TOWN OF FARMINGTON
PLANNING BOARD
MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY - May 6, 2008
356 Main Street - Farmington, NH
Members Present: Chairman Charlie King, David Kestner, Paul Parker, Hiram Watson, Gerry Gibson, Charlie Doke and Cindy Snowdon
Selectman’s Rep: Paula Proulx and Joan Funk
Staff Present: Daniel Merhalski, Director of Planning and Community Development
Public Present: Attorney Tim Bates, JoAnn Doke, Jim Horgan, Packy Campbell, Bill Snowdon, Tracy Major, Donna Thibault, Paul Thibault, Jim Horgan, Carl Thunberg (Nobis Engineering), Don Rhodes (Norway Plains), Kevin Gagne (FST), Kevin Watson, Holly St. Peter, Ryan Jackson and Eric Martin.
Chairman Charlie King called the meeting to order at 6:07 pm.
Business Before the Board
1. Recognition of Service for Board Members Don MacVane and Jim Horgan:
Charlie presented a plaque to Jim Horgan for his many years of service to the Town of Farmington as a member of the Planning Board from 1993 to 2008. Don MacVane was not present to receive his plaque.
2. Election of Officers:
A. Paul Parker nominated Charlie King for Chairman, noting his excellent service for the past several years, 2nd Gerry Gibson. Motion carried with all in favor.
B. Hiram Watson nominated David Kestner for Vice-Chairman, 2nd Charlie King. David declined the nomination noting his busy work schedule.
C. David Kestner nominated Paul Parker for Vice-Chairman, 2nd Gerry Gibson. Motion carried with all in favor.
D. Hiram Watson nominated Cindy Snowdon for Secretary, 2nd Paul Parker. Motion carried with all in favor.
3. Discussion on Strafford Regional Planning Commission Representatives:
Paul presented the Board with an application for the 1 year seat being vacated by Charles Wiebel. Dan informed the Board that John Law's seat is up but he is willing to be reappointed. Charlie King motioned to recommend Paul Parker and John Law for the Strafford Regional Planning Commission Representative seats to the Selectman for appointment, 2nd Gerry Gibson. Motion carried with all in favor.
1
4. Review and approve Meeting Minutes of 03-18-2008, 04-01-2008 and 04-15-2008:
A. Paul Parker motioned to accept the minutes of 03-18-08 as written, 2nd Charlie King. Motion carried with Gerry Gibson and Paula Proulx abstaining because they were absent during that meeting.
B. Gerry Gibson motioned to accept the minutes of 04-01-2008 as written, 2nd Paul Parker. Motion carried with Paula Proulx and Hiram Watson abstaining because they were both absent during that meeting.
C. Paul Parker motioned to accept the minutes of 04-15-08 as written, 2nd David Kestner. Motion carried with Gerry Gibson abstaining because he was absent.
5. Continued Discussion of Fee Schedule Revisions from 04-15-2008 meeting:
Dan supplied the Board members with a revised fee schedule for their approval. The Board reviewed the fee schedule. Paul Parker motioned to accept the draft amended fee schedule and forward it to legal for review, 2nd Gerry Gibson. Motion carried with all in favor.
6. Discussion with Tim Bates Regarding Ian's Way Plan Issues:
Cindy Snowdon recused herself from the meeting noting a conflict of interest. Paul Parker motioned to adjourn to non-public session for the discussion with Attorney Tim Bates, 2nd Gerry Gibson. Motion carried with all in favor.
The Board reconvened at 7:57pm and Charlie opened the Public Hearing.
Public Hearing at 7:58 PM
Continued Cases:
• Continuation from 04-15-2008 meeting of Application for a 2-lot Subdivision By: Cynthia and Jean Crawley (Tax Map R-36, Lot #3); to subdivide the existing approximately 12.9 acre parcel into two (2) parcels of approximately 6 acres and 6.9 acres for the property on Pound and Paulsen Roads in the Agricultural Residential (AR) District.
Charlie informed the Board that he spoke with Mr. Green, the applicant’s engineer, in reference to this subdivision and he said he was going to request a continuation. Dan responded that he has not received any request in writing but would enter the request into the project file when it was received. The Board agreed to move this item the end of the agenda.
