Planapalooza Kicks off with Cookout and Opening Presentation

The Master Plan Steering Committee invites residents and stakeholders to attend the 6-day Planapalooza from May 31, 2012 to June 5, 2012.   The Committee is hoping to hear from Londonderry’s students, recent graduates, older citizens, families who just moved to Town, families who have lived here for generations, business owners, property owners, developers, and anyone who has an interest in how Londonderry grows in the next 10 to 20 years.

The workshop will kick off on May 31 with an opening presentation and cookout at the High School Cafeteria. The presentation and cook out will run from 6 PM until 8:30 PM. Following the workshop, the plans will be on display at the Town Hall Moose Hill Conference Room for all members of the public to review. There will also be an Interim Pin-Up and Review on Saturday, June 2, from 6:30 until 7:30 PM in the conference room. A closing presentation will be held on Tuesday, June 5, 2012, from 6:30 until 8:30 PM at the Lion’s Hall.

Planapalooza; click for larger image.

Members of the public will receive the opportunity to work directly with a multidisciplinary consulting team consisting of planners, economists, architects, engineers, and artists. The result will be a Master Plan that will shape the future of Londonderry and set policy, funding, and regulatory priorities for the next 10 to 20 years. The vision and the plan will be informed by the citizens of Londonderry who involve themselves in the process. Through the process, decisions like how big citizens want the town to be, where the center of town is, what Londonderry will look like, what is missing, what needs improvement, and what is loved and celebrated about the Town.

More information about the Master Plan and the public outreach events can be found on the Master Plan web page on the Town’s web site, and on the Master Plan Facebook page. Don’t forget to “like” the page, and check back often to see how the 2012 Master Plan takes shape.


21 Responses

Write a Comment»
  1. +6 Vote -1 Vote +1Just wondering......

    We killed traditional New England town meeting after years of discussion about voter turn out and disenfranchisements. Despite pleas for participation only a few hundred turned out, if that. Most of those where there to support this labor union contract or this special funding request. Not equitable and fare was the cry. Town leaders pressed to eliminate town meeting, wanting to increase participation we moved all votes ultimately to the voting booth. At least at the poles several thousand would get to decide instead of a hundred. That’s why a majority of town folk approved this.

    Why is this planning process different ?

    Who shows up. The same “crowd” I imagine. Those with a special spending request. Those with nothing better to do or that can’t move job or family obligations. So we have a plan (or read what we will spend money on) that is based on a lack of participation from a majority of citizens and disenfranchised voters. Or voters who think, like town meeting, the results are pre-ordained.

    The hard work of the earnest volunteers is not the issue. The issue is you can’t knock one process (voting) and then use the same process for essentially the same purpose. The final plan can not then be ‘truly’ reflective of the town if the only voices heard are those that show up.

    I know if you don’t speak up you can’t be heard. But who is listening anyway ?

  2. +4 Vote -1 Vote +1Fred2

    @Just wondering:

    It is obvious this is all agenda driven by the handful of people participating. The ones that scream the loudest. Never the silent majority that has to work to survive. The people that relish their Saturday. Who is going to show up for that workshop? When this latest group of “leaders” (I use this word lightly) fade away, we will be stuck with this plan for 10 years.

    I do like the idea that this group is going to bring a river to Londonderry, NH. Hopefully they will run the river through my area of town, and my property value will match my assessment. Sure this group will get it right! Unlike the last 200 years.

  3. +3 Vote -1 Vote +1Bill

    Why bother? I don’t believe that the last 10 year master plan included anything about a PUD. But we have one. Any input from the citizens that creates the master plan can just be ignored and changed by 5 individuals.

  4. +4 Vote -1 Vote +1Fred2


    So well said about the change by 5. We saw it with the PUD, and other convenience zoning by another group of 5 going against the master plan. All the hard work for 5 to have all the say.

  5. -2 Vote -1 Vote +1Martin Srugis

    The PUD had hearings open to the public, no one came!?
    You can still show up and put in your view of the future of Londodnerry.
    The master plan process is a two year process with many hearings.
    How many will you show up at?

