TOWN OF FARMINGTON
PLANNING BOARD
WORKSHOP MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY - March 18, 2008
356 Main Street - Farmington, NH
Members Present: Chairman Charlie King, David Kestner, Paul Parker, Hiram Watson and Cindy Snowdon.
Members Absent: Gerry Gibson
Selectman’s Rep: Joan Funk
Staff Present: Daniel Merhalski, Director of Planning and Community Development
Public Present: Packy Campbell of RSA Development, Lori Wedge, Scott Spework, Eric Martin, Ryan Jackson, Tracy Major, Donna Thibault, Alicia Stickney, John Hannigan IV, Holly St. Peter and Scott St. Peter.
Chairman King called the meeting to order at 6:10 pm and seated Cindy Snowdon in the vacant seat.
BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD:
1. Discussion of Sidewalk Amendments to the Subdivision and Site Plan Regulations:
The Board reviewed the suggested changes Dan made to the sidewalk amendments as a result of the last meeting. Charlie commented that under #4 the word "standards" should be added after "ADA" for clarification. The Board agreed and Dan will make the change. David commented that in Table 20 (I)/4.19 under the RR district (c) compacted gravel should not be stricken and should be increased to 4 inches deep. The planning board discussed this and could not come to a concensus as to whether they wanted this included or not. Some argued that by including compacted gravel, which is a lower level of requirement, you would presumably always get that from the developer. The Board will further discuss this at the next meeting.
Charlie commented that in #7 there are areas outside of the Village Center in which the Town maintains the sidewalks. Dan replied that the planning board could identify those areas and grandfather them. Paul then asked Dan if he has had counsel review this document because he questions the legality of the section which refers to the change from private to public. Dan replied he has not sent this to counsel yet and Charlie added that it will go to counsel once the planning board is satisfied with the document. Paul Parker motioned to table the sidewalk amendments discussion until the end of the meeting, 2nd Joan Funk. Motion carried with all in favor.
Cindy Snowdon recused herself from the meeting.
1
Public Hearing at 6:30 PM
David Kestner motioned for a five minute recess, 2nd Paul Parker. Motion carried with Joan Funk and Hiram Watson opposed. 6:33pm.
Chairman Charlie King reconvened the meeting at 6:40 pm.
CONTINUED CASES:
• Continuation from 1-15-2008 of Compliance Hearing: For previously approved cluster subdivision By: RSA Development, LLC, for compliance with the terms of the approved cluster subdivision decisions and related plans for the property off of Elm Street/Dick Dame Lane, (Tax Map U-9, Lots 18 & 19 and Tax Map R34, Lots 1-8); Located in the (SR) Suburban Residential Zoning District. The project consists of sixty (60) single family dwelling units.
1. Mr. Campbell began the discussion by stating that his attorney sent a letter to Dan on 2-4-08 that he has not received a response from yet. Charlie acknowledged that the Board did receive a copy of this letter and Dan responded that a he sent a response letter to Attorney Shannon on 2-11-08. Charlie asked Dan if he received any response back and Dan replied no. Mr. Campbell stated that he would speak with Mr. Shannon and see what was happening with the correspondence.
2. Compliance issue #1, #3, #4 were resolved at the last meeting under the agreement that Mr. Campbell agreed to complete it.
3. Mr. Campbell stated that he feels compliance issue #2 was also resolved at the last meeting and that the Board had come to a concensus the additional lights were not necessary and that the current lights could be shown on the as-builts. Dan replied that this is true and the only reason why it is still listed as an item of compliance is because the Town has not received the as-built plans, nor has the planning board accepted them. Dan also added that this is the case with compliance issue #11. Mr. Campbell formally requested that the Board take a vote to recognize that compliance issues #2 and #11 can not be addressed in the as-builts until the development is
completed. Charlie responded that he apologizes for the confusion and that is why they are having this meeting tonight to make sure everyone is doing what is needed to get the development into compliance and completed.