• Continuation from 03-18-2008 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 Suburban Residential (SR) District, The projects consists of sixty (60) single family dwelling units.
Cindy Snowdon and Paula Proulx recused themselves from the discussion based
2
on conflict of interests. Charlie seated Charlie Doke for Cindy Snowdon and Joan Funk for Paula Proulx.
1. Retaining Walls - Dan informed the Board that he received the Nobis engineering reports for the retaining walls and the bond estimate reviewe and gave all members a copy for their review. Carl Thunberg of Nobis Engineering stated that the concerns identified in the review can all be addressed and that he included a list of five recommendations regarding the retaining walls. (A copy of this review is on file in the Planning office). Paul questioned if Nobis evaluated the base materials of the wall and Mr. Thunberg replied no and that is why they recommended an engineer for the wall be on the file of record. Mr. Thunberg then said that he did not have any
reason to question the quality of the base because the materials surrounding the walls looked like original materials and not fill.
Hiram questioned the first recommendation, which included removing the small, round fill rocks from the gaps of the walls and applying the appropriate materials. Mr. Thunberg replied that this is not a difficult job and can be done by a laborer in just a few hours. Charlie asked what type of impact there would be if the back soil was not free draining. Mr. Thunberg responded, "all bets would be off and the entire analysis would be incorrect." Gerry asked if the back fill needs to be further addressed to ensure the back fill is free draining. Mr. Thunberg responded, "that is what a prudent engineer would do."
2. Drainage Review - Mr. Thunberg stated that Norway Plains presented a drainage plan that consisted of the unapproved drainage and did not include the approved drainage. So in turn his office had to create their own model for comparison and found no significant difference between the two and also found no backflow issues. Paul noted for the record that the engineers report was just forwarded to the Board tonight so they had not had ample time to review it. Paul then asked Mr. Thunberg to explain the sand build-up outside the drainage pipes. Mr. Thunberg replied that during construction sand often gets into the pipes and that this type of sand is consistent
with typical construction. He also noted that he did not see any notable signs of erosion that could be a source of the sand.
David asked if Mr. Thunberg went up the hill during his investigation because near the top of the development, near lot #56 there appears to be no catch basins and there was evident flow over the road this winter. David also noted that the lower catch basin is missing and questioned if the elimination of the catch basin half way down the hill has caused this water. Mr. Thunberg responded that drainage models and reality don't always agree and that it could also be a question as to how the system was built versus how it was designed; he noted that these questions would be answered in the as-builts.
Don Rhodes of Norway Plains (the applicant's engineer) responded that this is a question that came up in a previous discussion and he has reviewed the area. As a result of his review he discovered that on lot #55 it appears the drainage has been cut off by a
3
trench that was dug between the two houses and the water is being diverted so this would be a homeowner issue. Mr. Thunberg asked if water is being caught by subcatchment #16 and Mr. Rhodes replied yes.
Charlie asked what the crown in the road is in this area and Mr. Rhodes replied it should be 2% from the crown to the sides of the road to the catch basins. Charlie asked what the slope of the road in this area is and Mr. Rhodes replied a maximum of 9% and that he did not measure the crown of the road but the 2% would be standard. He stated he is assuming the correct crown was applied but that this is something the as-built would verify.
Charlie then questioned the written statement by Mr. Rhodes regarding the addition of swales; noting he did not see the cross-sections for these swales. Mr. Rhodes replied he did not do a specific grading plan for each lot but in doing the original calculations he had to assume the water would drain from the back of the house going back and the front of the house going forward. He noted that this is how the drainage works throughout the development except on lot #55.
Paul questioned why a homeowner would have built a trench if there was not excessive ponding of water. Mr. Rhodes replied he is not sure what the existing conditions were in the backyard when the home was sold but noted that the grade of the backyard was significantly changed to be flat and the original intent was for the slope of the backyard to assist with the drainage to the rear of the property. Dan commented that it appears the back of the lots were not excavated to promote the model drainage and asked if the applicant anticipated the topography to change. Mr. Rhodes replied that the grades and the road construction plans show the grades he is referencing.
