## Facts

- Landowners sought preliminary subdivision approval to build 49 homes on a hill in Hanover, New Hampshire.
- The only access to the proposed subdivision was Hemlock Road, a town-owned road already serving 18 homes.
- The planning board found Hemlock Road unsafe and inadequate: narrow (about 14–16 feet), steep (grades at times exceeding 15%), winding, with limited shoulders and sharp curves.
- Evidence showed winter conditions often forced residents to leave cars at the foot of the hill, raising traffic and safety risks; the police chief expressed concern about emergency response access in winter.
- The applicants did not dispute the accuracy of the board’s factual findings about road conditions and safety concerns.
- The planning board denied preliminary approval based on the inadequacy of the off-site access road.
- The applicants appealed under RSA 36:34 (Supp. 1975); the matter was submitted on agreed facts and transferred for appellate review without a trial-court ruling.

## Issues

1. Whether RSA ch. 36 and Hanover’s subdivision regulations authorize a planning board to deny subdivision approval that otherwise conforms to applicable requirements solely because the off-site, town-owned access road is inadequate and unsafe.
2. Whether the planning board may treat off-site road conditions and related safety impacts as grounds to prevent “scattered or premature” development or danger to public health and safety, even where some existing development already uses the road.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of New Hampshire affirmed the denial of preliminary subdivision approval.
- The court held that both the state enabling legislation and Hanover’s subdivision regulations authorized the planning board to consider off-site road adequacy and safety.
- The court rejected the claim that the board had to confine review to on-site features of the subdivision plat.
- The court accepted that additional development could worsen an already dangerous access situation, notwithstanding existing homes on the same road.

## Legal Principles

- Planning board authority in subdivision review derives from the enabling statute and duly adopted local regulations, and may include consideration of off-site conditions tied to transportation and public safety.
- A subdivision proposal that conforms on its face to zoning and subdivision design requirements may still be denied when its sole access depends on an existing public road that is demonstrably unsafe or inadequate.
- In applying statutory standards concerning danger to health and safety or “scattered or premature” development, a planning board may consider cumulative impacts of added units on existing infrastructure and emergency access.

## Conclusion

The court upheld a planning board’s power to deny subdivision approval where uncontested findings showed that the only off-site access road was unsafe and inadequate, concluding that state law and local regulations permit consideration of off-site transportation and public-safety constraints even when the subdivision’s internal design complies with applicable requirements.


Garipay v. Town of Hanover, 351 A.2d 64 (N.H. 1976)