MANCHESTER, N.H. – The public hearing on a proposed development of single-family homes off Wellington Road will remain open following various concerns from the Manchester Planning Board during their May 21, 2026 meeting.
This proposed development, dubbed “Overlook Estates,” seeks to place 31 lots onto 21 acres of land on a property designated as Tax Map 860, Lot 30. Purchased by Manchester Water Works in 1940 with the intention of the property eventually hosting a water tank, the property was declared surplus by the Manchester Board of Mayor and Aldermen in 2024
The primary new street in the development, which would be called Summit Drive, would begin on Wellington Road almost across the street from Linda Drive, heading northwards toward Shepard Road until takes a westerly turn and ends in a cul-de-sac facing Fleming Street. Another, smaller, proposed street in the development that would be called Ridgeview Court, stems off Summit Drive and also points toward Fleming Street, with its edge leaving only a few feet from the boundary line of properties on Fleming Street.
During the May 2026 Manchester Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting, a variance was granted for the proposed development related to wetland-related issues, as the portion of the development closest to Wellington Road consists of wetland area and a small stream that filters into nearby Lake Massabesic.
In addition to the subdivision application for the development sought by Granite Engineering LLC for the project, a waiver was also requested from City of Manchester Subdivision and Site Plan Review regulations that limit a permanent cul-de-sac street to 1,000 feet. In plans submitted to the Manchester Planning and Community Development Department, Ridgeview Drive would be approximately 2,041 feet.
Development is also proposed immediately to the west on property behind One Church – Manchester Outpost with the church looking to subdivide part of its property into a new 16 single-family home development that would create two new streets off Lakeview Lane: Merrill Lane and Bailey Court.
Representatives of both projects told the board that connecting the two streets would be infeasible given the steepness of the terrain near the boundary separating the two proposed developments. Granite State Engineering Principal Engineer Brenton Cole stated to the board that the terrain slopes upward from Wellington Road to the back of proposed development and some proposed lots would have difficulty obtaining driveways at the recommended maximum safe grade of ten degrees, or one foot of elevation for every ten horizontal feet.
Several abutting property owners on Shepherd Road and Fleming Street spoke in opposition to the project for a variety of reasons. Concerns included impact to property values, limited tree buffer between properties, rock blasting during construction and potentially hazardous runoff into the wetlands that proposed retention ponds on the development would not be able to handle as well as the proximity of the cul-de-sacs to Fleming Street and overdevelopment of the area.
“(Overlook Estates is) ten pounds of development in a five-pound sack,” said attorney Jason Reimers of, representing the Davey Family of 78 Fleming St.
It was noted by several of the abutters that an appeal of the requested variance is likely in the near future.
Cole told the board that each of the lots in the development had far more than the minimum required amount of frontage and area under the city’s zoning ordinance, making the density appropriate for the development’s 21 acre size. He added that the cul-de-sacs were comparable to those in nearby neighborhoods and the 1,000-foot limit stemmed from older limitations to fire engine hose length that was no longer relevant. Cole also responded to a question from Planning Board Chair Stephen Meno by stating that sidewalks would not be necessary given the width and limited number of pedestrians on the streets. He added that anyway sidewalk wouldn’t lead to anywhere since Wellington Road does not have sidewalks in that area.
With the concerns lingering, the board determined that more information from the Department of Public Works and other city agencies would be required and it would take more than two weeks to obtain that information. With that, the hearing was continued to the board’s meeting on July 2.
Planning Board Member Maggie Baldwin recused herself from participation in the discussion stemming from a letter she sent to the Department of Public Works related to the development.
If the subdivision request is successful, the development would also require several additional permits from state agencies related to the environmental impact of the proposal.
