does that help board members understand. Okay, thank you.

G

Any other board comments.

G

Just open the public hearing um comments, 2 4 against first round.

G

Anybody in the audience anybody on zoom.

L

Good evening this is sheridan lloyd again at 45, cliff road.

L

So I live right down the street from this, so I just had a couple of questions.

L

Questions just one second, I was reading the go ahead, so go ahead. Miss miss lloyd.

G

This gentleman had gotten up, we didn't, we didn't realize you had your hand up, but go ahead.

G

Mrs lloyd, you can go ahead. um I okay, um I had read the the whole report. It's a very long and detailed.

L

One so thank you for putting together a great packet for information, but it looked like that.

L

The traffic, the the evaluation of the amount of traffic was based on additional traffic on.

L

Sagamore avenue, but it didn't seem to address any sort of impact on sagamore grove, which is actually.

L

Where the driveways are being relocated to so, did I miss it? Is there any evaluation of what.

L

Impact this is going to have on sagamore grove, because sagamore grove is a really tiny street.

L

And I think there may be some congestion with that number of cars coming out of this new.

L

Complex and it's a pretty sharp turn to then come from the complex right to the stop sign.

L

And it may be having difficulties for anyone else that lives on the grove to actually get out of.

L

Their own street because it is a challenging location. So that's one of my questions um and.

L

I would just like to comment too: having walked across the new bridge. That's there and yes, there.

L

Is just sidewalk on one side, one of the other board members did suggest maybe having a crossing.

L

One of those flashing crossing devices right there and I think, for the safety.

L

Of that curve and having that number of new residents in that area, they would be.

L

Crossing over to the sidewalk on the other side of sagamore ave, so I believe that that would be.

L

A very valid addition to this whole development is having a safe crossing at that location and allow.

L

For a greater amount of pedestrian residents being able to walk into downtown portsmouth.

L

From that, because it's it's certainly very walkable from that location. Thank you. Thank you.

G

Yes, my name is uh william pingree. I lived on sagamore grove for more than 15 years.

C

And I currently live right across the street from the proposed development and as far as I know,.

C

Everybody on the street is in favor of the whole project. To answer the last question as.

C

Far as traffic, I think, there'll be significantly less traffic with a condo than there was with a.

C

Restaurant, it was tremendous coming and going there for a long time. The whole project is.

C

Just going to be a big improvement for that area for the wetlands for the people that live there.

C

So uh basically, I just want to say that we're strongly in favor of it.

C

Thank you any other, first-time speakers.

G

Nobody else on zoom nope.

G

Second time, speakers.

G

No zoom second time, speakers any third time. Speakers in any part of the world.

G

Close the public hearing board conversation: what's your pleasure.

I

Mr chairman, I'll make a motion that we vote to grant the wetland condition.

I

Conditional use permit, as presented second.

I

I'll just speak on that that um you know, I think they are doing a great reduction in this this. This.

I

Area it's a small area but um they're, certainly enhancing that buffer area yeah. They do have the.

I

Patio in there, but I think it's certainly a good net reduction in impact in that location.

G

I agree actually in having the signage the conservation commission mentioned.

G

Will provide a little educational component, so people can understand what's what's there so.

G

Any other comment on the waiver: I guess we're ready for another roll call. So this is a roll call on the wetland.

A

Conditional use for 960 sagamore, mr hewitt. Yes, mr harris, yes, mr gellman, yes, mr pizzulo, yes.

A

City manager, connard, yes, councilman. Yes, mr clark, yes, ms pagala, yes, mr mohana, yes, russian passes.

G

And on the site plan, I will make a motion that we vote to grant sight perm plan approval with.

I

The following stipulations: 2.1 through 2.11, with additional stipulation under conditions present.

I

To include language within the um landscape, maintenance.

I

Plan and on the plant set itself to only use slow release fertilizer on site. Second,.

G

Core would you like to speak to that yeah? I think. um Well, you know I I do think uh this is.

I

This is a good project. I'm glad to see that all the uh folks that live down sagamore grove are.

I

You know approve of this project and there's you know, there's no um impacts to them on it and.

I

um But one thing I I would like to just kind of get uh others input is the whole pedestrian thing.

I

um You know I I do realize it's it's going to be awfully difficult to do any sort of sidewalk on.

I

The side of the the proposed development, because uh for one we don't have a sidewalk on that side,.

I

Nor is the sidewalk continuing on the bridge on that side, the the only sidewalk on the bridge is.

I

On the west side of sagamore ave, so there would have to be a crosswalk there um and given that.

I

Well, they do have the the uh the walkway from the building out to the road um like the.

I

Applicant said it's, you know, it's not gonna, be a full-time use thing, but I also worry about people.

I

People down sagamore group, then wanting to use that crosswalk.

I

So if we were to say okay, you know, let's, let's put in a situation, that we got to put a crosswalk.

I

At that walkway well, it will work really well for the residents there, but what I'm afraid.

I

Might happen, is people are going to walk down, sagamore grove and then walk around so anyways.

I

Matt um one of the things I was going to ask to add, as a stipulation to it, is that we have the.

B

Applicant work with the planning department and maybe dpw to look at the feasibility.

B

Of a crosswalk at the end of sagamore grove, so at the corner, not where the walkway comes out, but.

B

Closer to the bridge right where sagamore grove, so then it would be much easier for everyone to.

B

Be able to get across the street, I don't obviously I'm not looking at it, but I think if they at least.

B

Look at the feasibility of whether or not that's a possibility. I think that would be.

B

A great way to solve that yeah, I think so too. um My only concern with that is uh the infrastructure.

I

The applicant's putting in at that corner in order for the storm water system, so there's.

I

Gonna have to be uh some uh that's why dpw and planning should have to kind of figure that out.

G

Yes, city manager, I think it would be appropriate for us to uh with planning and dpw to speak.

C

To the state, as this is a state road and and work together on a on an appropriate solution,.

G

I think that's a good idea, because I I can tell you from my own experience and I'm not.

G

Going to put any other members on the spot on this, getting a crosswalk across the state highway is.

G

Not a small matter, there are pros and cons to it as eric explained and.

G

As corey said, if you don't provide the pedestrian facilities, people won't walk.

G

Or they'll be in putting themselves in danger, so it's it's a uh it's a bit of a conundrum.

A

Director is there a hand or is it a comment? Oh mr hewitt wants to speak.

A

Yes, uh I can confirm that uh the state highway uh stops at the intersection of.

C

1A and 1b at the bean group and that section of sagamore ad in front of this development is.

E

City maintained yeah because we did the bridge that's right. We paid to actually do that great.

C

So good, thank you for that and we don't have to include this day. In that conversation, I wondered.

B

About that, because I knew we paid for that whole bridge yeah, that's right! That's always what we.

G

Pay for right so beth. If I can understand I'm trying to understand the condition it'd.

G

Be a study between the applicant and the city staff to determine what, if anything, can be done.

G

Yeah I mean if it's totally not feasible, I I'm going to let the city departments tell us that.

B

But if there's a feasible way of doing it and they can come up with it, then great. Let's, let's make.

B

It a stipulation that moves forward applicants need to submit information, it's adequate for the.

G

Staff to determine an inner discretion if it's feasible or work with both dpw and planning yeah.

B

And obviously mr priscilla can correct me if I'm wrong as to whether or not that's a good way to.

B

Do it, I think so yes, and would you so you don't see that needing to come back to this board, but.

G

Let that be worked out with staff, not unless it changes something on the site plan that.

B

We would actually have to have approval. They should be able to administratively do that. Yep.

G

Would that possibly include a sidewalk easement or not? uh No, because I'm not talking about building a.

B

Sidewalk on that side, I'm talking about just building across the walk across the actual.

B

Street to the sidewalk on the other side, okay, so we have a motion to approve the site plan with.

G

The stipulations listed the additional one cory added and this additional study to be worked out.

G

With staff right and just to make sure it's very clear that it's my intention, that whatever is.

B

Determined to be done, that would be the applicant. That would do that. I'm sorry! I couldn't hear that.

B

It is sorry I have talking to each other, it's hard to remember, to talk into the microphone. It is my.

B

Intention that you know once it's determined whatever can be done with a crosswalk, that.

B

We're putting it upon the applicant to actually do the whatever is decided upon.

G

That in terms of providing information, but if actually getting across the street, might.

G

Involve some other property owner right and that might that might be the case, but we're.

B

Going to have to let that be determined by this, like I said if it needs to come.

C

Back to us, then it does but we'll let the city staff determine that.

G

Okay, does everybody understand the motion.

G

I think we're ready for another roll call. Another.

A

Roll call for this is for site plan review with stipulations.

A

Mr hewitt, yes, mr harris, yes, mr chairman, yes, mr pizzulo, yes, city manager, canard, yes,.

A

Councillor moreau. Yes, mr clark, yes, miss pagala! Yes, mr mohana, yes, unanimous motion passes.

G

G

So I will um 25 again look to my board members for help keeping me on track, but I think we're at.

G

5E yeah, thank you. Correct yep, application of adl 325 little harbor road truck trust.

G

Efficiently use permit, in accordance with section 10814 of the zoning, for conversion of existing.

G

Exec accessory dwelling structure, which was formerly the caretaker's home.

