At
their June 27 meeting, the Manchester Planning Board voted to table
the Waterford Corporation's Hackett Hill Single Family Homes project.
Members of the board who were present and voted for the tabling were:
Planning Board Chair Joan Bennett, Vice Chair Ronald Poltak, Kevin
McCue, Raymond Clement, Peter Capano and Alternates Alderman Betsi
DeVries and Todd Connors.
The vote took place during a business meeting, which was preceeded by a lengthy public hearing concerned with numerous subdivision and site plan/planned development applications. It was interesting that numerous members of the public who testified during these hearings expressed concerns about loss of open space and wildlife habitat due to residential development projects, as well as pointing out how development-related traffic would affect their neighborhoods. The impact of new residential housing projects on schools was also mentioned.
The Waterford Application was listed as follows on the June 27 agenda:
#15. S-13-2002 Property located on Countryside Boulevard & Hackett Hill Road, an application to subdivide property to create 115 residential building lots - Waterford Development
Public Hearing Held: 06/13/2002
Deadline for Action: 08/08/2002 (Staff Report)
Prior to the vote, the Planning Board each received a detailed copy of Waterford's Development plans, which they had requested at the public hearing on the project held on June 13. The plans were also made available to members of the public who were in attendance and requested a copy.
The
members then discussed a Union Leader article written by Mark Hayward
which had appeared the day previous to the meeting. The article
described how certain Hackett Hill lots, seemingly destined to be
used for Waterford's development project, conceivably could have
another fate. Jeff Brillhart, project manager for the DOT's
mitigation funding for Route I-93 widening, was quoted in the
article. He had indicated that the Hackett Hill land was being
strongly considered by the DOT for purchase for conservation land. He
noted that he had heard from the Sierra Club, the Manchester
Conservation Commission, the EPA and The Nature Conservancy - all of
whom supported this possibility. He stated that the DOT would have no
interest in the land if houses were built on it.
Todd Connors then verbally abstracted from a letter which the Manchester Conservation Commission had written to the Planning Board. He noted that one part of the letter was a follow-up to testimony given by Conservation Commissioner Eric Skoglund at the June 13 public hearing. At that time, Skoglund noted a difference of opinion between himself and Waterford's wetland consultant regarding the designation of certain parts of the project area. Skoglund had contended that these areas should have been considered wetlands, while the Waterford consultant disagreed. Connors noted that a third party had not yet been selected to settle the disagreement and that additional time would be required for the field work to take place. Chairman Bennett asked how much time would be required for the matter to be resolved, and Connors responded that a period of several weeks might suffice.
Subsequently, the Planning Board voted unanimously to table Waterford's application.