Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers present concept for 44‑unit townhouse project on New Salem Street; board offers preliminary feedback
Summary
Attorney and developer described a conceptual plan to remove existing commercial buildings and build eleven two‑story buildings with 4 units each (44 units) at 707/907 New Salem Street. The board discussed fire separation, parking, snow storage and utilities; no formal action was taken.
Attorney Ethan Wood, representing the applicant, and developer Kevin Morissette presented a conceptual plan to the Laconia Planning Board on March 4 to replace existing commercial buildings on lots along New Salem Street with 11 buildings containing four units each for a total of 44 two‑bedroom, one‑bath units.
The presenters said the design would use city water and sewer and provide roughly enough parking to give approximately two spaces per unit (the plan showed over 80 spaces). Morissette said the first three buildings closest to New Salem Street would be developed first and noted ADA accessibility at the front building. The applicant described the units as market‑rate rentals and said architectural details will be refined during site plan review.
Board members raised technical and design questions. Fire‑safety spacing was a principal concern: the applicant said where separation between buildings is less than 20 feet, the design would include fireproofed exterior party walls (fire‑rated sheathing under siding) after consultation with the fire department. The board also asked about sewer and drainage; the applicant said engineers DuBois & King prepared plans and that the proposal would have less stormwater impact than existing conditions. Other topics included snow‑storage locations, one dumpster shown on the concept plan, landscaping to screen parking and requests for minor aesthetic variety across façades.
No vote or formal acceptance was taken; the board agreed to continue coordinating with the applicant and the Technical Review Committee (TRC) as the developer prepares a formal site‑plan application. Board members suggested the applicant include a detailed snow‑storage plan and address any fire department comments before formal submittal.
Ending: The board indicated preliminary support for moving the project into the formal review process if the applicant resolves fire‑separation details, finalizes drainage solutions and supplies a site‑plan application that addresses TRC and fire department comments.
