City of Portsmouth, New Hampshire Planning Board, 19 May 2022

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: 5.19.2022 Planning Board

Description

5.19.2022 Planning Board

A

It's completely.

B

Okay, I guess we've got word from the computer. This is the may 19th 2022 planning board meeting call.

C

To order first order, businesses are minutes, I'm not sure if we actually have anything to.

C

Do with the minutes not no we're trying.

C

We have determinations of completeness, we have requests of elizabeth, the larson trust of 2012.

C

As owner for property, located at 668 middle street, requesting preliminary final subdivision approval.

C

If you need a motion to accept that application is complete.

D

Second, any discussion: all those in favor hi motion carries request to four amigos. Llc is.

C

Owner for property at 1400, lafayette, road and 951 beverly hill road requesting preliminary.

C

And final subdivision approval again, we need a motion to accept that application is complete.

E

Second, discussion: all those in favor, aye, aye.

C

We have another site plan review motion to acceptance, complete request of elizabeth larson.

C

Trust of 2012 is owner for property located at 668 middle street, requesting site plan approval.

C

You need a motion to accept that application is complete, so moved. Second, all those in favor aye.

C

Aye aye aye aye motion carries unanimously again on to public hearings. We have the next two items.

C

We can consider together, um I will read them and then, if somebody wants to make a motion to.

C

Join them, I I think we need to make a motion to join them before you read them. Well, then,.

C

Why don't you would you like to make sure I'd make a motion that we go ahead and hear uh item three.

E

A and three, no four, four a yeah three, a and four a as one application with two votes.

E

I'll! Second, that any discussion on that all those in favor aye, aye aye any opposed.

C

Motion carries we'll consider them separately. The first is.

C

Requested donald lowell, sticky, the third is owner for property at 213 jones avenue.

C

Requesting a conditional use permit under section 10.814 of the designing ordinance.

C

Modification standards set forth in 10 8, 14 40 or 10 8 14 52 through 10 8 14 56, to construct.

C

A new single family residence and convert the existing residents into a detached accessory.

C

Dwelling unit totaling 886 square feet of living area properties shown on the assessor's map, 222.

C

Lot 69 and lies within the single residence b district, who is here to speak for this application.

F

Good evening, mr chairman, members of the planning board, john shagnan from ambit engineering.

F

With me tonight is is donald stickney, as well as chris mulligan from boston associates here to.

F

Represent this project, we're asking for cup for a detached accessory, drawing unit.

F

And a cuc for wetland buffer impact taking you through the plan set, we have a cover.

F

Sheet showing the location in the project team, the next sheet is the existing conditions plan.

F

The lot is fairly large for the neighborhood. It's a 62 528 square foot lot in an area where.

F

One dwelling unit per 15, 000 square feet is allowed. The next plan is the detached.

F

Accessory dwelling unit plan and I'm going to let attorney mulligan speak to that one.

C

Thank you good evening, mr chair and members of the board. Again chris mulligan, representing the.

G

Applicant um the uh request before you for the conditional use permit for the accessory dwelling.

G

Is for a detached accessory dwelling unit? This one is a little unorthodox in that what we're.

G

Proposing to do is construct a new freestanding primary dwelling and utilize. The existing dwelling.

G

On the site, which is very small by conventional standards, as our accessory dwelling unit.

G

In order to take advantage of the existing built environment, which includes this 862 square foot,.

G

Existing dwelling we're going to need three waivers from the dimensional requirements.

G

Under the conditional use under the detached accessory dwelling unit ordinance, however,.

G

We feel that all of the criteria are satisfied, given the waivers specifically section.

G

814.10 requires that a detached accessory dwelling be on the same.

G

Lot as the single family dwelling that will be satisfied, um 814.20 requires the.

G

Detached accessory dwelling unit to conform to all zoning regulations.

G

That is satisfied earlier. This week we were before the board of adjustment to obtain variants.

G

For a second driveway on the site, we received that relief unanimously from the board of adjustment.

G

So we comply with all zoning section. 81421 requires that the.

G

Detached adu comply with lot area setbacks, open space, lot coverage, off-street parking.

G

And building height we meet all those requirements. Section 8.14 requires that it meet the principal.

G

Building setbacks. This project will respect the required setback in the srb zone.

G

Section 8.14.31 requires that the residents and the proposed uh the primary residents.

G

In the adu be in common ownership, mr stickney will obviously own the entirety section 8.14.32.

G

Further requires that the that the applicant owner occupy one of the units- that is the intention here.

G

um Point eight eight, eight point: one four point: three three requires that the applicant.

G

uh Represent that he does not intend to use either the resonance or the adu as for business purposes,.

G

That is the case here. 814.34 requires the septic to meet the standards. Mr shagnon can explain, but.

G

We do have a state-approved septic plan in place. Section 8.14.51 requires that the minimum lot area.

G

For the srb zone be satisfied, we meet that section. 8.14.52 requires that the.

G

The detached adu be limited to two bedrooms which we meet and be less than 750 square feet.

G

Or less than or equal to 750 square feet, that's one of the.

G

Waivers we're requesting, because we're slightly larger than that, the existing.

G

Dwelling is 862 square feet, so that's one of the waivers we're requesting the next waiver we're.

G

Requesting is from 8.14.531 that the facade area of the detached adu be less than 40 percent of.

G

The combined facade of both the uh adu and the primary resonance we're slightly over that at.

G

42 percent, so we need a waiver there um 0.8 one four point: five three: two structure height is.

G

Less than that of the single family, residence that will be complied with um section eight point: one.

G

Four point: five: three: three: the two structures are intended to be architecturally, consistent, you'll.

G

See in the packet there are renderings of the elevations for the proposed primary dwelling and.

G

The proposed re-cladding of the facade of the existing dwelling and they are consistent, section.

G

8.14.54 requires a separation between the two structures of at least 20 feet. We comply with that.

G

Section 8.1 4.55 requires that the front wall of the detached adu be set back at least 10.

G

Feet farther from the front wall of the existing or of the uh primary dwelling we're requesting a.

G

Waiver from that again, the only way we could comply with that would be to move the primary.

G

Dwelling forward far enough, in which case we would need a front yard setback, variance to do so.

G

The other option is, of course, to move the existing structure back. Neither of those is a reasonable.

G

Alternative so we're requesting a waiver there, then. Finally, none of the no part of the adu.

G

This is 8.14.56, no part of the adu is within the front yard setback. So we believe that.

G

The criteria are all met and that the findings that you need to make in order to.

G

Proceed are all satisfied. 8.14.61 requires that the exterior designs be consistent.

G

We believe that they are 8.14 requires that there be adequate and appropriate.

G

Space, open space landscaping and off street parking- all of that is, is met with the plans.

G

And 8.14.63 and 64 require that you find that it's, the adu will maintain a compatible relationship.

G

With the adjacent properties, in terms of its location, design and off street parking.

G

And will not significantly alter reduce the privacy of adjacent properties. This.

G

Structure that will be the detached edu, already exists within the neighborhood, so it meets that.

G

That requirement excessive noise traffic or parking congestion. This is 8.14.64 again. This.

G

Is already existing and it's been integrated into this neighborhood since the 1950s, so.

G

There will not be any excessive noise traffic or parking as a result of this structure being.

G

An accessory dwelling as opposed to a single family dwelling, so that is the presentation.

G

For the accessory dwelling unit, we think again it meets all the criteria with the waivers that we've.

G

Requested, which I think are reasonable. There are a number of letters of support in your packet from.

G

Members of the immediate neighborhood and it's you know unanimous and universal support for this.

G

Project, so we believe the conditional use permit is appropriate. Everyone, quick technical question.

C

Before I went up to the board, you said 862 square feet and unplanned show 886.. I I think the.

G

It's 886., okay, I think I misspoke mr chair just want to make sure we have six.

C

Correct number: any questions for the applicant.

A

Hi, yes, um I I just had a question about so when you put the new driveway in, does that change.

A

What the front where the front yard is located? No, you know the primary residence.

A

Where, where does that new driveway go okay? If we, if we look up actually.

G

If we look at c2 yeah, okay,.

G

This is the existing dwelling, which will be the detached adu. The existing driveway.

G

Is to the west of it, and this will be the new primary dwelling with the driveway out front.

A

So the answer is yes, it changes. What becomes the front of the property? Is that correct.

G

No, no, the the well! I I guess, maybe I don't understand your question. The.

G

The front yard of the property fronts on to jones avenue now, and it will once this is constructed.

G

It'll just have two driveways, so the primary residence will be even closer to jones avenue.

A

Is that right, um the price at its closest point? It will be just over 30 feet from jones avenue.

G

Okay and then um I have one other kind of question comment. um Part of this is, I can't remember how we.

A

Measure um the square living square feet of the detached accessory dwelling unit, but I mean I see.

A

That that is that it has a little patio. So if it's inclusive of patios and decks and things like that.

A

Then one thing you could do the applicant could do to become closer toward the 750 square foot.

A

Maximum is to get rid of that deck or patio, so so the the calculation that we.

G

That we use to come up with the floor area is from the the tax card, which is.

G

The exterior footprint of the structure itself, it does not include not including the patio.

A

Is that correct, though I mean, I know that we we looked at this before I just can't.

A

Remember if it ended up being inclusive of the outside area or not it's gross floor area.

C

So that that would be building space, not outside not the deck. Okay, it's gross living area.

E

Okay, it says girls floor area, I think um we've always. I thought we changed that at one point to.

E

Make it gross living area because we were it, does I'm having an argument? I remember one night about.

E

uh Whether or not storage, space, unfeeded space, so definitely unheated space does not count, so um it.

E

Has to be actually finished living space, so it does say clarify. Thank you. The hatched rectangle.

C

Which is the building that people live in is 886 square feet to those outside walls. That's correct,.

G

Yeah: okay, correct any other questions.

H

Having lived around the corner and walking and biking through this area during high.

H

Water events, whether it be snowmelt or spring rain, I know that this portion of this land is.

H

Lower and does collect quite a bit of water, so my question is towards the new elevation of the new.

H

Building and then additional runoff that may be created from that, it usually seems to pool up on.

H

The the aerial left-hand side, but from the street front, the right-hand side of the property and so.

H

Is that something that you guys looked at, and if is that a concern of any neighboring.

H

Properties because of the flow patterns here, I'm going to have to turn that over to mr shaggman.

H

I can repeat that.

I

All right, um john shagnan again are we going to also uh talk about the wet and when.

F

Conditional use permit at this time so appropriate I'll make my presentation.

F

Which will deal with the whole issue of drainage if that's appropriate, for this yeah.

C

You, you can say something now to save later I mean okay, so you're, just talking about the.

C

Adu we're just talking about the adu which okay, we're supposed to vote on the short apology. The short answer, okay, is that, yes, the drainage has been looked at.

F

And taken into account there's a culvert under jones avenue, and so we've designed this to.

F

Not in to deliver the same flow to that culvert, so there won't be any impact on the drainage.

C

And actually, john, to clarify, you can talk about both we just vote on them separately. Okay, so if.

C

You want to explain more, you can you can yeah, I do have a presentation about the wetland adu and.

F

I'll go through that whenever you want great. First, any other board questions on the adu.

C

Why don't you launch into the wetland the wetlands cup? Sorry, yes, so the next sheet.

F

Which you do have up now is the cup wetlands site plan and the project is.

F

Going to have an impact in the buffer of 1776 square feet.

F

We're introducing a new, state-of-the-art septic system which has been approved by the state.

F

And eliminating a system that is probably located back here- it's not state approved. So that's an.

F

Improvement to the environment, the landowner has planted some significant amount of trees already.

F

In the buffer area and in this plan, we're adding some more buffer plantings.

F

To the buffer area, just to be clear, the wetland uh comes across the back and then has a finger.

F

That comes up into the lot so that the the buffer line is kind of an oddly shape. It's.

F

Not square across the back of the lot, but the wetlands are in the back of the property. The.

F

Project as you, as mentioned by member simonis, the drainage flows from the back to the front to a.

F

15-Inch culvert that goes under jones avenue and in order to not send more water to that culvert.

F

To maintain the flow to that culvert, we need to do something to retain or slow down the flow of water.

F

The buffer being in the back means that we really can't place the house in the back of the lot. So.

F

We had to place the house here, the house, for example. There is an area here outside.

F

Of the buffer, but that would be very far from the detached accessory dwelling unit and the idea of.

F

The ordinance is to put the the primary structure forward of the detached accessory drilling unit, so.

F

It kind of forces to put the location of the house where you see it on the plan in order.

F

To slow down the flow of the drainage, we're proposing to construct a berm across the back.

F

Portion of the lot that berm intercepts an elevation and holds back water, that is.

F

Coming down towards the front of the lot and that holding back of the water reduces the peak flow.

F

To the street and maintains the suitability of that 15 inch culvert. So as far as meeting the.

F

Criteria for wetland conditions permit. We have to show that the land is reasonably suited to the.

F

Use and activity, it's a residential structure and a residential adu in a residential zone.

F

That there's no alternative location outside the buffer, that's feasible.

F

For the proposed user activity, given that we're putting the new structure in the front of the lot.

F

And we have to retain some water. We need to work in that buffer in the back. In order to accomplish.

F

The stormwater goals that there be no adverse impact on the wetlands function or values of.

F

The site the berm is entirely in the buffer. There is no wetland, direct wetland impact.

F

And we submit that there's no uh adverse impact to the functions and values by placing the berm in.

F

The buffer and slowing down the water next is that the alteration of the natural vegetative state.

F

Will only occur to the extent necessary. We need to place the berm from one elevation across the.

F

Lot to another elevation and that's the minimum length that we can adequately.

F

Detain the runoff and slow the flow to the culvert. It just so happens that the buffer.

F

Impact is in this corner, where the finger of wetland that protrudes uh creates a larger.

F

100 foot setback bulb so we're only building a berm. The berm is the minimum necessary. The.

F

uh We have to show that the proposal is the least impacting alternative. We met with the conservation.

F

Commission we had an alternative design in the beginning that had more buffer impact. That was.

F

More of a detention pond structured surface- and we worked with the commission to redesign to the.

F

Thing you, the the design you have before you tonight, and the commission voted to recommend.

F

Approval of the wetland condition use permit, and the last is that the area within the vegetated.

F

Strip will be returned to a natural state, the extent feasible. So this berm is basically a.

F

Planted berm so there's nothing artificial. It is sort of going back to a natural state.

F

The next sheet is a grading plan that shows some details about that, graining that I.

F

Mentioned and then, after that, the next sheet is the state approved septic system with the.

F

Usual detail sheets to follow and that's if you have any questions, that's all I have to present.

F

About the wetland condition use permit. Thank you any questions, yes, corey. Thank you chairman.

J

There's a couple of uh things out in the back, at least on the existing conditions plan. There's.

J

A chicken coop, gravel, walk garden all within the wetland buffer, as shown on the on yeah on.

J

That plant are those proposed, are they there? Are they not there? Are they proposed to be moved or.

J

Anything those are there and they're not proposed to be moved at this time. Okay, all right, because.

J

Part of the chicken coop at least one corner, looks like it's actually in the wetland.

J

At this point in time, I think that's all I have regarding that. Okay.

C

Jane, thank you. I just um wondered about um the very large septic system.

A

Leech um field area- that's shown on the maps, because your note says that you're going to.

A

You know remove the existing dry well and the septic system. Will you be? That looks enormous.

A

To me like, will you be putting something special back in there that will help with.

A

um All this flow of water around the edges of the property, do you fill it with gravel? What do you do.

F

So the the septic that exists now is most likely undersized and closer to the water table than.

F

Currently allowed the size of the system is based on the percolation rate of the soil.

F

And the height above water table that is required for the system.

F

So I don't know about the rest of your question, but the driveway and the.

F

House grading are detailed on the grading sheet, there'll be a culvert under the driveway.

F

So the water will still be able to move around the new house from the old house and from the back.

F

And there'll be a swale on the left side as you face it, so that water can all go to the culvert.

F

Under jones avenue that answer your question yeah, and so are you saying that that septic.

A

System area will be even larger larger than it is designed to comply with the des rules about what.

F

Size is required in the particular case based on the flow to it and the soil type that is.

F

Receiving the effluent, but like what shows on the cup wetlands site plan, which is c3.

A

That is the current or the proposed septic system. That's the proposed okay, okay yeah. We don't know.

F

Exactly where the current is in its entirety, thank you jim. I was wondering on the uh on the second.

K

Driveway did that comply with portsmouth's driveway policy for sightline distance.

F

uh So that driveway application was submitted and the um it's awaiting the zoning board.

F

Approval of a second driveway, but there will be 200 feet of sight distance. Currently, there's a.

F

Fence, if you've driven to the site, you'll notice, a fence that fence needs to be moved back to provide.

F

For sight, distance and will be- and it's shown on the plane as having been being moved back.

F

uh But you can see across the lawn across the locust lot 200 feet. Looking left.

K

For some reason, I thought you already received uh the variance for the second drive.

F

Yes, that was the tuesday. Oh, you did receive it. Yes, that was granted on tuesday for the.

F

Second, drive: okay, I misunderstood so you you do have 200 feet in both directions.

F

Yes, but that that approval was by the zoning board right for to have a second drive. We.

F

Still need a driveway permit on the public works department, oh okay, and they were waiting for the.

F

Variant's approval got it okay, that makes sense any other questions for the applicant.

C

No other questions to the applicant open. The public hearing.

C

Anybody here to speak to for or against this application.

C

Anybody on zoom- I guess we have one person here.

C

Name and address please for the record good evening: my name is bob mcdonald and I own the.

I

Property at 246 jones ave across the street from the applicant, and I just wanted to come in support.

F

Of the application donald keeps a nice property and.

F

I think it's a good use of the of the ordinance. Thank you. Thank you.

C

Anyone else two for or against the application.

C

Still nobody on zoom.

C

Second round speakers third round speakers, I'm going to close the public hearing.

C

First, we have the conditional use permit boards discussion.

C

On the adu, sorry on the adu, and it is gross floor area by the way I checked.

E

You want to start with the waiver, or do you want to start with modification? Well, I think.

C

If the board is inclined to grant it, we first have to make findings consistent with. I think.

C

The staff report- okay, so you want to start with three. Yes, I make a motion that we vote to find the.

E

Application satisfies the criteria set forth in section 10.107.50 of the zoning ordinance. Second,.

C

Any discussion.

E

I have more discussion on the other points, so this is on the wetlands aspect of the application.

C

No, no, I think you, no, I remember what you decided was no. I did not say a wetland.

E

Initially used permit, I cited the 80 datasheet to use okay right, my bad.

C

Conditioner, this is on the accessory dwelling unit, so we have a motion. We have a second.

C

No discussion, all those in favor, aye, aye aye, opposed motion carries unanimously now I'd make.

E

A motion that we vote to grant a modification to the requirements set forth in section 10.815.30.

K

I'll, second, that.

E

And if I'm right, that's the one on the the multiple size.

I

They requested okay. So it's all several all the modifications, all three all three.

E

So yeah now I'm confused. Maybe I should have done two first, never mind um a little confused.

E

Of my order tonight uh I actually went out to the uh tax card and the technically the gross.

E

Floor area, it's a 36 by 24 um building based off the tax card, so that comes out to 864 square feet.

E

So I think that's the actual square footage. I just want to make that clear for the record.

E

This is a unique property because of all the wetlands on it, so I feel like it has a very.

E

Unique situation where they can't based off of the setbacks and based off of all the bar zoning.

E

In order to be compliant in the end, it looks a little bit more like two lots versus one lot.

E

Based off of them being equally sighted, so it's not perfect to our detached adu wanting one to.

E

Be subservient to the other, and especially with the two driveways, it definitely looks.

E

Like two separate structures and two separate ones, I think that makes it unique based off.

E

Of the fact that there's a curve in the road, so it almost also would be difficult for them.

E

Unless you made the existing house bigger and then built a smaller adu and the other one that would.

E

Be really the only way to kind of get and meet all of the zoning, so I feel that there are some very.

E

Unique circumstances for this specific pie sheet piece of property that I would allow modifications.

E

But that's just me, thank you. Anybody else have any comments or.

C

I'll be ready for uh okay, we have a motion in a second. I believe.

C

All those in favor, aye, aye aye, opposed motion carries unanimously.

E

I'm so confused.

E

I vote to find that the application meets the requirements set forth in section 10.814.60 of the zoning warrants and grant the conditional.