G

Oh yeah into an attached dwelling unit with a gross floor area of 1300 square feet.

G

Property shown on assessors map 2052 and lies within the rural and single residence, a districts.

G

Corey, are you here to speak for the application? Yes, sir good evening, mr chairman members of the.

P

Board corey caldwell from tf moran on behalf of the applicants, the adl 325.

P

Little harbor road trust with me tonight is jim youngblood, our builder from young blend builders.

P

And josh bergery our landscape architect with matthew, cunningham, landscape design,.

P

Our application is to convert an existing.

P

Accessory structure, formerly known as the caretaker's house on the island into a detached.

P

Accessory dwelling unit at 325 little harbor road, which is also known as belle isle or lady isle and.

P

What I've got on the screen now is some pictures of the caretaker's house. A brief.

P

History of the island, it's approximately 12 acres in size. It's located in the rural zone.

P

There is currently on the island, a residential home, a carriage house, a barn, a horse, shelter.

P

And caretakers home, which is what's pictured on the screen there.

P

The caretakers home and all the remaining structures are located on the easterly half.

P

Of the island, the westerly half of the island is virtually untouched. I'm going to bring up a.

A

uh Beverly is changing it, so you could ask for the next slide to be easiest. Okay, that's.

P

Just a pointer the the next slide, please she's she's back there. Let's see here.

P

A couple more slides with an aerial image if we could go through the plans to the aerial image.

P

The while she's bringing that up the um the caretaker's home, as you can see from.

P

The pictures it's in a state of disrepair it currently contains about 2 400 square feet.

P

This building was previously home to a family that lived on the island in the early 1900s, the island.

P

Then became the home of a small catholic school nuns lived on the island and school children were.

P

Bussed back and forth to the island daily, the sisters of providence, the former owners of the.

P

Island and the the buildings sold the property in 1998., the current owners, the adl 325 little harbor.

P

Road trust bought the property in 2015.. The school existed on the island from about 1941 to the 1990s.

P

The caretaker's house has sat vacant on this island since the the early 1990s, we're not sure.

P

Just when it was constructed, however, there's some hand-hewn beams in the structure itself.

P

And architecturally we're told by local experts that they believe the vintage was early 1800s or.

P

Or possibly, even earlier into the late 1700s, the building was slated for demolition a few years ago.

P

However, after further consideration and understanding the historical significance of the.

P

Buildings, the owners would like to renovate this building into a detached accessory dwelling unit.

P

In your packets are a set of site plans, landscape design plans, architectural plans and photos of.

P

The building also included, is some aerial imagery of the island as it exists today and then there's.

P

Four photos in your packets uh showing what the island will look like, post construction.

P

Our application proposes to remove the one-story appendages of that caretaker's house.

P

And restore only the main section, and this main section is where that timber frame currently sits.

P

This reduces the area of the building from 2400 square feet to about 1300 square feet.

P

This 1300 square feet exceeds the 1000 foot maximum allowed. However, section.

P

10.8147 to the zoning ordinance states that a dimensional modification of this.

P

Standard can be issued by this board and what is is what we are requesting tonight.

P

Simply stated: reducing the historical structure to anything less than thirteen hundred square.

P

Feet would compromise its structural integrity and require demolition and rebuilding of this.

P

Main historical portion, furthermore, the island is over 12 acres in size, post construction, the island.

P

Will contain 94 open space where 75 percent is required and will have a building coverage of 2.6.

P

Where up to 5 is allowed, we exceed the minimum for both of these zoning requirements.

P

In addition to the dimensional requirements of section 10521,.

P

Only one that requires that a detached accessory dwelling unit.

P

Also comply with the standards of section 10, 814.30 and 10-8-14-50, which include first, that.

P

The principal dwelling unit and the accessory dwelling unit shall not be separated in ownership.

P

The entire property will remain under the ownership of the adl-325 little harbor road trust.

P

Secondly, that either the principal dwelling unit or the accessory dwelling unit shall be occupied.

P

By the owner of the dwelling, the owner will continue to live in the principal dwelling unit.

P

There is a another application before this board, which was postponed tonight, where the rebuilding.

P

Of that principal dwelling unit is proposed, we are currently submitting plans to tack and anticipate.

P

Being back before this board within a month or two for that principal dwelling unit, construction.

P

So the owner will continue to live in the principal dwelling unit.

P

As required in that section, third requirement is that neither the principal dwelling unit nor.

P

The accessory dwelling unit shall be used for any business, except which is allowed in the ordinance.

P

Neither business is not proposed beyond what is allowed in the ordinance.

P

And the owner has stated that in a letter to this board.

P

Fourth, finding is that, where municipal sewer service is not provided, the septic system shall.

P

Meet new hampshire, water supply and pollution control division requirements. We are currently.

P

Working with the city to bring sewer to this island, however, this detached accessory dwelling.

P

Unit and the main house are currently connected to an existing functioning septic system, not part of.

P

This application, but the proposal that will be coming before this board in a month or two will.

P

Demonstrate the removal of that septic system and connection to the city sewer, however, should that.

P

Not happen, this building can continue to function as it sits today on the existing septic system.

P

Fifth, in the rural district, a lot with a detached accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the.

P

Minimum lot area for the district, but need not comply with the minimum lot area for dwelling unit.

P

The minimum lot area in the rural district is five acres. This island contains 12.3 acres.

P

The sixth requirement is that the dadu shall not have more than.

P

Two bedrooms and she'll not be larger than 750 square feet gross floor area, except that.

P

A maximum gross floor area shall be a thousand square feet if the lot is two acres or more.

P

As previously stated, this detached accessory dwelling unit will contain two bedrooms. However,.

P

It will contain 1300 square feet which exceeds that thousand square foot limit, we're requesting.

P

This dimensional modification, as permitted by section 10.81470 of the zoning ordinance.

P

The dadu shall be clearly subordinate to the principal single-family dwelling in scale.

P

Height and appearance, uh the proposed dadu is subordinate in height perimeter, facade area.

P

And appearance, it's approximately between 15 to 20 the size of the principal dwelling unit.

P

And the facade area of the dadu that faces a street on which the lot has frontage shall.

P

Be no more than 40 percent of the combined visible facade areas of the principal single.

P

Family dwelling and dadu facing the same street, this property is a little unique, doesn't require.

P

In our opinion, compliance with that because it's a it doesn't have frontage. It's an island.

P

It's surrounded completely by water and last. A few requirements are that the building height.

P

Of the dadu shall be less than the building height of the principal.

P

Single family dwelling this proposed building or the existing and proposed is 21 feet in height.

P

The principal dwelling will be 32 feet in height, so we satisfy that requirement as well.

P

The dadu should be architecturally consistent with the principal dwelling through the.

P

Use of similar materials detailing and other building design elements.

P

This proposed dadu will be architecturally, consistent design, materials and other building.

P

Elements in fact, we've prepared a if we could scroll through the drawings please to the aerial.

P

um There's four images of what the island looks like today and I believe these are in your packets.

P

And there are also four images post construction of what the island's going to look like and like.

P

To bring your attention to, I believe it's photos, I believe they're labeled, a b c and d and those show.

P

The island post-construction and you can see the similar elements of design and detail and facade.

P

And the lastly, the dadu shall be separated from a.

P

Single family dwelling by at least 20 feet we're separated here by 112 feet.

P

The front wall of the dadu shall be set back at least 10 feet further from the front lot line than.

P

The existing wall of the single family dwelling again we're on an island. But if you were to use.

P

That water's edge this accessory dwelling unit is set back further from the water's edge than the.

P

Principal dwelling by approximately 20 feet, so we comply with all those requirements which are the.

P

Required standard career ordinance to satisfy the requirements of a detached accessory dwelling unit.

P

Further, a conditional use permit to grant this detached accessory dwelling unit was granted by.

P

The portsmouth planning board on june 20 2019 this permit was extended by vote of the board.

P

Until june 20th 2021 the delay in construction in 2021, there was a result of the death of our.

P

Contractor slated for construction at the time uh mr peter kasnett, passed away in december of 2020.

P

As a result, we've hired a new builder and there's some been revised architecture and we're back.

P

Trying to get the project going, the only difference between the originally approved.

P

Application in ours tonight is that back in 2019, we were proposing to keep the whole.

P

Building all 2400 square feet and now we're proposing to move those one-story appendages.

P

Which leaves only the main two-story timber frame section, which is approximately 1 300 square feet.

P

So we believe we've complied with all the requirements of the ordinance.

P

The aerial imagery, I think, speaks volumes and for itself. That concludes my presentation and.

P

Myself and the team are happy to address any questions. Any questions for yeah.

C

Jane, so if the building dates back to the 1800s, does the septic system also date back to the 1800s.

P

No, no, the septic system was put in by the previous owner to the current owner, so 1998 to 2015 some.

D

Like yeah, it was the late 90s when the septic system was put in my understanding. Thank you.

G

Yes, right, you had a question on the um you mentioned. The the adu will be served.

K

In the current the current septic system, it's currently connected to it. Yes, so just.

K

Curious in how the logistics of that would be when you you're going to use the existing.

K

Septic system and then you're going to be um providing a a future sewer to serve the other.

K

House and that will be connected to the new sewer yeah at that time, yeah shown on our site plans.

