Windham residents speak out on proposed school road
Wednesday, August 13th, 2008August 13, 2008
Eagle Tribune
WINDHAM — Support for a $1.25 million secondary road to the new high school gained traction last night with answers to lingering questions on the project’s cost, history and whom it would benefit.
The answers came at a deliberative session attended by about 65 people at Town Hall, less than a month before residents vote on the bond Sept. 9. The money would be used to establish the access road on what used to be London Bridge Road.
Town officials petitioned Superior Court and were granted approval to hold the Special Town Meeting vote.
One question last night came from resident Tom Case, who asked the fire chief if he ever approved a plan for the school that did not include an emergency access road. Some residents have said the secondary access road was not part of the original plan and became an issue after the fact.
“The answer is no,” said fire Chief Tom McPherson. He said that at no time did the Fire Department approve the project without secondary access.
McPherson again confirmed he will not allow the school to open without the access road.
The fire chief has the authority to waive a secondary access but said he will not because it would put the students and others at risk. The primary entrance is about a mile off Route 111.
The school is slated to open next fall, but the town will need much of the time before then to clear trees, remove ledge and construct the 4,000-foot-long and 24-foot-wide paved road with curbing and drainage.
The former London Bridge Road is a rocky, root-strewn path through the woods that wends around curves and climbs over rolling terrain.
Selectmen Chairman Dennis Senibaldi told the audience that the town road agent has assured him the entire construction cost would be covered by the $1.25 million bond.
The 10-year bond, at 4 percent interest, would cost property owners eight cents per $1,000 valuation in the first year, then decline to six cents in the final year, he said.
Some residents want landowners along the site of the proposed access to foot the bill since the road would make their property more valuable by opening it to residential development.
Project designer Peter Zohdi countered this assertion, saying landowners already have access to the undeveloped property without the new road.
Several of these landowners have offered to donate property for the road so long as the town constructs a paved road.
Town lawyer Bernie Campbell said state law has no provision for charging these people fees to build the road.
Campbell also researched ownership of the town road and found that it was legally discontinued in 1935.
Several speakers spoke in favor of the road.
Among them was resident Betty Dunn, who said she withheld her support until last night. Now, she wants the road. The town is in a bind since the school cannot open without a second access road.
“We would effectively be shooting ourselves in the foot (to do otherwise),” she said.
Still others said the road remains too costly and would be unsafe for pedestrians.
Resident Tom Cleary said the road design includes no sidewalk. This would endanger students walking to school in the winter, he said.
Resident Carol Pynn called the paved-road proposal “overkill.” She supports a gravel road available to just emergency vehicles.
Resident Ginny Campiola said an unpaved road would be a nightmare to travel during the winter.
In addition, Senibaldi said Road Agent Jack McCartney estimates it would cost tens of thousands of dollars each year to regrade the gravel road.
Another speaker suggested that the road be gated, allowing only emergency access.
Selectmen are to vote on their recommendation at a regular meeting. But a majority of board members have said they support the road.
Selectman Roger Hohenberger said he feels better about the road’s chance for success after last night’s deliberative session.
“There were some questions answered that were hanging out there,” Hohenberger said.
On Sept. 9, voters will also cast ballots on an article that would permanently preserve, through a conservation easement, more than 80 acres of town land near Goodhue Road.
The conservation easement, held by the Southeast Land Trust, would prevent future development of the land except through taking by eminent domain.
Approval of the article would qualify the town for a well-water-protection grant from the state.