Charlie commented that in reviewing the new drainage design plans for the remaining six lots, the Board was unsure if the drainage will work as planned and if it will fit. David requested a cross-section of the areas for the swales to show if everything (including the sidewalks, swales, and utilities) will fit and flow properly. Mr. Rhodes responded that he could provide all this in the as-builts. Mr. Campbell noted that he recently visited the site and noticed the conduit (which is just piping at this point) and recognized that it needs to be reinstalled. Charlie stated that his concern is that there doesn't appear there is enough room for the design and would like it proved on the cross-section on a profile of the sidewalk, shoulder, road and bottom of the swale.
3. Utility Pole - Mr. Campbell informed the Board that utility pole #19 is in the sidewalk area and that his plan is to "cheat" the sidewalk at the point and move it closer to the road by reducing the gravel shoulder width.
Paul Parker motioned to continue the meeting until 10 pm, 2nd Gerry Gibson. Motion carried with all in favor.
Charlie King motioned for a short recess, 2nd Gerry Gibson. Motion carried at 9:12. Chairman King reconvened the meeting at 9:25pm.
4
4. Outstanding Compliance Item #5 - Charlie stated that Mr. Rhodes responded to this action item in a memo dated 4/15/2008. Mr. Campbell noted there was no debris in the outlet pipe and the flooding was because the river height was well above the level of the driveway. Mr. Rhodes reported that he checked the outlet pipe and it was clear, however he did not go up the pipe.
5. Outstanding Compliance Item # 8 - Mr. Campbell informed the Board that he spoke with Kevin Martin from John Turner Consultants and they are in agreement that the action items identified for the retaining walls are all attainable goals. Mr. Campbell then noted that that he would like to proceed by giving John Turner the time to respond to the recommendations made by Nobis Engineering and that installing a fence is not a problem.
6. Outstanding Compliance Item #11 - Kevin Gagne of FST informed the Board that he reviewed the bond estimate provided by Mr. Campbell and explained how he arrived at his estimate. Mr. Gagne then noted that $105,250 could be removed if the retaining wall is taken care of and the Board does not feel it is necessary; therefore the new bond amount would be about $124,750 or a little less. Mr. Campbell stated that this item should be continued because he is currently working on the paving, sidewalks and the play area and therefore those items might be able to come out of the bond as well.
Mr. Gagne said that in regards to the 2% crowning of the road discussed earlier he would recommend a 3-4% crown to address the drainage. Mr. Rhodes responded that if there is water sheeting over the road than the first step is to ensure the 2% crown is present before installing the pavement. Mr. Gagne stated that FST would not normally verify the height of the crown during paving. Mr. Campbell replied that on Thursday before the paving commences he will verify the 2% crown with Dave from FST and will make any corrections needed and noted there will be field notes in regard to this verification.
Mr. Campbell then stated that he does not think the homeowner on lot #55 dug the ditch line and would like to propose installing a dry well to act as an overflow pipe on the back side of the curb on this lot and then an 160' outlet pipe in front of lots #54 and #55 to function during substantial rain events, which in turn should channel the excessive water.
Gerry Gibson motioned to extend the meeting until 10:30pm, 2nd David Kestner. Motion carried at 10:00 pm. Charlie opened the meeting for public comment.
7. Cindy Snowdon, Lot #55, informed the Board that when her home was built there was originally no drainage issues but once construction commenced on lots #55-#60 the problem arose. Mrs. Snowdon provided pictures of mud/water that is continually entering the ditch area that she did not dig and was actually an idea by the Code Enforcement Officer to assist with the excessive water. Mrs. Snowdon also stated that she did not change the grading of the yard and that anyone could verify that by looking at
5
the ledge in her yard. She added that she believes the drainage issues might be a result of the change in elevations on lots #55-#60.