4. Dan commented that compliance issues #5 and #21 are tied together. Mr. Campbell replied that these items were also addressed at the first meeting and further reminded the board that these were changes made in the field and will be addressed in the as-builts, as well as they will show the drainage is working properly. Dan responded that the drainage needs to be proven to work and needs supportive engineering verification that the outlet/inlet pipes, and catch basins were designed and installed properly. Mr. Campbell replied that he is willing to make not on the as-built that the drainage is working properly but is concerned that he should not have to contract
an engineer to redo drainage calculations. He also commented that Dick Colby, the Town's third party engineer for
2
the development, stated at the last meeting that he approved the change in the field and that it should work properly. David reminded the Board that Mr. Rhoades agreed to make sure the inlet/outlet pipes were working and installed properly at the last meeting. Charlie added that he would like a detailed letter with supportive information on the specific basin and drainage from Norway Plains stating the pipes and basin were installed correctly and functioning properly. Mr. Campbell stated that he feels Mr. Colby had the authorization to make the changes in the field. Dan replied that Mr. Colby did say he approved the change however he did not verify that the drainage was functioning properly. Mr. Campbell receded that he has no problem getting the letter Charlie requested and can get it prior to the as-builts.
5. Mr. Campbell agreed to complete compliance issues #6 and #7 at the last meeting.
6. Charlie reminded Mr. Campbell that the Planning Board requested a safety inspection of the retaining walls be completed at the last meeting. Mr. Campbell provided a letter tonight from the project manager of the retaining walls attesting to the walls integrity. Charlie said he is happy to receive the information tonight but it was discussed at the last meeting that all materials would be provided to the planning board two weeks prior to tonight's meeting and that it is not fair to expect the Board to act upon the information tonight. Dan added that the engineer who wrote this letter was an employee of RSA and the walls should be reviewed by an outside
engineer. Mr. Campbell replied that the engineer no longer works for him but he is a licensed PE engineer. He also stated that he has provided copies of the signed Certificates of Occupancy (COs) for the lots with the retaining walls. Charlie responded that the Code Enforcement Officer, Dennis Roseberry, provided correspondence to the Board that stated the issuance of a CO does not guarantee there are no issues of compliance. Mr. Campbell replied that this is not a surprise to him due to his recent conversations with Dennis but noted that the COs specifically addressed the retaining walls and required a fence be installed prior to the issuance of a CO.
Joan questioned Dan if he would require a third party engineer to inspect the retaining walls for safety. Mr. Campbell questioned why the Town would request another engineer when the engineer who created the wall holds his PE license separate from RSA Development. Charlie responded by asking Mr. Campbell if a suit was filed due to the wall who would be responsible-this engineer? Mr. Campbell replied it would be subjective. Charlie stated he would like the retaining wall addressed from a professional engineering point of view and proved to be built as such. Mr. Campbell asked how it changes the Board's standing knowing the retaining wall is on a residential house lot and not in the common area, so therefore addressed in the site plan. Mr. Campbell stated that he does no feel the Board has any purview over the
walls. Dan replied that the wall has not been officially identified as being on the residential lot but also the Board would have purview regardless because it is a common utility for the development. Charlie stated that Mr. Campbell should contact Dan to see what the minimum requirement would be to resolve this issue so that the Board can feel confident that the walls are safe.
7. Concerning compliance issue #9, Charlie reminded the Board that Dick Colby stated
3
at the last meeting that this was a change in the field. Dan corrected this statement in that the change was requested to LC Engineers who then responded the applicant would need to have it approved by the Town. Mr. Campbell stated that he provided copies of the letters from the engineers which approved this change at the last meeting and that because it was a substantial change it was also reviewed by Dale Sprague. Dan replied that a letter from the Town needs to be received that states the Town approved the relocation of one of the basins and removal of the second and clearly addresses the drainage calculations that would change due to this relocation.
8. Charlie stated that according to his notes compliance issues #10 and #11 are to be reflected in the as-builts and issues #12, #13 and #15 were agreed upon to be completed by the applicant at the last meeting.
9. Charlie stated that compliance issue #14 is outstanding because it is not complete. Dan asked if a bond was ever put up, how much it was, what the current balance is and who held it. He also stated that written confirmation of the bonding is required as this was a part of the decisions. Mr. Campbell replied that a letter of credit was established but he is unsure of it's present status. Dan commented that a letter was sent to Attorney Shannon regarding this requirement. Mr. Campbell stated again he was unsure of this because he was unaware of the correspondence. Charlie stated that there appears to be some issue with Mr. Campbell not receiving copies of the
correspondence and asked him who he would like future correspondence to go to. Mr. Campbell replied he would like them sent to him and it was duly noted.