P

In the packets we are connecting this dadu to the new sewer um and the only reason I raised.

P

It is it it's currently connected to septic. It can exist that way, but we're proposing to remove that.

P

System and connect it to the sewer. Okay, so would the intent be to someone to not live there until.

K

That new sewer gets built, or would it be to use it intermittently? You know before that happens.

P

The intent is to probably not use it until the new sewer gets built. I would think that.

P

If we were to do so, otherwise um permitting from des would be required right, even though it exists.

K

Logistically, I think it'll be a quite a task so yeah. I agree. The antennas connect to the sewer.

P

Thank you, corey. Thank you chairman. um I guess uh you know I was I was here when we voted on this.

I

Last time- and I know there was a lot of heartburn over the size of the ada you at that time and we.

I

Were kind of led to believe that there was because of the historic significance of the structure.

I

Even the these uh editions, if you will, any change was going to be. You know detrimental.

I

To the structure, so was there additional surveys done of the structure to see if we could, you know.

I

Get rid of those additions. What changed that now allows us to remove those additions where.

I

In 2019 we could not yeah exactly further survey. We had a timber preservation company.

P

Since we got the permit in 2019, go in and assess the timber frame and basically it was his.

P

Information to us that the only portion of the structure that's timber, framed and that that's.

P

Structurally sound is that main original structure that two-story addition. We learned that all the.

P

Other appendages, the one-story appendages, were stick framed and not timber-framed.

P

Okay- and that was by removing some walls, some floors, really digging into the structure.

P

And so we also believe that we don't have photos to to back it up, but we believe the the main.

P

Structure is what was built first and existed solely on its own and those one-story appendages.

P

Were added later, which makes sense with the with the building construction type? Okay, thank you.

G

Any other questions.

G

I have just a quick one corey based on um actually ray's comment. I know you plan to come in with the.

G

Big the big plans soon, but is it fair to say that this application is intended to proceed.

G

So that, even if something held that up you'd proceed with the renovation of this building,.

G

And it would use the septic system while you're doing that renovation and using that building.

G

Not dependent on the future big house plan, yeah, no good question, so the the plan is to is to do.

P

Some of this construction as soon as possible to this accessory dwelling unit that construction.

P

You know we don't know how long it's going to take it. It could take 6 8 10 months. We're hopeful that.

P

By the time that construction is done, the sewer will be in place. However, if it's not.

P

We do have the fallback position of utilizing the existing septic system that serves it today.

G

And you've you've examined that system and you feel it's it's adequate and functional and.

G

All that uh it's I'll be honest with you, it it's adequate, what we don't like about it and why we're.

P

Proposing it in the next application to be removed is its close proximity to the piscataqua river.

P

Right, it's not it. You know it. What it was was a very old system originally placed there.

P

And then, when the former owner bought the property, he just.

P

Kind of rebuilt in place in kind and it's it's very close to the water so.

P

We we hope we never have to use it, we don't intend to use it, but um the state would allow it.

P

If necessary, that's what I'm trying to say would you consider a time limit within which.

G

You would have to do something else, given that it's an older location that close to the river.

G

Have you thought about that at all? I'm sorry, I don't understand a time limit to occupation. You.

G

Wouldn't use it, let's say the house got the big house got delayed, and so it's five years now and.

G

There's you know you've been using that old system um and that's all that's happening on the site.

G

And what if the big house gets used as it is without any renovations, does it continue to.

G

Use the same septic system, um I'm just asking questions, yeah, no, no good question! So if, if.

P

The big house didn't get torn down and remained and currently there's no one living in it. But.

P

Was was occupied again and then the detached accessory dwelling unit got built and occupied.

P

The sewer wouldn't be there. We'd have to rely on that existing septic system.

G

In the boar's experience has an accessory dwelling in it been used without the main house being used.

M

I don't get that.

B

Ownership has been the only thing we've ever been truly concerned about. As long as that owner.

B

Intends to occupy and not rent out that unit they can only rent one of them. They have to live in one.

B

Of them, that's the way it's written, so I guess whether they're occupying it or not. At the time.

B

Isn't really a concern? They just can't rent it out, yeah, it wouldn't wouldn't really. Okay,.

G

I'm good thank you. Anybody else.

G

Okay, I guess we'll open the public hearing anybody speaking too far against this application.

G

Here or elsewhere on the big screen, nobody on zoom anybody in the room.

G

Second round speakers third round speakers going fast.

G

Close the public hearing or open up the board conversation.

I

Mr chairman, I'll make a motion to vote to grant.

I

Dimensional modifications as permitted by section 10.814.53 of the zoning ordinance to allow a.

I

Maximum of 1 300 square feet of gross floor area where 1 000 square feet is allowed. Second,.

I

And I guess speaking on that um you know this is better than what was in front of us in 2019.

I

For sure, um at that time, that was a really big reach. This is still a reach. You know historically.

I

This board has done everything in our power to try to keep those square footages within the footprint.

I

Of the adau, and so while this one is slightly larger, I think.

I

uh I'm really happy to see that the applicant has really shrunk it down to uh the original.

I

Footprint of the building and given also the size of the lot. You know um it is 12 acres, not.

I

Just two acres or more so um you know I you know kind of how uh councillor moreau said it in 2019.

I

It'd only be something approved, it's only something approvable on a 12-acre island, so.

G

Yes, councilman I'll, just add to that that it's really the uniqueness of this property so that.

B

Other people don't get some idea, I've got 12 acres, I can get 1300. This is unique. That.

B

The protections that were put in place based off the size aren't really.

B

Applicable because it's an island, it's far enough away from all its neighbors, that it's.

B

Not going to cause any issues, so that's the uniqueness of the property is very specific.

G

Anybody else I have, I think your emotion was made in accordance with the findings.

G

We've we've reached all these same findings that were proposed. Those are required of us so uh and.

G

Those are in conformance with the idea that this is an island property. It's unique, it's also an.

G

Existing building that has been there a very long time and I think our our ordinance was written.

G

Contemplating new construction of you know adding a building to a lot that didn't have something.

G

Before so, I think that also makes this unique. Some of us had the benefit of a site, walk and.

G

So we actually saw it and it that was very helpful. So, yes corey, you have something nope, nope, sorry.

G

Okay, we have a motion. Second, everybody good with that.

A

Abstain, mr harris, yes, mr chairman, yes, mr pizzulo, yes, the manager, canard, yes, concert mural,.

A

Yes, mr clark, yes, ms pagala, yes, mr mohanna, yes, okay, motion carries.

I

Mr chairman, I'll make a motion that we vote to find the remainder of section. 10.518.50 is.

I

Satisfied by the application- second, just speaking on that you know, I think you know, we've.

I

Given the uh the applicant's presentation, you know, everything else meets the criteria.

I

Appears to be, and so um yeah we'll move forward with that. Okay. Thank you. Any any other comments.

G

Okay, I think we're ready for another one. Mr hewitt. Yes, mr harris, yes, mr chairman, yes, mr.

A

Pazula, yes, senator connard. Yes, councillor morale! Yes, mr clark! Yes, mr golan, yes, mr mohanna, yes.

I

I will follow up, mr chairman, that we vote to grant the conditional use permit with the following stipulations: 3.1 and 3.2.

B

Second, sorry, he was reading something distracted. I think yeah, just as I stated before, you know.

I

It doesn't meet the criteria and I do think um I think you know we had. I appreciate the.

I

Chairman's discussion on the um the septic in the holding tank- and um you know hopefully that.

I

That all comes to together, be you know without any lagging time, so.

G

I guess the condition number two for no additional adus is consistent with the ordinance so.

G

Right, I'd just like to add one point that um you know that before they get a building permit.

B

They do have to have approval, even if it's of the septic or holding tank or whatever it is.

B

From new hampshire department, environmental services, so there are protections in place to.

B

Make sure that that's operational if it needs to go into use yeah? I know I just.

G

I raised it as a topic of conversation because pre-existing conditions get treated differently.

G

Than do construction, and so sometimes you get to do things you might not otherwise do.

G

That's all so, I think their approval will be based off of it being used.

G

Yes and I think the owners of this property look like they're, proposing.

G

Some extraordinarily significant investment in this property so take that into account too.

G

Okay, we have a motion and a second no further discussion.

A

So bro call on number three to grant the conditional use permit for the dadu.

A

Mr hewitt abstain. Abstain, mr harris yes, mr chairman. Yes, mr pizzulo, yes, diminisher connor, yes,.

A

Also morale, yes, mr clark. Yes, ms pagala, yes, mr mahana, yes.

G

How's everybody doing. Does anybody need a break.

B

Drink enough today,.

D

G

We're back online: this is a better process, though rolling right along here.

G

6A on our agenda request of bailey, j, frederick, the third owner for property.

G

At 2, 12, 14 and 216 woodbury avenue preliminary conceptual consultation for a lot line. Revision.

G

Demolition of one structure, the construction of one eight unit structure and two tuning.

G

Structures, one three unit structure, properties on assessment map, 175 lot, 1 175, lot, 2 and 175 lot, 3.

G

And lies in the general residence gra district, who is here to speak.

G

For this application good evening, um uh mike garabe with garabee planning consultants.

