The Planning Board met on June 26 for a special meeting to hear a formal review of the infrastructure needed to make the Village at Technology Hill site plan a reality, but that plan was met with some issues related to subjects on the towns checklist not being addressed.
Project co-developer, Dick Anagnost, was at the meeting with Nick Golan from TFMoran to outline the plan to install roadways, water, sewer, electric, and gas utility services to the mixed-use complex.
“When we first started this project and first came before the Board, we essentially took the approach of ‘how to eat an elephant,’ and it’s one piece at a time. We met with staff multiple times and before this Board we’ve presented twice now with various small bites of the project,” said Anagnost.
After getting feedback from Londonderry officials and residents, the co-developer added that traffic was not a focus of the infrastructure presentation. The Technology Hill team promised to present a detailed traffic study at a future meeting.
One issue that came up right away was missing elements to the infrastructure application.
“The applicant has not provided utility clearance letters for telephone, cable TV, or water services,” said John Trottier, Director of Public Works and Engineering. “The applicant has not provided bridge design plans and supporting information for the checklist, the applicant has not identified wetland impacts to deal with a proposed bridge crossing.”
Golan stated that he had trouble getting a letter of confirmation from the telephone and cable provider and assured the Director there was a memorandum of understanding in place for their water services plan. Based on feedback from the Conservation Commission, he assured the Board that the project’s environmental impact received extensive attention.
“It’s not something we would necessarily think of when talking about infrastructure, but it’s really turned into one of the most important elements of this site overall,” said Golan.
NH Fish and Game was involved in building wildlife passages through the Village complex. He also promised to implement town and state requirements related to storm water runoff.
Several members of the public were at the meeting with questions related to the project.
“There’s certainly a lot to look at here, a lot of concerns, and what the impact is going to be on the Fire Department, Police Department, DPW, water, sewer, and storm water runoff,” said Ray Breslin of 3 Gary Drive.
Division Chief, Brian Johnson, of the Londonderry Fire Department added his concern to the project, especially regarding multistory buildings and whether water supply systems were equipped to handle a possible fire.
“I have seen multiple hydrant plans, not one of them meets our regulations as of yet. They have resubmitted, but none of them have passed,” said Johnson.
Partial property owner, Ken Solinsky, stated to the Board and residents that all concerns would be addressed to the best of his ability.
“We have tried from day one, to design an attractive development, that will be an asset to this town, I think we’ve tried to meet every desire that has been expressed by the Board,” said Solinsky, who expressed frustration that he only received some comments on the project immediately before the meeting. “Why is it that we submitted infrastructure originally in January, and we didn’t get comments until May? We responded to those comments, then we’re getting comments now!”
Assistant Town Manager, Kellie Caron, indicated that at least some of the delay was unavoidable.
“What we need to keep in mind, is that the PUD Master Plan, the regulatory document that we needed to have in place, meaning approved, was passed on May 9. So, a month and a half ago,” she explained. “Even though we may have been in possession of plans for our infrastructure residential, we couldn’t fully conduct a throughout review until that piece was done.”
Caron mentioned that third party comments were received by the Planning Department two days before the meeting, which didn’t leave as lot of time to review them. She said, “Is there a solution to that problem? Probably, but we haven’t found it yet.”
Trottier clarified that the comments being referred to are not “third party,” instead, they are the town’s comments. He added that there were 75 comments that weren’t answered.
She added it would take a change in the town’s regulations for a remedy.
The Planning Board voted to waive a regulatory requiring the applicant to identify every tree 15 inches or more in diameter and agreed to continue the application to their Aug. 7 meeting.