Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
North Berwick planners hold public hearing on 4‑lot Adams Bridge subdivision
Summary
At a public hearing April 9, Altus Engineering presented a preliminary plan for a four‑lot subdivision on Adams Bridge Road. Residents raised concerns about drainage, wetlands and traffic; the engineer said the plan would not change hydrology and provided a rough trip estimate. A drainage sketch will be submitted for third‑party review.
The North Berwick Planning Board held a public hearing April 9 on a preliminary plan to subdivide land on Adams Bridge Road into four single‑family residential lots, the board announced at its meeting.
Erik Saari of Altus Engineering presented the plan and a rough drainage sketch completed that day; Planning Coordinator Matt LeConte asked Saari to submit a hard copy of the drainage plan so it can be sent for third‑party review. Chairperson Jon Morse opened the hearing at 6:35 p.m. and closed it at 6:44 p.m.
Residents raised site‑specific concerns during the hearing. Ben King said "a lot of water percolates and flows with terrain going down to Adams Bridge Road" and asked how the plan would address that runoff. Neil Bryant asked whether freshwater wetlands in the area continued onto adjacent lots and pointed out a stone wall that he said marks a boundary with his property.
Saari responded that the project team "are not making any changes since this subdivision should not change the hydrology at all," and said the designer did a rough traffic study estimating "about 9 ½ trips in a full day on average per household," which he characterized as not a major impact. Saari also said the team would review and add wetlands delineation information to the plans and examine the stone wall easement issue.
Matt LeConte told the board he would expect the drainage plan to be turned in as a hard copy so the town can arrange a third‑party review. No formal vote was taken on the subdivision at the meeting; the board closed the public hearing and asked for the additional documentation to be submitted for the next steps in review.
