Planning Board
Preliminary Meeting Minutes –
Recorded by Angélique Moon
July 22, 2013
Members present: RMarshall, PRenaud, SChicoine, AMoon, JFletcher, KO’Connell
7:00 p.m. Minutes
PRenaud began reading the July 8, 2013 meeting minutes. No substantive changes were made, and the minutes were accepted as read.
7:15 p.m. Mail Received:
1. New England Forestry Consultants-Plat correction
2. LGC Monthly Newsletter
3. Mailed Neighborhood Heritage Survey
CPG2 Advisory Committee will be providing consolidated feedback on either August 14th or August 22nd. The feedback will be provided to the consultant who will draft an outline, the feedback and outline will then be provided to LMurphy who will draft the ordinance.
LMurphy will be in on August 12th to review the Population and Housing section of the Master Plan. RMarshall asked LMurphy for the expected budget to wrap up Master Plan in 2014. This may be as much as $8,000, as it would constitute 3-4 sections of the Master Plan. We want to wrap this in 2014 to stay within 3 years of our Vision Statement.
Roger Williams will be coming in August 12th for Subdivision PCC. He’s also on the August 26th agenda (placeholder).
7:28 p.m. CIP
1. Administration
PRenaud said both the Town Clerk and Tax Collector need more space and are talking about knocking down walls. He talked to APatt and reviewed the storage space downstairs. APatt feels that they can reconfigure the existing space to meet the administrative needs. There are several other administrative line items (e.g. new computers).
The parking lot lights (from last CIP) are no longer a valid project. Office window upgrades were stalled based on specific requirements for historical buildings. This needs to be repriced, but for CIP planning purposes the original quote will be used.
Meeting House furnace needs to be replaced, as well as the propane heater. Quotes are being gathered. The furnace will be reflected in CIP, as well as a secondary furnace. The propane heater will fall below the budgetary requirement and will not be in CIP.
Care of the maple trees on the common and landscaping will need to come before the town meeting for approval.
Road maintenance plan: No longer considering the $5M bond, which was based on a UNH road study that used our town as the model town. APatt did extensive research and is looking at a $1.25M bond, which will calculate to approximately $1.375M with interest over the 10 years of the bond. This plan is already running, with the work being down on Mountain Road and Slip Road this week. Next year they’ll do the paved part of Old Bennington Road. In 2015, Knotwood Drive and Longwood Drive. In 2016, portions of Russell Station Road and East Road. Plan is to create an ongoing 10-12 year cycle for repaving and reconstruction.
4. Police Department
Replacement of cruisers, as needed only, approximately 4-5 years.
5. Fire Department
AMoon is meeting with LWhite on July 30th.
6. Recycling Center
JFletcher spread the projects across the six years. Requesting compactor and yard box. Removed the glass crusher.
7. Library
The Library wants to introduce climate control, working on a three year fundraising plan, to include both air conditioning and a heat pump. They are working with Emergency Management to become a resource in case of emergency. They are also working on getting a generator to back this plan. Costs will be split into three categories: private fundraising (including grants), Friends of the Library, and Town expenditure. The Library committee expects that they will recoup the costs within 3-5 years based on energy savings from installation of the heat pump.
8. Conval
Marian Alese, Business Administrator for Conval SAU, provided the complete Conval capital projects plan. PRenaud will review and pull down to expected Town expenditures.
At next meeting, PRenaud wants to review the requested projects, discuss priorities and alignment to Master Plan.
RMarshall noted that, speaking with APatt, he understands that in the past the quoted numbers have not always been very accurate. Members were urged to assure that the numbers included in the CIP be as accurate as possible.
8:19 p.m. Sawmill Estates Deliberation
PRenaud asked CBranon to point out on the plat where the newly included developable land discussed at the last meeting, that allowed the total lot yield to rise to 25, was gleaned. CBranon pointed out areas between steep slopes and wetland buffers which are not required to be excluded from developable land.
PRenaud asked CBranon to clarify the handling of the easements around the former Dorr Way. CBranon clarified the easement placements. PRenaud noted that the easement crossing the open space may create a scenario where the easement cannot be converted to a road given that the land is cast in open space. CBranon said that not counting the easement in open space should still meet the open space requirements, but the applicant will tweak a lot line to ensure compliance. The Board and CBranon clarified as well that the land crossing the open space will be a clearly designated access easement, removed from the open space, with any future use or change of use proposed by the Homeowners Association subject to approval by the Planning Board in effect at that time.
This change will also ensure the application meets the requirements of RSA 674:21-a Development Restrictions Enforceable, which will subject all designated open space land to a conservation restriction upon approval of the application.
PRenaud noted that the applicant will also need to ensure that suitable language is added to or amended in the Homeowners Association Agreement to address this access easement.
CBranon reviewed the applicant’s revised waiver request letter.
Waiver 1: Grade at intersection exceeding 2%
· SChicoine expressed concern regarding considering waivers before having an outside consultant review this version of the plan. PRenaud would support the need for an outside expert review. JFletcher, AMoon, and KO’Connell feel that if the underlying conditions in consideration (the road design, the road grade, etc) have not changed, then the prior engineer’s report could be used.