Q

I'm here with joe coronady from jones and beach engineers uh and as required by your site plan.

Q

Regulations uh when I believe there's any proposal uh for more than one dwelling on a structure, we.

Q

Are to come before this board for preliminary application, it's a good thing to do anyway.

Q

So we can get some feedback from you folks. We have recently put the under contract the bailey.

Q

Property, it's consists of four four parcels. We're actually just three are subject to our.

Q

Application before the board tonight, it's 212 214 and 216 woodbury avenue approximate to.

Q

The portsmouth traffic circle, if you folks, are familiar with the location.

Q

um It's uh right behind uh the roundabout diner approximate. I don't know if there's a.

Q

An aerial that we can bring up of the the site itself, but it's at the corner of woodbury and boyd.

Q

uh Our proposal is to um the the the the building the existing dwelling at 212.

Q

The corner of boyd and woodbury 212 is an older building in disrepair.

Q

It's unoccupied and we're proposing to demolish that that building as part of our proposal, the.

Q

Existing dwellings at 214 and 216 are proposed to stay as as they exist today on slightly modified.

Q

Lots will create lots that are compliant with the zoning of the gra zone, which is 7 500 square feet.

Q

Per lot so we're going to propose to reduce those lots in size and create a condominium.

Q

Development of eight units, which is compliant with zoning as far as density, goes in the gra.

Q

And we'll be proposing a small private roadway that would be accessed off of boyd.

Q

Which we thought was the best place to come in from an access management standpoint.

Q

Closing off the existing curb cut to 212 woodbury and we're proposing with the plan.

Q

That you see before you a three unit: a triplex unit, a single family and two duplex units that.

Q

May change as we go through the attack process and go through the planning board process. Ultimately,.

Q

But that's what we are here tonight to discuss with you folks uh there's. I guess.

Q

Not much else to say at this point we're here basically to get some feedback from you. Folks,.

G

Board members have any official comments. Corey, mr chairman, thank you. um Yeah.

I

I guess just just so that uh I just kind of want to throw this out there for the other.

I

Board members who are new to this um this is you know I don't want to put anybody on the spot or.

I

Anything, but this is definitely the opportunity to speak up uh for sure when, um because this.

I

Applicant's gonna have to come before us, uh you know um again, and this is kind of the certainly.

I

The preliminary phase so now is when it's much easier to make changes now than further down the.

I

Road so anyways um one quick, a couple of questions I have um you know you have the storm water in the.

I

Back corner of that site, assuming there's gonna, have to be some sort of uh discharge.

I

Off that corner, you're gonna have to get any flow adjustments onto any of the butters. In order to to.

I

Discharge out of that area, or um what's your thoughts on that well joe, might be able to.

Q

Speak to it better than I can with respect to storm water, but as you're probably aware, this is.

Q

Very preliminary, as far as we put storm water, we haven't done test pits on the property as of yet.

I

Okay, um although we've evaluated the site we have, we think we have good soils for.

Q

For drainage um but joe, I don't know if you want to speak to that at all.

J

Yes, uh joe coronado jones and beach engineers um the way the property slopes.

J

The middle button, the kind of the I think it's the little one, the the magnifier.

B

Yes, I think it's the smaller of the two buttons on there.

A

No, all right, I'm not going to use that here. You come kevin's coming.

J

So the way the site is sloped, um basically everything sort of pitches down towards this.

J

Corner today and there's a little bit of a berm along this lot line over on this side,.

J

So it even directs the storm water. I think it all gets funneled down into this low spot.

J

Existing so we won't be able to increase that flow. That's currently going there yeah, but we can have.

J

An outfall if, if need be, and there's a right in that location, there's uh some wooded area on the.

J

Other side of the lot line I mean some brush area and then there's parking, lots and the buildings.

J

Are kind of gapped okay? So it's not right into the back of a building and the the building to the.

J

I guess the north side over here. This is sort of raised up from us also, so it's a.

J

It'll that'll definitely be the low spot. Definitely the location for the storm water.

I

Okay, um another uh comment I have is: is there any way to line up the driveway coming in with the.

I

Manor drive across the street that way, you know you don't have this offset yeah. So you know if.

H

One's coming down, mana drive, you know, I just think that would help with the traffic coming to and fro.

I

On the site, yes, we could we'll certainly take a look at that. um That could be a good goal. We.

J

Haven't done the uh or the field survey is ongoing, we don't have actual. This is really lidar mapping.

J

And uh sure urinary mapping, so once we get the survey work, we can we'll know better where those.

J

Drives really are, and we can. uh We can certainly take a harder look at that. Try to get the.

J

The angles hopefully will work out manner is pretty it's a it's quite a bit closer to the.

J

Intersection um but yeah we'll look at that and then my last uh question is there: is there any.

I

Way to possibly um continue the sidewalk down woodbury. Currently it ends at the hotel is.

I

There any way we can bring that down um at least down to the uh the intersection there. uh Well, yes,.

J

The right answer I like it, I like always a way to bring a sidewalk but you're taking dave. uh I.

J

Mean that's his that's his purpose. More than likely there'll be a sidewalk extension. I.

Q

Would imagine right through the attack process, okay, great likes building them all over town.

Q

That's right, that's right! Great! Thank you. Yes, greg quick question on the uh on the.

J

Grapevine run coming in there. I know this is very preliminary. We wore the same shirt on purpose.

Q

Twins, it looks really tight from a driveway standpoint. Where are you going to put the snow.

Q

No, that's another joke question. I'm just going to sit down.

J

Okay, banking, on global warming. um No, we there is space, there's the whole.

J

um You know the side of there's no development, obviously, for this whole length of the the roadway.

J

And then we have the the area next to these two parking spaces, I think there's adequate be.

J

Adequate space for snow, it will be a condominium, um you know, form of ownership, we'll have notes on.

J

There, if you know the if the area has to be trucked off snow, may have to be trucked off.

J

um You know during heavy snowfalls like we might have saturday, but.

J

But it is, there is room, I mean, I think I think, there's going to be room and we'll get.

J

More detailed with that with our landscaping and we'll have to show snow storage for attack.

E

Andrew, could you just, although it's super preliminary, could you just give.

E

Like a brief narrative of the type of residence you see in this, this.

E

Type of development for sale for rent long-term shirt term, um I'm trying to conceptualize.

E

These types of housing units on this type of site, given the existing neighborhood and what else it.

E

Looks at sure yeah what uh we haven't completed. We've started our architectural design work uh as.

Q

Because we do need to go to the zoning board first, actually before we even get to the attack process.

Q

So they require renderings and floor plans and all that good stuff.

Q

So we will be we're working on those now we're assuming these are going to be somewhere.

Q

In the 2 000 square foot range for the dwelling size finished.

Q

Finished living space, three bedroom would be two-car garage, so that's.

Q

Sort of what we're targeting for a product for for all of the units.

Q

Similar to what exists on the site today, um for I think the existing ranch is a is a two-car garage.

Q

The single family is actually with has no garage, we may and we may consider adding a garage to that.

Q

But I don't know if that that answers your question, but it'll be a for sale product. I think.

Q

Yes, if it would be a rental or it would be a for sale, we'd be looking at a for sale product here.

Q

We looked at, we did look at some other options for this site, given where it is approximate to.

Q

The circle and its surrounding uses, it would be a site that could potentially support more density.

Q

But we're looking to try to go through that zoning process and the planning process with as little.

Q

Variance requests as we possibly can for the site. That's obviously the the bigger picture.

E

Type of proposal is given the fact that you can. You have amassed a good chunk of land in an area.

E

That wouldn't be, I guess, as influenced as maybe other parts of portsmouth to see different types.

E

Of housing or more creative, efficient types of housing, um that's the thought, but if it's truly.

E

You know your least passive resistance to go in and get these types of homes approved. Then.

E

So be it, it is just a consideration again because you've amassed this land and there are generally.

E

Not a ton of workarounds and red tape between wetlands or toppo issues that type of thing.

E

My big picture consideration was, if you can create the density, it may be. This attainable housing.

E

Style where it may not be three bedrooms, but you now open up to a much wider spectrum of home buyer.

Q

Sorry you're you're, talking about potentially having us, seek a greater density with a different.

Q

Product is that what you're asking a different presentation of the same for sale, product.

E

But merely a suggestion, just given the fact that you're already creating these tri units.

E

Or duplexes sure, so at a greater density. Is that what I'm hearing or I I just want.

Q

To make sure I'm clear about what you're yeah and that's your appetite for proposals.

E

Sure and again that path of resistance, so that would be your discretion and the boards.

B

um So in an effort to go along with what mr clark said in trying to possibly move the entrance.

B

Closer to where manor drive is, I think it actually in my mind, and you can check this out. I think it.

B

Would make more sense if you did a duplex in the corner? You moved the road over. It did a duplex.

B

Where the single family is so it kind of matches. So there's two two, two two versus the three, the.

B

Three together just look really clumped together and that's a really truly sort of single family.

B

Looking mostly neighborhood so especially from the woodbury ave side, I think it might look better.

B

If you didn't have such a clump of ones in that specific spot and move the road over a little gave.

B

Yourself a little bit more room there. Maybe try fitting that in. um I really hope that you'll make.

B

Sure you reach out to, I think the only um other residential house that's actually on boyd road.

