The Hudson Planning Board met on Aug. 26 to continue its review of a proposed automated car wash at the former Burger King site on Central Street, hearing updated details from Civil Engineer Jeff Merritt of Granite Engineering, LLC and Traffic Consultant Scott Thornton of Vanasse & Associates. The project has been under Board review since June, with traffic concerns emerging as the central issue.
Merritt told the Board that the applicant had revised the site plan following comments from both the town’s consulting engineer and Planning Board members. “Late last June we were here to present the project to the Board and at that time we had just received comments from the town’s consulting review engineer, so we hadn’t made any changes to the plan to address those comments,” Merritt said. “We made some changes not only to address the town’s review comments, but also to try to address some of the Board’s initial comments on the project.”
The updated plan includes two touch-free wash bays, a single wash tunnel, and 21 on-site parking spaces equipped with vacuums.
While the layout changes addressed several design questions, the most significant feedback from the town’s peer review focused on traffic impact, particularly at the busy intersection of Kimball Hill Road and Route 111.
Thornton explained that the applicant had submitted multiple rounds of traffic analysis. “We have gone back and forth with the town staff and the town consultant related to traffic,” he said. He noted that the applicant responded to peer review letters dated June 12 and July 14, followed by additional comments from town staff on August 11. “I think in general; the peer reviewer was generally satisfied with our study,” Thornton said.
Town staff, however, requested a more in-depth traffic study to evaluate queuing, trip generation, and potential congestion. Thornton argued that the expanded study would be “excessive” and “expensive,” but said the applicant was willing to conduct the original monitoring study proposed earlier. He also emphasized that the project is under review by the NH Department of Transportation, and that similar car washes typically do not create major traffic impacts.
Board member Todd Boyer raised questions about delivery vehicles accessing the site. “Is there a note on the plan that says your deliveries will come in a small box truck and not 18 wheelers?” he asked. Thornton acknowledged that no such note existed but said the applicant would be willing to add one to ensure only smaller trucks use the loading zone.
“This is the second car wash we’ve done in the last six months and we know you mainly just bring in soap,” Board member Ed Van Der Veen added, suggesting that large deliveries would be unlikely.
Vice-Chair Jordan Ulery pressed Thornton for more detail on how the applicant concluded the car wash would not significantly affect traffic. Thornton reiterated that the study showed only a “minor” impact that was “unlikely to be noticed,” though he conceded that any new business would generate some additional traffic.
Town Engineer Elvis Dhima expressed stronger reservations. “Kimball Hill and Route 111 is a significant intersection,” he said, noting that traffic is already heavy in the area. Dhima warned that if the initial study underestimated the impact, the town could face public backlash and safety concerns. “My concern is, what if this first study is not accurate? Who’s going to get the calls when people say they can’t go in or out?” he asked.
Dhima urged the Board to consider adding more stipulations to projects with potential traffic impacts. “We can’t keep approving these, expecting nothing, and then getting beat up by the public,” he said. “It can’t be a burden to the town.”
Board Chair Tim Malley acknowledged the concern but noted that a full traffic study could cost as much as $45,000, a significant expense for the applicant. The Board also discussed the fact that the site is currently vacant, raising questions about what type of business might locate there if the car wash does not move forward.