E

Thought you said it well any other discussion. All those in favor, aye opposed motion carries.

C

Unanimously and then we need a vote to grant the wetland conditional use permit as presented. Second.

C

Any other discussion- yes, just real quick. You know there are some existing things out there in you.

J

Know really close to the wetlands um that you know would be good to probably bring those back.

J

However, one thing that is uh good about how they're finishing the site is, the berm is going.

J

To be a great, basically definer as to where that wetland buffer is so, um you know, as far as future.

J

Creep into the wetlands, it should be mitigated to some extent by having that berm right. There.

J

So and the new septic system will be a great enhancement for the ground water as well agreed.

C

Any other discussions before we take a vote running all those in favor.

C

Aye aye aye opposed motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much.

C

We have a public hearing requested, 2422 lafayette road associates is owner, waterstone properties.

C

Group incorporated as applicant a property located at 2454 lafayette road unit, 9 requesting.

C

An amended site plan review approval for the alteration of commercial pad and sidewalk removing.

C

This existing sewer line, relocation, bicycle racks and expansion of unit 9 from the existing.

C

Footprint of 1833 square feet to 36.50 square feet and to then divide the space into two units.

C

Equaling 1555 square feet and 2400 square feet, property shown on assessors map 273 lot 3 and lies.

C

Within the gateway quarter, g1 district lot 22-46 who's here to speak for this application, yeah.

L

Good evening my name is neil hanson, I'm with tyne bond, we're the civil engineer for the project.

L

Also here tonight is scott haley from waterstone group with a applicant and owner of the site.

L

Go to the next sheet, please, so this is the overall plan of the site.

L

I'm assuming most of you or all of you are very familiar with the site. By now, we've been in here.

L

Quite a few times over the years for various site plan approvals site plan amendments, um so we got.

L

You know route 1 lafayette road over to the right of the plan. Water country is up here at the top.

L

The cannons pins, um so the the building we're gonna be talking about tonight is is up here.

L

Along the uh water country, property line and specifically we're gonna, be um looking to amend.

L

The uh the end of this building, uh which is the current location of the uh the diner uh you go.

L

To that sheet, please, uh so this is just the uh up close zoomed in uh portion of the uh the site that.

L

We're gonna be uh looking to amend, uh just go to the next sheet and then again this is the overall.

L

Proposed site plan, and then um up here is, is where we're going to be looking to amend the.

L

End of that building to remove the the diner space and replace it with two retail units next sheet.

L

Again, this is the limit of the the site work so, along with the the reconfiguration at the.

L

End of this building there are some existing bike racks that we're going to be they're kind.

L

Of near the front entrance of the diner and we're going to be relocating them to here,.

L

Along with sort of realigning, the curb around the side of this building go to the next sheet.

L

As far as um drainage and utilities go, there's there's not a whole lot of of work involved.

L

Here the the biggest piece is the relocation of the sewer around the corner of the new.

L

Building currently, the sewer goes from this, uh where we're putting this new manhole here.

L

And runs at a diagonal, so we need to re-route it around the the proposed.

L

Building the existing water service for the building comes in down at this corner, so we.

L

Don't need any modifications to that and then, as far as drainage goes we're adding one new roof.

L

Drain connection and tying it into this existing drain line that runs down the back of the site.

L

So that's really the the extent of the uh the site plan amendment. uh We did have three.

L

Stipulations from tac, um one of them being replacing existing sewer, manhole 24-94, which.

L

On this plan, is this structure right here, so we have done that.

L

We have also expanded the view to show where the water ties into the building those were cut off.

L

Of the package that went to tax, they had asked us just to make sure those were visible in the plan.

L

And then the third was a request to prepare a trip generation memo for the change in use on.

L

The site, so we did that and uh submitted it with the package so for the weekday am peak hour, it.

L

Produced nine fewer trips, the weekday pm peak hour was an increase of seven and the saturday peak.

L

Hour we had an increase of four there's: a very minimal um change to the the traffic use uh for.

L

This proposed amended uh plan. um The last thing I just would like to touch on uh for answering.

L

Any questions you might have is uh we're reading through the proposed stipulations in the staff.

L

Memo and there's there's just a few that didn't seem to apply to this particular amended site plan.

L

The portions of 1.1 that relate to off-site easements and proposed easements or private.

L

Easements being recorded, we're not proposing any new easements as part of this, so the piece of 1.1.

L

Recording the site plan. Obviously we agree, that's that's a requirement of the city. Similarly, 1.2 and.

L

1.6 are also related to recording of easements, of which we are not proposing any new easements.

L

And then under cons conditions, subsequent 1.4 about the engineer of records submitting a written.

L

Report certifying stormwater infrastructure was constructed to the approved plans as far as new.

L

Stormwater infrastructure for this, we are only proposing the addition of a roof drain connection.

L

So I'm not not sure that necessarily rises to the level of needing an engineer certification, uh but.

L

Obviously, it's it's up to you, folks, if, if that will remain a condition um and then again, uh 1.5.

L

About reporting of inspection and maintenance, so we're not uh proposing to amend any of the.

L

Stormwater uh treatment infrastructure on the site, uh there is a current inspection.

L

And maintenance plan for this site as part of a prior approval, which has a reporting component.

L

So I don't know if necessarily this stipulation needs to be reiterated, but of course, if it is.

L

The site should already be complying with that. So just wanted to raise those comments about those.

L

And uh take any other questions. Well, I've got one quick one on the easements uh you're.

C

Re-Rooting the sewer line won't that require a different easement route. uh It will not there's.

L

No existing easement for the sewer because it's uh it's on private property and it's really amazing.

C

Thank you any other questions for the applicant.

K

I just want to clarify that what's happening here is you're replacing paved surface with.

K

A built surface is that accurate, yes, okay and so impervious stays all the same. There's no there's.

L

A slight increase to impervious, but it didn't have any impact on the off-site flow or the.

L

Sizing of the existing treatment practices on the site, this portion of the site, the treatment, is a.

L

Quite large underground infiltration system, which is, I believe, they're five foot, diameter pipes and.

L

It's it's very massive, um so it can, it can handle the the minimal increase. Okay! Great! Thank you.

C

Any other judge jane. I just want you, you give us the trip generation, but.

A

In addition to number of trips, um there's also the increased parking demand, and I know.

A

There's a vast sea of parking there, but I actually use one of the retail places there. A lot and I see.

A

The parking around noon early afternoon already, it's already difficult to find a free parking spot.

A

To go to one of the places that are along that same side, where you're going to be building so.

A

I just wanted to ask you about parking, demand, analysis and also increase in pedestrians, and then.

A

Finally, um you know there's that weird little as you come out past, what's now the diner there's.

A

There's a bottleneck there, as people are turning into all that retail shopping, that you're going.

A

To expand and they're trying to turn out to come to a stop to get back out on route 1.

A

I don't know if you know what I mean yeah I do so. How do you prevent that from becoming even more.

A

Of a bottleneck, um well we're not modifying that intersection at all and the the level of change in.

L

Trips for the change in use is very minimal, so that condition is, is not going to change.

L

Significantly or at all, with with this project, so you're saying 24, trips is minimal. Yes, well, it's 20.

L

It's 24 total, but there's that's an increase of four.

L

Over, what's existing so right now the diner generates, if I'm assuming you're looking at the.

L

Saturday peak hour, the diner generates 20 vehicle trips. The proposed retail use would generate 24.

L

So it's four additional trips, but hasn't the diner been closed for a really long time.

A

I I does anybody, the trip generation is assuming. It is not closed.

A

So this is all theoretical trips. If the diner was doing some kind of level of business versus.

A

Whatever these unknown, retail stores are going to do for a level of business, so the trip generation.

L

Is is based off the ite manual, and so it's based on square footage and by use so we're just. We just.

L

Take the square footage of restaurant use and replace it with a square footage of retail use.

L

And you it tells you what the uh assumed trips for each of those uses are based on the square footage.

I

Can I add something I think that what I think that the traffic impact analysis when the diner was.

I

Sighted would have contemplated the impacts of the diner, whether opened or closed, and that what the.

I

Impacts would have been to the road signalization turning motions, all of that, so whether when that.

I

Was cited all that was considered when it closed those conditions still exist, whether it's open or.

I

Closed, so it's not that there's a change! It's just that it's size for that that existing use, whether.

I

It's open, if all that closed, we wouldn't shut down a lane, it would all still be sized okay. Thank you.

A

That makes sense thanks, thank you and to answer your other question about parking. The retail.

L

Uses have a lower parking demand than a restaurant use, so the parking demand actually decreases even.

L

Though we have an increase in square footage, there's a slight decrease in parking demand.

A

Well, I understand that theoretically, but that's.

L

How parking is is calculated per city ordinance and through.

L

If you do an I.t parking demand, analysis, which we have done for this site previously.

C

Any other questions of the applicant, yes, corey, real, quick. um Thank you. Neil one, quick question.

J

The alteration of terrain permit, I assume that was for the whole site um and I'm kind of going broad.

J

Brush because, obviously this is not alteration of terrain size, stuff, but seriously has that.

J

Permit then completely closed out for the site. Yes, it is oh okay, it has so. The timeline is laps.

M

Okay, that was just my question. I just was curious if it was still open and if this was gonna have to.

J

It's you know, it's not okay and then my last question. Sorry because it was about pedestrians.

A

So um I I don't see a pedestrian analysis, but I'm sure you're going to tell me that it's not going.

A

To result in that many more pedestrians it'll be probably 12 to 24 pedestrians, making these trips.

A

But there's no sidewalks for pedestrians to they can walk down those that retail, but they can't.

A

Walk, how do they make it across the sea of parking lots to chipotle or to the rest, to the grocery.

A

Store there are there's a lot of cross pedestrian, there's increased cross pedestrian traffic.

I

So the site, as as previously approved and built, has two main pedestrian crossings right through.

L

The middle of the site and then when the chipotle pad was added, there's pedestrian connections again.

L

Coming all the way through the site and sidewalks connecting all of it. So this this was designed.

L

Under the old it was the old gateway ordinance which had a whole pedestrian.

L

Walkability component to it and that's how this this whole.

L

Current layout of the plaza was designed under that with pedestrian orientation in mind.

G

Do these demands for parking take into account some of the changes with the new.

B

Theater within a magic going away and in the new apartments yeah, so we had to met. We have a cop for.

L

The site for calculating parking demand using the it parking demand calculation, and that was revised.

L

And reapproved as part of that conversion of the the cinema to the the condo part of that approval.

E

um Because I can't remember- and I have seen this property so many times.

E

Did we on any of the previous ones, have storm water, inspection and maintenance stuff? That's.

E

Being done regularly so that there would have been one for the the viridian.

L

uh In 2016. uh that that was covered under an alteration terrain permit, so that would.

L

Have had an inspection, maintenance report and reporting component to it to the city.

E

Yeah is that continuing to be done or no? It should be, but it's beyond the ownership to be doing that.

E

No I'm only asking because I'm trying to think of maybe some of these things are actually applicable.

E

Based off of it's continuing from all its previous approval right, that's all I didn't.

C

Quite catch what you said about what it should be, but what the stormwater maintenance should.

C

Be continuing but I'm sorry I didn't hear it. Oh, I was just saying it's on the ownership.

L

To be doing those inspections and reporting, so I I don't know if that has been occurring. Okay,.

C

Any other questions.

C

This will open the public hearing.

C

Open the public hearing on this application- anybody here to speak to for against this application.

C

Is anybody on zoom.

C

Any second round speakers third round speakers, nobody here, nobody on zoom still close to public.

C

Hearing, what's the board's pleasure, mr chairman, I'll, make a motion to be voted, grant amended site.

J

Plan approval with the following stipulations: 1.1 through 1.6. However, I propose to before.

J

So, like 1.1 after it says the site plan comma, I propose putting in any new off-site easements.

J

Along with further down so basically read the site plan, any new off-site easements to the benefit.

J

Of the development and any other new private easements shall be recorded at the registry of.

J

Deeds by the city or is determined appropriate by the planning department and um I'll continue going.

J

Because I guess I'm just thinking of including that just in case there's whatever reason.

J

So then in 1.2 it would read a general description of any new easement plans or deeds for which the.

J

City is a grantor or grantee shall be submitted to the city with the following information for.

J

Review and approval by the city council, the following two bullets and then skipping down.

J

Into one, if I could interrupt you just briefly that we are recommending that that item be removed.

I

We had taken some direction from our legal department about that they reconvened and.

I

Actually said that they want the full easement um precedent to the building permit. So wherever that.

I

Is present, I'm asking that we strike that that is the change that they directed uh towards the.

I

Legal department gave me that direction after the packet had gone out, that they had reconvened and.

I

Decided that that's not the direction they want to go, so I apologize for that. It was a little.

I

After the fact, but I told them that I would correct that, so I would recommend just striking.

I

Two altogether and that we just captured 1.2, so we don't want that. We want the full easements.

I

Prior to proceeding to the building permit, we want them recorded and uh that's what that's my.

I

Understanding and that would require 1.6, also be struck, so my apologies for that we will get.

I

That corrected and part of the reason for that was that in the past there's been some times.

I

They've changed and they've had to come back as they go through the building process, but then.

I

They did a review and to see how many times that happened and what they ended up saying was.

I

That they think the better policy would be just to get it all preceded to the building. Permit.

I

So, okay, so get rid of 1.2 and 1.6. The only other changes I am proposing would be 1.4 to be written.

J

As the engineer of records shall submit a written narrative with photographs and engineer stamps.

J

Certifying that the stormwater infrastructure was not altered from previously approved plans.

J

And that's my only other modification so and we have a second second. I just want to clarify.

K

um 1.1 is still a requirement. Okay, even though the applicant said that he didn't feel that way.

K

Well, corey had any knew it says the site plan. We definitely need amended site plan to get recorded.

K

C

So the cyclone gets recorded if it has any new easements those get shown on it. If it.

C

Doesn't they don't get shown on it? um Did you courage? You explained your motion pretty well.

C

Did you want to say anything else about it? The only other thing I was going to say is.

J

I remember when that diner was built um about 10 years ago. I think give or take so.

J

um It'll be good to see the site, you know once uh once the residents are built and.

J

This is built, I mean it just feels like this site's been kind of an ongoing.

J

Project after project after project so it'll be nice to see when it's completed and.

J

The dust settles for at least a little while so anyways any other comments.

C

All those in favor aye opposed motion carriage unanimously. Thank you very much.

C

We have another two items that may be considered together. If somebody would.

C

Be so inclined, uh yes, I'd make a motion that we hear um under item four public hearings.

E

New business items c and d, we will have them uh discussed together and voted on separately. Second,.

C

So we will now consider the request of elizabeth b larson trusted 2012 his owner for property located.

C

At 668 middle street, requesting pulmonary and final subdivision approval construct to subdivide.

C

One existing lot with eight eighty one thousand forty six square feet of lot area and sixty nine.

C

Point eighty three feet of street frontage into three lots proposed lot: one with eighteen thousand.

C

Six hundred forty six square feet of light area with no street frontage lot, 2 with 18 756.

C

Square feet of lot area and no street frontage proposed lot 3 with 43 644 square feet of lot.

C

Area and 69.83 feet of street frontage existing buildings will remain and be proposed on lot. Three.

C

It's a property shown assessors map, 147 lot 18 and lies in the general residence. A district.

C

The second part of this application same owner requesting site plan approval for construction.

C

Of two two unit structures and improvements in existing structures to create a total of.

C

Eight units on three lots with the associated utilities, connections and site improvements.

C

Again, it's on assessor's map, plot map, 147 lot 18 in the historic and general residence, a districts.

C

Who's here to speak this application good evening, I'm mike garabi with garappy planning consultants.

D

And I'm here representing the applicant and owner uh thanks for your time tonight.

D

And thanks for combining the two applications together, that'll help, hopefully speed things up.

D

If you would like to go to the c1 sheet, the first plan sheet existing conditions, just sort of just.

D

Give you a brief overview of the site itself. It's rather unique it's about a two-acre site.

D

On middle street, it's 668 middle street. um It is bifurcated in part by the historic district along.

D

um The frontage along middle we're not proposing to do anything with the existing structure.

D

On middle, which is housed as a three unit apartment building beyond the historic district.

D

In the general residence zone is a single family dwelling, that's also on the on the subject parcel.

D

It's a conversion of an old carriage house, a single family home with a two-car garage attached.

D

Which has access via a shared driveway with the three-unit building off of middle, but also.

D

Has access off of chevrolet have to the rear of the property? So our proposal is um such that we.

D

Are looking to do a three lot subdivision, creating two new lots that would be sized appropriately to.

D

House duplexes on the two new lots and the remaining one acre parcel, would house the.

D

The existing dwellings and existing structures that are there today.

D

If, uh if you would go to the the a1 and really the a2 sheet, I wanted to talk about a couple of things.

D

With respect to this plan, the a2 sheet is the easement plan sheet and there's a.

D

Quite a bit going on here. I just wanted to just quickly outline sort of what's happening here.

D

If you, if you notice on the plan, the existing chevrolet avenue, which is a which is a private way,.

D

Currently maintained by the city is partially located on the subject: property and the adjacent.

D

Property owned by the walens this this plan, this easement plan um proposes to.

J

Provide easements for the city, both on our subject parcel and on the waylands parcel, which we do have.

D

Agreements with the weylands to provide those to the city for both the right-of-way itself.

D

Utilities and for any drainage that might be required any utilities in the street that.

D

Exists there today, so hopefully, what that does? Is it cleans up an existing condition.

D

Where there are currently no easements in place for or the actual roadway itself other than that.

D

We do have a shared easement proposed for a shared driveway for the two duplex lots.

D

Both lots are about about a half an acre in size, each they're, 0.43 acres in size.

D

And I did want to say that as a component of the subdivision and site plan applications.

D

Themselves that we originally had proposed a much denser application.

D

That was not well received by the neighbors um we spent quite a bit of time. We pulled back.

D

That application from ours from the zoning board- and we spent quite a bit of time with.

D

The neighbors um several neighbors that sort of um formed a group of concerned residents and.

D

Worked with them very diligently, and I think you'll know tonight that there may not be anybody.

D

Here, because we've, I think, we've worked together to create something that we can all agree on.

D

So that's the subdivision itself is really just creating.

D

The three lots out of the one the existing single family residents will still enjoy.

D

Access off of both chevrolet and middle as it does today, so there's no real change. There.

D

We did have a variance, or do we think we had two or three variances granted in july of 2021.

D

For frontage, the existing lot uh only enjoys about 70 feet of frontage, on the middle, where.

D

100 feet is required for the zoning and we receive variances to allow for furnace to be.

D

Created or funded to be provided off of a private way for those two lots along chevrolet and then.

D

Subsequent to the subdivision application, if we want to jump into the site plan, that's on sheet c2.

D

Of the plan set it's sheet 5 of 14 and that just will show you the configuration of the.

D

Proposed duplex dwellings, we do have an architectural.

D

Packet plan plan set along with your packet as well, if you'd like to look at those.

D

Each of the duplexes is approximately 2700 square feet of living space per unit. We're.

D

Proposing again, a shared shared driveway off of chevrolet to reduce curb cuts along the roadway.

D

And they would that would provide access for both both duplex structures. Drainage is fairly.

D

Simplified, if you will, we do on sheet c3, which is sheet six. We show um where our drainage is.

D

Being collected to a small rain garden um on one of the lodge, the sort of the north.

D

Easterly lot and then there is a tie into the drainage system in chevrolet as an overflow.

D

And, as you are probably all aware, uh this has gone through several iterations in.

D

Of tack, so we've gone through the tac process for both the subdivision application itself.

D

And then, through um subsequent hearings and meetings with the folks attack, we went through.

D

The whole site plan as well so keep it short for you folks and be happy to answer questions.

C

Thank you. Any questions to the applicant.

C

uh Dan go ahead and thank you, um the shared driveway for those new duplexes, as it goes out.

A

Onto chevrolet avenue um is, could you can you just point out where the exit is from the um malt mill.

A

Exchange because that's right across yes, if I can work this, this would be amazing. I wanted to play.

D

With this thing for a while, so there's there's the exit to the mall house exchange right. There.

A

It's further down from where this driveway comes from yeah. The driveway is going to.

D

Propose drive, we will be here in this location here. This is awesome. I need one of these.

D

And that's the other, the other curb cut for the existing.

