Developer asks to skip sidewalks in front of White Oaks Road subdivision

LACONIA — A developer proposing to build a 25-single-family-lot subdivision along White Oaks Road doesn’t want to construct sidewalks.

“Basically, they’re seeking a waiver from the requirement to construct sidewalks on all existing streets that abut, or are proposed within, the subject property,” Assistant Planning Director Tyler Carmichael told members of the city’s planning board on Tuesday night.

Engineer Neil Hansen from Tighe & Bond told members of the planning board they’re requesting the sidewalk waiver “due to the fact that White Oaks Road currently does not have any existing sidewalks on it, nor does the street that White Oaks Road connects to adjacent to this project site.”

“We would essentially be constructing a sidewalk to nowhere along the frontage,” Hansen said. “Same reason for the proposed roads, the sidewalks would then connect to a road that does not also have sidewalks on it.”  

Planning board members denied the request unanimously. 

Tighe & Bond, the engineers on the project, wrote in a February submission to the city’s technical review committee that owner Daniel Greenhalgh and applicant Scott Buonopane are working to subdivide the existing, 16-acre parcel at 33 White Oaks into 26 lots, including 24 single-family residential building lots, one lot for proposed drainage improvements, and one lot for the remainder of the land. There’d be 7.46 acres of developed land when complete.  

The proposed work includes the construction of two new public roadways, and infrastructure improvements.

“Everybody knows how I feel about sidewalks, because that’s how we get them built, even if it's piece by piece,” board Chair Charlie St. Clair said.  

Planning Director Rob Mora told board members the city’s department of public works supports the waiver. 

“On that Lake Street there, half of the street is in Gilford, and the other half is in Laconia. The side that is on the Shaw’s side is in Gilford, not in Laconia,” Mora said.  

All of White Oaks Road is in Laconia. 

“Be that as it may, even if it's technically a sidewalk to Gilford, it’s still an area to walk on that would take people closer to a commercial plaza. If the sidewalk would be completely enclosed in Laconia, whether it connects to a Gilford road or not, isn’t really our concern — I just would like to see more sidewalks,” board member Gail Ober said. “Especially on these ends of the road, where people are more inclined to walk, as opposed to down in the middle, where it’s a long walk to get to any commercial aspect.”

Mora said adding a sidewalk would include a requirement public works staff maintain and plow it during the winter for a low traffic-yield. 

“Is that really cost-effective for DPW to be bringing out a sidewalk plow through Gilford to do this sidewalk? Which is why DPW also supports having the waiver approved for this project,” Mora said.  

“Maybe the city council should come out and say, ‘We are not going to allow any sidewalks to be built where DPW is going to have to bring a plow out and plow in the winter time,’” St. Clair said. 

Carmichael told members of the board both that body and the city council adopted updated impact fees, which include sidewalks.

“The city can use impact fees to build sidewalks,” Carmichael said.  

Impact fees must be used within six years. 

“We adopted those so that we could remove this requirement from the site-plan subdivision regulations — we haven’t done it yet,” Mora said.  

“If we continue to expand residential development for single-family homes and condominiums along White Oaks Road, there is going to come a point in time when someone’s going to get hurt, someone’s going to get killed and the city’s going to have to build a sidewalk,” Ober said. “That may not be six years from now, it may be 12 years from now, but, at the same point, we have to be forward-looking, in my opinion on this board, and try to see around corners that we can’t necessarily see around.” 

Their application was continued until the May meeting of the planning board.