Hooksett planning board keeps 32‑child cap at Merry‑go‑round after contested hearing

The Hooksett Planning Board on Aug. 3 disapproved the amended commercial site plan submitted by Merry‑go‑round Child Care Center and declined the applicant’s request to replace a condition limiting enrollment with language that would defer capacity entirely to state licensing. The board voted to keep Condition 5 — capping enrollment at 32 children — "in full force and effect."

Attorney William Grama, representing owner Mary Anne French, told the board the business has operated in the neighborhood for decades and that state licensing and recent inspections have shown a higher allowable capacity. "The business has been here since 1988… Mary was given the ability to have 41 kids since 2018," Grama said, arguing that the town should reconcile local conditions with DHHS licensing. Board members repeatedly sought documentation tying the state license history to the town record and asked for a current, surveyed site plan and traffic/parking analysis if the business wanted relief beyond the existing condition.

Neighbors and abutters described repeated morning drop‑off lines, blocked driveways, and safety worries at peak times. "I do not wanna see a child killed out there or hit," resident Scott McMillan told the board, summarizing abutters’ concerns about cars, narrow sight lines and winter ice. By contrast, employees and several parents said Mary’s operation enforces written parking procedures and serves children with special needs who otherwise lack placements; Catherine Tilton, a lead teacher, said staff and families follow a detailed staggered schedule and parking plan.

The board’s motion, made and read into the record by Member Jared Williams, disapproved the amended commercial site plan, denied the requested replacement of condition 5 of the Dec. 8, 2025 notice of decision, and explicitly stated that the 32‑child limit remains. Williams read the motion point: "Condition 5 limiting the number of students to 32 shall remain in full force and effect." Members said the applicant may return with a full site plan (survey, traffic impact analysis, redesigned parking and explicit enforcement provisions) should they seek additional relief.

What happens next: the decision preserves the existing local numeric cap while leaving administrative paths open — the owner may reapply with a full updated site plan or pursue state licensing changes, but any higher occupancy that depends solely on DHHS administrative allowances would be subject to future planning board review and the town’s enforcement mechanisms. The board recorded its findings of fact supporting the decision and said enforcement of on‑the‑ground violations remains a separate code‑enforcement process.