D

Mall house exchange and on c2 when you say that this driveway is going to be relocated.

A

To eliminate encroachment, yes so, and it's only a small portion of the driveway we're going to.

D

Actually modify that note just so it's a little clearer on the final plan. There's.

D

The where the driveway comes out onto chevrolet, which is actually part of the walens property.

D

It slightly encroaches upon the whalen's property, so just in order to clean up any potential issues.

D

We're just going to make a slight adjustment, as as the existing driveway enters.

D

Onto onto the roadway very minor, um so you so those buildings so down that side of the property.

A

They would also be entering from chevrolet avenue, or would they be entering from middle street.

D

When you say that you mean the the single family home, so the single family home currently.

D

Has access from middle street and they have some parking in right right out in front of the I'm.

D

Going to do this again, they have parking right out in front of the carriage house.

D

What we call the carriage shots, a single family, home, there's a three or four parking spaces here.

D

um In front, but they also have their driveway off of chevrolet that they use to come into.

D

Their that's the only access they have to their garage. They have a two-car garage.

D

That is accessed from from chevrolet itself, okay and then my last question.

A

Is it's more of an appeal? So when I looked at this property over the six-foot stockade vents.

A

I saw beautiful, mature pine trees, just a couple of them.

A

Are those going to be eliminated in building the duplexes or can you work around those somehow.

D

Well, I'm not sure where the pines are you're. Referring to. I know that there are several larger.

D

uh Trees there that are most there's one pine tree and I'm not sure if you're referring to the one.

D

That's right in the middle: this is I'm going to use this all the time right in the middle of the.

D

Existing driveway as a is a pine. It's an evergreen there. We tend to keep that.

D

More than likely anything that's existing on those two proposed lots to be constructed will probably.

D

Have to be removed and then re-vegetated with the landscaping that we're proposing.

A

um I just hope you can please put in big trees to keep portsmouth.

A

Residentially shady and lovely and good quality living down there, and then I would just.

A

Really like to thank you for the process that involved the neighbors. I really am. I applaud.

A

That thank you appreciate that councilman um you're no longer condolizing this right.

E

Because I know at one point that was the case: it's not proposed under this plan you're just.

E

Doing the straight subdivision, so two duplexes will be on one lot, two on the other and then the.

E

Main house and the correct carriage house, on the other, although we are proposing on on the plan.

D

Itself on the site plan itself we have, we are, we are creating two condominium units, so there will.

D

Be a condominium, a and b of the existing dwellings or existing structures on the site. I should say.

E

Okay, so for those you're going to create a condo of just like the main lot and then are.

E

You doing it for each of the duplexes or are those going to be they're, not they're.

D

Just at this point they're not proposed to be conducted, I was just curious. Thank you.

K

Thank you yeah, mr garby, could you explain the variances you received.

K

Particularly one and three, I I'm having a hard time understanding exactly what those mean.

D

Well, um let me just quickly look at one and three, because I know we I think we did.

D

Worth three, I only recalled two, but I guess there must have been a third one.

D

um I think I think two and three were actually excuse me. One and three are kind of together.

D

We asked for the variance for number two under the abundance of caution. We didn't actually feel we.

D

Needed it because it's an existing condition, but we did receive that variance as well. The ordinance.

D

My understanding of the ordinance is that- and I have kevin baum here attorney obama's here in case.

D

You can help me if I need to be bailed out of this legal question. Is the ordinance requires that the.

D

Frontage be on a city street and chevrolet is at this point in time, not technically a city street.

D

So we did get a variance to allow the creation of frontage or the utilization of frontage on a.

D

Private way, so technically, you're not allowed to subdivide land on a private way is that the issue.

K

All right, that's our technical understanding of the of the portsmouth ordinance, correct, okay, yep.

K

And then number three is confusing also because it says you need a variance to build a structure with.

K

Access to a private way correct, so two different things, so one is one- is to create this. The lot.

D

Itself and the other is to build a structure on that lot, with access to that private way.

K

All right, that's uh I'll, have to look at that zoning ordinance because to me.

K

It seems unusual that you have a private way, you're not allowed to build a structure on it.

D

It did seem a little antiquated, perhaps but okay, that's not our your problem. My problem just.

C

Any other question andrew uh it may seem trivial, but just thinking about the function and.

H

Livability of these units, the proposed mail box is on chevrolet, ave and thinking about snow build-up.

H

Plowing, as well as gathering your mail sure do we think that that may cause a congestion of traffic.

H

And it's a little you know, people are going both ways on chevrolet as well as people coming in and.

H

Out of these condos, so it may just be something to think ahead about and where that could be located.

D

We we would have preferred them to actually be on on each unit, but we know that I guess that.

D

Is something that the postal department is sort of getting away from? So kiosks are sort of the.

D

Even like the new norm, this is this location was actually when we were working with with dpw. This.

D

Is where they suggested we'd put it I'd, be, I guess, happy to move it to somewhere else. If it were more.

D

Appropriate so when dave defosus tells me to do something, I usually do it. Yes, we all do yeah.

D

So but if that's a field change that dave might recommend that we put it somewhere else.

D

We'd be happy to put it somewhere else, little reflectors on that. Just so people see it yeah.

D

And I we don't have a detail, I don't believe for the the kiosk we may have one in there, but.

C

You're gonna have to stand there with that remote keep pressing the button just continue to press.

D

That any other questions corey so building on mr simonis uh discussion about the mailbox, how.

J

How do you propose deliveries are going to be made? Are they the trucks going to use the kiosk or are.

J

They going to come down the driveway to each and then I'm just curious about the and unit.

J

Turning um are they gonna back back down, so when you say you mean deliveries to each of these units,.

D

That say if it's an amazon, yeah exactly yeah yeah, I mean the the the you know. I I think logically.

D

They would pull into the drive and they would pull into each. You know whatever driveway they.

D

Were delivering to and then back out and then make that turn head back out onto chevrolet from there.

D

Okay, okay, um all right that makes sense, and then I guess, my other, just just from my own.

J

Knowledge, I'm assuming you proposed two lots to get the varying setbacks and frontage and.

J

That sort of thing versus just one lot, I'm just curious. Why why you have two laws, but that's just.

J

My my own question question well in order to, um in order to put the ford dwellings on you, you.

D

Need you need lots, you need fees, simple, okay, yeah yeah, put the duplexes on them right. Okay, a lot.

J

Of further variants, because of the because of the zoning in that district, okay, gotcha. Thank you sure.

A

And then, mr chairman, I just had a question of the planning department regarding our notes. The.

A

The recommendations include, um I just want to make sure I understand that condition, 1.1 that has to.

A

Do with milling and overlay of the road, sidewalk etc is who bears the burden of the cost of that.

A

Is that is that the builder to do because it's a condition of this approval, it's one.

A

It's a condition that our dpw department requested be included. Great stipulations.

C

Any other questions of the applicant.

C

Yeah I'll open up the public hearing see if your prediction was correct.

C

Anybody here we should speak 2-4 against this application.

C

Anybody on zoom.

C

Second third round speakers last chance.

C

Nobody here, nobody wishes to speak close public hearing.

C

What's the pleasure of the board, mr chairman, I'll, make a motion to vote to grant.

J

Preliminary and final subdivision approval with the following stipulations: 1.1 through 1.6. Second.

C

As per the staff memo, yes, thank you.

C

Any discussion.

C

All those in favor, aye opposed motion carries unanimously. We have site plan approval next.

C

Yep I'll make a motion that we vote to grant site plan approval with the falling stipulations 2.1.

J

Through 2.7, as laid out in the staff plan, if if I could suggest that a second, oh I'm sorry second.

C

No, it's 2.3 again if we could, potentially uh if the board would consider removing 2.3 and then.

I

In 2.2, similar to the other amendment to the um and any other new private or public easements.

C

Kind of, like you did before all right. I apologize for that.

J

In this case, would it make more sense just to well obviously we're going to strike out 2.3, but.

J

Rather than have any new off-site usements, I mean this is a little different, where it's completely.

J

I guess new to us um so.

C

Well, this one clearly does have easements yeah lots of things, and some of them involve the city.

C

So if you said I mean you could just leave it as it is or just say any new, either way.

I

I think that reference, if you could um just basically say 2.2 um and then uh we can also.

I

We would delete 2.3 and 2.5 because we want all the easements prior to the building permit uh per.

I

My most recent direction, 2.2, would read the site plan. Offsite easements benefit the development.

I

Any other private, any other new, private or public easements shall be recorded. The registry of deeds.

I

By the city, or is deemed appropriate by the planning department.

I

So it's just that amendment to 2.2, with a strike of 2.3 and 2.5.

J

That works for me me too.

C

It sounded like an amended motion in an agreement by the second person, so any other discussion.

C

All those in favor aye aye hose.

C

Motion carries unanimously. Thank you very much. Thank you very much appreciate your time. Rain.

F

Sounds like rain wow. It could be very loud, didn't bring my umbrella.

I

I think you're going home afterwards.

A

No, but to get to the car, this is.

C

We have another pair that may be considered together. I'd make a motion that we hear items.

E

Three, a and four b to be discussed together and voted on separately.

J

C

All those in favor aye, aye, aye opposed and we're going to consider.

C

Two out two applications together. The first is requested for amigos: llc is owner for property.

C

Located 1400 lafayette, road and 951 beverly hill road is the pressing preliminary and final.

C

Substitution approval to subdivide one existing lot with 223 thousand four to 16 square feet.

C

Of lot area and 789.91 feet of frontage on beverly hill road at 576.28, feet of frontage on.

C

Lafayette road into two lots proposed lot: one will have 111 415 square feet of lot area and 467.63.

C

Feet of frontage on beverly hill road proposed a lot too we'll have 137 276 square feet of lot area.

C

With 325.59 feet of frontage on covered hill, road and 576.28 feet of frontage on lafayette road that.

C

This property is located in sessions map 252, lot 7 and lies within the gateway center district g2.

C

Also for discussion at the same time and separate voting is.

C

Requested by the same owners, the same property requesting an amendment and a one-year extension.

C

The previously approved site plan and conditional use permit for a development site.

C

According to the requirements of section 10.5 b, 40 of the zoning ordinance and the site plan.

C

Review approval for the construction of a 53-unit garden and townhouse-style residential development.

C

Consisting of six structures with a combined total footprint of thirty seven thousand.

C

Seven hundred seventy five square feet more or less, and one hundred twenty two thousand.

C

Growth floor area with associated grading lighting utility storm water management.

C

Landscape improvements in community space, this property again is located in sessions map 252.

C

Lots four five and seven and lies in the gateway center district g2 who's here to speak. This.

C

Application uh good evening, mr chairman, members of the board uh for the record chris tamula, I'm.

B

A senior project manager with green and peterson uh with me tonight are members of uh for amigos.

B

Rick and jenna green as well as kenny lindsman. um So if, if the board doesn't mind what I'd like to.

B

Try to do is go through the site plan portion of it first and then kind of get into the subdivision.

B

We basically put the subdivision plan with the site plan package together. So if we can go to the.

B

Site plan sheet number four: if possible,.

B

Great thank you um so obviously, so we're here tonight um seeking approval for an additional.

B

One, an additional one-year extension uh to the original 2020 uh plan board approvals.

B

uh We're also seeking an amendment to the site plans and a subverted outline consolidation.

B

Of the aforementioned lots, four five and seven.

B

We previously received a one-year extension uh back in 2021 before this board.

B

um But in order to uh receive any additional extensions, uh we obviously have to go through.

B

The attack process and come back before this uh back for the board, which is why we're here tonight.

B

um Ultimately, what we've done, uh we've scaled back, the uh the project, development.

B

uh Based on the number of units uh we've reduced parking, we've reduced building footprint and we've.

B

Reduced impervious coverage, um we started this project in 2019 until 2020 the pandemic hit.

B

I think we actually had our first zoom meeting uh with the planning board uh lengthy meeting.

B

The market has changed uh so now they. What they have done is.

B

We've we've eliminated the four-story apartment complexes that were.

B

Along beverly hill road and along along the back property uh towards the uh towson hotel.

B

The the former units there were four-story garden style.

B

Buildings and now we have three-story townhouse units consistent with the.

B

Other townhouse units that are on site and previously approved.

B

We've reduced the number of residential units from 53 down to 32 units. We've reduced the.

B

Building footprint from approximately 37 775 square feet down to 25 600 square feet.

B

We've reduced the parking from 106 spaces down to 93 spaces.

B

And we've also reduced the impervious coverage by about 3 900 square feet. Therefore, creating.

B

Additional green space on the overall property we previously met with all the conditions of approval.

B

But my clients decide to basically, like I said scale back to project based on market conditions.

B

uh While keeping the same architectural design elements uh previously approved.

B

um Additionally, uh as part of the development, what we've done is we've separated out the commercial.

B

Development in the front from the residential uh component in the back, which is why we have the.

B

The subdivision plan as part of the package, so if we can go to sheet number 21.

B

Or the subdivision plan, whichever is easier.

B

B

So, as you can see uh the subject plan, what it does it separates out the front portion.

B

Of the site, which is, as I'm sure everyone's aware, it's the right aid, um the five guys.

B

uh As well as the newberry put um five cent savings bank, that commercial property is.

B

Basically, being divided by the uh the the common driver, that kind of splits.

C

Top button never get used to these just hold it. So basically there's a the existing.

B

Driveway that currently bisects uh the rear portion of the site, which is vacant and the.

I

The existing driver that comes that circumvents uh through the site um and basically the financing.

B

The subdivision is being created due to financing to separate, like I said, the commercial and the.

B

Residential components of the property as part of the subdivision, uh the front lot, 7.

B

Will be known as 1400 lafayette road and will be about 3.1 acres in size.

B

While the remaining portion of lot 7 will be subdivided consolidated with the with the two lots.

B

Four and five in the rear, uh those that lot would be known as 951 beverly hills road and would be.

B

Approximately 2.6 acres in size, both lots, meet all the zonal requirements and no variants are needed.

B

From open space building setbacks, parking, etc. The only uh item that we need is that.

B

We do need a waiver um as part of the subdivision for the uh dumpster location, which is generally.

B

The existing dumpster for the rite aid is right here um and that's to allow the dumpster to.

B

Remain there, uh it's it's within 20 feet of a lot line, which is as part of the straight.

B

Line requirements, but it does meet the the 10-foot requirement as part of the zoning bylaws.

B

We've also addressed the the comments uh by tac. uh We met with them on may 3rd.

B

We provide a letter that outlines all the changes to the plans.

B

uh The only two items that are outstanding as part of the tax comment is uh note, number two.

B

uh We just need to basically confirm that with dpw with regards to flushing the hydrant, I don't.

B

Believe we need to do it because we did move the hydrant. um So we believe that's a non-issue and.

B

Then we just need to add a sprinkler room um on the final building plans, so overall we feel that.

B

We've scaled back development we've reduced the buildings, the building size, parking, reducing.

B

Purpose coverage: um all this is combined with the with the consistency of the previous approvals.

B

The architectural design elements are the same. The landscaping is the same utilities, um drainage.

B

Et cetera and we're hoping to get a conditional approval this evening, so we can start construction.

B

uh This fall uh I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Questions for the applicant.

J

Thank you chairman. um Just a couple of questions um you on the.

J

On the site plan on complex b, there's quite a looks like from and I'm comparing to what we saw.

J

In 2020, the uh paid area looks a lot bigger and I'm curious if that's there's no parking striping.

J

On the plan, so maybe that's why? But I'm just just curious on that one. um So, on complex b, that is.

B

uh This upper area here yep correct yeah, so um what we did is we basically uh there.

B

There is each one of the units obviously have a two-car garage, and my client wanted to provide.

B

Some additional room for people to park in front of it, but with the elimination of the.

B

Of the u-shaped building that was formerly here and the other apartment complex, which was here.

B

We ultimately eliminated a substantial amount of purvis coverage, so we felt that we could. We.

B

Could add some additional parking and still have a net reduction in impervious coverage on site.

J

Okay um and then another question I had was uh did the applicant and I'm not I'm not sure how the.

J

Market changed, but did the applicant look to change the seating area between complex, a and.

J

B into an actual playground- and the reason I mentioned, that is one of the renderings there.

J

Was five kids in that one rendering? So I'm just curious if the market changed to more family style.

J

And if that's the case, if the applicant looked at putting a playground in that corner because.

J

There's really no playgrounds anywhere near this site, so no um so we had actually initially looked.

B

At putting a playground on the development and during our initial discussions with staff, who sort.

B

Of pushed away, is you know not that not to provide that so the uh the renderings may show some.

B

Liberties by the architect, putting you know people around, but the the intent is to still have.

B

An outside patio area, um which is generally located here, it should be noted that we actually.

B

Did add an additional area located here, so we do have an outside pattern area. Here, we've added.

B

Some bike racks along here and we've added some bike racks along here as well, which sort of makes.

B

Sense for having the patio area and having some bike racks associated with that. Okay. Thank you.

J

Yes, jim, yes, uh could you please review the pedestrian improvements on pevery hill road? If.

K

They have changed at all since the last approval. They have not we're still providing the crosswalk.

B

The flashing beacons everything that was previously approved is still consistent.

B

With this with, there are no changes to that whatsoever, so the improvements consist of a.

K

Crosswalk to west road that is correct and as part of the original approvals, um our company.

B

Designed a an additional sidewalk along the uh the west side of of beverly hill, if the city decides.

B

To move forward with constructing that sidewalk, the approvals were we design it and ultimately,.

B

The city, if they decide to move forward, can um can build it, and that is still part of the same.

B

Package and that that design is still um submitted to the city. Okay, thank you.

C

Yes, jane, thank you, and so I just want to make sure I get this clearly it that there are.

A

There are three entries and egress from this property.

A

Two of them are going to be off of beverly hill road and one will be.

A

You know going like you're going to go into rite aid but or you're going to go into the hotel off.

A

Of lafayette you could get in those in and out those three ways is that right yep. So there is.

B

So, across from west road there's an existing driveway, that's there today, that's true remain.

B

That that, basically, is for the residential complex, uh the other driveway, that's located.

B

A little further south that is there today, that is also to remain, and then the right.

B

In right out, that's at the rite aid, that's essentially for the right of development.

B

And then there's a common access driveway between the our property and the in the hotel. None of that.

B

Is changing? This may have been discussed before when it was a larger project? I don't know, but.

A

um I just really am particularly concerned about that intersection with west road, because you.

A

Said that you're designing a sidewalk for the west side of beverly hill, which side is that? Is that so.

B

Along the opposite side of our site, so along the marked basket side, so there is a opacity side, so.

B

We've designed a crosswalk with flashing beacons, uh basically just south of west road. um It is in.

B

The plan set uh so there'll be flashing, beacons and a crosswalk, so somebody is wants to cross. They.

B

Press the button the flash and beacons go and then it provides a cross, crosswalk and sidewalk to the.

B

Existing sidewalk, that is at west road, the design that we incorporated part of the plan set, was to.

B

Design a future sidewalk along the market basket side. We couldn't put it as part of.

B

Our plant set because we would need to obtain easements because of the right-of-way location.

B

And the sidewalk, so it felt it made more sense to you if the city was going to.

B

Build the sidewalk that they would be able to obtain the eastmans rather than.

B

Than us, but have have you done a a traffic analysis or this a trip generation.

A

Particularly about that entry, egress that's across from west road yeah and it was determined um so.

B

There was some discussion on whether the crosswalk should be um maybe located further south close to.

B

The intersection um our traffic, uh our traffic group and, basically, that's called a mid-block.

B

Crosswalk, it didn't, um it didn't, make sense from a safety point of view, and it was ultimately.

B

Deemed that the correct appropriate location was where it's shown on on the plan, um we did.

B

Do um a traffic study it's all been submitted as part of the development. There will actually be.

B

Essentially, less traffic associated with this now because we're reducing it from.

B

The 53 residential down to the 32 as well, so all in all, it's consistent with the original approvals.

A

Is there any is, can you discuss the possibility of putting on a sidewalk that's on the side that the.

A

Development is on because, if I'm, if I apologize safety here, if I'm a kid great, I've got seven.

A

Bike racks, or whatever I get on my bike: where am I going yep so as part of the development we do.

B

We are proposing a 10 foot wide sidewalk on our side of the site from the the northerly portion.

B

All the way down uh connecting into the uh basically the sidewalk that is currently at the.

B

um At the five guys, so there's a ten foot wide sidewalk on our side of the development.