B

To make sure that you know they're pulled into all of the things that you're planning, because.

B

It's always we really like to see that there's residential buy-in and that they're kept informed.

B

So that they know what's going on, you are going to be adding a lot more activity to this area.

B

So also looking at how that's going to apply to traffic would be really important to us as well.

B

And I think that's all for now yeah and to sort of get into that a little bit when I.

Q

When I first started the presentation, this is the the proposal that we're showing you.

Q

We had submitted, but we've already kind of made some design changes and and.

Q

Are sort of advancing those as we get through with more survey data coming in we're looking.

Q

At making that triplex a duplex in a single or in some other configuration. So if, if lining up.

Q

Our new road with manor makes some sense, and it probably does you know we can we'll take that.

Q

Into consideration as we're designing these units, we do, I think I mentioned.

Q

Tax map 175 lot, 13, it's it's six, boyd, that's also in in our ownership as well. So we are working with.

Q

Them obviously, as we go through our design, there's a few other residences across the street that.

Q

Will I know we haven't spoken to yet but we'll be making those outreaches, as we normally do.

Q

To our to our neighbors great thanks sure.

G

Any other comments.

G

uh Just to pick up on what beth and corey both said, I I think you've got a little bit.

G

Of a possible drainage issue at the corner, and I think if you flip, that big building.

G

Over as beth was saying and slide the driveway down that might help avoid a problem. There.

G

And I do think it's good that you internalize things with the proposed driveway. That's that's.

G

Certainly good for uh your internal circulation and traffic issues, so thank you. We have.

G

A 10 o'clock requirement to consider whether we split our agenda or continue to push through.

G

I raise it for conversation, we have two items on the agenda tonight that are time sensitive.

G

Because they have to be considered within a 30-day 30 days of our december 30th meeting so.

G

We really should look at those, at least um I'm fine to move on.

B

I don't know what other people feel, but mr chairman I'll make a motion that we vote to.

I

Continue moving on. Second, we have motion in second to continue pushing on is that where the board is.

E

So the two that you're saying and what else, how many uh there we have one more preliminary.

C

Conceptual and one design review correct and a couple of extensions and two extensions which.

A

Should be quick, the design review could involve some conversation, but I'm good. If the board is. I.

G

Just want to raise it because we're supposed to talk about it. I've been here till one in.

B

The morning before I know you have, let's press on that, may not be a good thing. I like to avoid that.

G

So, okay, we have a motion and a second to continue pushing through. Would that.

G

Not split the agenda continue with the agenda, as it is exactly split the agenda. Do we have.

B

To take them out, wait a second once there's a motion. We have to actually take that sorry, okay,.

G

We have a motion and a second to continue with our agenda as we have it before us. Any discussion.

G

On that, I'd really like to split it, and first we have to vote on that. Are we all.

C

Set with these gentlemen, well we're actually the next agenda item too so.

G

It doesn't take long and we'll get right back to you so.

G

I guess there's no further discussion. Well, I just have a question which is if, if we say we're going.

D

To continue is there there just I'm not hearing any end time? Is there actual actually a new end.

D

Time that, like I don't I don't know if I do want to go on to one o'clock in the morning, sorry.

G

There could be another motion later to adjourn.

G

But at the moment, if you vote on this, we're committing to try to getting through the entire.

G

Agenda and it's just an open-ended time frame: correct, okay, living dangerously yep.

G

Okay, I think we are ready for a roll call. Okay, mr hewitt.

A

uh No, mr harris, no de chapman, yes, mr priscilla, yes, city manager, canard, yes,.

A

Councillor moreau. Yes, mr clark, yes, ms bagala, yes, mr mohanna, yes, we shall push on. um So I'm sorry.

G

I interrupted you, I was required to do that. Did you have any when we had a good conversation going.

G

I think was the board finished with questions about the application we just we're. Looking at.

C

Okay, you know the only thing I wanted to mention about that real quickly is.

Q

And we've submitted a letter, I believe, with the file with the application. Is that.

Q

There was on the on your gis mapping. There is a wetland shown on your gis mapping.

Q

um Approximate to where we're showing units five and six on our on our plans, we've had our.

Q

Wetland scientists go out to the site and verify that there are no on-site wetlands, so it you know.

Q

Sometimes your gis mapping is is inaccurate, um so we wanted to make sure that we feel verified that.

Q

And in case you know someone's looking at your gis maps and says well geez. What's.

Q

What's this, you know, and why is why isn't this shown on the plane? We wanted to make sure that you.

Q

Folks were all aware of that, um and that letter is in the file. I think peter. You should have that.

Q

That's all I wanted to say.

G

Okay, well, if you have a wetland scientist that certifies it that's what it takes: yep yep.

A

I can just add that part of the site review process there might be an independent review.

A

Of that just to confirm sure absolutely that would be at a later date. Yep.

G

Thank you peter, so um we're on to 6b, I believe literary conceptual consultation.

G

For 635 sagamore development, llc preliminary conceptual consultation for the demolition.

G

Of existing commercial structure on lot, 19 635, 695, sagamore avenue, construction of five.

G

Single unit structures on lot 19 construction, one single unit structure in lot, 18.

G

Properties on successors, map, 222, 18 and 19 and is in the single residence a district.

G

Go ahead and it's me again, mike garby from garyvee planning consultants representing the applicant.

Q

635 sagamore development, llc uh and uh the address is the same as obviously as the as the applicant.

Q

635 sagamore um and we're also working with the neighbor at 695 sagamore to potentially do a.

Q

Merger of the two parcels, uh in a redevelopment of of both if you're.

Q

You're, hopefully, all familiar with the site, it's the site known as the luster king. It's a.

Q

And we're actually uh calling it the luster cluster for now.

Q

Come on come up with a better name than that at some point.

C

So it's currently and has historically been for years, auto, auto detailing shop and there's also.

Q

An existing garage in the rear of the property or not the rear of the property, but behind the.

Q

The auto body or the auto detailing that does some auto body and repair type work there. So.

Q

It's it's located in the sra zone and it is.

Q

Non-Conforming, the use is non-conforming, there's also an existing, an apartment above the commercial.

Q

Building in the front, so it's both commercial, automotive and residential in nature. Today,.

Q

It's in the sra zone, as I mentioned, which is, I believe, a one-acre zone.

Q

For residential and so in order to achieve the desired goal, which is on the next sheet.

Q

Of the plant set, we are proposing to demolish the existing buildings on 635 sagamore.

Q

Maintain or retain the existing single family home on 695 create a small subdivision, private roadway.

Q

And locate a total of six new dwellings on the parcel. In order to do that, we'd need variance.

Q

Relief for density, which would be consistent with the across the street from this site, is all srb.

Q

Zoning which this would comply with and it's our property is adjacent to the tidewatch condominium.

Q

Development to to the uh the rear of our parcel to the east of the parcel and excuse me to the south.

Q

Of our parcel and we'd be looking at a similar density to that that development as well so.

Q

So similar to what we just talked about on the last application, a similar type proposal with.

Q

A short private roadway um and, in this case, we'd, be looking at all single-family homes.

Q

For this location, but does require some density relief, which the zoning, if we're able to achieve.

Q

The the variances that we'll be requesting would be sort of we'd be making the site.

Q

More conforming in many aspects um and obviously we'd be but we'd be seeking some density relief.

Q

So that's the really all I had to present for this one as well.

Q

No questions about drainage, though corey not yet anyway,.

G

I know you wanted to ask that corey. Well, I do have helpful questions.

I

I guess on that topic um there there's a essentially like a 12 foot grade difference.

I

Between the the driveway in the back, the what I think, the the center of the most furthest back.

I

Unit and so not only from a storm water aspect, but also a sewer aspect. How are you going to get.

I

Your gravity up, or at least maybe you're, going to be doing force mains all the way back. I don't know.

I

um But I'm just curious to see how not only not only the utility aspect, but also, how are these.

I

Units going to appear to be abutters, if, like you know, if you're trying to get things to work,.

I

Are they just going to right up? You know behind the uh from from the butters point.

I

Of view from the from the tidewatch yeah the point of view, well, we we have designed these.

Q

So they're sort of sitting up above clearly um we're sort of avoiding those slopes down below.

Q

um As far as um as far as sewer, we have looked at sewer, preliminarily we're looking at.

Q

You know, hopefully being able to gravity. There may be a requirement that we'd have some grinder pump.

Q

Systems for some of these units- and I think joe we talked about that.

Q

Some of those back units um how this, how these lots? We assume that's these rear, the rear units.

Q

I think we're showing showing them on the plane is six uh six and five and and probably three.

Q

Would would probably have a walk out type aspect to them, um but how they're situated on the site we.

Q

Have yet to really sort of really kind of figure that out what we're gonna do for regrading and.

Q

And what have you on the site that has sort of yet to be explored right right? I mean you know earlier.

I

Tonight we were talking about building heights, so I think that's you know. The appearance is going.

I

To be kind of critical here, too, should possibly be a butter sauce. It's a fairly. I mean the site.

Q

Is short in the rear of the property beyond the existing buildings? Now it's all it's all trees.

Q

um So we'd maintain some buffer. Certainly um around you know the perimeter of the site.

