The Planning Board voted to recommend to selectmen that the town adopt revisions to the road ordinance to allow a subdivision developer to secure building permits before the subdivision’s road has been accepted by the town.

The Planning Board is asking selectmen to put the revised ordinance up for voter approval at March’s town meeting.

The revisions would allow a developer who has built the road up to final grade, fully prepared for paving, to be issued building permits for lots provided the developer gives the town a performance guarantee to ensure the road’s proper completion.

The conditions and amount of a certified check or performance bond should at least be equal to the cost of completing the road plus one year of maintenance and snow plowing for the street, with the condition that the road be completed within two years of the date of the bond.

Roads developed under this scenario would still be required to go to the annual town meeting for approval.

The intent of the revised ordinance is to remove a barrier to developers. It would still protect the town’s interest in having a properly constructed road completed in a timely fashion.

Durham:

Changes outlined,

concerns voiced

About 100 people braved subzero temperatures to attend a public hearing on proposed land use ordinance changes.

Although a majority just listened, some builders and developers voiced concerns about a limitation on permits issued for family members who are involved in the building business. Another questioned why there was no provision for previously approved subdivision owners that would allow them to get more than one permit.

Comprehensive Plan Committee Chairman Mike Fitzpatrick chaired the meeting that was jointly hosted by his panel and the Ordinance Writing Committee. They have been working on revisions since an earlier proposal was turned down last August.

Among the ordinance changes turned down last year was a provision that would have “grandfathered” existing subdivisions. Taking that vote into consideration, the Ordinance Committee opted not to include it in the new ordinance, a committee spokesman said.

However, one resident, who complained about the absence of that exception, said he thought it was turned down because it was grouped with another unrelated issue in one article.

Fitzpatrick said this was not the case; it was in an article dealing with only ordinances.

The goal of both committees has been “to keep the rural character of the town,” something residents indicated they want, and to ensure that it’s “not overbuilt,” Fitzpatrick noted.