Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Large Senior Housing Thames Road topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

ZBA opens hearing on large Thames Road senior‑housing proposal; hearing continued to March 11 after heavy public comment

2270811 · February 11, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Developers presented a concept for a large age‑restricted community on Thames Road that could allow hundreds of units on the 98‑acre site; the Zoning Board kept the public hearing open and voted to continue the item to March 11 so the applicant can supply additional engineering and utility information.

The Hooksett Zoning Board of Adjustment opened a public hearing on an application by BNR Development LLC (buyer) and Bridal D Holdings, LLC (landowner) for a special exception under Article 7 to permit an older‑person (55+) housing development on a large Thames Road parcel (application E24‑32). After presentation and extensive public comment, the board voted to continue the hearing to March 11 to allow the applicant to provide additional materials requested by the board and members of the public.

Applicant presentation and numbers Steven Blum, managing member of BNR Development LLC, described the concept as an age‑restricted residential community sited on a parcel the applicant described as about 98.2 acres, with roughly 38.4 acres of wetlands and approximately 55.2 acres of developable land. “The site has about 4 and a half acres of over 1 half acre steep slopes and has approximately 38.4 acres of wetlands. This leaves about a 55.2 acres of developable land. So at 3 units per acre, this is 465 units,” Blum said while explaining the conceptual density math used to estimate maximum potential units under Article 7.B.3.a (the ordinance allows up to 3 units per acre on developable acreage under certain conditions). The applicant emphasized the planning‑board opinion (October 22, 2024) that the location could be appropriate provided the project can demonstrate a secondary public access.

Key concerns raised by abutters and town representatives Attorneys and condominium‑association representatives for nearby Granite Hills told the board they oppose use of Thames Road as primary access and challenged infrastructure assumptions. Attorney Bob Best, speaking for the Villages at Granite Hills condominium association, told the board Thames Road is a private condominium roadway, not a public town road, and said that fact materially affects emergency access, maintenance responsibility and whether town services (police, fire, public transportation) will be available. “Thames Road is not a public road. It's an approved private road that's part of the condominium associations. That makes a huge difference,” Best said.

Alan O'Brien of the property management firm for Granite Hills added that the association’s governing documents do not permit the use the applicant describes and that the association had declined permission for the applicant to use its roads; he said the association would enforce its rights if needed. Residents and condominium association leaders said a project with hundreds of units would substantially increase traffic on privately maintained roads, increase long‑term maintenance and liability for the association, and change neighborhood character. Several residents also raised environmental concerns, citing wetlands and an on‑site pond and beaver habitat.

Utility and municipal capacity questions Board members and members of the public asked the applicant to provide clearer written documentation on water and sewer capacity and on fire and emergency‑service impacts. Applicant representatives said they had talked with town departments and outside consultants and planned to provide engineering studies, but the board and multiple residents said the materials need to be in the record before the ZBA could make findings. The applicant said the project team includes engineers from VHB, counsel from Hinckley Allen and local consultants; the owner of the land, Bridal D Holdings (John DiBatteto), attended but the applicant said DiBatteto is the seller and not part of the development team.

Action taken The board voted to continue the public hearing on the Thames Road application to the March 11 meeting and left the hearing open so the public and municipal departments can review additional engineering and utility documentation the applicant agreed to provide. The board asked the applicant to submit any correspondence from central water and sewer reviewers, the fire department, and any proposed access agreements or easement language regarding use of private roads.

Why it matters If approved, the scale of the concept described by the applicant would represent a large increase in housing units for Hooksett and would require substantial utility, roadway and emergency‑service planning. Neighbors and the condominium association emphasized that Thames Road is private and said they have not granted access; the planning board’s conditional support cited the need for secondary public access before higher densities would be appropriate.

Next steps The ZBA set the matter for continuation to March 11. The applicant was asked to file engineering exhibits, written confirmation or evaluations from the water and sewer authorities and documentation relating to access (for example, any proposed easement or agreement with the condominium association or alternative secondary access options). The hearing remains open to additional public comment and written submissions.