    1. +4 Vote -1 Vote +1Bill

      I will be showing up at precisely zero sessions. I would like to but I can’t. The reason being is that I don’t have the time. Working between 50-55 hours a week with no ot pay (Salaried). No raise in the last 4 years. Kid in college. Busting my #$% just to be able to pay the bills. The time I do have is dedicated to my family. As far as no one showing for the pud hearing? I consider myself VERY informed about what goes on in town. I remember seeing some info in the paper about this. But there was never an explanation as to what the impact was going to be. If there was, myself and I’m sure quite a few others would have made the time and shown up at the hearing. As voters we elect councilors to represent our best interests. They knew what was going on and they ruled in the interests of the developer. Now that everyone is up in arms about this at least one of the councilors that voted for the pud says that he is now opposed to it.

      1. Vote -1 Vote +1Brian Farmer

        A very revised history of the facts.

        1. Vote -1 Vote +1Bill

          Please enlighten me as to which fact(s) are incorrect.

          1. Vote -1 Vote +1Brian Farmer

            Any comment that you, and or others, make that speaks of the five members of the Council as a collective “they” that states that “they” knew what was going on and ruled in the interest of the developer over the best interest of the town is a complete misstatement of the fact.

          2. +3 Vote -1 Vote +1Louis

            Subsititue ‘she’ for ‘they’ and you’ll be a bit more correct on who sold out.

        2. +1 Vote -1 Vote +1Bill


          I will throw myself on my sword. I should have said some of the councilors instead of they, implying all of you. I apologize. If those that knew what was going on behind the scenes had been forthright, you and the remaining members of the council, as well as the general public, would have know what was going on.

          1. +2 Vote -1 Vote +1Bill

            Sorry, I meant Brian. Unless you’re Swedish.

          2. Vote -1 Vote +1Bill

            They all knew exactly what was going on read the stories in the past on this blog. Mike Brown was the Chairman he wrote a long comment about it all a year or two ago. Byran must live in Sweden, because he spoke about Woodmont just prior to the vote. The only councilor to step down from the vote was a her. It was approved 4-0 stop rewriting history. Besides who cares they are all gone now anyway and the rest of us are cleaning up what was left behind.

          3. Vote -1 Vote +1Bill

            Just to be clear. These are two different Bills.

          4. -1 Vote -1 Vote +1Martin Srugis

            How about using your last name? Then we can tell the difference!:-0

      2. Vote -1 Vote +1Ken McLoon

        Bill, I am in the same boat as you on a lot of things above, but what I remember about the PUD proposal was the constant reference to the area of Pettengill Road. If someone had actually mentioned Woodmont, or any other farm boardering residential neighborhoods, I would bet quite a few more people would have stood up and askked questions.

        The recent article in the Union Leader at least mentioned that our current elected officials can still shape and control what goes into Woodmont. Let’s see how they handle it if Woodmont ever gets their act together.

  6. +1 Vote -1 Vote +1Steve Homsey

    I may be wrong; however, I believe the PUD was in response to a State Workforce Housing Law, which basically “forced” towns to have one??

  7. Vote -1 Vote +1Martin Srugis

    The PUD was in response to development at the airport. It orginally started out as the flexible business district.
    One of the concerns of the townspeople was not for Londonderry to look like Boardway in Salem nor like Willow st. in Manchester.
    The 100 acre min of a PUD allows a developer to have the same look.
    The workforce housing RSA allowed a (at the time) 36 unit apartment (Vista Ridge type) to be built in an AR-1.
    That is why I worked with others to get the number of units down to 16 with the exception for elder apratments.

    1. Vote -1 Vote +1Brian Farmer

      Marty – a more correct term was Flexible Industrial District and yes it was focused on the Londonderry acreage surrounding the airport. This goes back to at least 2003 when a design charette was held, followed by a years long series of workshops and public hearings. It morphed, seemingly overnight, into the PUD.

  8. Vote -1 Vote +1Steve Homsey

    Martin; thanks for the information. As you no doubt know, keeping track of the history is a daunting task!

  9. Vote -1 Vote +1Martin Srugis

    Yes, it is. The flexible Business district went thru many convolutions before it became the PUD.
    Just like the catapiller turning into a butterfly!:-)

Leave a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.


Connect with Facebook


Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.