Manchester "encouraging" granite curbs

[KBCraig]

The Planning Board isn't requiring granite curbing, but they're "encouraging" it. 

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=City+tries+to+persuade+developers+to+use+more+granite&articleId=f07df9a1-2a38-4f4d-a69e-358914b46ad8

City tries to persuade developers to use more granite

By MARK HAYWARD
Union Leader Staff

MANCHESTER ? It happens nearly every time a developer appears before the city Planning Board with blueprints for a condominium project, commercial building or any kind of development with a parking lot or private drive.

Planning Board members see specifications for inexpensive asphalt curbing and tell the developer they'd prefer granite curbing. The developer will swallow hard and see the price for curbing jump about four-fold.

The informal requests for granite curbing have been going on for the last couple of years, said Kevin McCue, chairman of the city Planning Board.

In November, that practice was called into question when an official with Opechee Construction Co. outright refused to go along.

Since then, Opechee has backed down and is using granite curbing along the edges of a parking lot on a project off Zachary Road in the East Industrial Park.

City regulations do not require developers to install granite curbing on private property.

But usually a client will acquiesce to the planning board's request, not wanting to disrupt plans for a project, said Ken Rhodes, an engineer with CLD Consulting Engineers.

If they don't, "I tell them, 'how long do you want to wait?'" Rhodes said.

Vertical granite curbing costs about $21 per foot, installed, compared to about $5 a foot for asphalt, said Dick Anagnost, a Manchester developer.

The planning board encourages a less-expensive option, sloped granite, in some cases. That runs $14 to $16 a foot.

"To me, the (asphalt) berm is easier. It's easier for me to repair," Anagnost said. Granite is far from maintenance free, he said. When it moves, falls or shifts, an entire crew is needed to reset it, he said.

City officials maintain there are several benefits to granite curbing. Like any curbing, it directs runoff into storm drains. As for granite, it is durable, permanent and protects pedestrians on sidewalks from automobiles.

"At some point, we have to change the attitude of people to make the job site one of quality," McCue said.

For about two years, the board has been trying to convince every applicant that granite curbing is best, McCue said. He stressed the board will go along with the less-expensive sloped granite curbing.

"It became kind of an accepted practice for the board, not to require it, but to strongly suggest it," he said.

McCue said the impression may be out there that a developer could do better for himself if he agrees to granite. He said the board wouldn't stall a plan if it did not include granite.

"We as a board have to try to persuade. We don't threaten, just convince," he said. As it turns out, most developers realize the benefit of the curbing, he said.

The city, however, doesn't always realize that benefit.

Granite curbing is required on city-owned streets. But at times, the city will use asphalt curbing, such as when it upgraded Derryfield Park two years ago. While a parking lot in front of the new tennis courts uses granite curbing, the curbing along Reservoir Avenue is black asphalt.

Charles DePrima, deputy director of city Parks and Recreation Department, said granite curbing was used along Reservoir Avenue "as far as our budget would allow."

Budgetary constraints forced him to prioritize, DePrima said. Placing curbing along the entire length of Reservoir Avenue would have "no measurable benefit to the project or the people that use it," he said.

When the city reconstructs or builds streets, it typically uses granite curbing, said Kevin Sheppard, deputy public works director. Recent examples include reconstruction of center city streets with federal grant money and the widening of Candia Road.

But the city will sometimes waive the requirement for streets in rural areas or in neighborhoods without granite curbing.

[Spencer]

It sounds like the protection racket; you don't have to pay us a weekly security fee, but we can't guarantee that your restaurant won't burn down next week.

[Braddogg]

 

[Lloyd Danforth]

When I was a kid the curbs in my neighborhood in Hartford, CT were concrete.  My grandfather added a metal corner to his. It held up well.  They came thru in the late fiftys replacing the road and adding Granite curbs.  They came thru in the early seveties with a replacement road surface and new Granite curbs to replace the still perfect ones.  They did it again in the ninetys, replacing the Granite curb with new Granite.

[Rosie the Riveter]

Thanks for the heads up on this one -- I'll definitely do a round of letter writing so they know that as a city resident, I don't agree. Although, I think that Anagnost has enough clout to ignore them and to get them to stop "suggesting" it. He owns A LOT of property in Manch.