10. In referencing compliance issue #16, Mr. Campbell reminded the Board that it is specific to the final grading around the hammerhead. Dan stated that the area also needs to be vegetated for stabilization. Mr. Campbell disagreed stating that it was built this way due to the fact it is in a flood plain and built to slow down the water and maintain the structural integrity of the area. The Board agreed with Mr. Campbell's explanation in regards to the erosion and agreed that it should be left as a gravel, rock area.
11. Dan stated that in order to resolve compliance issue #17 an engineered stamped set of as-builts need to be provided to the Town and it also needs to be addressed with the Board of Selectmen because it was their requirement. Mr. Campbell asked Dan if he received the LC Engineering field notes at the last meeting. Dan responded that he did get a copy of the field notes but there are issues with them, in that he cannot determine from the notes that construction met the plans. Dan added that it appears there is substantial information missing because in several places deficiencies were noted and never addressed as to how they were fixed. Mr. Campbell then asked
if the Town acknowledges receipt of the working as-builts. Charlie responded that maybe some of those plans were forwarded to Dale Sprague and not the Planning Department.
12. Mr. Campbell commented that he feels compliance issue #18 was addressed at the last meeting with a plan that was provided. Dan replied that the "plan" Mr. Campbell is referring to is not considered a plan until it has an engineer’s stamp and signature. He also commented that the existing conditions of the remaining six lots is not per the
4
approved plans. Mr. Campbell replied that the six lots are not to be built below the 262' elevation because it would cause drainage issues on the lots. Charlie asked Mr. Campbell if he can provide what Dan is requesting for plans for the remaining lots. Mr. Campbell replied that he does not feel it is the Board's privy to require this. Charlie acknowledge Mr. Campbell's frustration but noted that the materials were not furnished two week's prior to this meeting as agreed upon. Dan added that the applicant can request an amendment to the plan for the last six lots, to be approved by the planning board. Mr. Campbell stated that the lots are house lots and are not defined in this application. Charlie said the swale in front of those six lots is not present as depicted on the plans. Mr. Campbell replied that the
272' elevation line was not to be the finished elevations and therefore no amendments are needed. Dan replied that the swale line needs to be constructed to maintain the grade of the lots. Charlie asked Mr. Campbell to formalize a plan for the six lots and work with Dan to resolve this issue. Mr. Campbell responded that he has a problem working out these items with Dan because they have a huge disagreement with fundamental issues when it comes to interpretation and that he also received an email from Dan asking him "not to call him." Dan corrected Mr. Campbell’s statement and said that his e-mail stated that all future correspondence should be in writing for recording in the project file. Hiram asked Dan if he needed engineer stamped plans. Dan replied that the plans are not accepted without an engineer stamp/signature because anyone could have drawn them. Mr. Campbell supplied a letter tonight from Don Rhoades of Norway Plains stating that the original drainage
calculations counted on the drainage from the lots going into the road.
At 9:03, Charlie King motioned to extend the meeting until 10pm, 2nd David Kestner. Motion carried with Hiram Watson opposed.
David Kestner motioned for a 2 minute recess, 2nd Joan Funk. Motion carried at 9:04 pm with all in favor.
Chairman King reconvened the meeting at 9:15 pm.
Mr. Campbell proposed a resolution for issue #18 in that he does not have an issue providing stamped/signed plans for the six lots but does not want to repost for a public hearing for an amendment because it would not be an amendment, just additional information and proof the drainage will work properly. Charlie commented that his primary concern is the drainage of the lots and could consider the plans a clarification to the original plans, noting that they need to be stamped/signed and delivered to Town staff for review. Mr. Campbell questioned if the plans would need to be reviewed by a 3rd party and Dan replied yes and that he would like to check with town counsel to be sure the plans do not change the intent of the original design. The Board was in consensus that the signed/stamped plans for the six lots can
be provided to Dan and considered clarification to the plan.
13. Charlie concluded that items #8, #9, #14 and #18 still need to be resolved. Dan replied that is correct though the other items still need to be completed by the applicant as agreed upon. Mr. Campbell commented that in regards to #14 he has no problem
5
reposting a $30,000 letter of credit.
14. Charlie opened the meeting to the public.
A. Donna Thibault, 53 Sky View Drive, requested that the planning board address the drainage in the development because her sump pump runs year round.
B. Tracy Major, 36 Sky View Drive, stated that she agrees that the drainage needs to be addressed because her lawn washes away and the common land area is washing away already.