B

And then a future sidewalk by the city on the opposite side of the road.

A

Great. Thank you any other questions. The applicant.

C

No other questions the.

C

I'm applicant open up the public hearing. Anybody here speak too far against this application.

C

Anybody on zoom.

C

Second third round speakers, since there's nobody, I'm going to close the public hearing.

C

Pleasure the board.

C

Have a motion to discuss it? If somebody would like to make a motion, mr chairman, I will make a.

J

Motion that we vote to grant everyone, we vote to grant preliminary and final subdivision approval.

J

Of the following stipulations: 1.1 to one point, four, two and three, as laid out in the staff memo.

E

I think two and three have to be separate.

J

Oh, I'm sorry, those are the votes yeah. My apologies 1.1 through 1.4.

J

um I guess just all in all you know it's, um it is.

J

Similar to what we saw in 2020 a little bit different.

J

I think, as far as the subdivision goes, you know it's more of a technicality to.

J

Kind of make things work at this point. um I can speak a little bit more when we get to the next.

J

Site plan approval but yeah, I'm I'm fine with the subdivision.

C

Thank you any other board discussion on this motion.

C

Seeing no discussion I'll call for a vote. All those in favor aye, aye, aye aye, proposed none.

C

We have numerous final subdivision approval. Oh uh couple more, I know there's more, but that that.

C

Was the vote on perimeter? Oh! Yes! Yes, sorry I'll, make a motion. The vote to grant waiver to section.

J

9.3.5 of the zoning ordinance to allow dumpster be located within 20 feet of the property line. Second,.

J

Yeah- and I think in this case you know it's, it fits with with what they're trying to.

J

Accomplish out there, so I don't see an issue with uh with that being where it is. I think.

C

It's been there too right. Yes, it is there. I, I guess you know, it'd be nice if it could go.

E

Somewhere else, but I'm I'm best at I'm betting, whoever ends up living, there will have a say.

E

Any discussion.

C

We have a motion to grant a waiver all those in favor opposed none waivers granted.

C

Next and I will make a motion, I vote to grant a one-year extension of the site plan.

J

And conditional use permanent approval with the presented amendments in all original conditions.

J

As approved on april 30th 2020 under lu-20-12, in addition to the falling stipulations- and I think I.

J

Got it right this time, 3.1 3.2, with the changes on 3.2 to read the site plan comma, any new off-site.

J

Easements to the benefit of the development and any other new private easements shall.

J

Be recorded at the registry deeds by the city or as deemed appropriate by the planning department.

J

Strikeout 3.3 go to include 3.4 3.5 3.6 is laid out in the staff memo strikeout 3.7.

J

Include 3.8 and 3.9, as in laid out in the staff medal. Second,.

C

Explained it any discussion I'll just just add a little bit. um You know.

J

I I think this is a better um development than what we originally saw it. It was very.

J

Dense when we saw it before so, I think this is certainly better. um I do a little struggle, not.

J

Not just the the playground comment I had earlier, but you know with some of the uh community space.

J

You know some of it is really just kind of landscaped areas that um that to me I'm.

J

Not really sure how that you know will benefit the community. I am intrigued that about the.

J

The lawn chairs out on the corner of lafayette beverly- hopefully that works great um but uh yeah.

J

I just you know for future reference. I it would be nice to see a little bit more work put into that.

J

But overall I think it is definitely a better project than what we saw originally. Thank you.

C

Yes, yes, um I just add to that yeah. I I agree with everything that um mr clark said. There.

E

Had been with the larger buildings we had sort of built in the sort of like.

E

Protected kind of area where people could gather and talk and that's.

E

Not part of this more because these are more like single-family homes, they're just all attached, because they're more like row homes. So it is disappointing. But when you look at the.

E

Renderings there's a little bit at least more green space, because they're smaller buildings.

E

So I think it's a trade-off so and then being less dense will probably help there not being.

E

As much incidents- and there should be hopefully more room in the internal side of the buildings.

E

For children to pay play it just will be on asphalt versus, probably more grass. That's all.

C

Yes, jane yes, I I'd just like to really agree with the previous two comments. Sets of comments and.

A

um To emphasize that, I hope all these round circles that look like their trees and bushes.

A

Are as big as possible, making peverly hill and that sidewalk area livable high quality for all.

A

The people that live in portsmouth and the people that are going to live in this complex because.

A

You've got such limited green space. I I think that that makes it compelling that it's really.

A

Good green space- I don't know that people could have picnics there that they could have a lawn.

A

Chair out there that they could have barbecues out there and that kids could play somewhere. That.

A

There's a swing set somewhere and that there are actual substantial trees that will not.

A

Take 30 years to grow. I'd really appreciate that and I'll be watching just so you know.

K

Yeah, this is just a general comment that uh I, as a resident of long time, resident of portsmouth and.

K

Noted that when this site was rezoned, g2 gateway 2, I think at the end of 2017.

K

There was some hope that uh density bonuses would be granted so do some affordable housing here.

K

Because I think at the time they felt that residential homes and route 1 would be less.

K

Desirable in other areas of town therefore be more affordable, and it appears that the market.

K

Is such that I think you've reduced this the number of units, but they're, larger and.

K

The condominiums now instead of apartments, so it's just an observation that um it's unfortunate: that.

K

A more people aren't taking advantage of the gateway to.

K

Opportunity to have affordable, I'm sorry, workforce housing.

K

That's all any other comments. I think we're ready for a vote. We have a motion in a second everybody.

C

Clear on that corey's, I think you've walked us through that pretty well all those in favor.

C

Aye aye aye opposed none. Thank you very much. Thank you very much.

C

This isn't on our proposal, but it wouldn't make any sense to switch the order of the last two.

I

I just wrote and just suggested that yeah that would be.

I

You mean the city council, the city, council referrals, you mean yeah.

I

um I think the next one is the uh design review, but then, after that is the city.

I

Council referrals and you, oh I'm sorry you can put city council after after we get to the council.

C

Didn't mean to skip over you folks, we have a design review application, public hearing request.

C

Of 8 kph, llc is owner for property located 161 deer street to be known as 88 maplewood avenue.

C

Design review for the demolition of existing one-story commercial building, construction.

C

Of a four-story building with a penthouse, this property is shown on assessors map 125 lot, 17-3.

C

And lies in the character district 5. john. You are here to speak to this application. Yes, thank you, mr.

F

Chairman members of the board, john chagnet, from in bit engineering speaking on behalf of eight.

F

Eight kbh tom ballen who's also here and carla goodnight from cg architects is here.

F

Also tonight, the plans are essentially the same plans that we presented for the concept.

F

Meeting at the last month's planning board meeting, we can quickly go through the set. The desire here.

F

Is that we get any additional feedback from the public before we go to the final uh design and.

F

Into the technical process, the plans are cover sheet. The next sheet is a couple of plans that.

F

Show the subdivision that was approved for the creation of six lots on uh deer street and.

F

Hill street and there's a plan showing an easement that was obtained from the.

F

Railroad for additional space allotments along the north side of lot, five, which is the further.

F

Right most lot on the northeast side of deer street, then the next plan is essentially the.

F

Existing conditions and then we have demolition plan and then the proposed site plan so we're.

F

Removing the existing building, that's there constructing a new, uh larger building and.

F

The building will have, as shown on the next sheets of underground parking and.

F

I guess for the benefit of the public, we can have more of a presentation, but I don't know if there's.

F

A lot of people here to speak to it so I'll keep it short as time is, is moving along this evening.

F

If you have any questions, we'd be glad to answer them. Are there any changes to the plan you showed.

C

Us before no, we did not make any changes. Yet we want to wait till we get additional feedback.

F

uh But we did, we did hear your comments last month and if you have additional comments, we'd.

F

Be glad to talk about them. Thank you just wanted that clarification. Any questions the applicant.

J

Thank you chairman, so, just just to clarify um the proposed building is 58.

J

I assume you're going for an incentive. I thought the max height was 50., so just just to I'm just.

J

Curious on that, on the on the building height on the building height. Yes, so as we presented the.

F

We are contemplating a variance. We would ask for variance for building height.

F

But as you mentioned, there are other alternative ways such as.

F

Community space allocation, uh workforce, housing, etc. So we're still looking at the options.

F

But our initial thought was to apply for variance there's a as I explained last month, a lot of.

F

That is based on the fact that we want to pull the basement level to a level that makes sense.

F

With coastal resiliency and groundwater, and that forces us up out of the out of the street.

F

Due to the fact that it slopes away from maplewood as you go west on deer street,.

F

So we presented information about that. Also our florida floor heights.

F

And we don't want to artificially um raise the grade around the building to.

F

As you know, that's a way that you can lower the billing height, but we want to be upfront and we we.

F

Think that the building fits and but we'll we'll be doing some sort of either variance or other.

F

Alternative in regards to that, uh before we come back that answered the question: yep, okay, andrew.

H

As we previously established this, I'm not dbw, so I could be missing something.

H

The proposed service vehicle and delivery parking that is directly off of maplewood ave.

H

Do we see that as a congestion or choke point for deliveries in and out, so the that particular.

F

Location c3, you go two plans further, so you're talking about this. Yes, this area over there so.

F

Right now, that's the entrance to the site. uh So if you've been there, the building kind of sits up.

F

Front there's parking along the railroad and you come in there there's an existing collection of.

F

Gear that is a pad mounted transformer and some switch gear, that's owned by eversource.

F

The building will need its own transformer, which will need to be located in that general area.

F

And eversource needs access to that, so we're maintaining that for that purpose and we.

F

Are talking to the city about using that as also a delivery point.

F

But that's in discussion with technical folks, dpw, etc. That should stick with them great.

H

The second question I had was about the trash and storage in the parking area.

H

And maybe it's because there's no dimension to it. So forgive me, but how do you access that trash.

H

Area and then how would somebody bring trash out like a bin, a roller, etcetera.

F

Sure so in buildings, with underground parking in tight urban environments, the trash in the basement.

F

Is a good way to deal with trash? We don't have to take up space on the lot with dumpsters and.

F

So on and so forth, and the way that you would manage the trash is, you would base the you have.

F

A certain amount of space that would be accessible and easily transferred to a smaller truck you just.

F

Increase the frequency of pickup to match the demand so yeah, so it will depend. You know a.

F

Residential, the residential units above will have a certain demand. uh It depends on who goes.

F

Into the commercial space, but if you need to do a pickup every day, because you only have a limited.

F

Space, that's what you do so and so uh in this trash and storage area there will be the rollers.

H

That will exist and then someone will bring them out. It would be a small truck pickup. You could do.

F

The 90-gallon totes thank you, those kind of bins. Sometimes you can do a rolling two-yard container.

F

That would just be swapped out. There's various ways to do it. You don't have to come in with a.

F

Big truck that dumps yeah overhead, because obviously you don't have the headroom.

K

Yes, jim, yes, I just like to uh clarify from last month, um there'll be three floors of residential.

K

And six units per floor at 2 400 square feet each is that true? I would defer.

F

To to the architect sounds about right, yeah and then one penthouse unit on top.

F

Okay, so they'll be three per floor, like you said for three floors, just to put it in the mic.

F

And then uh one unit penthouse with additional common area.

F

At the upper okay, so now it's for a total of 19 units total of 19 years. Okay, thank you.

C

Yes jane, yes, thank you. um I'm also I'm just coming back into the conversation about this.

A

Building, um I'm still trying to understand. Does the penthouse constitute like story.

A

Four and a half or is the penthouse a fifth story, thus requiring so the the building is a.

F

Four-Story with a penthouse and your ordinance defines that as not a story, it's a penthouse.

F

So you have in your height allowances, you have stories and then you have the ability to have.

F

A certain number of stories and a penthouse- and this is a fourth story with a penthouse so didn't.

A

This building originally have um a trade-off with workforce housing like a unit or two of workforce.

A

Housing and that's where I'm confused about now, you've reduced the size so that that's not.

A

A requirement hi uh carla goodnight from cj architects. um I'm just give john a little bit.

I

Of a hand, the original approval had a five-story building with the workforce, housing component by.

I

The previous owner and what we're proposing is a four-story building with a penthouse that meets.

A

The requirements in the zoning ornament ordinance for penthouse, which gives you a couple of feet.

I

Of height, but actually doesn't count as a story and has to be held back. A certain distance from.

I

The edge of the floor below and also has to occupy a certain area. So that's what we are.

I

Looking at now, we did have our first work session with the historic district commission.

I

And we looked at context and um that and massing and just the early massing they seem to have no.

I

Issues with the height and size of the building, actually because it is- has come down somewhat in.

I

Size from the prior prior approval does that help here. Is that that's clear and then I also wanted.

A

To ask about the concrete ramp: that's on the deer street side, which I guess is paralleled with a.

A

Concrete sidewalk, so what is the it's got arrows on it like? What is the use of the concrete ramp.

A

Okay, the one on deer street. Well, the civil engineer has um drawn that in.

I

A very utilitarian way, which the hdc will never stand for so um so we will be.

I

Making that into a brick, a brick, elevated um plaza, some some part of it- is planned to potentially.

I

Go back into the building and service a coffee shop or a restaurant or or something, but that's.

A

All pedestrian, that's all! Okay! I didn't know if that was for automobiles. Oh no! No! Okay,.

A

And then I guess I I just wanted to check about fire truck access, because fire trucks could either.

A

Access this down maplewood or deer street, I don't know about their access over the railroad tracks.

A

I don't know what to what hypothesis to use for that kind of access, but there's.

A

Obviously, no access in that space between this building and the next property is that right.

F

Correct, I don't think that the fire department is going to require this to be a building that.

F

They drive around completely. I think they would finding it from the street side or this the the.

F

Southwest side and the building will be fully sprinklered too, which is a great advantage.

I

Okay planning board member begal. You may or may not be aware that the deputy fire chief.

I

Also sits on the tax comes in as an application. Okay, he uh he is a pretty big. Okay. With this.

I

No, I don't know if he is yet he hasn't looked at it. Yet, oh okay, but he will yeah great.

C

Yes, corey just one more general comment, I guess and I'm just bringing this up in case.

J

The applicant wants to say anything um given that this intersection needs a lot of work to pull.

J

People, you know to activate it, we have you know. We now have one corner across from this. That's.

J

Well, there's no way to get into the building. um The other corner is a um investment firm.

J

Not a lot of traffic, but I'm pleased to see that there's commercial first floor.

J

So I'm just throwing it out there that would love to see something that entices people to.

J

To want to at least slow down as they sprint towards downtown through here, so.

J

Because, as of right now, it's like you know, and you have the new development proposal across the.

J

Street too, and I just ask the same thing of them: just try to like you know, make it an enjoyable.

J

Spot: okay: um I think that that uh raised area is uh potentially going to be covered so that we will.

I

Have uh that be a very inviting place to service the the retail spaces? A lot of areas have had the.

A

Their indoor outdoor experiences expanded over the past few years, so we're we're.

I

Looking to create that that interface between the interior and the exterior along the deer street.

A

Side and then we do have a radius corner there, and I know that mr ballen is still looking at.

I

A variety of occupants for the space, but I think that upper area would definitely.

I

Be somebody that would have a presence for the public, okay, fantastic.

A

Sorry, I have just one other. I just want to make sure that I get this as compared to the first.

A

Time around that now this building has um it. It's got completely sufficient parking unto itself is.

A

That right, except for maybe the retail um on the first floor, because I thought it used to have some.

A

Spaces at the foundry garage or something like that correct. So as redesigned we've dropped from.

N

I'm trying to remember which, whether the 45 unit or the 55 unit was the final plan that.

N

Came in by reducing to 19 units and providing tandem parking, we've met the requirements and.

N

Provided two units for each two parking spaces for each commercial unit and is that under the.

A

Is that, like a garage level yeah, that's all garage? Okay, great? Maybe some people will.

A

Be attracted to use the foundry garage to come to your retail one can dream.

C

I think you've got two spaces per residential unit, not commercial yeah,.

N

Per the ordinance, the commercial does there's no required parking for the commercial, but.

N

As an owner of a building, we know we have to provide it or we'll never rent it.

N

So we are highly motivated to provide that.

C

The south corner of the building is quite a bit out of the ground, as I understand it, the way john.

C

Explained at the last meeting you've got concerns about groundwater and contamination on the flight.

C

Both driving the building into the air a little bit at least that corner, is that correct.

N

um We have a supplemental presentation. Actually, if isaac can pull that up I'll, I apologize.

N

It's going to take 10 minutes but it'll be it'll, be good detail to read into the record.

N

And there's there's two issues, but um I would say: contamination is actually the least of our worries.

N

At the moment, um most of this building in lot five would have been directly under the train station.

N

Back in the day, so a majority of the contamination is actually unlocked form three further to the.

N

West, but I wanted to uh call out a few things that weren't in the original site plan um next slide.

N

So this is a blow up of the site plan and, let's see I've never used this thing. Let's see this work.

N

And the main storm drain for all of this part of portsmouth runs across the front.

N

Down deer street there's a t junction right here and then there's a 20 foot easement.

N

That runs out to north mill pond through here and that's a 48 inch rcp pipe. That.

N

Kind of directs all the storm, water and poor stuff, and we were talking to dpw at the tac meeting the.

N

Term they used was, you know, can we pump into that storm drain system because we do have to connect.

N

Our roof drains into it, but can we pump into it and dpw's answer was no, you can't it's it's full.

N

And I guess what the purpose of this presentation is to explain what full means uh next slide.

N

um This is just a quick excerpt from the original geotech um report. These little blue.

N

Dots of the water observe water levels during geotech boring, so the building is originally.

N

Proposed prior to our acquisition actually had the finished floor. Elevation below the water.

N

Line and would have required pumping on the site next slide. This is the outfall of that.

N

48 inch rcp pipe that dumps into north mill pond. uh You can kind of see the parking garage here.

N

And the pipes right here- and this is a typical low tide- um the bottom of that pipe is kind of.

N

At median sea level, so when we're talking about flood elevations, they're, roughly measured from.

N

The bottom of that pipe, it's only a it's only a few inches above the of the mean sea level,.

N

Next time, this is your normal high tide, so six or seven foot tide roughly covers about half that.

N

Pipe and that'd be about 27 days of each month that you'd see for high tide during the day. Next,.

N

Slide so very recently, so the last three so three days of the month, you've got a full moon here and.

N

Your morning, spring tides in may and june are the highest tides here in portsmouth, tuesday was.

N

A 9.85 foot forecast tide, but there was a storm surge coming through and weather channel issued.

N

Coastal flooding alerts that day now we were lucky in that the storm actually kind of went up through.

N

Lake winnipesaukee and didn't actually hit portsmouth, so we didn't see any precipitation.

N

This day next slide, but this is high tide at one in the morning on tuesday two days ago,.

N

That's the top of the storm drain system and you can see there's two lugs here where at.

N

Some time in the past, gpw had attempted to put a flapper valve flood prevention device on there.

N

Those lugs are about an inch above the water line. You see all the straw here is actually floating.

N

And then the main pipe leading back in is under water uh next slide, just this quick one. This.

N

Beautiful house, in the corner by uh when you come across the bridge on maplewood, but.

N

That high tide actually exceeded his retaining wall height that night. He just.

N

Replaced not great pictures. I apologize is my wife holding a flashlight at one in the morning.

N

Next slide, so this is the new fema map that came out in january. 2021 shows based flood elevation.

N

At eight feet, um one more slide: isaac actually now go back, go back to sorry, go back one more one. More.

N

So, with regards to this pipe, so the 40 inch eight.

N

Inch pipe right now is completely open, so there's no damper on the end of it.

N

When dpw says, the pipe is full for three days for about three hours during high tide.

N

All all of north mill pond actually fills that entire pipe. All the way back to the parking garage.

N

So all the pipes are full and the issue is if we have a significant precipitation event, while that.

N

Pipe is full every there's, a lot of paved area in the north end and it all runs right at this site.

N

So there's no place for the water to go and no place so we've got we'll have detention, tanks.

N

On our site so that our roof water has some place to go during that three-hour period. But we can't.

N

Control everything that's coming at us from the rest of the city, so um down two sorry, one more so.

N

This is the high tide map for june this. These will actually be the highest tides in portsmouth 10.

N

10 1, that's the 16th and 17th. You don't have to mark your calendars. Just look for the full moon.

N

And get out at one or two in the morning and that'll be your key to. And if it's really.

