Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Site Plan Stone Ledge topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board continues Stone Ledge 70‑unit townhouse site plan after public concerns and technical follow‑up
Summary
The board accepted the Stone Ledge major site plan (Loyal Holdings LLC) for review, heard a technical presentation on grading, stormwater and traffic, received abutter concerns about buffering, blasting and traffic, and continued the hearing to Feb. 18 for follow‑up on AOT, fire, blasting notifications and traffic‑signal analysis.
The Milford Planning Board accepted and opened a major site‑plan review on Jan. 22 for Stone Ledge (Case SP2024‑22), a proposed townhouse‑style development from Loyal Holdings LLC that would place 70 multifamily units in nine residential buildings on roughly 15.96 acres near Nathaniel Drive and Webster Street.
Keach Nordstrom lead engineer Pete Madsen presented the application and led the technical review, describing nine buildings (70 units), a clubhouse, two access points (primary on Nathaniel Drive, gated emergency access on Webster Street), three proposed fire hydrants, and stormwater controls including an infiltration pond, a detention pond, and a wet pond designed to meet drainage and recharge requirements. Madsen said the site is wooded, contains no wetlands in the plan area, and that AOT comments had been received and would be addressed.
Traffic engineering (GPI) and the project’s traffic consultant reported that a cumulative analysis of the Stone Ledge development, the approved nearby Queue project and a proposed gas station shows the intersection at Nathaniel/Route 13 meets two of three signal warrants and projects a level‑of‑service C at the ten‑year horizon. GPI’s engineer, Robert Bollinger, said the warrants can be met without mandating a signal; both New Hampshire DOT and the town’s third‑party reviewer (Hoyle Tanner) concluded mitigation or roadway widening from a nearby gas‑station project could avoid immediate signalization but recommended that the town seek a mitigation fund or contribution for future intersection improvements.
Abutters raised multiple concerns. Neighbors pressed for mature buffering and denser screening between existing Prospect Street homes and the new buildings, asked how blasting will be managed and how damages would be handled, questioned whether Webster Street and existing sewer/water infrastructure can accommodate additional connections and construction traffic, and sought guarantees the emergency gate would remain controlled with a fire knock box. Applicant representatives and counsel said standard blasting protocols and pre‑construction surveys would be provided, water/sewer calculations would be submitted to state reviewers, and gated emergency access with a knock box is standard and acceptable to fire services.
Given outstanding technical items (AOT responses, fire‑department hydrant placement and memo items, detailed blasting plan and notification procedures, response from Hoyle Tanner on traffic/signal recommendations, and landscaping/buffering details), the board continued the Stone Ledge hearing to Feb. 18, 2025 to allow the applicant to return with those materials.
Next steps include applicant responses to Hoyle Tanner and NH DOT traffic comments, finalization of required state permits, a detailed blasting notification and survey plan, and a refined landscaping/buffering plan to preserve or supplement existing tree buffers between the development and Prospect Street homes.
