The Rochester Planning Board on June 2 denied a conditional‑use request and a waiver to allow two long, narrow lots at the rear of a proposed five‑lot subdivision at 1494 Rod Road, and approved a revised four‑lot subdivision with two technical waivers and standard conditions.

The decision matters because planning staff and several board members said the two back lots would be largely unusable — encumbered by wetlands, 50‑foot wetland buffers and steep slopes — and approving them would set a precedent for similar splits in the city’s agricultural zone.

Jace Gregoire, an engineer with Civil Works New England representing the applicant, described the original proposal as a five‑lot frontage subdivision with private road, stormwater improvements and two treatment ponds. “We meet all the stormwater regulations in the city of Rochester,” Gregoire said, and noted the design includes detention and treatment ponds and retaining walls, and that third‑party and technical review group (TRG) comments had been addressed.

Planning department staff told the board they supported two technical waivers — a reduced driveway separation and steeper roadside embankment (from 3:1 to 2:1) — but opposed the conditional‑use permit to reduce frontages on the two lots at the cul‑de‑sac. “Staff does not support the conditional use permit,” the planning staff member said, adding the department believes the conditional‑use criteria are not met and that the end lots would have “a lot of area that is inaccessible, and is encumbered by steep slopes, wetlands, wetland buffers.”

Board members voiced similar concerns. Planning Board member Peter Bruckner called the proposal “precedent setting” and said the two rear lots would likely be unused despite meeting minimum acreage requirements. Several members argued a four‑lot subdivision would produce a more usable final lot and avoid creating narrow, hard‑to‑access parcels in a once‑agricultural area now under development pressure.

After debate, the board voted to approve waiver requests 1 and 2 (driveway spacing reduction to 45 feet and allowance of 2:1 roadside embankment slopes), denied waiver request 3 (the long‑narrow‑lot waiver from Section 5.2.4 of the subdivision regulations), and denied the conditional‑use permit to reduce frontage on the two cul‑de‑sac lots to 20 percent. The board then approved a four‑lot subdivision with conditions including: final third‑party sign‑offs and DPW review, plan notes for embankment stabilization, and a requirement that the applicant revise the plan so the two rear parcels are combined into a single lot rather than two long, narrow lots. The board directed the applicant to work with planning staff on the revisions and indicated the revised submission can be approved administratively unless the changes are substantial.

Planning staff and TRG will require final engineering sign‑offs and standard plan notes; staff also recommended erosion‑control and stabilization measures for the steeper embankments and documentation for drainage and shared easements. The planners noted state subdivision requirements — including a 4,000‑square‑foot septic usability area and a 50‑foot wetland buffer — constrain where dwelling sites, wells and septic systems may be placed, reducing the effective usable area on some parcels.

Board members and staff said the decision reflects broader questions about development pressure in the city’s agricultural zone and flagged the need for staff to review possible changes to zoning or subdivision rules to prevent unwanted precedents.

The applicant said it will prepare revised maps and supporting material for planning staff review; the board did not require the applicant to return for another public hearing if the changes are limited to the plan revisions agreed to by staff.

The discussion began during the Planning Board’s new applications segment and included multiple rounds of TRG and third‑party review. The board’s action completes the conditional‑use and waiver deliberations and sets the project on the path to state subdivision submission and final engineering approvals.