· CBranon stipulated that the regulations have changed, but the underlying design hasn’t changed and the engineer engaged by the Board in 2008 was asked to review the entire application, not just portions thereof.
· Discussion determined that outside review is not needed prior to waiver consideration.
· KO’Connell moved to approve this waiver. JFletcher seconded. PRenaud noted that this is 2.9% on one portion of the intersection, but the return is at 8% and this is a potential safety issue. After subsequent discussion, the waiver was approved unanimously.
Waiver 2 & 3: Maximum allowable grade exceeding 8%
· Discussion regarding whether the waivers should be evaluated as per Private Road or Public Road requirements. The waivers will be considered in terms of Private Road requirements.
· JFletcher moved to approve waiver 3. AMoon seconded. The waiver was approved unanimously.
· Waiver #2 is withdrawn.
Waiver 4: High Intensity Soil Survey
· JFletcher moved to grant waiver 4. PRenaud seconded. The waiver was approved unanimously.
SChicoine noted that a topic raised some time ago was whether the Board should require a sidewalk or bike path. CBranon noted that there’s little appetite for this change from the applicant. AMoon questioned if this would be an HOA decision, though it would require unanimous action. JFletcher noted that sidewalks are not prevalent throughout town. KO’Connell noted that the center of town has a similar density and does have sidewalks, but that he does not feel it would be necessary for the Board to compel creation of sidewalks. It was the feeling of the Board that sidewalks or bike paths need not be required.
CBranon asked if there are any additional Board concerns that should be addressed before they revise the plat. PRenaud noted that there are several legal items open, but they would not impact the plat design. CBranon said that they would like to bring back a revised plat with updated legal documentation for Board review. The updated HOA Agreement will be substantially the same, aside from updated references. RMarshall confirmed that the revised HOA documents will need to be reviewed by Town legal counsel and noted that the Board should review the existing document such that we can provide any feedback and inclusions to CBranon so that they can be taken into account.
SChicoine raised the topic of driveway placement and the open question regarding whether a new Site Walk is needed. RMarshall noted that this process will be overseen by two Town officials – DPW and Code Enforcement – and is subject to our Driveway Regulations and the Driveway Permit process. The Board decided that sufficient protections are in place and a new Site Walk is not needed.
KO’Connell asked to see how the phased development will play out as part of the plat. One of the prior concepts was that Phase 1 would include a smaller loop road through a lot and this temporary road would be removed when development moved to Phase 2. CBranon agreed that the phasing will be delineated on the plat and can be reviewed with the Board at the next meeting.
KO’Connell raised a question regarding drainage. Road has a lot of pitch, and at the end of winter we tend to have issues with drainage. He questioned the potential of having chambered drainage built in below the frost line in the retention zone to mitigate the water impact. CBranon noted that the drainage requirements have not changed and given the soils and the cuts on this property they are catching the runoff and metering it off the property. This plan doesn’t account for any infiltration, given the water table levels. CBranon said, “So any infiltration is a bonus.” If they included submerged chambers, they would be submerged in water and thus ineffectual.
The plat does meet the local and state drainage criteria. CBranon reviewed the plan for any opportunity to include a stone trench in order to assist infiltration, but could not find any retention basin with sufficient water table depth to support this practice. He did note that while this is not required in local or state criteria, he would view this as a best design practice.
JFletcher read notes from the prior meeting wherein CBranon noted that their wildlife experts had found no key wildlife areas. JFletcher asked for something in writing to this effect from the wildlife expert. CBranon agreed that they will provide this.
SChicoine noted that there is a signature line for TMurray on the plat, though he will not be able to sign off on driveways on this plan as none will yet exist. He asked if we should remove this line. RMarshall asked if there is a note on the plat regarding Driveway Regulations and Permits. CBranon read the current notes re: driveways on the plat. The Board agrees that the signature line for TMurray should be removed from the plat.
With regards to monuments, KO’Connell asked that we specify granite bounds on all corners. CBranon noted that the plat already calls for granite bounds on all corners, both within the plat itself and on the cover sheet in Note 13.
SChicoine raised a point regarding storm water requirements in Subdivision Regulations requiring independent consultant review. CBranon noted that this design hasn’t changed from the original design, which was reviewed by Keach and was also reviewed by the State. The Board agreed that this is sufficient.
CBranon said that they will review the bonding to revise to current budget expectations and will come back to the Board with the proposed bonding, which will then be sent for independent review.
RMarshall scheduled continuation for August 26th 8pm. He noted that Sawmill Estates is also scheduled for September 9th at 7:30pm (placeholder). CBranon noted that he feels ready to move forward with revising the plats.
11:05p.m. Board Business
Given the hour, SWOT discussion was postponed to September 9th.
11:08p.m. Adjournment
JFletcher motioned to adjourn. KO’Connell seconded. Vote unanimous in favor.
| 