Q

um Certainly that doesn't it's not going to mask the view completely, but it's going to.

Q

Provide some buffering okay, so we'll have to obviously consider that as we're going forward.

B

um The very first unit that you have coming off of sagamore ave on the right.

B

I'd really like you to consider facing so at least the what looks like the front of that house and.

B

Maybe a walkway down to the sidewalks that are going to be put in there to so that it looks like.

B

That house actually faces sagamore. I don't mind that the entrance to like a garage or something.

B

Be off of the private road, but I just think because all the other houses really face that road.

B

It's going to look odd, somewhere drive by and you see the side of a house and it doesn't look.

B

Like it's the front of the house, so that would the orientation of how that is designed would be.

B

Important- and I would really want you to put in um as much of a buffer with natural trees,.

B

And whatever, what's there or add to it, to be able to buffer it from the other um condominium units.

B

I think that those will probably be extremely important to the neighbors that are there, who.

B

Have been, you know, had this giant sort of forest behind them and now won't anymore, so sure um and.

B

And to to corey's point because of the great change really take a hard look at the drainage.

B

And the runoff from this, because you don't want to cause any issues to the other existing houses.

B

That are there and have them end up starting to flood when these are all put into place. That's it.

Q

Thank you. Anybody have anything else I mean. I know this is preliminary I'll. Just tell you that.

D

I really don't understand why you don't stay to the one to three dwellings per acre called for.

D

By the current zoning ordinance, I don't like why have more is more better. More is better.

Q

Thank you for clarifying that you know. We've we've evaluated this site.

Q

In looking at the existing non-conformity, we've talked to several of the neighbors in order to.

Q

Redevelop the site, we need more density if we were just going to develop this site, residentially.

Q

Today, we'd be allowed one unit. So there's not a lot of there's, not a lot of.

Q

Economic incentive to do any redevelopment of the site without.

Q

Some density relief we're trying to be consistent with what the the rest of the neighborhood is.

Q

For density, where that that we're not looking for a reach of a tremendous density um for the.

Q

Site beyond what the neighborhood currently is, zoned for there's only a few homes along this.

Q

Side of sagamore road that are sagamore have that are zoned in this same fashion, sra and they're.

Q

Actually, small lots for the most part they're smaller than the zoning would require. So we're.

Q

Just we're trying to match the consistency of the zone right across the street from this parcel.

D

Thank you, but thanks. Okay! Yes right, I just had a comment on the sewer. I'm.

K

Think you might be aware, but there isn't any sewer in sacramento have in front of this property. um I.

K

Think it ends at the uh my information ends at the entrance to tidewatch, um where they come in with a.

K

Force main: that's where the gravity I believe is general yeah, that's where the gravity ends. Yeah.

K

But that's downhill of this site. Maybe we did meet with zach cronin. We met with zach uh what last.

Q

A couple weeks ago, so you could probably speak back to. Did you do this part of that same this.

J

Is part of that same development? That's uh same sewer expansion, that's happening for shaw, road.

J

They're, bringing up uh there's two manholes gravity: manholes going to the top of the hill.

J

And then that's the the manholes that get tied into with the uh low distribution. Okay, so.

J

uh Force main coming up off the shelf, this is also a situation where the future future sewer.

K

For the city, correct yeah, we actually end up with a manhole almost right in front of our uh proposed.

J

Roadway, so you have to be able to tie into so you plan on using that that the pump station e1.

K

Systems is that what you are yeah we were, we were looking at. Maybe the first couple of units could.

J

Probably flow gravity, so we'd probably have a gravity line into the site and then we could pump.

J

The back units into into that line on our own property, okay, so we would just need a stub from.

J

Sagamore once it's brought up there, okay good.

C

Okay, I guess that's, I guess that's it. Thank you very much.

C

Do you have something else? Okay, yep great thanks. So much appreciate your time.

G

I believe next is designer view consideration.

G

A

We have to decide whether or not we can schedule it right.

A

Yeah at this point this this one, basically scheduling.

B

Right, so we just have to determine that we have enough information to review it and schedule it for a design review at our next scheduled meeting right. I was.

A

Yeah this is the next one. Sorry this is the next one. So it's a request by port harbor, llc, poor.

G

Harbor land llc for property at two russell street along russell street and deer street. It's the site.

G

Across from the sheraton, as you come into town, our christian design review for mixed use, project for.

G

Office, retail, commercial and residential uses and one four story and two five-story buildings.

G

Between russell deer street maplewood and the railroad corridor, successors, maps, 124, 12, 1, 118.

G

28 119 4 and 125 21, it's in the character, cd5 district. Anyone here to speak to this application.

C

uh Good afternoon, patrick cummins, with time bond we're the civil engineer on the project.

C

We're here this evening, just seeking a vote from you folks to hold a design review hearing at the.

E

The next public hearing- we don't have a presentation planned at this point, usually.

C

During these we don't even actually get up here to speak, so I'm just seeking a vote this evening.

C

To have the design review here next month, just giving you the opportunity. I appreciate that.

B

Mr chairman, I'd make a motion that we vote to put on our schedule for our next scheduled.

B

Meeting the design review of to russell second, would you like to speak to that councilman.

B

No, I think that we've already reviewed this in pre-conceptual design and I think we can now take.

B

A deeper dive into it at design review and look at the additional information they provided us.

G

The other thing I'll add, is by scheduling the design review. We are teeing it up to at that.

G

Meeting set the zoning and lock in the zoning at that point is that correct, correct that is.

B

Correct: that's! What design review does? Yes, because you have to have a public hearing for that right.

G

Any discussion about the motion.

G

Big project a lot to talk about, but not tonight.

A

I guess we're ready for roll call, so this would be to vote to schedule design review for the.

A

February 17th planning board meeting mr hewitt. Yes, mr harris. Yes, mr chairman, yes, mr pizzulo,.

A

Yes, city manager, conard, yes, councilor moreau; yes, mr clark, yes, mrs pagala, yes, mr mohanna, yes.

A

Unanimous. Thank you all we look forward to presenting next month. Thank you.

G

We have city, council, referrals.

G

8, a application randy collins for restoration of install.

G

Involuntarily merged lots at 77 meredith way to their pre-merger status under the.

G

I've got two different one with a check mark and one without I'm looking at the one without check mark so.

A

The next one is there's two uh extensions. These are typically uh granted they're part of the.

A

Zoning ordinance to allow one year extension that one year extension is is generally automatic. The.

A

It's the second. They can't go beyond that if they get the one-year extension.

A

They have to come and represent as a whole new application. I mean if they after the first year.

A

It's it's uh 9a, london, uh london bridge, joel lazadorian, london bridge, south representative,.

Q

We're here looking for a one-year extension. Originally uh this site was zero. [, __ ] way.

Q

Granted um to raleigh way holdings, we purchased it uh the property november 17th of uh 2021.

C

We've made considerable progress we're about a week away from.

I

Getting the bond yeah, I heard you guys- are really close. Yeah.

G

Sounds like it's ready for a motion.

B

uh This year, I'd make a motion that we grant the one year extension. Second, second, any discussion.

B

Very excited to hear they're so close, let's move on.

A

Mr hewitt, yes, mr harris, yes, mr chalman, yes, mr pizzulo.

A

Yes, city manager, connor, yes, councilman rowe; yes, mr clark, yes, mr gala, yes, mr mohammed, yes.

G

9B similar woodbury avenue corporation cooperative, thank you 1338 woodbury avenue one year extension.

G

Is there anybody here say anything about this one? There usually isn't always somebody usually.

G

Don't come yeah yeah, they usually don't. Remember, I'm just I'm just giving them a chance. Yeah yeah.

A

Okay, so maybe it's about 50 50., I don't know yeah or less less. Mr chairman, I would make a motion.

B

That we uh grant this first one year, extension at 1338, woodbury avenue. Second, look at mr harris.

G

In the discussion pretty automatic yeah I mean we're we're not as a board.

B

Obviously required, but it is pretty standard we'll give you at least that one year and.

B

Then you're gonna come back with some really good explanation. If you're gonna ask for a second year.

A

Ready roll call: okay, mr hewitt. Yes, mr harris! Yes, mr charlemagne, yes, mr brazillo, yes, the manager.

A

Connor, yes, councilor moreau; yes, mr clark, yes, mr gala, yes, mr mohana, yes, okay, another unanimous.

G

Okay, we have two requests for rehearing, um first being a request.

G

By duncan mccallum for rehearing on 31 reigns avenue, 203, maplewood avenue and 1 range avenue.

G

I think this uh I won't read the entire request.

G

The city attorney is here, I don't know, did you bob? Did you want to speak to this or.

G

A

Okay, there's also a memo from the city that I know the the city uh new arsenal, city planning, director.

G

um Provided us with a memo, that's in her package, hopefully, everybody's read that.

G

There's also, I discussed this with enhanced municipal association. There is a.

G

Relatively recent case in nashua involving this, this topic.

G

I will say that, although there is no specific statute on it, the court has.

G

Said that boards such as ours do have the right to reconsider something within a 30-day appeal period.

G

That doesn't mean we should doesn't mean we have to.

G

We should reject out of hand. We can consider it if there is reason to consider it.

G

If I'm speaking out of turn city attorney, please tell me so, but that's.