N

Raining out, it should be interesting, next slide, and so so this last slide just to take away so.

N

We got existing groundwater from the geotech report at six feet. Those geotech borings certainly.

N

Were conducted at high tide during a rain event, so we know the groundwater level is at least six and.

N

Could be higher, we know our base. Flood elevation is eight. We have, in our opinion, prudently put.

N

Our garage floor elevation at eight feet as a result, so that we won't be continuously pumping.

N

um 25 years from now, I can't guarantee that, but for the time being, that will be sufficient.

N

And that puts the upper floor at 18 feet, which is about three feet above the curb.

N

And this is where we get to that elevated patio that you called out not concrete it'll, be better.

N

Than concrete, but um that elevated walkway actually goes to a patio that will be kind of.

N

By the time you get to the end of the building, the is actually at six feet, and this is of great.

N

Concern to nick and others at the planning board, but our plan is to have that part of.

N

The building open during the summer so that it's a big floating patio at about six feet which, from.

N

A customer standpoint will put them above the kind of parked car line so that if you're there.

N

You're there you're having dinner you're having coffee at least you're, not looking at parked cars.

N

But low enough so that people coming up the street will be able to see what's going on and kind of.

N

And we've had good interest from restaurants and that kind of work so and then the last. The very.

N

Last point, which is worth noting, um there are a lot of underground parking garages in portsmouth.

N

That are only seven feet clear in height, new ada requires that we provide a van ada space.

N

So the clear height has to be eight foot two inches. So while in theory we might try and.

N

Go to nine feet between garage and first, we have to do ten to meet those ada requirements.

C

Your geotechnical report is the one that was done for dear street associates.

C

Correct and the groundwater that they mapped was that across the entire site or based on borings.

C

Taken at various locations um that geotech report has about 40 borings across the all.

N

Of the lots, so it's the same report that everyone all these lots follows: deer streets, property, yep.

C

It seems to me there's some pretty serious technical questions. You know.

C

A lot of ways to address this one would be no development. That's not a good solution for you.

C

Although you made a pretty good case of why it's maybe overloaded already.

C

There is a provision in the site plan review where the we can ask tac to have.

C

This reviewed by an outside engineer, I don't know how the board feels about that.

C

If there are any concerns, I'm an engineer, so I look at this differently than some people do.

K

Doesn't our ordinance also allow parking to be below the required flood elevations.

K

That's one use that is allowed to be below living. Space has to be above, but right.

K

Garage areas can get flooded if they need to. Is that true? Yes, that is correct. Yes,.

K

But I agree if you ask the question: if we need an engineer to review this, then I I support that.

J

I would agree um the only the only thing I'll throw in there is, I believe.

J

As part of previous developments, I believe um I think it was cma looked at this pipe in particular,.

J

Pretty extensively, I think and john might be able to correct me on that if he remembers, but.

J

This isn't certainly not the first time that this pipe has been.

J

Looked at from you know from all the development that's taking place or proposed in this corner.

F

Sure I believe that the approval for uh the one of the deer street projects and.

F

The approval for 46 maplewood required a contribution to that study of this pipe.

F

But I have not been able to get my hands on that study. Okay! No, if I looked at it either so.

J

Yeah at least be a starting point, and maybe you know we need to build upon that, particularly you.

J

Know with this development, so the reason I raise it, it's a technical question about the drainage.

C

Obviously, but it's also, it affects the height of the building and at that south corner, it's.

C

Quite a bit out of the ground: if that's the way, it has to be that's the way it has to be, but.

C

I'd feel more comfortable having some technical backups. It's like.

C

A traffic analysis, sometimes you have traffic reviewed by an outside person, so.

C

It's 2.3 of the site plan review technical review and assistance paragraph two: anybody wants to.

E

Typically, I'm I mean in the past. Usually it's been tech. That's actually asked for this before.

E

It even comes to planning board well, we could make it in the form of recommendations, attack.

C

I'd be I'd, be okay with that.

I

The planning board can make that recommendation to tac that, if that they consider utilizing a third.

I

Party reviewer to review the geotechnical report and the drainage analysis is that what I'm hearing.

M

C

There's some there's the issues are the drainage there's a lot of you know: should there be a flat.

C

Valve on the end of that thing, I have no idea that that study may make comment on that. If you.

C

Can find it some of this may be excavation of old reports and not doing it all afresh.

C

Additional retention is that somebody else's responsibility.

C

Questions we don't know and I think questions we should consider pretty big project.

J

Yeah, and just just just for comparison purposes, what was presented to us on lot three and what.

J

I recall, I know they had a full underground infiltration, a retention gallery along basically.

J

Underneath that entire building was all big, just storm water retention system um and I believe.

J

I can't remember if there was there had to have been parking above that I know so. Basically, first.

J

Floor was all parking and then below that so rather than sinking the building down, they just.

J

Had to fit that subsurface gallery somewhere and that's where it went so.

J

The parking was the first floor with liners. I think so.

C

Yes, andrew does does that drainage, analysis and study.

H

Taken into consideration or is influenced by what is the first floor, use so going off of what corey.

H

Mentioned as well as what jim had previously stated about the parking being under the.

H

Level water table level does that study highlight that in any way? Well, I think.

C

It should comment on that, because what the applicant is saying they they can't go into the.

C

Groundwater with that, I I know parking garages do sometimes go into the ground water. Nor would I.

H

Want it to, I suppose the question is around: would the actual first floor use so the street level use.

H

Have any influence on that or be influenced by only in terms of elevation? I think.

I

It pushes the parking up onto the to grade rather than.

I

Some great, which affects, I guess, how the building presents to the street.

C

So we can close the design review process this evening in terms of uh it doesn't stop discussion.

C

About the application, uh did you have something you want to say john? We have to have a public.

E

Hearing yeah, I know I'm just I'm just I'm jumping ahead, because I want people to think about it.

C

Before we before, we close this part and move on to the public hearing, if there's anything else,.

J

Yeah, I guess the only other. Only other comment I might make is that um at I believe, 46 maplewood.

J

That parking is below the groundwater table. I think, and I'm looking towards mr shagnan to either.

J

Confirm or deny that, but uh I I thought that that yeah, as we discussed at the last meeting, that.

F

Garage is lower. There was a geotechnical report on that lot. That identified a different water table.

J

Okay- and there is some ledge that crosses the corner- the south east corner of this lot and.

F

So that might influence provide a barrier to the sort of tidal influence of the pond, so that.

F

Was based on the geotech study for that one, and the only reason I bring that up is just that. There.

J

Are different options? For you know, people have looked at different options.

J

To try to make this work in this area, I'm not saying one is better than the other, but there's.

J

You know there's a couple of ways to maybe try to tackle it, but I think, starting with.

J

Figuring out where that report is the one that was, you know, was um that I believe was done or should.

J

Be done um by the third party where that stands currently and then trying to build upon that. If we.

J

Need to to answer any other additional questions, because yeah that pipe's got a lot of issues.

J

For sure so so before I do the public hearing, did you guys want to say anything about that.

C

Okay, I'm going to open the public hearing the anybody here too for against this application.

C

Certainly a crowded room tonight. Anybody on zoom.

C

Any second or third round speakers saying no I'm going to close the public hearing.

C

What is the board's pleasure.

J

Mr chairman, I'll make a motion that we vote to find the design view process is complete exactly.

C

And we're gonna have a recommendation to um attack.

J

As a part of that yeah, I was, I guess I couldn't quite put it into words, but.

C

Geotechnical drainage study.

J

By a third party, reviewer okay, so it would be um the one stipulation that.

J

Consult with a third party reviewer to review the existing geotechnical report and the.

J

I I trying to think if I guess it would be the stormwater report that was done for this corner.

J

Or, but if they can't find it, they might have to do a new one right, so geotechnical and drainage.

C

Analysis satisfactory attack by an outside party, yeah yep. That may be an existing report or may not.

C

Work, I know I was leading the witness, but.

J

Works for me, the second okay, with that any discussion.

F

Yes, I just, I really appreciated the walk through that additional information and that report about.

G

That having been here for 30 years and having a very historic home with it, it's the severe events.

G

Are significant and some in particular like with the nor'easter in october, I'm king high tide that.

G

That almost want to add that to be those specific events that back to like 96, even when they had.

I

Had some of those to be part of that review or if they're not you know what happened then, with that.

I

Pipe, I have to be cautious about a historic event: that's usually not a design criteria.

C

Of note, but not something you try to design for so any other.

C

Emotions- second, all those in favor aye opposed none. Thank you very much.

K

I think this is where you want to skip to part b from.

K

Council referral I'd make a motion that under city council referrals, that we take up item b.

E

First, we have a second second, second, second, all those in favor, hi, hi hi, do.

C

We need a short break. Can we do it right after this? We can do it right after this.

C

We have a recommendation. I have to make a recommendation city council for application.

C

Of cheryl cherilyn burnett young and of rath young and pignatelli on behalf of the applicant.

C

Margot thompson and edward thompson to request the porsche city council apply for urbanized.

C

Shoreline exemption pursuant to rsa 483 b, colon 12 for property located at 57 salter street.

C

Tax map 102 lot 32 in the city who's here to speak for this good afternoon. Sorry good.

O

Evening, chairman and uh members of the board, uh my name is james steinkraus, I'm an attorney with.

O

Wrath young pignatelli here on behalf of margot and edward thompson, I'm also joined today by mr.

O

Thompson there's an applicant requesting the city of portsmouth to apply for an urbanized shoreline.

O

Exemption, I just have a brief presentation to sort of give you an overview of what we're.

O

Requesting it, why we're requesting it and some of the evidence that supports, we think supports.

O

A favorable recommendation for the application, so on april 25th two of this year, uh margo and.

O

Edward thompson submitted a request to the city to apply for an urbanized shoreland exemption.

O

um That request was heard by the city council and forwarded to the planning board for recommendation.

O

We subsequently submitted uh additional information requested by the planning.

O

Department through the portsmouth open gov system next slide. Please.

O

So the way this works is sort of unique, um the thompsons are actually requesting.

O

An exemption from the shoreline petroleum water quality protection act, however, that application.

O

Has to come through from the city of portsmouth if the city applies for the exemption, and it's.

O

Subsequently, granted and approved by new hampshire des, as well as the governor and executive council.

O

It would then exempt the property from certain requirements of the shoreline protection act.

O

That exemption would essentially have no impact on the water quality for the hazard river, given.

O

The the current property, uh this application was actually made at the recommendation of des.

O

uh And that, if granted, would allow the thompsons to settle a pending appeal.

O

With des over administrative order at the wetlands council and ultimately allow the.

O

Use of the building as a primary residence, just as a little background, the thompsons have lived.

O

In portsmouth for about 40 years raised, children are active in the community and the.

O

Constructionist, property or renovation of this property is really part of their retirement plan.

O

And this essentially is at risk right now with this pending appeal, so.

O

If uh the city makes the recommend, the report makes a recommendation. City council.

O

Subsequently apply and then the application is granted, um the thompsons would also and settlement.

O

With des the appeal, thompson would need to relocate the building approximately five feet back.

O

Currently, the building's cantilevered about five feet over the water by moving it back, it would.

O

Remove it from the jurisdiction of 482a, which is the wetlands protection act that would then.

O

Allow a settlement, but then any movement of the building or future changes would have to come back.

O

To the city we'd work with, obviously the planning department, inspection department.

O

And the conservation commission next slide, please. So what is the application under 43 b-12, the city.

O

Would uh apply to requests for 57 salt street, the special localized urbanized conditions exist.

O

Pursuant to 483b415 for the protected shoreline for exemption fact at this property urbanization.

O

Essentially shows a concentrated development found in various cities and towns, where there's.

O

Been a historic pattern of intensive building for residential commercial industrial uses.

O

Whether it's a downtown community center central business district, where all vegetative barriers.

O

Have been depleted where imperial services are in excess of 50 percent and the residential uses.

O

Are at least 10 dwelling units per acre, and it's important note that this application would only.

O

Apply to 57 salsa street, it wouldn't apply beyond that next slide, please. So in order to support.

O

The application we've submitted documents that is part of the record that the cinema city would then.

O

Subsequently, submit to the new hampshire officers, strategic initiatives in their planning department.

O

Along with the documents that thompson's provided to show the current and past building density, the.

O

Commercial industrial residential uses, evidence of municipal or other public utilities for the site.

O

uh Current municipal land use regulations that affect the protected shoreline on the property.

O

Designation is a downtown community center, central business district, urbanized area or.

O

Urban cluster, as designated by the u.s census bureau and any additional information that the.

O

Des commissioner might require next slide, please let us quickly run through the so. The first is.

O

The current and past building density, I'll review, the properties in the area around 57, salter street.

O

57 salt street apparently has two condominium units or residential units and the other.

O

Properties in the area are typically very densely built historic buildings from the 18th and 19th.

O

Centuries, as you can show, they're all relatively small lots, largely single-family properties in the.

O

Waterfront district business district next slide, please so the lack of vegetative buffers as.

O

You can show this is a picture of 57 salt street, the main building to the right and.

O

Unit which is unit 2. unit 1, is to the far left the thompson's property. That's the building. You.

O

Can see that there's no vegetative buffers that's right! Most of the properties in this.

O

Area the waterfront business district are built right on the water on retaining walls.

O

Next slide, please so the impervious area for this particular parcel is over 50 percent.

O

uh Work by the thompsons has reduced that was approved by des reduced the impervious area.

O

From 57 percent to 52 percent, uh even with that work, it still exceeds the 50 threshold.

O

Next slide, please so the waterfront district is currently zoned to accommodate and support.

O

Businesses uh dependent upon the piscataqua river for transportation resources, the property.

O

Was previously used for a mix of commercial and residential uses, the thompson's unit unit, one was.

O

Formerly a lobster and boat repair building, which was then later converted to an office.

O

And in december 2018 the thompson's received the variance from the zoning board of.

O

Appeals uh adjustment excuse me to convert unit 1 from a commercial to a residential use that.

O

Work was also approved by the historic district commission in february 2019.

O

uh Next slide, please so both units, one and two at 57 salta street, are served by public water, sewer.

O

uh Electric gas and telephone now this is important because there's no septic systems.

O

On the property, so any use of either unit one or unit two as a primary residential unit.

O

Will not impact the water quality to the scatterplot river because there's no chance.

O

For septage leaking into this system, so that's a key consideration, so it's certainly used.

O

Both units are certainly uh have public utilities next slide, please um evidence of you know current.

O

Regulations regulating the property, certainly it's subject to zoning ordinance, article 10, subject to.

O

Review by the historic district commission, it's the property is located in flooding district.

O

Zone ae and finally, due to its location on the piscataqua river or any developments.

O

Also subject to review by the portsmouth conservation commission next slide, please.

O

So this property is located within the waterfront business district, but it's also been.

O

Designated as an urban cluster area by the u.s census bureau- and this is a map from the 2010.

O

Census date of march 8 2012 is showing its designation as the urban cluster.

O

Next slide, please, in the next two slides are really just maps showing as part of the evidence.

O

Under the regulations a clearly delineated location, this is from the city of portsmouth's.

O

Tax assessor maps: this is a lot for 50 lot. 32 of map 102.. You can see that.

O

Unit 1 is the larger property in the upper left hand, corner and unit. Excuse me unit 1,.

O

Right hand corner next slide, please this is an aerial view of the property.

O

uh The red mark is on unit two, which is the main residence owned by the pastrnaks and the.

O

Again, in the lower right hand, corner is unit one which is owned by the thompsons.

O

So, thank you. So thompson's application is supported by the owner's unit to the posternacs.

O

And also by many of their neighbors evidence of that support was submitted.

O

Including a signed petition by a number of portsmouth residents and neighbors in the area.

O

As well as part of the public comments for this record,.

O

uh Given, given the evidence presented, the limited nature of the request for just 57 salter street.

O

The lack of impacts to the water quality for the scatterplot river support from the neighbors.

O

And the hardship that would otherwise be followed, thompson's absolute application.

O

uh We respectfully request that the portsmouth planning board uh favorably recommend to the city.

O

Of portsmouth file, an application for urbanized shoreline exemption for 57, salty street meeting.

O

The special local, local urbanized conditions and again just reiterate that this is a recommendation.

O

For this application by new hampshire des, but I'm happy to answer any questions you.

O

Might have thank you any questions for the attorney. Yes, courtney. Thank you, chairman.

J

Just to clarify I'm just a little confused, so there were two permits um issued by nhdes.

J

In 2019 and 2020 for this work, was it the fact that those permits or the applications.

J

For those permits didn't uh identify this being residential. Is that, where the administrative order.

J

Came from essentially yeah, so there was references to making a residence and the applications it just.

O

Wasn't caught by the es, so our my clients went back to des to actually say hey. Is it permissible.

O

To have a an exhaust for a heater installed from the side of the building des took a look at that.

O

They came back and they noticed that it was being converted to a residence. They then issued a season.

O

Issued a letter, my clients voluntarily ceased immediate activity of the property.

O

They then issued an administrative order in I believe august of last year,.

O

Which we then filed an appeal which is pending before the wetlands council? Okay, so you haven't.

J

Heard from the wetlands council yet actually that appeal is um currently stayed pending. This.

O

Application to the city, okay, with the hope that we could resolve that yep. Any other questions.

K

Is this, do you know is, is this the only the second time one of these has been requested.

K

In portsmouth uh it may not be the second time, but certainly it would be the second time it's granted.

O

If allowed so, the other one that we're aware of is a 99 bow street, uh an exemption.

O

Urbanized shoreline exemption was granted for the property at 99 bow street in 2007.

K

And maybe this is a question for the planning director, but um would uh would the conservation.

K

Commission have any interest or do something like this be under their purview also or I just want to.

K

Know the procedure, so we had a discussion as staff and we discussed with the city attorney about how.

I

To proceed with this, this did not necessarily even need to come to the planning board. It could have.

I

Gone directly to city council and the council was advised to send it to the planning board.

I

um It doesn't fall under their jurisdiction, as you know, um and so we uh worked with that. So I.

I

Think the council was interested in hearing what the planning board had to say. um I would like.

I

To add that it was also important for staff to understand the permitting history and the uh the.

I

Approvals that this had received, we do believe as a staff that the applicant put this in place.

I

In good faith uh was transparent with the city and there's evidence in emails in correspondence.

I

With the state also that they had, while it may not have been discussed or openly declared, it.

I

Certainly was never concealed in their written work, so we do believe they operate in good faith.

I

As they move forward with this project, so I think it was a surprise to them when they were issued.

I

That cease and desist that's my understanding. It was important for staff to understand that.

I

As well so- and we do but yes, it was the council's decision that the planning board should receive it.

C

And you're proposing to move the building five feet back. If you get the.

C

Purpose or granted, so if we get the exemption it's finally granted we're then able to settle.

O

The appeal part of the settlement of the appeal would be an agreement with new hampshire des.

O

To relocate the building, so it's no longer located over the water that would remove it.

O

From jurisdiction under 482a, which prohibits new buildings converted over water by moving it back.

O

We then be able to with the exemptions granted by the shoreline exemption. We then be able to.

O

Maintain the residence at that location and also there's a secondary uh prohibition on the minimum.

O

Shoreland shoreline for two lots to consider the conversion of condominium two, um which is.

O

150 and then by granting that exemption, that would um that would not be an issue either so.

O

But yes, we'd have to come back to you to then relocate the building. The five feet back.

C

Yes, jane, I'm sorry were you gonna say something more. Let me go go ahead. Okay,.

A

I I really am struggling with this just so you know I I'm trying to believe.

A

You know the planning director's comment about all of this is in good faith.

A

But I really looked at this and it seems to me that you're not downsizing. As stated in one of.

A

Your first paragraphs but you're, going from a boat repair house which seems totally appropriate, use.

A

You know on the river that was 600 and something square feet. I I cannot find what the.

A

Square footages of this unit, 57 now that you've downsized what what is it? My clients downstairs.

O

Because they sold that property, I understand it's got to do with 75 salter, but pertinent to.

A

This structure itself you've actually upsized over time, but I can't find to what the square.

A

Footage currently is well, I believe, the square footage of the property as approved would be 600.

O

640 square feet, the the little house is still even though now it's two and a half stories, I believe.

O

I don't know if it's two and a half stories, I believe it's two stories.

A

I sorry I don't understand that, but because the picture of the original boat repair.

A

House compared to what it is now it's it's got, it looks like it has another whole floor on it to me.