8. Kevin Watson, 54 Skyview Drive, asked the Board to ensure there is a 2% crown in the road on Sky View Drive as well. Charlie responded that it should have been verified and asked the Town’s third party engineer to verify this. Mr. Watson then informed the Board that RSA went through his yard and driveway to get to the back area because they could not get there through the easements. Mr. Campbell apologized for the situation and damage and promised to repair any damages. Charlie noted that there are several easements within the development that will need to be accessed by RSA and anyone in the future doing any work and asked Dan M. to draft a letter to
the homeowners reminding them of these access easements, reminding them they can not block them with any structures. Mr. Watson then noted that Skyview is one word for the street name.
9. Tracy Major, resident, informed the Board that her front lawn keeps washing away because the curbing goes into her driveway and then the run-off washes away her lawn. She then asked how the easements work and Dan explained that a homeowner does not have the right to block or encroach on the easement. Ms. Major stated that she believes there is a fence within the easement.
Gerry Gibson motioned to extend the meeting until 11pm, 2nd Paul Parker. Motion carried at 10:38 pm.
10. Eric Martin, lot #51, requested that if the Planning Board instructs the developer to install a fence in regards to the retaining wall engineering recommendations then he would like his previously installed fence to be reimbursed. Charlie responded that he is concerned the style of fence currently on his lot may not meet the safety requirement. Mr. Martin also noted that Mr. Campbell requested permission to access their backyards to address the drainage and there was some damage done. Mr. Campbell replied then he would return the area to its previous condition.
11. Holly St. Peter, lot #50, stated that she saw the rock pictured in #6 of Mr. Thunberg's report and that it was dislodged by an excavator and was not part of the retaining wall.
12. Ryan Jackson, 87 Whippoorwhill Road, stated he is very disappointed with the town in this whole process and questioned how a certificate of occupancy was given when the development was obviously not built to spec. Charlie explained the process and that the building inspector has certain expertise and then has to depend on outside engineers for review. Dan added that Dennis Roseberry is a very good building inspector and that the items Mr. Jackson is referring to were the responsibility of the previous planner, but that the town is moving forward in a positive direction now and working to resolve all the issues.
13. Donna Thibault, Skyview Dr., asked if the money to fix the pumping station
6
could be included in the bond. Charlie replied that it could but the Board of Selectmen are dealing with that issue because it was built as designed and is not a compliance issue.
14. Drainage on lot #55 - Mr. Campbell stated that he would investigate the area to see if there is appropriate depth, without ledge, to install a drywell and that hopefully Mr. Rhodes and Mr. Thunberg can review his findings/solution and then he can fix the problem. Mr. Rhodes asked if it would be okay to install the proposed outlet pipe with a cap in the right of way before Thursday's paving. The Board was in agreement that Mr. Campbell could install the stub pipe if he wanted to.
Paul Parker motioned to continue the public hearing portion of the compliance hearing for the previous approved cluster subdivision by RSA Development, LLC (Tax Map U-9, Lots 18 & 19 and Tax Map R34, Lots 1-8) to June 3, 2008. Motion withdrawn. Mr. Campbell asked for the hearing to be held earlier, noting he could be ready for 5/20/2008. Paul Parker motioned to continue the public hearing portion of the compliance hearing for the previous approved cluster subdivision by RSA Development,
LLC (Tax Map U-9, Lots 18 & 19 and Tax Map R34, Lots 1-8) to May 20, 2008, 2nd Joan Funk. Motion carried with all in favor.
• Continuation from 04-15-2008 meeting of Application for a 2-lot Subdivision By: Cynthia and Jean Crawley (Tax Map R-36, Lot #3); to subdivide the existing approximately 12.9 acre parcel into two (2) parcels of approximately 6 acres and 6.9 acres for the property on Pound and Paulsen Roads in the Agricultural Residential (AR) District.
David Kestner motioned to continue the application for a 2-lot Subdivision By: Cynthia and Jean Crawley (Tax Map R-36, Lot #3) to June 3, 2008, 2nd Paul Parker. Motion carried with all in favor.
Gerry Gibson motioned to adjourn, 2nd Charlie King. Motion carried with all in favor.
Meeting adjourned at 11:18pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
Brandy Sanger
Recording Secretary
Charlie King, Chairman
7
| 
