Town of Greenfield
Selectmen’s Meeting Minutes
Tuesday – May 8, 2007 – 6:00 pm
Present: Selectmen - Selectwoman, Karen Day; Chairman, Aaron Kullgren; Selectman, Jarvis Adams, IV
Administrative Assistant, Deb Davidson taking minutes
Selectman Kullgren called the meeting to order at 6.00 pm
Appointments:
6:00 – Greg Nadeau – Mr. Nadeau came before the BOS to discuss his concerns about Old Lyndeborough Mtn. Road washing into his driveway; Selectman Kullgren stated that the Road Agent, Duffy Fox recommended Mr. Nadeau contact the FEMA number (the e-mail link is listed below) as there are funds for private property damage resulting of the recent flooding. Mr. Fox cannot be here tonight, he is in Peterborough at the FEMA program workshop.
Mr. Nadeau stated that this issue goes back 12 years and he does not believe it is solely a result of this storm. Old Lyndeborough Mountain Road was upgraded to a Class V road 12 years ago, to allow for building above him. At the time the road agent was Rick Weston, the bridge & grades were not done properly, since then there has been a variety of damage due to various storms. This storm was the worse ever, Mr. Nadeau’s question is what is the landowner’s responsibility for clean up and repairs for a situation the town has created?
Mr. Nadeau stated there is zero damage on his property as a result of the storm, except for the town’s portion of the road that damages his property.
Kullgren asked, are we talking about the culvert
Mr. Nadeau stated yes, according to the state it is classified by statue as a bridge. A bridge report is supposed to be filed biannually - he asked for this earlier today, and there are not any reports filed in the town office.
Day stated that several years ago it was stated the culvert needed to be reset.
Mr. Nadeau showed photos of the damage to the bridge.
Discussion followed…
Mr. Nadeau discussed the differences in what creates a bridge vs. a culvert – a bridge is 10’ this is 10’2”.
Kullgren asked what Mr. Nadeau would like to have as a resolution
Mr. Nadeau stated on the bridge, a short-range solution is to build-up the side of the banking.
Selectman Adams discussed what is happening, the big fix is to replace the culvert, but if we bring the bank up it will protect the road, driveway and the wetlands.
Mr. Nadeau stated this is the last straw; he has been doing this for 12 years and would like to have this resolved.
Mr. Nadeau stated the second issue is RSA 234 bridges & bridge aid; the definition of bridges is found under RSA 234:2; maintenance is found under RSA 234:20; inspection by the city officials is found in RSA 234:23. All these statutes were provided to the BOS for review. Mr. Nadeau stated these matters need to be addressed, one option he has is to go directly to the State, and they will fix it plus add 10% and charge the town. He does not want to take that avenue, but it is an option.
Day stated she knows that when she went out there the road has ledge under it and it needs to be blasted, and it will be costly.
Mr. Nadeau stated that there are specs., the State could reimburse the Town
Day stated if Duffy could tilt the road, it would relieve the gravel from going into Mr. Nadeau’s driveway.
Mr. Nadeau said that is another part of this issue
Kullgren asked again what would a resolution be.
Mr. Nadeau stated:
· Get his driveway back to what it was;
· Get the banking built up higher than the bridge so it will flow properly.
He further discussed his other matter regards Old Lyndeborough Mt. Rd., the culvert right before Mr. Nadeau’s house collects everything from the top of Old Lyndeborough Mt. Rd that goes down the road past his driveway.
Lengthy discussion followed on Mr. Nadeau culvert issues & what options could be used to resolve this
Kullgren stated he would like to have the selectmen go to this property and have a visual of what is happening.
Adams stated this road should not be washing into Mr. Nadeau’s driveway; he would like to have it fixed and see if it helps the situation.
Action:
· Site walk with Selectmen, Road Agent & Mr. Nadeau within the next two weeks
· Gravel put back in the driveway
· Build the wall to whatever grade is needed
· Change grade to allow for culverts to drain properly
6:30 – In accordance with RSA 91A:3 II (a) motion by Selectman Kullgren to enter into a nonpublic session. Seconded by Selectmen Day & Adams. Voted unanimously
6:43 – Motion by Kullgren to enter out of the non-public - Seconded by Selectmen Day & Adams. Voted unanimously
Decision: no action taken at this time.