[Spencer]

Manchester should take a look at Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that the City of Tigard, Oregon could not -- consistent with the Fifth Amendment's "takings" clause -- condition approval of a building permit for a hardware store's expansion on the owner giving the city, among other things, a fifteen foot wide bicycle path (purportedly to offset increased automobile traffic caused by the store's expansion).

Justice Souter -- everyone's favorite former NH Supreme Court Justice and hater of private property rights -- dissented, because the majority opinion "has placed the burden of producing evidence of relationship [between the condition and the development] on the city, despite the usual rule in cases involving the police power that the government is presumed to have acted constitutionally."  We have Bush, Sr. and Sununu, Sr. to thank for Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court.

[Rosie the Riveter]

Manchester should take a look at Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that the City of Tigard, Oregon could not -- consistent with the Fifth Amendment's "takings" clause -- condition approval of a building permit for a hardware store's expansion on the owner giving the city, among other things, a fifteen foot wide bicycle path (purportedly to offset increased automobile traffic caused by the store's expansion).

Do you think it makes sense to include this precedent in my letters?

[burnthebeautiful]

Well there's a good way to lower Manchester taxes, $21 tax payer money per square foot every time the city repairs something... Make them change to concrete and city taxes should fall a decent amount.

[Spencer]

Manchester should take a look at Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that the City of Tigard, Oregon could not -- consistent with the Fifth Amendment's "takings" clause -- condition approval of a building permit for a hardware store's expansion on the owner giving the city, among other things, a fifteen foot wide bicycle path (purportedly to offset increased automobile traffic caused by the store's expansion).

Do you think it makes sense to include this precedent in my letters?

I don't think that it would hurt.  Bureaucrats are often scared of case law (although many have developed an immunity).

[Rochelle]

The city, however, doesn't always realize that benefit.

Granite curbing is required on city-owned streets. But at times, the city will use asphalt curbing,

Say, for example, when the part of town is a not-so-nice one and the city planning board doesn't see the logic in using the more expensive granite curbing. I notice that a lot in my neighborhood.

[Michael Fisher]

When I tell people outside of New Hampshire that the roads are lined with curbs made of massive six-inch-thick slabs of granite, their eyes bulge out. 

[Lloyd Danforth]

Bill Campbell has a story about a midwest friend who plows year after year without seeing a rock and thinks New England farmers are rich because they all have stone walls!
We're so rich here we have stone walls running thru our woods!

[anthonybpugh]

Granite curbs?  I've never heard about that till now.  The reasons they give for wanting granite curbing isn't genuine either.  It isn't to make pedestrians safer or because they are more durable.  Probably to support some local industry and because it looks pretty.  Got to have pretty curbs to make Manc the envy of the world. 

[burnthebeautiful]

It's probably some 'preserving our culture' crap. Groups of people in a given location, without any involvement from the government, create their own traditions and ways of life, which inevitably evolve and change as the years ago. But as I said, ways of life change over time, but the government doesn't realize whatever 'culture' a group of people have is a result of voluntary interaction and change. When change begins to become evident, the government runs in and says "No, we can't change, we have to preserve our culture!", and they pass laws mandating that buildings keep being built the way they used to be, that people be taught in schools to speak the way they used to and crap like that. The government doesn't want to let 'society' change and evolve in it's own pace, they think 'culture' is synonomous with 'the way it used to be' and try to slow the change down.

So anyway yeah, rant aside, the reasoning is probably something like "New Hampshire is the granite state, we need to preserve our culture by making people put granite everywhere".

[Michael Fisher]

It's probably some 'preserving our culture' crap. Groups of people in a given location, without any involvement from the government, create their own traditions and ways of life, which inevitably evolve and change as the years ago. But as I said, ways of life change over time, but the government doesn't realize whatever 'culture' a group of people have is a result of voluntary interaction and change. When change begins to become evident, the government runs in and says "No, we can't change, we have to preserve our culture!", and they pass laws mandating that buildings keep being built the way they used to be, that people be taught in schools to speak the way they used to and crap like that. The government doesn't want to let 'society' change and evolve in it's own pace, they think 'culture' is synonomous with 'the way it used to be' and try to slow the change down.

So anyway yeah, rant aside, the reasoning is probably something like "New Hampshire is the granite state, we need to preserve our culture by making people put granite everywhere".

I have to say: That is one of the best arguments I've ever seen against planning, zoning, and other regulations.