C. Sean, 68 Whippoorwill, wanted to make sure there is lighting installed at the turn around. Charlie replied that a street light is suppose to be installed here. Sean also agreed with Mr. Campbell that the bridge area should not be vegetated.
D. Ryan Jackson, 27 Whippoorwill, questioned if this is the biggest cluster development the planning board has ever dealt with and Charlie replied yes. Mr. Jackson stated he is concerned why this development is just coming in for a compliance hearing when there are 50 plus houses already built and would like to see RSA Development and town staff resolve the remaining issues before the next meeting.
E. Holly St. Peter, 30 Whippoorwill, stated that the large retaining wall is on her property and she would like information provided that the wall is safe.
F. Cindy Snowdon, Whippoorwill, stated that there are enormous drainage issues on Whippoorwill and would like them addressed.
G. Eric Martin, Lot #51, stated he would like third party reviews of the retaining wall. He also noted that it seems there needs to be better communication between the town departments, code enforcement officer and the planning board.
H. Alicia Stickney, 68 Whippoorwill, stated she is concerned that the wearing course of pavement is no longer any good and needs to be redone before the final coat of paving is applied.
I. Tracy Major stated that her retaining wall was built after she moved in and questioned how it coincides with the CO. She also asked if the public comment of the hearing could be earlier in the meeting so that she and her neighbors can speak at a more reasonable time.
Paul Parker motioned to extend the meeting until 10:30pm, 2nd Joan Funk. Motion carried at 9:57 pm with Hiram Watson opposed. Hiram left at 9:58 pm noting prior commitments.
15. Dan stated that in creating an action plan for issue #8 he would need a third party engineer to verify the retaining walls are safe. He further stated that a letter needs to be provided with supportive information attesting to the structural integrity of the three walls and signed and stamped by an engineer. Mr. Campbell offered to have John Turner consultants or LG Engineers provide support/proof that the three retaining walls have sound, structural integrity. He also commented that he has no problem providing this engineer report but does not want his building permits held because of these because they could take 3-6 months. Charlie responded that a way
to resolve this would be through bonding so that the funds are available to cover the projects that are still outstanding. Charlie commented that if there is a plan to address the issues and a bond is established to cover the costs of the work that is agreed upon, then he can reasonably see the building
6
permits released.
Charlie King motioned to continue the meeting until 11 pm, 2nd David Kestner. Motion carried at 10:34 pm with all in favor.
Dan asked if the original bond was placed in the amount of $1.032 million. Mr. Campbell replied that a bond was placed but he is not sure of the amount and that the Selectmen did vote to reduce the bond. Dan replied that he was unable to locate any Selectmen meeting minutes that reflected the bond ever existing or being reduced. Mr. Campbell stated that letter of credits expire after 1-2 years. Dan commented that a bond can not be reduced or changed without a vote by the Selectmen. Mr. Campbell replied that he will prepare a bond estimate for the 6-7 items that need to be completed so the planning board can move forward and building permits can be issued. Charlie commented that there are 16 items that will need to be addressed with a bond. Dan clarified that the bond estimates need to include the materials and
the labor costs. Mr. Campbell agreed and said he would send Dan an email on Wednesday, March 19, 2008 by 3 pm, that included a bond estimate.
Mr. Campbell requested permission to discuss the issue of building permits directly with town counsel. Charlie replied that he would not be in agreement with this. Mr. Campbell requested for town counsel to be present at the next continuation of this hearing. The Board was in agreement that Mr. Campbell may not communicate directly with town counsel but that counsel would be present at the next continuation of this compliance hearing.
Paul Parker motioned to continue the compliance hearing from tonight and 1-15-2008 for the previously approved cluster subdivision by RSA Development, LLC, for compliance with the terms of the approved cluster subdivision decisions and related plans for the property off of Elm Street and Dick Dame Lane (Tax Map U-9, Lot 18 & 19 and Tax Map R34, Lots #1-8) to April 15, 2008, 2nd Joan Funk. Motion carried with all in favor.
• Paul Parker motioned to continue the sidewalk draft amendment discussion to April 1, 2008, 2nd Charlie King. Motion carried with all in favor.
Charlie King motioned to adjourn, 2nd Joan Funk. Motion carried with all in favor.
Meeting adjourned at 10:58 pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
Brandy Sanger
Recording Secretary
7 8
___________________________________ ___________________
Chairman, Charlie King Date
| 
