Planning Board Continues Public Hearing on Adventure Zone Application

Waterville Valley, NH – The Planning Board held a public hearing on January 14, 2026, to continue discussions on the Adventure Zone application submitted by Tyrell Development Company. The primary focus of the hearing was to address public comments and engage with the applicant regarding parking requirements, particularly in light of the VHB parking study and the North Country Council’s peer review parking study (link). The Board’s objective was to determine if the amended application met the town’s parking regulations.

Parking Requirements and Concerns

The discussion began with an attorney representing the Select Board, who suggested the inclusion of a dedicated drop-off area on-site to prevent congestion, especially given the potential distance visitors might need to park from the facility (link). The Select Board’s preference was for 48 additional parking spaces to be located directly on-site (link).

A significant point of contention revolved around the availability and legal right to use parking spaces in the West Side parking area. The attorney for the Select Board presented an easement agreement indicating an exclusive right for Town Square to use a portion of these spaces (link). This raised questions about the applicant’s authority to allocate these spaces for the Adventure Zone without explicit permission from the easement holder.

The applicant clarified that while deeds and easements in Waterville Valley can be complex, they have historically treated the West Side lots as shared parking. They expressed willingness to make it a condition of approval to record a deed clarifying that these West Side lots are available for the shared use of Town Square and Adventure Zone guests (link). The applicant also noted that they had added 14 additional parking spaces and planned to restripe existing lots as requested by the Board (link).

Further debate ensued regarding the interpretation of the 1000-foot radius requirement for off-site parking. While the total West Side lots offer 554 spaces (with the recent additions), concerns were raised that the VHB study’s numbers did not specifically measure demand within the 1000-foot radius on peak days (link). Some Board members and the Select Board’s attorney argued that on peak days, the combined demand from existing users and the Adventure Zone could exceed the capacity of spaces within the 1000-foot radius, leading to overflow and potential illegal parking (link).

The applicant maintained that their parking plan, based on conservative estimates and peer review, was adequate for a resort community with shared parking models (link). They reiterated that they have no incentive for guests to have an unpleasant parking experience.

Public Safety and Other Conditions

The Fire Chief raised concerns about emergency access in the East Side parking lot, specifically the fire lane around the ice arena. He requested a review of the configuration to ensure proper access for fire apparatus, suggesting that moving a couple of parking spaces nearest the ice arena building would help (link). The Chief also noted that while the town’s ordinance specifies a 1000-foot radius for parking, common sense suggests visitors will use all available contiguous lots. The applicant agreed to work with Public Safety to address these concerns, potentially through permanent delineation or bollards (link).

Other conditions discussed included:

• Lighting: The applicant confirmed compliance with dark sky ordinances, full cut-off, downcast fixtures, and minimal necessary illumination for safety and security (link). A resident clarified that current parking lot lights operate on a timer and are on all night.
• Noise, Color, and Signage: The applicant affirmed compliance with relevant town ordinances for these aspects (link).
• Cross Country Training: The applicant confirmed that the cross-country training area would remain available and would be improved with ideal slopes for training, with the cross-country center moving to the ground floor of the Adventure Center building (link).

Proposed Conditions of Approval

Town Counsel outlined potential conditions of approval related to parking, including:

• Requiring the applicant to provide documentation to modify the exclusive parking easement for the Town Square parcel, making it non-exclusive (link).
• Mandating the applicant to monitor, sign, and enforce parking in the West parking lot to limit use to Adventure Zone and Town Square patrons (link).
• If parking proves insufficient, the applicant would implement a shuttle plan from other properties or return to the Board to amend the plan to build an additional 48 spaces (link).

Concerns were raised about the enforceability and objective standards for determining “insufficient” parking, and the potential for the town to be drawn into enforcement actions. The Board discussed adding a condition for the applicant to monitor parking usage and report back at 12 and 24-month intervals to ensure projections are not exceeded (link).

Landscaping and Screening

A Board member expressed concern about the effectiveness of the proposed landscaping plan to screen a 48-foot structure with 6-14 foot trees, noting that it would take many years for the trees to mature sufficiently (link). The applicant stated that the landscape architect followed zoning requirements and that the expectation was not for complete screening, but for aesthetic enhancement and preservation of existing trees. It was clarified that existing tall trees along Corcoran Pond, which are on town property, would remain untouched and provide a natural buffer (link). The Board discussed adding a stipulation to preserve existing trees along the shoreline for screening and erosion control (link).

Next Steps

The Board voted to continue the public hearing and begin deliberations on the Adventure Zone application to January 22nd at 5 p.m. in the same location (link). The applicant agreed to the extension, emphasizing a desire to reach a decision soon due to the project’s impact.