Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Campground 358 Rollercoaster topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board denies proposed Roller Coaster Road campground after neighbors cite safety and traffic concerns
Summary
The Laconia Zoning Board of Adjustment denied a special-exception request for a seasonal campground at 358 Roller Coaster Road after residents and board members raised safety, traffic and neighborhood character concerns; the applicant said the project would be family-oriented and connect to municipal sewer if feasible.
The Laconia Zoning Board of Adjustment on its November agenda rejected a request to allow a seasonal campground at 358 Roller Coaster Road, citing public-safety and neighborhood-character concerns voiced by nearby residents.
Applicant representatives Sarah Warty of Du Bois and King and Larry Chase described the roughly 40-acre parcel and said the campground would be seasonal, use the existing house as an office, and rely on either municipal sewer or on-site septic. Warty told the board the property "has over 800 feet of frontage," the site plan shows existing internal roads and that the development would not be visible from Roller Coaster Road. Chase described the proposal as "a family campground" and said sites would have sewer, water and electric.
Neighbors at the podium disputed the applicant's assurances. Sharon Spanos, who said the site would be "directly in my backyard," said Roller Coaster Road already has a "record" of serious accidents and that adding RVs and additional traffic would make conditions worse. Multiple speakers raised similar concerns about a dangerous curve, routine congestion during Bike Week, and potential strains on policing and emergency response. "I respectfully ask that we deny this special exception," Spanos said.
Board members debated the special-exception criteria, focusing on whether the proposed campground would create undue traffic congestion or be detrimental to the character of the residential neighborhood. One member noted the campground concept had a preexisting 1991 design with as many as 85 sites plus 12 cabins, which amplified neighbors' traffic worries. The applicant emphasized that a traffic study and site-plan review would occur at the planning-board stage.
After an initial motion to approve failed, a separate motion to deny the special exception was made and carried. The board recorded that the motion to deny passed and the application is denied. The denial is limited to the zoning special-exception request; any future application that materially changes the proposal would need to be filed and noticed again.
The applicant and staff were reminded that technical permits (sewer, site plan, photometric plans) remain part of subsequent review if a revised application returns.