6:45 - In accordance with RSA 91A:3 II (a) motion by Selectman Kullgren to enter into a nonpublic session. Seconded by Selectmen Day & Adams. Voted unanimously
7:00 - Motion by Kullgren to enter out of the non-public - Seconded by Selectmen Day & Adams. Voted unanimously
Decision: no action taken at this time.
7:00 – the appointment did not show
Action: Motion by Selectman Adams to hire Mr. Sousa for the part-time general maintenance position; Seconded by Day; No discussion. Voted: unanimously
Chairman Kullgren directed Deb to write the appropriate letters to the applicants.
7:15 – Higgins Lane - Daniel LaGuerre, Attorney MacMartin; Attorney, Teague, Attorney, Fernald, members of the planning board were all present to discuss the building permit request from Mr. LaGuerre on Map S3-Lot 5, located on Higgins Lane.
Selectman Kullgren opened with a discussion regarding policy in the Town of Greenfield, particularly policy of allowing building on Class VI Roads. Kullgren had copies of a possible policy the BOS would like to adopt; Peter Hopkins made 8 copies to provide to the public. Kullgren discussed this type of a matter has been discussed in the past. The proposed policy cites RSA 674:41 – Kullgren began to read items, which will be a requirement of this policy to allow it to be acted upon.
Kullgren asked if anyone had any questions about the policy
Day stated if the policy is adopted, then some people need to see the policy that are listed in the policy (i.e. Conservation Commission, Fire Chief, Road Agent etc.)
Adams stated that he believes it is important that the town adopts a policy like this and he is glad to see it was presented tonight.
Kullgren asked for comments, Attorney Teague responded in saying that every small rural town in NH is being faced with such concerns, this policy is important to have in place to prevent the scattered random building. There needs to be some means of measuring such building.
Kullgren asked if selectmen have the authority to issue such a policy.
Teague stated yes, they also have the authority not to issue, however if they want to consider authorizing building on Class VI or Private Roads, it is better to go forward with a policy in place.
Kullgren asked for more comments:
Planning Board Chair, Dario Carrara stated his main concern is the road and the quality of the road, for instance he thinks it is important to be fair and consistent. He knows it’s a new board but in the past others people have had to upgrade either Class VI Road. His question is, are we getting away from that and are we enabling people to get building permits on Class VI roads without upgrading to Class V status.
Adams commented on that, he feels this case is an apples and oranges, this particular situation is not asking for a subdivision, it is a road that is already developed already being used, we are not extending anything. The scenario that Dario discussed is for a new subdivision, this is a unique situation.
Planning Board member, Kevin O’Connell stated that when we use the terminology of “lot of record” we must remember that all lots in town are a lot of record, the town is using the term as an ability to develop, but it does not mean a lot is developable.
Attorney MacMartin stated that our zoning ordinance explains what a lot of record is, and he further commented that Yes, every lot is a lot of record
O’Connell stated he is trying to find the terminology Attorney MacMartin has referenced
Attorney Teague discussed this is a general language document; the use of a proposed road is different than building a new road for a subdivision.
Dario asked how many lots this type of policy would affect
Mr. LaGuerre provided evidence that shows how many buildable lots are located on private roads in Greenfield
O’Connell pointed out that some of these lanes are in fact shared drives and not private roads
Mark Fernald introduced himself as representing abutter, Mrs. Kathleen Burgess. He asked that he wanted to have a clear understanding of what the intention of the law is and further commented that his point is, if you are going to change your policy to allow construction on Class VI & Private Roads the town may want some design criteria before authorizing a building permit? Or the town can take the attitude if we are going to sign a release, it is all right to build on these roads, the question is do they want some release.
Attorney MacMartin commented on Attorney Fernalds summary of the law, going forward he agrees is accurate, he wants to say what the policy is doing is trying to not take such a heavy handed approach to this matter. He agrees with Selectman Adams in that, does the lot predate the adoption of zoning, and further added to the policy should be something regarding, if there will be access from another road. Which this lot does not have.
Code Officer, Peter Hopkins stated this is a big matter for him, dealing with existing building code, but we are dealing with an existing piece of property. A new subdivision should follow the zoning, but this is a lot that has existed.
