Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Regulations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Keene planning board asks staff to revise proposed site‑plan review thresholds after concerns about downtown and multifamily treatment
Summary
Planners proposed changes to LDC §26.12.3 to widen the minor‑project review committee’s jurisdiction, add thresholds for additions and for new residential units; the board asked staff to clarify language (remove unintended 'commercial' limitation), consider downtown sensitivity and return next month.
Planning staff presented proposed amendments to the Land Development Code (LDC §26.12.3) intended to broaden the range of projects eligible for the minor project review committee, add thresholds for building additions and for the number of new residential units, and create administrative review pathways for some street‑access changes.
Staff explained key proposed thresholds: additions to existing principal buildings in the downtown district greater than 15% of gross floor area (25% in other districts) would trigger higher review levels; projects that create 25 or more new dwelling units in a year would be subject to major site plan review; and a lower threshold (10–24 new units) would send projects to the minor project review committee. Staff said the aim is to improve the utility of the minor project review committee and preserve public notice/oversight while shortening overall review time for smaller projects.
Board members raised readability and coverage concerns. Councilor Mike Remy and other members observed the draft used the word “commercial” in one subsection in a way that could unintentionally exempt multifamily projects outside downtown; staff agreed that inclusion of “commercial” was likely an editing error and proposed splitting the language so downtown and non‑downtown thresholds are explicit. Members also urged staff to confirm whether the form‑based downtown code and historic‑district processes already capture many downtown impacts, and whether a separate downtown threshold should be lower to protect Main Street character.
Several board members favored returning with a revised draft. Staff indicated they would: (1) remove the unintended exclusionary wording and split the additions threshold into clear downtown/non‑downtown subsections; (2) retain a 25‑unit major threshold while setting the minor residential band at 10–24 units (staff noted a traffic‑analysis threshold already exists at 10 units); and (3) codify administrative review for certain commercial/multifamily street‑access modifications subject to city engineer review. Staff said they plan to return next month with updated language and related site‑development procedural revisions.
No formal vote to adopt the amendments was taken; the board directed staff to bring back a revised draft for further deliberation.