O

I believe that it's approximately 640 square feet as currently constituted.

C

I think I think what we're being asked is whether or not we.

C

Make a recommendation of council that this is an urban area for the council to make a.

C

Decision is that well. Is that correct? That's what we're supposed to be discussing, but.

A

I would like to go back to a previous comment about the possibility of the conservation.

A

Commission weighing in on this and it's because of the timing of when these things were.

A

Built expanded and got these additional approvals. I mean it's in a flood zone. It's in a flood plain.

A

That flood plain has been established, since I believe 2005 and yet.

A

In 2018, the structure is being converted to a residential structure, knowing that it's in.

A

A flood plain so I mean I actually have a lot of questions about this. I don't understand why.

A

You'd only move back five feet according to the shoreland protection act of 2007, the new hampshire.

A

Shoreline protection act you're supposed to have at least a 50-foot buffer, if not a 250-foot.

A

Buffer, but I don't know if I you know if we can answer that, but it seems to me like those kinds of.

A

Questions answered by the conservation commission would inform the decision about applying for this.

A

Urbanization, shoreland exemption, there's many aspects to it being on the shoreland.

O

If I might address the floodplain, a floodplain analysis was actually performed.

O

And submitted as part of the, I believe, the 2020 permanent application that was reviewed by.

O

New hampshire des moines, so that was part of the permit application as part of the flood plan.

O

Analysis of risk analysis was submitted as part of that, as part of which application uh permit sorry.

O

A wetlands permit that was granted by des 2020-1252 in july, 2020.

O

There were two separate permanent applications.

O

201901730 and 2020 one two five two, so it was submitted as either I and I it.

O

May have been submitted as the 2019, but it was definitely there was definitely a flood plan analysis submitted as part of that application. Those two permanent applications.

O

And essentially, the request for urbanized conditions is that we're saying that we've.

O

Presented enough evidence for the city to consider the application and forward it to.

O

The state for evaluation, so that the final decision isn't necessarily with the city of.

O

Portsmouth, if it supports our application, it would then forward it to the state.

O

Osi playing division: if osi playing division evaluates it, they then make a recommendation.

O

To the commissioner of def, the es, commissioner, then evaluates it and then makes a recommendation.

O

Yes or no to the governor and council for approval, but this request is for.

A

Us to support that application correct well, actually the city actually has to apply.

A

For us to recommend to the city that we support the application, correct, correct.

A

I personally I have a lot of questions about this, that I don't know that I'm in a position to be.

A

Able to make that recommendation, mr chairman, yes, if I can ask the attorney, can you reiterate for.

I

The board's uh clarification, the position of des that they they would be supportive of the city.

I

Submitting this application to them. Yes, as part of the discussions on the appeal.

O

Des actually recommended that my clients file this application with the city as a means of.

O

Seeking a grant, which is essentially a waiver of the shoreline protection.

O

Requirements so that we can then appeal, settle and resolve that appeal, then move back the building.

O

To resolve the appeal: that's pending with the wetlands council, given that, mr chairman, if it's.

I

Not out of line to do it now, I would recommend that that we recommend that the planning board.

I

Recommends to the city council that um that they submit this application on behalf of the applicant.

C

That it meets the bourbon has arrived criteria under 43a. That sounds good. Second,.

C

Any discussion on that.

C

I can add just briefly: I've done a lot of work on lake unisaki, and I know that.

C

Boat houses up there have had a history, especially his more historic ones, of having residential uses.

C

Over water- and I know of owners have gotten into some very difficult situations with those.

C

And the state is not, does not take these lightly they're. Looking at this very very closely so given.

C

The history, uh if there had been any anything untoward, I think they would have discovered it.

C

And I I don't know that, but I from my experience with other locations, I'd.

C

Feel comfortable with that, so just as a small fyi one.

C

So we have a motion in a second any further discussion. Yes, I'm just going to comment that.

A

I still don't understand why the house would only be moved back five feet. It would be right.

A

On the shore of a big river, that's definitely a fourth degree river or larger, with flooding.

A

Ability in a town that has a 30 year very high risk of flooding.

A

I'm concerned about liability for the city that we in supporting this application.

A

When this does flood that somehow the city will be liable, I'm I'm not in support of us.

A

Making that recommendation to the city council- I just I won't be voting yes for those reasons.

C

That's why they're nine members? Thank you. I think we're ready for a vote.

C

All those in favor aye aye opposed one. I don't know what to say, but I don't I oppose it.

C

You have your recommendation eight to one. Thank you very much.

O

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much now we're gonna take a ten minute break.

K

C

We are back, live.

I

Just want to make take note of the time we're coming up on 10 o'clock. As you know, we're.

C

Supposed to stop at 10 to talk about how much we continue we have on on the agenda.

C

Presentation by our principal planner, nick correct now and a public hearing on some proposed zoning.

C

Amendments I understand the presentation will run 15 to 18 minutes roughly, depending on how much.

C

Feedback we have in as presentation proceeds. So what's the pleasure of the board, shall we continue.

E

I have chocolate now, I'm good okay,.

C

You don't need a motion, just just nodding of heads will do it. Okay, and this is the last.

C

This is the last on the agenda mm-hmm, mr crocodile, give me 18 minutes all right. Thank you. Thank you.

M

Mr chairman, members of the planning board again for the record nick recknell, the principal planner.

M

uh What I'm going to do in the interest of time is just give you a quick overview of the updated.

M

Amendments that are before you, I've got a presentation where I've broken them down into four.

M

Four main parts: so what I'd? What I'd suggest we do is go through each part.

M

Maybe stop for a minute make sure I haven't lost anybody and you could ask any questions.

M

I'm catching my breath from going upstairs uh to get those chocolates so again, what we're trying.

G

To what we're focused on here for the zoning amendments are the building height standards.

M

And trying to provide consistency again across all the character districts, which are primarily.

M

Downtown in the west end uh remove an incorrect reference on the on the building height map.

M

And clarify the intentions of building height on lots where there's cuts and fills next.

M

So there's four parts here: the first one's talking about the building height map itself.

M

Which is essentially a street based building height map, so there is a correlation between.

M

The character, districts and the map, but it's not a one-to-one relationship. You tend to have.

M

Taller buildings in the cd5 than the cd4 and you have lower buildings in the cd4, l1 and l2.

M

So it's not a it's, not a typical dimensional table where you just look up the zoning district and it.

M

Tells you how tall the building could be. You have to look at the building height map itself.

M

And identify what the building height is along the street or a public place adjacent. So then we're.

M

Going to look at the building height standards on corner lots through lots and waterfront lots.

M

That's number two and then talk briefly about adding some development standards. Some dimensional.

M

Controls to the civic properties, those are for the museums and the uh nonprofits that we have uh in.

M

Our character districts as their own, uh their own zone and then lastly, we're going to talk about the.

M

The grading and how building height is measured and in two minutes I'll, maybe get my breath back.

M

Next, please, so the first part is the building height map. So there's three things: we're trying.

M

To do with this map, the map that we have that's existing is is over here thrown in the lower right.

M

There are, you know, take the mic, there are a host and I won't touch the screen.

M

As you can see, if you squint on the map, um there are a lot of yeah all the municipal properties.

M

The civic properties, like the warner house or the parking garage at high hanover, the north.

M

Church they don't have a building height standard around them. We didn't include them on municipal.

M

Properties because they're exempt from zoning- and we didn't do it on the civic properties, because.

M

We figured they weren't going to change we're going to add them in so this map reads easier.

M

And there'll be better context when we're looking at both redevelopment of any municipal property.

M

If it ever happens in the future, but any alterations, we've seen a couple of pr.

M

Properties, the st john's church, with the connector building and there's going to be a new accessory.

M

Building added to the to the warner house that needed dimensional controls and we didn't have.

M

Them because they weren't in the code so we're we're adding those uh as part of the map. The.

M

Building height and then the third part of this presentation is adding dimensional controls.

M

Beyond height to civic districts, we're going to add new streets like foundry place, you can see.

M

Today, foundry place is shown on the map, but it doesn't have a building height because.

M

It wasn't there when we last updated this map on the ground, so we want to assign a building.

M

Height to foundry place, for example, we also want to adjust the building height standards on high.

M

And haven court and I can walk you through in the next couple of slides- why we're doing that next.

M

Is that next oops? Okay? So the last the last slide, I think said existing you go back one. I shouldn't.

M

Have turned around okay: we just went through that. That's the existing building height map. This is.

M

The proposed changes to the map, so all the colors you see on here are the gaps on the preceding map.

M

Which is the existing building height, so you can see the bridge street lot. The worth lot.

M

The municipal lot here going down to the bottom of the high hanover down to the bottom of hanover.

M

We've got the deer street pump station, we have the non-profits of st john's in the warner house.

M

There are all the synagogues here, the langdon house, the south church, the firehouse.

M

John paul jones, the old library and then here's the new street foundry place where we're proposing.

M

On both sides of it that it be the the brown line, the two to four stories 50 feet. It's also.

M

In the incentive overlay district, which we're not changing here, which allows anybody inside that.

M

Incentive based overlay district, which you cannot see on this map, but it's generally in this area.

M

People there can provide those incentives to the city in order to get ten more feet or one story.

M

On top of the 50 feet or four stories, if they're brown, so that's what we're proposing on foundry.

M

Place the the buildings currently that have been approved for what's been known as lot lot, 3.

M

And lot 6 from dsa they've both been approved. They both have active permits. They haven't.

M

Started construction but there are foundation permits issued they're vested in our opinion,.

M

And you'll notice uh in the existing uh plan, the existing building height map, the line along hill.

M

Street on the back of lot, six, which again here's lot six, I think I have a close-up so maybe I'll.

M

Stop and wait for that. uh It's currently brown, so we're we're talking about making an adjustment.

M

That we discussed here in our work session a couple of weeks ago, was that two weeks or one week.

M

I'm losing track of time. Okay, there's a bunch of uh lines being added up along the dennet street.

M

Neighborhood, these are basically properties that have a building height along maplewood.

M

Ave and dennett street, but they don't have it on the side street and anywhere there's.

M

A street or a public place uh that is like an alleyway like commercial alley or haven court.

M

We want to have a building height designation on it, so when somebody goes and does something to the.

M

Property, they know how to how to deal with it. Okay, we'll go next examples boundary place. I knew I had.

M

It so that's the parking garage foundry place, the uh the roundabout at the bottom or the cul-de-sac.

M

uh Here's hill street hill street goes up. It's a very narrow street.

M

It's actually private through here, where it's owned by both parties on each side of hill street.

M

We made that deliberately brown back in 2014, 15 or 16 when this was adopted. The north end.

M

uh Character, districts- and we did that, so this property would actually have a building height.

M

Associated with it, because foundry place didn't exist, so what we're trying to do now is is.

M

Put the lines on foundry place and then take another pass at: what's the appropriate building.

M

Height against this neighborhood on hanover street, so that's the existing condition. Let's.

M

Go to the next slide, there's what the existing map looks. Like apologies. It's.

M

It's kind of blurry, but this is a zoom in of what you saw at the beginning, foundry place the garage.

M

This is ferguson, the uh the plumbing shop or I think it is right plumbing uh and then.

M

These are the the two-story multi-family's a three-story and that's heinemann. So there's the.

M

Brown line that comes down to your street, so the hotel that isn't built yet that sits on lot three.

M

Already uses the brown line, we're not changing that the lot six that uh that uses this brown.

M

Line we'll use the brown line on the bottom with the next slide, you'll see the proposed.

M

These may not look as brown as they should, but those are brown lines that come down with the.

M

Two to four stories again they're in the overlay: uh we reduce it peter hackney's, the only one. This.

M

Property here that's impacted by the different color at the end and we've stepped it down 10 feet.

M

So this is a 40-foot district. This is 50. Both of them can go up, 10 feet with the with the incentive.

M

Overlay uh as now written so essentially these are 60-foot buildings, and these are theoretically 50.

M

And what we're proposing, at least as part of our conversation last meeting, is that we lower.

M

To better texture in the buildings that are going to fill this space, where ferguson is that won't be.

M

There forever that single story plumbing shop- these are intended to be taller buildings to.

M

Create a fairly urban neighborhood along foundry place and clearly they need to transition as best.

M

We can do that into a very low-scale neighborhood up on hill street autumn and then hanover.

M

So what is being at least proposed for conversation purposes is changing this brown to.

M

Green when the brown again is 50 feet, the green is 40., but again you can get 10 feet. On top of that,.

M

Both for ferguson and lot 6., so it's actually 50 foot buildings, where the the typical height.

M

Over here is well under 30 feet of the existing historic structures. So what I've told a couple of.

M

People that have called about this line, including neighbors in the neighborhood, if the intention.

M

Is to tear all this down and build it up taller then maybe this line is good as green at 50 feet.

M

But I see that still as a placeholder, because the community has not weighed in on what it wants to.

M

Do in respect to this corridor over here, so this is again a step in the right direction, but it may.

M

Not be the final step until we do a visioning exercise to figure out what to do with this.

M

Fabric over time, right now, you know nothing has changed here other than we're stepping.

M

Down 10 feet along hill street, so we'll go next example 2. This is the high street haven court.

M

Part of the proposal to change the map you'll, so this is the existing conditions. Most of us were.

M

Here today, the parking garage, here's high street haven court, there's the parking lot that went.

M

With rudy's, it's currently all in consolidated ownership uh and the we'll go to the next map.

M

You'll see the next image you'll see the parking garage is apparent. It is approximately 45 feet in.

M

The vicinity of where we walked up haven court, where, where it's almost four stories, parking on.

M

The roof and we're at about 45 feet to here all the way back, the pierce block, all the way back to.

M

The parking garage this building is is uh the same height here. The first building at one congress and.

M

Then they stepped down as you get into the wood frame, the brick and then the wood frame.

M

So, let's go to the next map to see what actually is on the map. Today, the existing building heights.

M

The orange on congress, here's market square, the north church, high high street and haven court.

M

When we did this remember, we did 52 acres and 450 properties when we did this initial a pass for.

M

Just the downtown, not the north end of the west end. So I say that because people have to realize.

M

It's it's not perfect what we did in 2015, and I I think this is an example where maybe more thought.

M

Could have gone into the into the haven court, this parking lot that we knew was vacant at the time.

M

Clearly, everything out here corresponds to a fairly high degree to the 45 foot height. That.

M

The orange represents, so it's a three story with a short fourth and a short fourth, you probably.

M

Heard that now a few times from the applicant, a short fourth is a is a fourth floor. That is.

M

No taller than 80 percent of the floor below it. Typically, what you see it like at starbucks.

M

The top floor and that four-story building is compressed, it's federal style, sort of architecture.

M

So we we allow it's basically a three-story, what they're proposing with a pitched roof.

M

You could I'm not even sure it isn't a three and a half story. Building that we've seen before you.

M

And the hdc again in concept, but what's being proposed here, is that this green line, which is.

M

40 feet versus 45, when everything here is 45 on the ground, there's really not a rationale.

M

For that to be 40 instead of 45. that that's how I feel about it, it could go either way.

M

Clearly, what the applicant's trying to do here is link all of these buildings together to provide.

M

Internal access: well, they can't do it with 40 feet. They need 45 to make them all match up the front.

M

To the back, I don't I don't personally see that as a problem and I think at the end of the day,.

M

Regardless of what any of us think about the style of the building, that's not what this.

M

Is about this is about the scale of the building, not the design of the building.

M

If you like it or don't like it, the hdc is going to determine what that building looks like.

M

Not any other board or staff member in the city, it's it's squarely in their jurisdiction. So this.

M

Is really about? Do we add five feet to that area to make it commensurate with the parking garage.

M

And what's around it and next slide I'll show you the proposal it's to do just that, we're adding in.

M

The building height- it's already- it's green right now going down here on this side. The reason this.

M

Is green is because it's new it's on the garage and then the orange would be across from this lot.

M

And again, that's only a five foot increase. It's up to my nose to the to the floor. It's it's! It's yes!.

A

Hey nick, didn't you didn't, you say that the garage is four stories.

M

The garage is four stories in in this area. I mean the garage exists, it's grandfathered. There are.

M

Buildings all over the downtown that don't meet this map that are already on the ground so but.

A

Actually, this this property is squeezed in between 45 feet and 40 right this property here yeah this.

M

Property is surrounded by 45 foot buildings, with the exception of the two that we saw on the back.

M

This is 45 this this is 45. This is not these lower buildings that we were looking at. Looking.

M

Down here, but this is all essentially 45 feet, so it's it so the uh again I I swear to you.

M

If it's 40 or 45, when you're in that space, no discernible difference, it's how they finish the.

M

Top of the building that's going and the ground floor, the ground floor will have the biggest.

M

Impact on a pedestrian, whether that's two, three or four stories is the least important for us.

M

You're not going to see over it if it's more than a story, so there's no views in that narrow.

M

Corridor to see that steeple with something in there it's impossible. I touched it um sorry so.

M

It's really about what the ground floor, what what they do with that ground floor.

M

In terms of penetrations and activity levels, that's going to make or break haven court.

M

And that's why I don't think this five foot uh addition is worth having.

M

You know a lot of pain and suffering over. It's really inconsequential to getting the building.

M

Design correct and that's for the htc to do, and I encourage any one of you to participate in in.

M

The community, with the htc's review a bit to make sure people are satisfied with how it's finished.

M

But that's all we're talking about here. Five feet, difference between green and orange. That's it can.

A

I just ask one of the questions I don't know if I can or not, but I'm going to um unless somebody.

A

Tells me I can't um when you say you tested that view corridor. How would you do that? What do you.

M

Mean test, I don't think I said I tested it, but I may have implied it. So what? What do you mean.

A

Well, I thought that you actually said that you know that you looked at.

A

Different heights of a building that went all the way back to the garage and that from that.

A

View corridor: you could not improve the view of to the north church yeah, so I didn't quite say it.

M

That way, but that's in fact the conclusion, so I'm going to reiterate what I think I said, which is.

M

Exactly the same outcome as what you thought, I said you build anything in here over a story.

M

You're not going to get inside that 20-foot corridor and see over even a single 12 to 14 foot.

M

You can't even do a single two is the minimum. So we are, I guarantee you, you put a building in two.

M

Stories high, which is uh three quarters of the way up that wall and you get in a twenty foot corridor.

M

Which which I'm basically now my back, is to the parking garage I'm not seeing over that two-story.

M

Form and it isn't going to ever be two stories. It's allowed right now to be three and a half.

M

Which is another 16 feet on top of it with a pitched roof, because everybody's doing a.

M

Pitched roof of mansard or because they can go to the midpoint of the roof. So now you've got a.

M

35 foot building as of right, we could walk away from this tonight say: leave it green.

M

You've got a 35 foot building there you've got a 40-foot building, that's going to have a high point.

M

Of 45 feet just not on the edge of the building, because it'll be a pitched roof fully compliant.

M

With the code, you will never see anything over that you'll be lucky to see the stars at the.

C

Pedestrian scale there'll be no difference with this proposed change. The you have a deflected view.

C

Of the north church, which is what we call it from an urban design perspective, you see it, you don't.

C

See straight onto the steeple down high street, you see the side of it a little bit, but with.

C

The existing map that's been in place for seven or eight years. There will be a building on that.

C

Corner that would prevent a view from haven court, so the change is to make it consistent with. What's.

C

On the other side of high street, that's the right and it's it's it's not it's not something that can.

C

Be perceived at the pedestrian scale, so is there another you want to go into the next one sure.

M

What's the next one here, I think I have a third example next, yes, so this is an example of the.

M

Municipal properties, the civic being the north church, the little former bathroom that's a park.

M

At the corner of porter and church, the the south church that again langdon house synagogue. So if.

M

We go to the next slide. The existing we'll show you the gaps, they're not actually uh identified.

M

This is an out parcel with a house on it, so you've got gaps all over the map for civic and municipal.

M

Properties and we're simply proposing to fill in those gaps with the next slide.

M

Showing these pieces being built in and and rubber sheeting them on to the surrounding.

M

Contacts, so these are all blue. These are blue. These are green because that's green.

M

uh So that that's the idea with the third part of the zoning map uh changes is to address the.

M

Municipal and civic properties, next, the fourth and final component of the of the map is fixing this.

M

Footnote that's referenced for probably six years uh 5a47. There isn't such a thing. It's actually 46.

M

So that the next slide shows the the remedy, pretty simple: uh it's really a scrivener error.

