Peterborough Planning Board hears plans for big projects

Mercer Holdings, LLC, a company registered in Miami, wants to build a 116-unit apartment complex off of Goyette Drive and Mercer Avenue.

Peterborough Planning Board members said Monday night that a proposed 116-unit development off Mercer Avenue is unworkable unless the apartment complex can be accessed from Route 202 rather than from Mercer Drive and Goyette Avenue.

About 60 residents of two Peterborough neighborhoods attended the Monday night meeting to express concerns and ask questions at preliminary hearings for two large proposed housing developments in town.  Chad Brannon of Fieldstone Engineering represented the owners of both properties, who were not present.

Mercer Holdings, LLC, a company registered in Miami, has filed a preliminary application for a 116-unit apartment complex off of Goyette Drive and Mercer Avenue. The proposal originally included a single, three-story apartment building, but after the Planning Board suggested the developer alter the plan to include multiple buildings and more greenspace, the owner purchased additional land and expanded the project to two buildings and a clubhouse, potentially with an indoor pool. The application is proposed as workforce housing, with a total 10% to 20% of units being offered as workforce housing. The development would be built partially in an abandoned gravel pit site and would require extensive reclamation of the land.

Brannon explained that as of July 2023, a change in New Hampshire housing law paved the way for this type of development to become possible, requiring towns to provide the same density in workforce housing as is currently required in elderly housing. The proposed preliminary plan shows access to the apartment complex from Mercer Avenue, a dead-end street with fewer than 10 houses.

Planning Board Chair Lisa Stone asked if the development would be connected to the town by a sidewalk or walking access, and Brannon responded that the he had discussed this with the owner and ideas were being considered.

Planning Board member Gary Gorski summarized his concerns about traffic and the impact on the neighborhoods.

“Typical housing units have about four cars in, four cars out per day;  so with 116 units, this is turning into over 800 cars per day on these little streets, and the neighborhood  is no longer walkable. This doesn’t make sense for this neighborhood. It’s not fair to the people who live there; they are not used to have 800 cars driving past a day. There will be cars idling and backed up on Mercer. It will no longer be a walkable street with traffic and 800 cars. There will be headlights shining into people’s homes on Goyette Avenue. If there could be direct access to (Route) 202, it could be maybe workable,” Gorski said.

Other members of the Planning Board agreed that the development would be viable only if the access was from Route 202, not through Mercer Avenue.

Board Member Stephanie Hurley said that 10% workforce housing was “not enough.”

“We need more,” she said.

Stone responded by saying that since Peterborough has not adopted a workforce housing policy, the town has to rely on state regulations.

“The state passed a law that allowed something the town never intended. It applies the rules for elderly housing, which is intended for dense housing such as assisted living, to workforce housing developments,” Stone said. “We will have to go back as a town and adjust zoning regulations.”

In the public comment session, residents expressed concerns about road safety, particularly in winter; traffic; the impact on the intersection with Route 101;  headlights from the parking lot at the clubhouse; stormwater drainage; impact on wildlife; erosion; and noise. Brannon said all these concerns would be addressed in the permitting process with the state, noting that this was a preliminary hearing only and that the project “has not been designed yet.”

Town Planner Danica Melone urged all residents to get involved in the town’s zoning process.