Planning Board — April 1, 2026
The meeting featured technical disputes between staff and the board regarding drainage, as well as community pushback regarding traffic and zoning usage.
Public impact
Cumulative Residential Development (3 Page Road & 295 Rockingham Road)
Decisions logged
Topics discussed
▶ 08:17 Woodmont Commons Annual Update
A presentation regarding the annual fiscal impact study of the Woodmont Commons development, covering population growth, tax revenue for the town and school district, and future development in the pipeline.
▶ 07:03 Site Plan Application: 6 Dicky Street
Leo and Tamara Lampis (applicants) are seeking site plan approval to transition their existing auto business from wholesale to retail. The project involves minor site improvements, including reorganization of vehicle storage, creation of a small customer parking lot, and drainage/landscaping enhancements.
▶ 57:01 SAU Building Project Review
A non-binding review of a proposed governmental land use project involving a 5,000 sq. ft. addition to Town Hall SAU and a 5,300 sq. ft. expansion of the police department impound yard.
▶ 1:22:59 Stormwater Management and Drainage
A major discussion regarding the proposed unconventional drainage system using porous pavement and infiltration for the Dicky Street project. Staff expressed concerns regarding point source discharge into abutting properties, winter freezing issues, and inaccuracies in soil/drainage calculations. Also covered waiver request regarding the lack of 12 inches of freeboard above the 50-year elevation.
▶ 1:29:08 Waiver Requests
The board reviewed several requested waivers for the Dicky Street application concerning interior landscaping, shade trees, perimeter trees, architectural renderings, lighting, curbing, and drainage freeboard requirements.
▶ 2:30:35 Site Plan Approval (3 Page Road)
The Board reviewed the conditional approval of a site plan, ensuring that all engineering and design review comments are met by the applicant in coordination with town staff.
▶ 2:33:00 12-Unit Townhome Development (3 Page Road & 560 Mammoth Road)
A public hearing was held for a 12-unit townhouse project involving a condominium conversion, lot consolidation, and wetland buffer impacts. The developer presented plans for two six-unit buildings and addressed tree preservation and utility access.
▶ 3:01:00 12-Unit Townhome Development (295 Rockingham Road)
The Board reviewed a second, similar 12-unit project on an 8-acre parcel. The discussion focused on differences in layout (5 and 7 units vs 6 and 6) and mitigation of wetland buffer impacts.
▶ 3:08:00 Traffic and Public Safety Concerns
Public comments and Board discussion focused on the cumulative traffic impact of both developments on the intersection of Page Road and Mammoth Road, as well as the impact on local residents.
▶ 3:18:40 Traffic Mitigation and Development Agreements
The board discussed how to address traffic concerns at the intersection of Mammoth and Paige Roads. They debated whether the board could require a more thorough traffic study or if a financial contribution toward town-wide traffic mitigation should be negotiated through a development agreement with the Town Council.
▶ 3:51:00 Zoning and Conditional Use Permits
A discussion regarding the purpose of conditional use permits (CUP) in commercial zones, specifically for multi-family residential use and why they offer flexibility for growing areas.
▶ 4:01:30 Heritage Commission Checklist
A brief update on the successful delivery of a new checklist to the Heritage Commission to assist in their committee work.
Controversy & dissent
Potentially controversial issues
Dicky Street Stormwater Management
Cumulative Traffic Impact of Page/Mammoth Road Developments
Split votes
Community vs. board tension
Action items
Notable statements
I will appoint Jason Knights to take Jake Butler's spot. Give us seven voting members, Mr. Chair. — Jason Knights · Appointment of a new voting member to fill a vacancy. ▶ 04:41
Because it's April 1st... Jason is now the chair. — Jason Knights · An April Fool's joke regarding the chairmanship. ▶ 04:53
This [New England stadium announcement] is definitely not happening. — Kevin Smith · Clarifying an April Fool's joke regarding a rumored stadium location in the development. ▶ 31:14
It seems like the only thing getting built over there is residential and doctor's offices... I can't help but feel like we've missed the window. — Jason Knights · Expressing frustration with the slow pace of commercial/retail development in Woodmont Commons. ▶ 3:40:44
The drainage analysis was using incorrect soil types and infiltration rates... calculations indicate features that do not or are not even represented on the plan set. — John Trudier (Staff) · Expressing technical concerns regarding the applicant's drainage proposal. ▶ 1:33:00
The planning board is a quasi-judicial board... our regulations say that you have to do that because everyone has to be treated exactly the same. — Speaker A (Board Member) · Addressing the applicant's claim of hardship and the historical nature of the business. ▶ 1:44:00
The design does include a porous pavement system... it's a filtration system because of the rapidity of the soil to receive water. — Jason Hill · Explaining the technical merits of the proposed stormwater management approach. ▶ 1:24:45
The traffic studies for these two projects don't mention Mammoth Road, even though it's a primary concern for residents. — Dave Robbins · Public comment regarding the intersection of Page Road and Mammoth Road. ▶ 3:08:00
If you want to change the zoning to prevent this, you've got to change the zoning; they've already filed their application and it's too late. — Unidentified speaker · Response to a resident's concern about residential development in a commercial (C2) zone. ▶ 3:19:00
The Planning Board is not responsible for or does not negotiate anything; that would be a negotiation with the Town Council. — Unidentified speaker · Clarifying the board's procedural limits regarding the proposed development agreement and financial contributions. ▶ 3:41:00
The applicant offered the solution or a workaround to us. — Unidentified speaker · Ensuring the record reflects that the $15,000 contribution toward traffic mitigation was a voluntary offer from the developer, not a demand from the board. ▶ 3:40:00
Public comment
Creating this report cost real money.
MeetingWatch attended, transcribed, and analyzed this meeting on its own dime. If this work is valuable to you, chip in to keep covering Londonderry.
Follow Londonderry
One email when a new report is published from the Planning Board — or one weekly digest.
grok-4.3, gemma-4-26b · analyzed 2026-06-02.