G

My understanding of how how it works, nothing, no merits get discussed tonight in any case.

M

Yeah, we actually did in the legal department a substantial amount of work on these requests.

M

In conjunction with the new planning director in particular, and I think the statements that were.

M

Just made by chairman chairman are accurate. There is no law either compelling you to.

M

Where there's no law compelling you to even consider requests for restoration over here.

M

However, you may do so. um We found uh quite a s split in the law as to the way these cases have.

M

Been handled in different places um and the principle that was just referenced is, is this.

M

If uh a a request for rehearing makes out an error, an error in an action of.

M

The planning board, then, as a matter of policy, it is probably better if the planning board grants.

M

The rehearing and deals with the area itself, rather than wait until some higher tribunal.

M

Deals with it first, um however. Obviously, if you don't feel that the request for hearing.

M

Presents any error that needs to be considered, then there's no reason to do that um in the zoning.

M

Context where rehearings are actually where you are, where the zoning board is required to consider.

M

Requests for rehearing applicants are required to file them as a preliminary to uh any appeal. The.

M

The statutory test in a zoning context is that you should grant the rehearing if you find it presents.

M

Quote good reason and quote for rehearing, I think there's a logic to applying that same.

M

Thinking at a planning board, even though there's no similar statute.

M

You have much more discretion in how you handle these than a board of adjustment. Would.

M

So going a little bit further, if you determined to have the rehearing, then you.

M

Would set it for another evening, you would probably make that determination based solely upon.

M

Reviewing the documents in front of you with no hearing or argument from anyone else and then at.

M

If you grant the rehearing, then on the evening that you set for the re-hearing, you would.

M

Allow any interested party to speak to present evidence to you and if you continue the parallel.

M

With the zoning boards of adjustment, then on a rehearing, you would have actually very large, very.

M

Broad latitude to to reconsider your your prior actions, I think that probably covers the ground.

M

Thank you. Thank you question. No, it's good make a motion.

E

I like to make a motion to accept a request for a hearing.

G

Is there a second.

D

I'll second, it I'll, second, that we had a few, um I think jane had her hand up first.

G

Peter, would you like to speak to your emotion, I think uh what attorney sullivan stated related to.

E

Evaluating these types of things it might to prevent.

E

Further movement into the courts is is worth uh evaluating. In the case of this, I.

E

This is the one that was uh happened in december, I believe in mid-december, and I I feel it was. It was.

E

It's there's some questionable things that happen. I I I wasn't really comfortable with.

E

How the vote went out on that and uh I think there's more to consider and I'd like to that's.

E

I think it's better for the city to have a rehearing and for the board to do that.

G

Yes, councilmember, um I would be against rehearing it. I think that this board did a.

B

Good job and had looked at this multiple times at different stages, and I think that there was.

B

A lot of effort put into looking at it for changes to be made and for it to come out with an approved.

B

Vote, I just don't see any error in the board that we did that we could correct. So that's my opinion.

I

Thank you chairman. um I would agree with what councilor monroe just stated um yeah. I don't.

I

Think that we should be um considering the request, I mean the way I look at. It is already an avenue.

I

For um for others who wanted to appeal, you know our decision, that's you know that's clear as day.

I

How to do that? My concern, is um you know if we decide to move forward with this, then you know.

I

We could be be getting re-hearings all the time. You know it's, it's uh it's just another avenue for.

I

You know people who you know just for one reason or another. You know disagree with the project and.

I

um And then you know put it back on us when you know, I think we're all doing our our job, and I.

I

Think you know we're reviewing everything as we should and so um yeah. I don't think we should be.

I

Considering it because I think it's going to set a a precedent that I don't, I don't know where that.

I

That goes, and you know how does that you know what limits are? Are there.

I

I mean there's no statute, there's nothing for us to go by. As far as you know, I mean.

I

This could it could we could just be muddled up in you know two neighbors that just don't get.

I

Along with each other, or something to that effect, that you know I I do kind of worry where there is.

I

Defined um legal ways, for you know, people to to appeal our decision so with that I'll be voting no.

G

Anybody else like to speak to the motion. Yes jane. Yes, um I feel like it's a policy area.

D

Area that the planning board needs to develop criteria for. But I don't think that that.

D

You know limits us from deciding to have a rehearing if we think that there's legal.

D

Consequences and I'm just concerned from reading all of the the paperwork involved with this- that.

D

That we, that I think we could divert a legal action by having a simple rehearing.

D

And parallel to that, talk in more depth in some fashion, about criteria for applying this.

D

For the future, to make sure to avoid what my colleague is saying about, setting a precedent.

D

So I would be in favor of re-hearing any other board. Members wish to speak.

G

Is greg I'm in favor of rehearing as well? I believe there were some procedural errors and.

C

I think attorney mccallum did a good job of outlanding 13.

C

Points, all of which seem to have some validity. I just want to add.

E

Thank you. Thank I really appreciate how what you're, suggesting jane and and.

E

The that supports it and it it. It makes a lot of sense. What you're, how you awarded that.

G

Council mural I'd like to ask the city attorney a question.

B

Without proper rules and procedures regarding rehearings for this board are.

B

We putting ourselves at any liability to grant one without that in place.

M

If by liability, do you mean, is there any monetary risk? I feel there's no monetary risk.

M

There is, however, the risk that uh you would be overturned in whatever decision you make.

B

Thank you, while I'm here, mr chairman, if I could it is the recommendation of both the.

M

Planet department and the legal department that.

M

The the planning board consider adopting rule or regulation as to how you would like to deal with.

M

The request for re-enter in the future, we think that you have pretty broad latitude to make your.

M

Own determination as to what your policy will be, and there are arguments pretty good arguments for.

M

Really both sides so something for you to think about corey did you have? Do you have your hand.

G

Up or yeah, I guess my I guess my comment would be is if we were to vote to uh grant consideration.

I

Without having any of those like, I guess I'm curious how. How is this going to.

I

To happen with no rules of procedures in place, I mean, uh what's the limits on the public hearing.

I

All that's, I guess I'm I'm curious. I understand you know if this is something the board wants.

I

To consider, then, I certainly am in agreement. We need to develop the procedures, but without.

I

Having the procedures, how do we even conduct these rehearings re-hearings um at this point in time, I.

I

Don't I guess I don't even know like yeah how how it would I don't know how it would work at all.

G

Well for my reading and please jump in, but for my reading, the board actually has the right of.

G

Its own volition to have a rehearing if something came to the board's attention following a meeting.

G

And it was within the 30-day appeal period, the board of its own volition, without an outside.

G

Input could just call for a re-hearing, so that's one thing and by the way I do agree we should.

G

Have separate rules about this and a complete agreement with the city attorney on that topic.

G

I think from what I've read if we grant a re-hearing.

G

We're not saying that we've granted the basis for overturning a decision we've granted.

G

A new hearing- that's all we've granted based on information. That's before us tonight,.

G

It's based on the application information that was submitted, so if you found something.

G

That was absolutely nothing new to in your brain that you know based on those members who were here.

G

Last month, that's one set of criteria for the new members if they found something that they didn't.

G

See in the record, that would be new information, and that could be the reason for the consideration.

G

Of you know a re-hearing which would create a basically a new review. I believe I believe, that's.

G

What would ultimately happen because now you're having input from the applicant input from the.

G

People opposing that and the public it's a public hearing so is that is that fair city attorney.

M

Yes, and until the law becomes more clear and of course it might become more clear as a result of.

M

Whatever decision you make, but until the law gets clarified by either the legislature.

M

Or the courts, um the only real guidance sort of available to you is by comparison um of uh to the.

M

Process which is followed in the zoning context, where rehearings are a regular part of the process.

M

M

As I said, what that would mean if you wanted to follow the zoning board type process, you would.

M

Look at the document you have in front of you with nothing else. No other input.

M

And you would determine whether or not that document presented good reason to have a rehearing.

M

If you chose to hold a rehearing using that test, um you would be where chairman chalman said.

M

Just bringing the matter back in front of you not necessarily overruling your earlier action.

M

Just bringing it back in front of you and when you bring it back in front of you, that's the rehearing.

M

And at the rehearing you can, you would expect to hear arguments at the least.

M

Perhaps new evidence uh if you operate in a parallel fashion to the zoning context, you would.

M

Actually have quite broad latitude in terms of the issues that you could consider and the decisions.

M

You could make, but you would make them after you'd, heard the arguments and heard the evidence at the.

M

Hearing at that time, you would be free if you chose to go back to your initial decision.

M

And make no changes whatsoever or if you chose you would be able to change your decision and that's.

M

That's the situation, and can I just ask you one additional question which is about the.

D

Time frame, because if we are supposed to be within 30 days of that original decision is.

D

It true that that was december, 16 and so are we're outside of the 30-day time frame. If you.

M

Were going to operate in a parallel fashion, zoning board, it would be within the 30 days.

D

That concerns me, I think, we're within the 30 days, is that.

C

That's my question: are we that's my question? Are we in or out of the third stage.

B

The decision was made in december 30th, oh december 30th, then we are in it. Okay. I thought it was.

D

December 16th yeah december, approved december. It was this. We split the agenda at the 16th because.

B

It was so large, it was one of the cases that was moved to december 30th agenda. Thank you.

