Planning board accepts jurisdiction on Sanborn Seminary redevelopment; wetlands, aquifer and gym parking remain unresolved

Kingston Planning Board members on the evening of the hearing accepted jurisdiction and opened a formal review period for an application to redevelop the former Sanborn Seminary property at 178 Main Street, a roughly 12.8-acre parcel that sits in the town's Historic 1 Zone and Aquifer Protection District A. The proposal converts the seminary into 12 studio and one‑bedroom apartments, adds 13 detached condominium-style single-family homes on one lot, and retains the existing Swayze Gymnasium and parking configuration subject to a parking-waiver request.

The application, submitted by Major Sanborn Seminary LLC and presented by Paul (applicant representative) and Brian (project engineer), proposes to keep the parcel as a single lot with limited common areas for each dwelling type, construct a small parking lot for the seminary building (two spaces per apartment), and provide private wells and individual septic systems for the dwellings. Paul said the developer "believe[s] we have" a feasible project after several years of design iteration, inflationary pressures and coordination with the Historic District Commission (HDC). The HDC has approved the design direction for the seminary and for four of the street-facing homes, the applicant said.

Why it matters: the site is in both a historic district and an aquifer-protection zone and contains wetlands and a vernal pool. Town staff and outside reviewers identified multiple technical and regulatory issues that could affect siting, septic and stormwater design, and overall feasibility. The Planning Board moved to send the developer's hydrogeologic study for peer review, requested legal review of condominium documents (including whether the condominium plan constitutes a subdivision under state law), and set a continued hearing date to allow the applicant time to revise plans.

Key technical issues and board concerns

- Wetlands and buffers: Town reviewers and the conservation commission flagged that portions of at least two proposed home sites and portions of proposed septic or parking areas fall within the town's wetland buffer zones. Dennis (town engineer) said the wetland functional evaluation in the submittal produces a buffer greater than 50 feet and that several proposed features (including pump house, parking and septic for Units 1–2) lie within the required setback. The applicant acknowledged some work occurs between the 50- and 100-foot buffers but said most disturbed work will be in previously developed areas.

- Aquifer protection and septic/nitrate loading: The site is in Aquifer Protection District A and the town requires stricter limits on nitrate loading. The applicant reported a hydrogeologic study and a nitrate-loading analysis had been submitted; the board voted to send that study to the town's consulting hydrogeologist (Dana Treslow) for review. The health department letter (Kevin Schultz, deputy health officer) notes multiple required town permits for wells and individual subsurface disposal systems, and that the town requires larger separation distances and closer review than state DES standards in some respects.

- Wells and water service: Plans showed multiple on-site wells; the applicant described three wells in one presentation phase and later documents and the health officer noted the site could contain up to eight wells when all units are labeled. The applicant confirmed a backup generator will be provided for the on-site domestic pump house; the school district's existing off-site well and tank that serve the gym's fire suppression system will not be altered.

- Stormwater and site grading: The applicant reported a net reduction in impervious area and stormwater quality measures including swales and a subsurface chamber system that discharge to the rear wetland. The town engineer raised concerns about stormwater volume increases to downstream paths and the location/elevation of proposed detention basins, recommending revisions and, where ponding is expected, fencing and further design detail.

- Parking and public use of Swayze Gym: The developer requested a waiver from the town's parking standard for the gym. The board and public commenters, including Dan Doyle (representing the SAU/school district), discussed the gym's existing use by the school and town (events, recreation, and voting). The applicant said the site cannot economically provide the 200+ spaces the gym's code listing might imply, arguing overflow parking exists across the street at Bakke School and that the apartment parking meets multifamily state limits. The board asked the applicant to coordinate with the SAU and Select Board about long-term gym use and potential off-site parking arrangements before the waiver is resolved.

Board actions and next steps

- The Planning Board voted to accept jurisdiction over the application and begin the local 65-day decision timeline. The applicant consented to the timeline and said it would request an extension if needed.

- The board voted to send the submitted hydrogeologic study to the board's consulting hydrogeologist for professional review and to establish whatever escrow account is required to pay for that review.

- The board voted to send the condominium (condo) documents to town counsel for legal review and to ask counsel whether the proposed condominium regime should be treated as a subdivision for notification and review purposes.

- The board set a continuation date: the hearing was continued to March 4, 2025 at 6:45 p.m., with revised plans due to staff by Feb. 20, 2025, to allow the applicant to address the engineering, wetlands, septic/well, stormwater and parking comments.

What was not decided

No final approvals were granted for the site plan, conditional use permits within the wetland buffer or aquifer district, or the gym parking waiver. The board, conservation commission and town engineering staff still require revised plans, additional test pits or well-radius adjustments, and peer review of the hydrogeologic study before making those determinations.

Community input and related commitments

Speakers from the SAU and other town departments asked the applicant to confirm ADA access to the gym and to simplify the crosswalk alignment from Bakke School; the applicant said those pedestrian changes had already been incorporated into internal revisions and will appear on the next plan set. The applicant also agreed to meet with the conservation commission for a vernal-pool site visit in spring and to work with the Heritage Commission on documentation required under RSA 79‑E historic revitalization covenant requirements.

Ending

The Planning Board's continued review timetable gives staff and peer reviewers time to examine septic and hydrogeologic work, wetland buffer impacts and stormwater revisions. The board and applicant agreed to return with updated plans and documentation on March 4, 2025, at which time the board will reconsider conditional use, parking relief and any remaining site-plan issues.