M

But we're in here, let's fix it, so those are the four I think the next slide we might as well go.

M

To it to make sure I'm right yeah now now I get into the other components. Are there any.

M

Other questions related to the map changes that that I just went through and we can come back to.

M

Them, but are there any before I move on to the next part just quickly your maps were a little.

C

Bit different than what was in our packet say it again, your maps look to be a little.

C

Bit different than what was in our packet, yeah and I'll I'll I can do you want to do that now.

C

I just wanted to just you: don't have to, can you hold that and then I'll come back to it at the end.

M

Reminding me we're we're well into uh 18. Well, the 18 includes it excludes your interruptions.

M

So 2a- and this is a simple one- what we're just trying to do here as a sort of preamble to the.

M

Building height standards is make it clear to the reader that the hdc has jurisdiction over.

M

The maximum building height within the historic district. So just because you can theoretically.

M

Do a 50 or 60 foot building if it doesn't fit the context, the hdc has the authorization to.

M

Require that to be lower, so it's just stating that so people aren't surprised in the process.

M

Not every building that gets built in the historic district is at the absolute maximum height.

M

Sometimes they aren't because they aren't the right fit for the property within the context.

M

Of the surrounding neighborhood, so the next slide just shows the change of adding in this sort of.

M

Disclaimer, this uh notice that when you're in the historic district, you just need to be aware.

M

You may not get the maximum from the commission you're not going to get less than the lower range.

M

But you won't get more than the maximum. Let's go to the next 2b so for corner or through lots or.

M

Waterfront lots there's been as as a result of one congress street and and those guys merging lots.

M

There's been an internal debate as to what the existing code says and how you treat the maximum.

M

Building height and how you allocate that across multiple streets, so I'll show you an example of.

M

What I'm, what it means, let's go to next! Well, the the language we're proposing to do is some word.

M

Smithing to make sure that the building height standard along a front lot line on a street or.

M

A public place and we've got a new definition in here for public place that didn't exist.

M

uh But it's ore, it's a street or a public place. She'll apply to the portion of the lot. That's 50.

M

Feet or less I've got examples of what that means. The rest of these go through well, if you're near a.

M

Water body- this is what you do if you're more than 50 feet from a this, is water body. Again, these all.

M

Relate to lots that have building heights on more than one side of the lot. So the examples I think.

M

Will make it clearer than trying to go through each each line there? Next? So, where am I where I'm.

M

On uh hanover ottoman hill streets, this is just an example, so this is these three double deckers.

M

With 12 units are actually owned by one person and so that's the side. The shape of the lot is in red.

M

Let's go to the next slide. The current building height standards are the 50 feet there and the.

M

40 feet here, so the the person comes in to staff and says well how's that work. You know how how.

M

Do I can I bring the 50 over here because I'm 50 there? Well, you can't the the preceding page.

M

With those four separate sections, tell you how you allocate a taller building height or a.

M

Shorter building height across that real estate across that lot, so let's go to the next slide.

M

So this is how it would work on this property today. If this is three stories or forty feet on.

M

These two streets, you have to maintain that that height, you can't exceed it. If you're the owner.

M

Within 50 feet of those green lines, so this this brown line it, which is the taller of the two.

M

Colors, it can actually, the owner can only achieve four stories or 50 feet inside this smaller box.

M

So that's an example of of how it would work on this property. You you a portion otherwise.

M

You've got to have a means to determine where the dividing line is between one street and another.

M

Let's just go to the next example of the high hanover high high street and haven court. This is.

M

Next next slide: whoa, that's not very good! Well, this is the consolidated lot. I don't know what.

M

Happened here I apologize, but this is the lot with one congress added in there's two two or more lots.

M

That are merged here, and they have the orange line here and the green line there. We're back to this.

M

Conversation about 40 feet and 45. so go to the next slide. Hopefully it looks better nope not much.

M

The only place that this owner, in our opinion, using the abcd.

M

That were on that preceding sheet within 50 feet of that green. It has to stay.

M

No taller than 40 feet or three stories the only place, the taller portion of the property.

M

Can bleed into the shorter is 50 feet away from the streets? Does that make sense? What.

M

What at least it says whether it makes sense on the ground? That's another thing.

M

But that right now we're protecting the reason it does. This is to protect what, wherever you are hi.

M

Hi uh hi, uh sorry hill autumn or hanover street. In the previous example, when there's a lower building.

M

Height next to a tall one, the idea is to not have the tall one go over. Imagine state street and.

M

Chief street you've got a taller taller buildings on state street. You wouldn't want them to just.

M

Plunk their way onto onto chief street, which is a much shorter context, but most of those lots.

M

Go from one street to the next, so we we require the first 50 feet on chief street, which is lower.

M

To be maintained, as you come towards state, it's imperfect believe me this. This number is probably.

M

A little big, the 50., uh but that's what it is right now. I think we need to explore in the future.

M

Reducing uh this step back because it's it's a long way from the street edge you'll, never see.

M

That building this far away from any street and 25 feet would probably be adequate, but.

M

I didn't change it, I'm just telling you what it says today.

M

Okay, next quick question: good, that's the end of that part part two! um You had at some point you.

J

Discussed 25 feet, I did when I went to the city council and I or when I came back here and I had.

M

25 in one place and 50 still in another sticking with 50. yeah yeah I mean 25 makes sense to me.

M

But I just tried not to bite off more than I get you which I probably haven't achieved.

M

Okay for now for now, uh okay, so I'm gonna run into part three, uh this one's real, quick, so we'll be.

M

In part, four real fast, this is again applying dimensional standards to civic properties. Next.

M

So you, those are what they look like. So all it's doing in the existing language.

M

Which is black is referring to the building placement and form standards for the cd4.

M

uh District for civic properties, so it creates setbacks.

M

Footprints, it doesn't have all the dimensional controls that go with every property. That's in the cd4 or five.

M

It's only building placement and standards, but it would allow the the owners of civic.

M

Properties to make alterations or additions and know what they have for dimensional controls.

M

Because now we have none. Okay, I have an example. uh So should have come here. I wouldn't have lost my.

M

Train of thought, so you have your your front: yard setbacks. Your sides, your rear, anything in the red.

M

Box is what is referred to it doesn't get into. You know what your ground floor, use your open space.

M

Your facade modulation length, those are not picked up for the civic districts. It's just dimensional.

M

Controls for the the height of the building is is picked up with the map, the roof types and then how.

M

Accessory buildings get placed the warner house, as I said, came in and wanted to rebuild a outbuilding.

M

And accessory building that used to be there a long time ago, they did go to the board of appeals.

M

And then the hdc, and it would have been better if we had dimensional controls in here, because what.

M

They were doing was innocuous and good for the the property, the program and the neighborhood next.

M

This is, this is the building footprint that they are yet to build, but that's where they're.

M

Planning to put the building so it's an example of uh just like the church next door joining the.

M

Rectory to the church, where we need dimensional controls. Okay, I think we're done with three.

M

Any questions on the civic piece- all right, there'll, be questions here. um So this is the last.

M

Section it's it's split into four, a I think in b. I don't think there's a c, but we wanted. We want to.

M

Define public places because we we didn't when we did the the initial zoning we want to.

M

Clarify the front lot line to again deal with this congress street problem. We ran into in respect to.

M

Merging lots and then bringing the higher building height further into a lower building height area.

M

And preventing that and then we want to modify the building height measurement requirements so.

M

We'll go first next public place things like the community space that goes into the brick market.

M

Vaughn mall is a public place. It's it's actually, not a street. It's not vehicular uh commercial.

M

Alley so these are examples of public places where we have building height allocations. The.

M

Vaughn mall on both sides has a building height requirement. It needs to be referenced in the code.

M

That these are public places that have building heights on the map. Not every public place has a.

M

Building height, unless it's on a street. So if you have a landlocked something like that, the j smith.

M

Park does have one along state street, but you're not going to find one on any of the other sides of.

M

It so if you're next to it, there's no building height, it's only on the front uh street level.

M

Okay, commercial alley has it going in on both sides? Okay, we'll go the next slide.

M

So again, wordsmithing to make clear what we've been doing for seven years, which is not letting.

M

Somebody bring a taller building height into a short neighborhood. That's what we've been doing.

M

For seven years so congress street that project, they challenged us to say well what it says.

M

On there, without your modified text, we don't agree, equals what you've been doing for seven.

M

Years we think we can bring the tall building all the way into that parking lot. We disagree. This is.

M

Going to firm up our position for the last seven years, that's the intent. Hopefully it does that.

M

But we're trying to make sure it's very clear that the building height is is clear when it's on.

M

Multiple streets corner lot through lot; waterfront lot that there's a principal front yard that that.

M

It deals with the address, but all those street frontages, they matter haven, court matters, high.

M

Street matters congress street matters- you can't just take the tall one and push it to the back.

M

So those are those three buildings actually that were up on autumn hill and hanover.

M

Let's go to the next slide because I think that's where I went back to that.

M

Example, this is the same one as before. This is how you allocate it across multiple streets.

M

Again, it's imperfect. It would be weird to have a building here with three stories here and four.

M

Stories there, someone could do it, they probably wouldn't. The whole thing would probably be three.

M

Stories or three and a half, but that's how that the code currently works, we're not changing it.

M

It's just an example: we're tightening the language, so we can continue to do it. The way we're doing.

M

And these are the 50 foot setbacks so like I said they could easily be 25 and you you'd get a.

M

You get the same effect on the sidewalk or the or the streetscape. Next.

M

Okay 4b: this is.

M

Okay, the measuring the the building height. So we came in here at the work session and our initial.

M

Draft was trying to deal with backfilling people, basically building the first story on the ground.

M

And then backfilling it making it a basement and then having only a three-story building. But the.

M

The existing grade or the prior grade before this project was done, was down here and was down here.

M

So what we end up getting if you're in the neighborhood it doesn't mean in every instance.

M

The outcome is bad, but people didn't adopt the zoning expecting this to be able to be done so.

M

Easily these are all outside the historic district. So there isn't that paragraph that we can use.

M

To drive it down, these are all as of right heights. So what we had at our work session, a.

M

Couple of weeks ago was, I think, a remedy of going from the finished grade back to the existing grade.

M

To prevent uh as much filling as we're seeing on some of these lots. But the question that.

M

Came up that was an excellent one from a couple of planning board. Members was: how are you going.

M

To deal with cuts not fills, so if you've got a property with a hill on it and you lock the hill.

M

Off, if you're going to go with the existing grade, now they can build. You know a story or two higher.

M

Just because they've got credit for what they removed. So I spent way more time than I thought.

M

Needed to come up with a remedy, you haven't even seen it yet because I couldn't get it when.

M

The packet went out, but I'm going to just walk you through it and we're starting a conversation.

M

Whether we're at the finish line or not you'll determine that next. So this was what I presented.

M

Two weeks ago is a new definition for the existing grade, which is essentially the exact same.

M

Definition of the existing finished grade this grade plane. Everything in black is already in the.

M

Zoning ordinance and it means finished grade. This is finished, finished ground level. So this.

M

Is how building height is currently measured in in portsmouth? You take the finish grade.

M

So whatever you start with, doesn't matter it's what you finish with and you go around the.

M

Building every five feet: six feet off: you take a measurement to the top of the building depending.

M

On the roof type, if it's flat gambrell pitch mansard, they all have different measurement points.

M

You take your measurements every five feet around. You average them up. You get an average grade plane.

M

That's this. This allows you to bring in phil to raise your grade, so we added a definition.

M

For existing simply to say, hey, it's the same thing, except instead of starting going to finish, you're.

M

At existing so go to the next slide, so that was here last meeting. The difference between last.

M

Meeting and this meeting is essentially these two lines here- the a and the b.

M

So we've got a lower reference, so you got to measure the height of the building and I just told.

M

You how it works, you got to find the lower spot and you got to find the upper spot. The upper spots.

M

Depending on the type of roof, you've got flat, sloped mansard gambrell, the lower is going to.

M

Be either the existing grade before you start your project or the finished grade? When you finish your.

M

Project, whichever is lower, so if you cut you, don't get a credit. If you fill uh you don't get a credit.

M

um So you've got a parallel plane that that engineer has to go around that building every.

M

Five feet six feet off: take a measurement and determine whether the lower reference point is the.

M

Prior grade or the proposed grade, and whichever is lower, is what goes into that ultimate average.

M

So that's essentially what I came up with looking at a lot of codes and some of them are far.

M

More complicated than this far more complicated, that's that probably do a better job and catch 99.

M

Of of unintended outcomes, but I think this.

M

Hopefully, will get us into the 90s well we're now below 50, uh because we're stuck with the finished.

M

uh Being the way it's it's derived, so that's that's the big change and I'm not sure I've got it.

M

Fully right but you're going to tell me- and maybe we need more time- let's go to the next slide.

M

So again, if you, if you have a site, that's sloped, and this is cut out or in another example. This.

M

Is filled with a retaining wall, the building height is going to come along the prior. The.

M

The finished grade is here because they're getting rid of all this earth and building a wall.

M

So the numbers, instead of being up at the existing grade or the prior grade they're, going to come.

M

Along here like this, and instead of going along here, sorry they're going to go down along the.

M

The lower, which is the existing so that reference point the lower reference point would be like that.

M

On this particular piece of land- um okay- well, let's there, there are a lot of graphics.

M

Online and I struggle to find one quickly, while you were in your fourth agenda item tonight and.

M

This is the best I could come up with um next okay, so I'm moving away from that from do. We want to.

M

Ask any questions on the building height measurement before I just talk about mansards.

M

Which I think it's a it's, it's a there's, pretty technical stuff. um Does anybody have any questions.

M

Yeah, it doesn't mean I got it right, yeah you I I get, you need we're we're really pushing that.

C

15 minutes: oh okay, how many more slides you got nick, not many, but you know um how many look it.

E

Was 11 20 when I got here last time, I'm almost done. I'm going to cut you off before 11 20., okay,.

M

So this is, this is not important uh the mansard roofs. We just want to clarify that when you have.

M

I went through this last time. There's no change here, except to be clear that when you have a hip.

M

Hop mansard roof, which has multiple roof planes like this one. You don't measure to the top of the.

M

Roof you measure to the midpoint- and this will make it consistent with the next slide, which is.

M

What's already in our code right here and you measure a hip top mansard to the midpoint and a.

M

Flat top you measure to the top so again we're just we're trying to be consistent and and.

M

uh Encourage these kinds of roofs and discourage these kinds of rupees.

M

This is new. uh Well, I was in here doing all this mind, numbing uh thinking about how do I resolve.

M

Cuts and fills it just kept coming back to me that you know the hdc every other project struggles as.

M

Does the design team representing the builder that right now, you can only have a parapet wall.

M

Be two feet higher than the roof, uh and we've got generally large buildings that get built.

M

In portsmouth, but certainly the north end, they're bigger than the traditional smaller.

M

Buildings- and that is what it is- that's the the economics of the of the situation.

M

But two feet does not allow you to take a long building and articulate that roof line very well.

M

If you've got like a hotel with an entrance or you've got an office building with a big.

M

Entrance normally, you would see in the first 300 years of our architectural tradition, you'd see.

M

A bump up where the main entrance to the building is or the middle of the building. You can't do that.

M

Here, without a variance and that tower, you saw on the provident bank on maplewood that actually.

M

Houses about eight condenser units inside it, they needed a variance to do that and we'd I'd like to.

M

Think we could come up with a taller feature to go on the buildings in a very discrete area, without.

M

Sending somebody people don't want flat buildings in portsmouth, well we're getting flat buildings.

M

We could make them a little less flat if we had the ability to to poke up above the roof with.

M

Either a tower element like the provident or a taller parapet wall like the athenium, which.

M

Has the swooping wall so anyway that I put that in there for food for thought. I guess.

M

I think it's a good idea, but that came from me next examples. This is this is the best they can do.

M

That's about a two foot parapet and it's not horrible, but it's all they can do.

M

There's you know, and I'm not saying this is the taj mahal, but that that was a feature to a skyline.

M

Feature for that building and it needed variances to be there. Okay! Next, these are other. You know.

M

It'd be kind of cool to be able to do something like that or a taller parapet, or you know what was.

M

Traditionally done, you can't do that now, it's too tall above the flat roof! Okay! Next, hey! I'm done.

M

Speechless, huh that's one word for it.

C

I'll be up here, ask you a question yeah in in very short order. uh Have we, as the city utilized.

H

Shadow studies or massing studies to determine some of those height, descript yeah indifferences.

H

No, do we think that maybe we can start utilizing them. We use shadow studies to review new buildings.

M

But we don't use them, we didn't use them in 2015 to develop the map.

M

So there there really wouldn't be unless you wanted to go through and redo the whole map. No.

M

I'm not saying you're suggesting that, but we the place you want to use the the shadow studies is.

M

When somebody wants to build something, there's no point in doing it for stuff that already exists.

M

And we do use it, we have a 3d massing model and it has we. We take graphics files from.

M

Design team, we insert them into the city model and then the city model has the ability to do the.

M

The shadow studies throughout the whole year so that that's the value added the new stuff.

H

Reason being is uh not only the haven, court and and congress street building, but also now the.

H

Cabinet house and some other buildings that are in this downtown corridor uh as they are abutting.

H

Pedestrian alleyways and we want pedestrians to use those throughout the entire day. Sometimes.

H

Shadows and lack of sunlight would prevent or preclude people from being able to do that.

H

Shadow study would tell us ahead of time. Hey. Maybe this five feet does make a difference, or maybe it.

H

Does not, and so we don't know, I don't know that personally, but nonetheless it may give us another.

H

Utility and resource tool in our tool belts here to uh make better informed decisions, and we have.

M

That tool and we use that tool and that project as well as any others not only is the applicant.

M

Doing shadow studies we have the ability to do it ourselves and compare our data with theirs.

C

We asked about that or I asked about at the last meeting, but it's not a simple thing which isn't.

C

To doing 3d massing, which is a preamble to doing a shadow study, what's not simple, though, did you.

C

Get the 3d masking we talked about that, you said it was dpw had to do it and it was oh.

M

It's well, I don't know, I don't remember saying it was really difficult. The the jamie in the.

M

Public works department, does it uh the htc will say to somebody like mark mcnabb. We want to get.

M

Your graphics file and put it in the city engine software jamie can do that relatively fast. He does.

M

It regularly he's never complained, uh I I'd say I think. Maybe what I said to you rick is. We need.

M

To be more diligent, both in my department and meaning me and the hdc to ask for it more until.

M

We get it to jamie and not wait too late in the process to get that data file and then decisions.

M

Have been made, but that's more on me and the hdc and more me than them to get that working better.

M

But it's all those graphics files everybody's using at least sketchup and that works. So it's.

M

Not hard to get the data in it's it's asking, for it reason I bring it up in particular, is.

H

Due to the green lines and brown lines are great, but only tell me so much and having additional.

H

Dimension or perception to those models would be very, very helpful, yep really hard to see and what.

M

I can tell you: is the height of every building: that's out there, we have a database. I can't do.

H

It standing here, but I have a database and that you can so so give me a break. That's helpful. Come.

M

On over peter I'll, tell you we've got, I mean this: is we have a public hearing tonight, so I'm yep, but.

C

What you presented, some of what you presented is some fairly technical definitions and whatnot.

C

And you have three engineers an architect, at least in the developer, and you know a lot of expertise.

C

Up here, I'm not sure if everybody I didn't absorb all of it, I'm still thinking about some of it. I.

C

Don't know if everybody else is really comfortable with it, yet um we are good yeah. I suspect you are.

C

You've been living with this no, but I'm good, there's no urgency if people need time to.

M

Review this yeah yeah, that's what I meant to say: that's where I was going yeah. Can I make a motion.

K

Or do we have to wait till after the public hearing so uh but we have any more questions.

C

For nick real, quick, so nick, I thought I had this figured out. What is your intent when we do the.

J

Building height a flat plane like a flat like currently, you know the current um finish grade.

J

It's a flat plane, that's basically being calculated and then you add another flat plane.

J

Is it the way when you, when you described when you had the drawing, could we have a plane like this.

J

And then come up 50 feet or whatever to a plane, still going to be a flat plane going around the.

M

Building five feet off and taking the measurements of either from existing or proposed grade. I.

C

Had the same three points: to determine a plane, multiple points, six feet around the building on.

C

A variable height, don't determine a plane, they determine multiple planes. So that's something.