D

So I guess we are inside the 30 days. Okay, I just want to make sure that was actually true. Thank you.

C

Yes, councilman um my biggest concern about granting this.

B

um Is that they're not using the proper, which is if there was an issue with our decision? It.

B

Should I believe, especially against the zoning, go to the zoning board of adjustment for appeal.

B

And I just because that mechanism is already there to go to a board for review.

B

I just think the the planning board looks like they don't know how to do their job when they're.

B

Without rules and regulations just accepting re-hearings, that's that would be a concern of mine.

I

Yeah, I would agree with that. I just I'm hearing a lot of you. Could you may you know I'm not hearing.

I

You shall- and I guess that's where I'm kind of you know everything that we do is pretty well spelled.

I

Out and what we can review and not- and I I I just would have a tough time you know I don't even know.

I

I I I'm just not even clear what the you know if we had a rehearsal hearing what.

I

Would even the motion be you know, and I don't think staff would be able to provide any sort.

I

Of recommendation as to you know what, because there's? No, so I guess I'm just struggling with.

I

Not so much the uh you know, the the actual request is it's it's more. The request before.

I

Having rules and procedures in place, if I could maybe help with that.

G

On this application, one of the things raised is under the conditional use permit which, as we know,.

G

Is basically a special exception that is considered by this board, as opposed to being.

G

A special exception considered by the board of adjustment and one of the problems, and I think.

G

One of the reasons the legislature is behind on this topic is because conditional use permits.

G

Are a relatively new thing under innovative land use controls and right now, when we make a decision.

G

On this, as we well know, the only appeal is to court or the housing appeals board. If you, if.

G

There's a housing component involved in it, so the courts in the decisions have talked about.

G

Giving the local board first opportunity to consider just in case a mistake or some new.

G

Information has come before you within 30 days to reconsider it in a much more expeditious manner.

G

Than a full appeal to either the housing appeals board or the court, which takes a great a great.

G

Long time, so that's that's one type of rehearing, um the other one is as a city attorney mentioned,.

G

If an error came to our attention, which that could happen based on a staff review following.

G

A meeting you know they might say: oh we missed this on, you know it. It could happen to any of us.

G

In terms of how the motion would be worded, I think the motion be just simple to either grant.

G

The rehearing or not grant the hearing, that's it and then it gets scheduled or doesn't.

G

I don't know if that helps, probably not, but.

I

It'd be nice to have, you know just a concrete playbook to go by so we may be creating a bit.

G

Of a playbook here I I'm not a big believer in setting precedent because there's so much.

G

Different about every application- and I think the two requests tonight are even very different. So.

G

um You know we have, we have a motion, we have a second board wish to discuss.

G

This further, I don't want to stop anybody if anybody wants to speak up.

D

I just like to say that I agree that the two requests for re-hearing.

D

Seem very different to me in in my reading and study of it. And when I apply the principle of.

D

You know is the does. It seem, like the request for a rehearing is lawful, reasonable in this case.

D

Because of the questions about legality that are raised from the materials that I've read.

D

I really think that we should be re-hearing this.

G

Is the board ready for a vote on this topic.

A

Was mr hewitt trying to say something, mr, are you trying to say, do you wish to speak jim.

C

No, I'm not, I don't have my hand up. Okay, sorry. I just want to make sure yep.

G

I think we're ready for roll call, so this is the uh vote to.

A

Request for rehearing item c in section nine, mr hewitt. Yes, mr harris, yes.

A

Mr charlie, I'm going to wait until the end of the vote for his chair, mr pizzulo, uh no city.

A

Manager, canard no councilor moreau. No, mr clark, no miss bagala! Yes, mr mohanna! Yes, mr chalman, yes.

A

So that's five yeses and four no's, so the motion carries.

G

We have another similar request um for 99 bow street by katie sherman.

B

What was that for cnd, or just for c? That's just for c there's a that was a second.

B

Rehearing under d for the same property yeah. Well, there we go again jumping ahead on my.

G

Ipad, sorry so we'd granted the request for a hearing on uh see c similar on d.

G

Is there a motion, mr harris? Yes, I like to make a motion for re-hearing none same criteria as.

G

Is there a second second discussion.

B

It, I think, all the same things I've said previously apply to this as well same.

E

Just all the same, any anybody wish to add anything.

A

Want me to go last with you, mr chairman. Yes, please, okay, um mr hewitt! Yes, mr harris, yes, mr pizzulo.

A

No city manager, connor, no councilor morel, no.

A

Mr clark, no miss bagala, yes, mr mohanna, yes and mr chalman. Yes,.

A

Same boat as before, motion carries.

G

Now we have reached the request of katie sherman for rehearing 99 bow street.

G

Is there a motion, I'd make a motion to deny their request. Second, would you like to speak.

G

To that yeah I mean this uh case I think was thoroughly looked at and all the points brought.

B

Up that really don't have a whole lot of merit. It was mostly about the trash which we came up.

B

With a solution, they need to actually report that as being a violation of their current approval.

B

And have let the health officer go investigate that and go that get fixed under the current one.

B

They, the other portion, they had actually changed the deck and made it smaller to get out of needing.

B

Any approvals from the neighbors, so I feel like our approval, is completely within our.

B

Realm and we did not make any mistakes whatsoever or be against the law in any way.

I

Thank you, mr chairman, thank you. um I would agree with what uh councilman just said, but I you know I.

I

This is where I'm kind of getting into you know. The previous one item c was for uh conditional.

I

Use you know it stated the conditional use permit of the the parking variant or not variance, but.

I

Parking um and then the d was for the wetland condition conditional use permit. Now this one.

I

Is um just a rehearing request? You know we didn't have a conditional use permit on this. One.

I

So that's where you know I'm already kind of running into.

I

um You know, are we just looking at conditional use permits or are we looking at site plan approval.

I

Like you know, subdivisions yeah, like everything, that's you know, I'm kind of already running.

I

Into where does this this snowball end? Because you know this is not like you stated chairman, you know.

I

There is no way for the the boa to review conditional use um where this you know it's.

I

Just out there, so I guess this is where I'd like to have the you know the rules and procedures in.

I

Place not only for us, but also for people. Looking to you know to appeal, because you know this is.

I

Where you know I just I struggle with uh how we're going to move forward with these, so thank you.

G

Well, I I appreciate your comment. um As I mentioned, a conditional use permit.

G

By affording the opportunity to come back here, at least you have the opportunity to ask.

G

That doesn't mean you're going to get granted that, but you have the opportunity to ask it.

G

Short of going to court or to the housing board of appeals, I think, as I understand it, you can.

G

An applicant or butter or an agreed party could ask for a rehearing for.

G

Anything this board does, but that doesn't mean anything. This board does has to be reheard.

G

So you know it's it's uh it's based on the merits of what was what was submitted.

G

To you to us for this evening, that's it, you know, I that's the way I understand it works.

D

um I'd just like to say um piggybacking on miss moreau's comments.

D

Actually, but applying my same criteria about, is it reasonable? Is it? Is it legal.

D

Is it a legal issue on those on that basis, I would vote to not grant a rehearing on this. I.

D

I don't think it meets either one of those like very preliminary criteria that are just my own.

D

So I think we actually can sort through requests for rehearing. I think we should codify it for the.

D

Future, but this is before us now so my vote is going to definitely be to deny this rehearing.

G

Any other peter just to reinforce. Thank you jane.

E

Based on the information provided to us, that's how we're making that decision! It's not how we.

E

What what happened before it's with the additional information evaluating it- and uh I.

E

Agree on on with you on on this and and and with councilor moreau and uh corey, I think.

E

There's a dif that helps understand like what the difference is between this and the prior to.

E

With the information that was provided.

G

Anything else are you ready for a vote.

I

Mr chairman, this is uh no we're not can you confirm what the motion is again please yeah.

B

It was a motion to deny the request. I was going to repeat it: yeah yeah.

B

So yes vote! So yes vote! Denies it a yes vote, denies it denies the application opposite.

A

Than the last time correct everybody clear on what the motion is you ready for a vote.

A

Roll call: okay, mr hewitt. Yes, mr harris, yes, mr chairman, yes, mr pizzulo,.

A

Yes, city manager, canard, yes, councillor moreau; yes, mr clark, yes, mr pagala.

A

Miss miss mcgowan, yes getting late. Sorry, mr mohanna. Yes, mr chalman.

B

If I'm allowed I'd make a motion that we adjourn unless there's something else.

E

Second, I I did want to have one quick thing. I think I'd and bethany you- and I talked about this.

G

Briefly, I think we as a board, we should have a conversation about regulations and our ordinances.

G

And things with staff that isn't a night when we have so many applications and things to talk about.

G

I don't want to overburden everybody. I know we're all here as volunteers, but.

G

I think it'd be nice to sit around the table in the same level and just.

G

Have a chat about that sort of thing and perhaps involve this gentleman sitting in the room you.

G

Can certainly schedule a work session to do that. That's what I'm talking about so.

G

But I second that you don't have to second it. I just wanted to do that. I support it.

G

We have a motion and a second to adjourn. So all those uh uh we haven't even roll call vote.

B

uh You could just saw you can call it adjourned. You better call that.

G

Meeting is adjourned. You can call it a journal.