Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 100 Church Street topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Keene committee declines to authorize sale of 100 Church Street after wide public push to keep pocket green
Summary
After extensive public testimony and committee discussion, Keene’s MSFI committee voted against a motion to authorize sale of 100 Church Street, leaving the city to retain the unimproved parcel and urging neighborhood stewardship while the council considers the item next week.
The Keene Municipal Services, Facilities & Infrastructure Committee voted on Tuesday not to approve a staff-backed motion to authorize sale of the city-owned parcel at 100 Church Street, siding with residents who urged that the small, neighborhood green remain public.
Public Works Director Donald outlined the history and legal status of the site and said the central question for the committee was whether the council wanted to convert the unimproved lot into a city park before discussing any improvements. “The first question that you all need to answer is, is this a property that the city council wants to convert to a city park and manage as a city park?” Donald said.
Neighbors, commercial tenants and councilors described the parcel as an active community space. Councilor Bobby Williams told the committee the site “functions as a park” for nearby residents and suggested modest, community-led changes — clearing invasive vegetation, lowering a berm for sight lines, adding a path and exploring community gardening — to improve safety and activation. Longtime neighbors and petitioners offered signatures of support and volunteer stewardship plans; Robin Cost said the lot is “the last small green space in that neighborhood” and noted it serves many elderly and disabled residents.
Speakers also raised specific operational concerns. Scott Olmstead, who sees the site from downtown offices, described frequent daytime public urination and defecation and suggested that adding restroom access would address sanitation problems. Ken Cost said residents had collected dozens of signatures and asked the city to consider transferring the parcel to Parks & Recreation so formal park rules (such as dusk-to-dawn closures) and signage could apply.
Committee members acknowledged the competing priorities — safety for abutters and desire for neighborhood green space — but several said they preferred retaining the site temporarily to allow residents to develop stewardship and safety proposals. After debate the chair moved to recommend that the city manager be authorized to negotiate and execute sale of Parcel 574‑015. The motion was seconded and then failed when no committee members voted in favor, leaving the parcel in city ownership and set for further consideration by the full city council the next Thursday.
Public works officials emphasized that no sale price or terms had been negotiated and that, if the council later elects to convert the parcel to a park, that change would be implemented through the capital improvement planning process and public engagement. Donald said staff could work with residents on an interim plan for maintenance and safety measures.
The committee’s decision is procedural: it declined to send an authorization to sell. Council consideration is scheduled for next Thursday, and neighbors said they will continue organizing stewardship plans ahead of that discussion.
