Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Major Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public hearing on proposed 5‑lot subdivision centers on wetlands, shared driveways and frontage
Summary
Surveyor Timothy Bernier presented a plan to split a 51.5‑acre parcel into five lots; residents and board members raised concerns about wetlands impact, driveway easements, road frontage and potential effects on wells and rural character. The Board denied requested waivers and continued the hearing for a revised plan.
The Salisbury Planning Board opened a public hearing on July 6, 2026 for a proposed five‑lot major subdivision on Tax Map 238, Lot 55 owned by Loren, Daniel and Jacob Martin. Surveyor Timothy Bernier described a plan to divide a 51.5‑acre parcel into two lots fronting on Route 4 and three lots fronting on Center Road, with shared driveways to reduce wetlands disturbance. Bernier said the current plan shows about "3,900 square feet of wetlands impact" and noted a driveway permit for Route 4 had already been granted by the State.
A resident, Mary Heath, presented Plan #4952 from the Merrimack County Registry of Deeds regarding a right‑of‑way and questioned whether the record supported a driveway easement on the subject lot or neighboring property. The Board read an emailed comment from Jon Adinolfo opposing the subdivision; Adinolfo wrote, "I am in full opposition to the Town accepting any request to add another roadway. I am also in opposition for the major subdivision to make 5 house lots," and expressed concerns about drainage, deforestation and potential reductions in nearby well yields.
Board members debated whether the proposal conformed to the town master plan and whether five lots were appropriate given wetlands and safety concerns on Center Road. Vice Chair Dobroslav Slavenskoj said the application "conformed to town standards in regards to frontage and acreage, but ... did not conform to the master plan" and raised the speed limit and driveway easement liabilities as problems. Bernier responded that NHDOT often prefers shared driveways and that the proposed wetland impacts met NHDES standards. Schmidl and Hostetler noted a lack of contiguous buildable area in one parcel and suggested that fewer lots might reduce wetlands impacts and access challenges.
The Board accepted the application as complete pending outstanding items including test pit locations, NHDES subdivision and wetlands approvals, metes and bounds descriptions, and other easement documentation. The hearing was closed at 7:08 p.m. and the Board subsequently moved to deny the requested waivers and to continue the public hearing until a revised plan without the waiver conditions is submitted.