C

Else I wanted to, oh, you add them up an average. You get a flat plane right. I guess that's yeah! Well,.

C

Let's talk about it, I think okay, I don't want to do it at 10, 35.

C

Yeah and that's fine too, I just I didn't know if it was going to influence. That's how we do it now.

J

Yes- and I just was curious- that we sticking with the flat or always tilting things.

G

Is way past 10 18., any yeah strange. I think my question is actually of you.

A

And I apologize everybody because you know I missed the may 5th session, but I just want to.

A

Understand the purpose of this, like I understand, nick, that you said that the paraben part is your.

A

Origination other than that part, where is where? What is the rationale for doing this?.

A

Because I see that we're only looking at a certain proposed areas of building height.

A

In looking at this, we're not like looking at the whole city. So what? What is the rationale.

A

Why are we doing this limited exercise um and how is it part of a bigger strategy.

E

You want me to take it I'll fill in a few, so land use committee came up with three different phases.

E

Of different zoning we're going to be looking at at different times, this is phase one which.

E

Is strictly some code cleanup unintended consequences, the things that have happened.

E

Over the last handful of years, these things have come up, so we are now cleaning up the code so that.

E

Those definitions are clear, so people aren't so we're. As he talked about you know, the 50 foot.

E

Back the two streets, we're getting people who are interpreting that in ways we didn't intend them to.

E

Do so so we're cleaning up the language to make sure things are interpreted the way we intended.

E

Them to be done so this is what we consider a true code cleanup that there are things.

E

That people are interpreting things to be that wasn't what we intended it to be so.

E

We're trying to make sure we properly define we're trying to make sure that grade and.

E

Measurements are all properly defined so that, from a legal standpoint, everything is properly handled.

E

That's all this is that's why it's so finite to some specific areas in order to make sure that.

E

We're hitting the things that have come up through several applications over many years, shall we say.

E

The second phase: we have multiple phases, so the other phases will start to look at.

E

Some of the other stuff throughout the year, but this is just the initial one, which is.

E

Truly just trying to make things more clear and extremely well defined, so that they're.

E

Getting rid of a loophole you think of that in the law you know people find loopholes.

E

We're trying to get rid of what people might see as a loophole in some of our measurements.

E

Our grades, that sort of thing does that help and to make subsequent phases that come forward.

I

More effective and to achieve the desired result subsequent phases. The map has some missing parts.

A

Because when I look at this, I I thank you. I appreciate that as like a background here, but.

A

When I look at this and I think about a strategy forward, that the planning board.

A

Might be very interested in my question is okay, like we have, you know the four stories as you.

A

Were pointing out that makes them candidates for fifth stories in the overlay districts.

A

And we will probably for which we will probably get common space, because no one seems to elect.

A

Affordable housing or workforce housing, so I would like to see on top of this, I don't.

A

I'm just going to say this: I don't know if this is the moment or whatever, but in terms of the.

A

Strategy going forward to really look at what we got for the five-story buildings.

A

That we have like, in other words, have your I'm going to say. 3D version of this, along with.

A

For those buildings that are five stories, how much the city actually got so we can see, is this.

A

Strategy working or do we want to maybe like take another look at this in terms of planning.

M

So I could just quickly respond to that. I did a presentation in front of the.

M

Former city council, I think in november of that very same topic and can send you.

M

I'll dig it out, um I would love it yeah well, and the incentives part is part of phase three.

E

That we're looking at in a handful of the phase, three that's written in the five point. Okay got it.

M

And just to summarize, it's all stages, it's primarily procedural cleanups and the four.

M

Substantive changes that I see in this first packet are the map change to hill street, because.

M

We're changing it from 50 to 40 and high and and haven. That's a substantive change right.

M

It's not just a cleanup, it's a substantive change. So there's two map changes changing.

M

How we calculate or measure building height is a substantive change that affects the whole city.

M

And then the parapet thing I added in is a substantive change uh which can stay or go, but.

H

Everything else is pretty minor, um meaning it's a cleanup right, not unimportant. Question.

K

The agenda says: hold a public hearing and consider a recommendation to city council.

K

This is a half-baked cake. We can't recommend to city council tonight that we wouldn't even.

K

Consider it and I'll make a motion that we don't, but what's our what's our goal right now.

C

We have to make recommendations um to counsel that recommendations could be more study. Those.

C

Recommendations could be, we need to think about things more or it can be that we need.

C

To think about things before we make those recommendations exactly so that will be my.

K

Motion after our hearing, but we have to have a public hearing all right, so uh is the board.

C

Ready for public hearing I'm going to open the public hearing. Thank you thanks nick thank you.

C

Nick, yes, thank you. Thank you nick. Thank you. Members of the public here speak to her against us.

P

Hi, I'm kim rogers, I'm with gl rogers and company inc. We manage.

P

Foundry place llc and deer street associates, I'm also a resident live at 579 sagamore.

P

We put together, we just heard about this zoning and thought it was further, along than it is.

P

We put together a letter um sort of addressing some of our concerns because we have a.

P

Development uh proposed development that has had site plan approval, amended site plan approval and.

P

Has a permit um and this the changes in zoning, especially on hill street, uh affect that project.

P

So if you know mine, I'm just I got 10 copies here. You guys already have it all right, great.

P

P

So two things I want to talk about: one is uh hill street and I'll. Try to keep this brief letter.

P

Says lot I just want to cover a couple of things and if you go to page two of that is two photos.

P

And you're familiar with autumn street, it's sort of on the corner of the three four plexes, and this.

P

Is a photograph of the garage on a somewhat foggy evening? So sorry it's blurry, but that's just the.

P

Way, it was, and, and so you can see, this is a fairly imposing structure. You got the stair tower and.

P

You got the lights on the top of the garage, it actually lights up the neighborhood pretty good.

P

And then, conversely, we have from the roof of the garage. We have a picture of lot 6, which is 89.

P

99 foundry place and the three four plexes and the one six plex on the other side of that lot.

P

And so we kind of looked at this back in 2015-14, there was a charette, they analyzed this area and.

P

They were like, let's build something that sort of helps screen the neighborhood from the municipal.

P

Garage, I mean it's a very nice municipal garage, but it sheds a lot of light noise.

P

There's the train behind it. Let's, let's have something: that's more of a barrier, so this sort of.

P

Illustrates I mean these these three four plexes are not little buildings right, they're, pretty.

P

Good-Sized buildings and then you've got the six plex next to it, and so our four-story building.

P

Kind of steps down that we've proposed steps down to this three-story and these two-story buildings.

P

All right so and you've got the municipal garage, which is five stories plus roof deck.

P

Parking and street lights, which is what you see here, so it's a very imposing structure.

P

And that, and we just feel like the hill street- should stay brown.

P

um It doesn't make sense for us to start having to chop the building, and it was at one point stepped.

P

It was 1.5 stories we knocked it down and it had some stepping. We eliminated the stepping.

P

Because of cost of construction and just keeping it squared and flat made it a lot more economic.

P

To build- and that's only become more the case as we've moved on and costs have increased with time.

P

And the other thing I wanted to talk about was height and how you measure it. You know one of.

P

The things that we've seen in our area is that you know we're within the resilient flood plain.

P

Right so for the city, for example, when they went to build the municipal garage, they filled.

P

A couple of feet give or take around the garage raised it up and built a 60-foot garage on top.

P

Of that, if it was going to be measured today, it would probably be considered or under was proposed.

P

It would probably be considered a 62 foot building or maybe 63 feet, because the original grade was.

P

Down, do you want this? Do you want to discourage the city or anybody else building in the resilient.

P

Flood plain area from raising their building up from raising the grades. I don't think so because.

P

You want everybody in some cases, I think they're even required to to lift up their site and to lift.

P

Up their building, so it you know, that's something to be considered. I don't know if this is true.

P

Or not because I haven't had a chance to check it, but somebody told me that rye has a similar.

P

Like measuring system for height, as far as going off of the pre-existing grade plane.

P

But they have an exception for areas that are within their resilient.

P

Flood plain area, and when I talk about that, it's the study that was done a number of years ago.

P

The hundred year for the 100-year flood, you know resiliency, so that's the other thing, so you might.

P

Want to look at that, if that's true, I didn't have a chance to confirm that, but it might be something.

P

Where you don't want to discourage people from lifting buildings up, thank you. Thank you.

N

Good evening to tom ballen, 233 vaughn street um I'll be less than 30 seconds. I hope.

N

Hearing this, for the first time, um wanted to point out one inconsistency and one concern.

N

The inconsistency is you're allowed to put a two foot cornice on the building by right.

N

You're allowed to have your stairwell and elevator exceed the building 10 feet by right. Nick has just.

N

Proposed that we can put towers in the corner of the building and want something more than two feet.

N

But in the regulation a penthouse in a building set back 15 feet that you cannot see.

N

Is allowed two feet so we would really like to see penthouse allowing somewhere in the four to six.

N

Foot range, you still wouldn't be able to see it, but it would alleviate the need to get a variance.

N

For our project and others, the concern is, um I think we would agree, mr chairman, that the zoning.

N

Board of adjustment grants a variance com, just some other project, whatever you want to that.

N

The hdc would not have the power to revoke that variance.

N

But what nick has proposed, in section two, I believe, is um giving htc the power to revoke.

N

Height, that's allowed by right in the ordinance, and I find that problematic. Thank you. Thank you.

C

Anybody else anybody we have zoom.

C

Go ahead good evening, thank you. My name is robin hustlage. I live at 27 rock street in.

I

The islington creek neighborhood, which is just a few streets over from hill street.

I

Our neighborhood is pretty much. um You know: two-story homes, many single family.

I

And the four plexes you know are like two and a half stories um right on. You know the back onto.

I

Hill street there um I am speaking in favor of the proposed change to hill street from the brown.

I

Height, which is two to four stories or 50 feet max to the green height two to three stories and.

I

And forty feet max: this is a neighborhood where fifty foot buildings do not belong.

I

Across the street, from two-story single-family homes, in addition, I feel the north end incentive.

I

Overlay district should be removed from islington creek because it's not the north end from bridge.

I

Street all the way down towards the the west end again, a 50-foot building, which is.

I

Which this overlay district would allow does not belong in a neighborhood full of mostly two-story.

I

Single-Family homes, this overlay district allows buildings to be upwards of thirty thousand square.

I

Feet as well as providing uh reduction and parking requirements- and this is in a neighborhood that.

I

Struggles with enough parking, as it is, keeping this north end incentive overlay district in the.

I

Islington creek part of the west end will promote demolition of these old single-family homes and be.

I

Replaced with 50-foot tall buildings with 30 000 square foot footprints, our neighborhood will.

I

Change from being full of quaint family homes to large apartment and condo buildings, because this.

I

Overlay district will allow it to happen. Please reconsider having this north end overlay district.

I

In our west end neighborhood, it doesn't belong there thanks very much. Thank you.

C

Anybody else on zoom.

C

Anybody else in the audience.

C

I'm going to close the public hearing did I say that you can quickly yeah your staff? Thank you. I.

M

Just wanted to say to the last speaker unless I misheard her comments, the overlay district.

M

For the north end, it stops at heinemann, it doesn't go into the islington creek neighborhood towards.

M

The west end that's important for her and others to know we're, obviously not changing any of the.

M

Overlay district tonight it goes up to rock street yeah rock street yeah yeah, so it but that's the.

M

Extent of the overlay district and the there are no homes that are left in it. They were on lot six.

M

So I I got the impression uh she was thinking it's larger than it is. There are no single-family homes.

M

In the overlay district just want to put that out there, otherwise the comments are good.

M

The importance for the parapet, the piece I put in there- it's not got anything to do with penthouses.

M

It's got everything to do with uninhabitable spaces to create decorative skyline elements on.

M

A building, so I I'm not advocating, and I doubt I would uh to bring habitable penthouse spaces.

M

Into somehow into that paragraph, it's really about projections, so I just wanted to say that.

M

uh Thanks for giving me the moment to do that, and obviously the assumption we've made as as.

M

It's important for kim rogers to hear it here tonight because it was said two weeks ago. The.

M

Assumption we've made in looking at hill street and and uh changing that to green is that those.

M

Folks have a building permit and they're fully vested, so most properties in portsmouth are.

M

Non-Conforming for something it doesn't make them unmarketable, doesn't make them unfinanciable. If.

M

They have a vested project, which is the assumption we have. Then this has nothing no impact unless.

M

They decide to redesign their project, then, yes, it would have to change, um but that's the working.

M

Assumption we've had in writing this because we're certainly not trying to penalize them.

M

uh They've got a project; they just need to build it um so uh and and with the respect to the vision.

M

Plan the the big buildings hill street wasn't 60 feet or 50, plus the 10 to screen any lights on the.

M

Garage, in fact, the images shown in the vision plan are three and four story: buildings on that side of.

M

Foundry place, what we were trying to build is a vibrant urban neighborhood on foundry place.

M

Not build the same scale buildings as the parking garage on hill street and theirs.

M

Isn't as big as the parking garage, but the green, which is 50 feet with the 10 feet, added.

M

We think is more than adequate uh for the for the site. um Okay, thank you. Nick.

M

Thanks, thank you. Might I make a suggestion? Is that possible? I think mr mohan had a motion pending, but.

E

I'd like to just make a suggestion, not emotion um that, because there's been a lot of additions.

E

And last minute, changes that we know have just happened: that we uh continue the review and, if.

E

We can reopen the public hearing, we can keep the public hearing open so that our next meeting.

E

We could actually then take additional public hearing. It would give all the members a chance.

E

To digest the information before we make a recommendation, that's just a suggestion. We've done.

E

It before that's, why I'm making that suggestion. I know it's possible need to reopen the public.

E

Hearing and then continue the public hearing yeah we can continue to update. Certainly you can and.

E

That way, we can take more public insight at that time. Once people have a chance to digest all these.

E

Were you thinking at the next regular meeting or were you thinking a special meeting? I was thinking.

E

The next regular meeting, unless people want to come meet more, I mean I'm here all the time.

I

I think you had a motion well, not if the public hearing's still open.

I

He closed it, so you have to reopen it. You would have to open it. Okay, well yeah, I'd like to make.

K

A motion that we table any actions on the zoning amendments and I ask that this board.

K

Receive 3d, modeling overhead imaging and any other visual work product duly labeled to help.

K

This board prepare these proposed amendments for city council. I was shocked. Okay, sorry, that was the.

O

Motion discussion modeling was part of that yep is there a second to that? I said. Look at that so.

K

I googled portsmouth 3d modeling and found it on a planning board site. Why didn't I know about that?.

K

It was very useful in trying to evaluate at least the rudy's site, but the modeling.

K

Doesn't exist for the new garage, I think we need that every single presentation that was given.

K

Tonight included aerial photos whether they be satellite or drone with things superimposed on.

K

Them so you can see what the heck it is. We had one dimensional drawings. I mean I literally submitted.

K

An application of the rochester planning board yesterday and I was asked to do overhead photos.

K

With things superimposed on it, I think the work is great. I think the idea is great. I like the idea of.

K

Cleaning up is perfect, but we're contemplating actual changes and I think, there's a conflict.

K

In trying to give mark mcnabb a gift of five feet, while there's a pending application for.

K

A building on that spot, it's his job to ask us for that five feet, not our job, to give it to them.

K

That's that's why I think we need much more time to work with this. I hesitate to talk about a.

C

Specific application, I think, there's a difference of opinion on that with the the landowner and.

C

Staff- and you know in fact it's still it's it's a pending disagreement, so um be that as it may,.

C

You know the idea I I've got a question: how much of a burden to staff is this request? Let's do this.

I

And also nick, if you could request the specificity as it relates to what.

M

Questions that's the only way it could ever be answered, um so what I would propose, because the.

M

Substantive changes, we're talking about are in respect to building height only on hill street.

M

And only on haven, court and high street that we will get the proposed building from the applicant.

M

Insert it in the model, and you can look at it and we'll that for hill and and sorry haven and hi.

M

I'll see what I can find is we only have what we have when it's, when it's designed by a third party.

M

So hill street will be a little trickier, but you saw a building in in the handout from.

M

Kim rogers tonight that has a 3d model of the building they want to build, so I can at least.

M

Show you that which will not comply or comport with the green line, but it's close but you're.

K

Mixing the two things I said, I love the cleanup. I love the cleaning up the zoning regulations.

K

And stuff, but making substantial changes to height allowances shouldn't be put in the same.

K

Cake mix as cleanup well, whether you pull them into two separate buckets or not, doesn't matter.

M

You still, the question still needs to be answered to staff. What do you want for the second bucket.

M

And what I'm suggesting I can get you for the second bucket, which is the substantive changes and.

K

That's fine with the 3d modeling, but I also ask for visual aerials on all the other stuff, because.

K

Pink green brown lines aren't subjective enough. I mean we learn so much by walking around.

K

That site today, so what I will do is send you a link to the 3d model, which is the only for.

M

The whole city, because you're talking about it, doesn't include the new garage. I already looked.

M

Okay, I'll find what I well yes I'll, find what I can find for foundry place and and hill street.

M

But in respect to all the civic buildings, the municipal properties you're going to have to.

M

Look at the model that's online and find your way around it. I could, if I could just maybe cut.

C

I asked how much of a burden staff it sounds like you can do. Hill street, you can do boundaries. You.

C

Can do the foundry, with whatever you've got there? I probably have a lot from the same candidate.

C

On hill street, could you just put a rectangle two different size rectangles, maybe to show the the.

M

40 and the 50. I mean ultimately it'd be nice to have a 3d model, the whole thing, but that's beyond.

C

Yeah, we are not going to make a 3d model. The part of your request, I'm not understanding greg, is the.

C

The aerial just simple: it's like a google maps with the with the changes, superimposed.

K

Over top of it, so how is that different than the color map? You can see context that wasn't a.

K

Color map that was a black and white map with with colored lines, so an aerial background of okay, I'm.

C

So the lines superimposed on an aerial background, yeah. Okay, that's easy! That's easy! Okay! So that.

C

Visual representation- that's easy, not boxes with so limited limited, 3d, yep, orthopaedic lines.

I

Other questions that they would like us to be specifically prepared for regarding.

I

The packet you know nick had broken down into four sections. Is there other sections that are still.

I

Problematic, there's definitions: you may recall the civic buildings, I don't know if there's questions.

I

About civic buildings or unassigned buildings, if all that's very clear, with definitions, changes.

I

That, I think, might have been okay. I think that was an area also that we could focus on and it wasn't.

K

Really clear on the agenda what we were working on tonight, it seemed like we were looking at part.

K

One, not all four, no, this is just part one, okay, good. She means the four difference between the.

M

Four part right make sure it's clear away: parts of phase one, but then there were these four parts.

M

Fit into phase one absolutely building definitions, I'd like to have continue the three, the three-way.

C

Conversation according to myself, and you now joe do you want to join in on? Yes, really yeah really.

A

Can I just ask about the civic buildings, um I I don't think I'm totally so you're.

A

Just capturing what already is yes for civic buildings right? Yes, when it comes to churches,.

A

I'm not sure how you're determining how many stories it is, as it goes into steeples beyond.

M

They're non-conforming, so there's no there's no assessment to say: okay, that's an 85-foot.

M

Building, let's make it 85. it's just it, it's less for the building height more for the.

M

Dimensional, controls of setbacks, connectors stuff on the ground, they're all they're, all protected.

M

You know because they're already non-conforming exactly okay, okay, we have a motion. We have a.

C

Second, oh, we needed a date, sir. We need to date certain to add to that june. 16Th.

C

Is that our next meeting yes june 6th, I say our next meeting: did you reopen? We need to give the.

I

Date until june 16th should I do any rule at the public hearing tonight for that or reopen it then.

C

No, you need to reopen it now, so that means okay, I'm going to reopen the public hearing now.

C

And now, let's, let's continue to a date june, 16th yep I'll second that motion well, I can't move.

I

That's needed, I think you could make the motion, didn't you make it sure yeah? I made the motion.

I

I'll second stephanie texted me: if we get an update, we've got a motion and a second to continue.

C

To june 16th, all those in favor aye aye aye opposed. We are continued. Now we have drugs motion.

C

Just to request more information, as we discussed with nick and that updated presentation too.

E

Or just the additional information additional information, not the whole presentation.

C

Fine get rid of the old one. Then, are we ready for a vote? Yes, all those in favor, aye, aye opposed.

C

We are now going to say we're adjourned for the evening.