Fernald stated that if this lot was created after zoning, then every lot in this town is an existing lot prior to zoning.
Adams stated Mr. Fernald brings up a good point that is why he doesn’t think extending the use of a private road is crucial to this matter; it takes care of the problem because it isn’t opening up lots that have not been traveled in the past.
Adams had a question for Mr. Fernald, when his client did work on her property, without a permit, wouldn’t this help them to upgrade the properties located on this particular road.
Fernald stated his purpose was to not allow selective building permits
Kullgren asked if Dario, as Planning Board Chair, has any comment know learning all the new information.
Dario stated that the PB had no comment due to the pros & cons of allowing building on this particular section of road, as a board they could not come to an agreement, he further stated the jist of the comments are in the minutes.
Kullgren read the PB minutes of April 9th discussing this matter.
Attorney Teague pointed out that we have a policy that charges the BOS to consider if the road is safe for pedestrian traffic etc…if this policy is adopted and a permit is issued, it could be conditional to certain upgrades made to the road. You can fashion the approval to meet certain criteria the way the policy is written, it is not just a matter of yes or no, you would not want to approve something that is not safe, conditional approvals are totally acceptable.
O’Connell asked how would you enforce a seasonal building?
Hopkins stated it would be tough to enforce.
John Teague discussed monitoring insulation would be one way, storm windows, insulation etc…we know seasonal when we see it, if that is a condition of the permit it is up to the property owner to adhere to the permit conditions, up to the board to enforce the conditions, up to the inspector to assure by inspections it is being built accordingly. He wouldn’t recommend adopting this he would look at the individual situation.
Attorney MacMartin stated thinks that insurances will enforce a seasonal building; his experience with fire & emergency chiefs they are conservative by nature, he thinks they need to be aware of this if adoption of this policy takes place.
Day had a question, if the agreement is made and Mr. LaGuerre signs a waiver of liability, can we then put something in writing that this is a seasonal lot
John Teague stated it would need to be recorded at the registry.
Adams asked if this policy is adopted, he has a question regarding the release, if it is put in would a bank be less likely to authorize a loan on the property if no ambulance or fire can get to the property.
Attorney MacMartin stated that is one of the issues his firm deals with, the issue is access as long as there is access, and a maintenance agreement on the road could be obtained. It is his experience that it would not stop a mortgage.
Adams discussed something that he would like added to the policy, he would like to add #15: “does not extend a Class VI or Private roadway beyond its current use”.
Add #16 to the policy to read “any relative facts”
Hopkins discussed this thought on Adams’ proposal
Attorney Fernald thought that what Adams was saying is the policy would not allow the issuance of a building permit beyond the last existing building.
Attorney MacMartin stated it could read “extend the use of the road for residential purposes beyond (past) the existing residential use of the road”
O’Connell stated when it comes to access how defensible is that?
Teague discussed this, he stated that Yes we can defend this in court and many other places
Jim Fletcher, speaking as a citizen, has there been any precedence on the responsibility of the enforcement of such a release
Teague stated not really
Attorney MacMartin discussed there is one case that he is aware of but it has been acknowledge that this release exists but is not a point of order
It was noted that when the PB was meeting, someone commented the town of Swanzey had to improve a ½ mile of road because of a similar situation.
Attorney Fernald stated he was not familiar with this and couldn’t find a case on it, do the other attorneys have any recollection of such a case.
Either Attorney MacMartin or Attorney Teague new anything about any case in Swanzey where the town had to improve the road.
Kullgren asked if anymore discussion on the policy
Day stated situations such as this should be unique to each situation
Hopkins asked generically, what is unique, what is unique to one might not be to another.
Teague discussed this policy is to review individual situations; he would shy away from the word unique.
Motion by Adams to accept the policy on Class VI/Private Roads as amended by Adams. Seconded by Kullgren. Discussion on the matter of the policy followed
Day stated that she feels they have gone through this quickly should we wait longer and allow counsel to look it over. If anything should be added does the town counsel think we should wait…
Teague stated that if it were periodically reviewed, then he would feel better than having it shelved. Another consideration is of the town master plan and how does this fit. He does not feel the need to delay for the sake of reviewing it any longer.
O’Connell stated that last week at the law conference and on the legal update he asked Attorney, Tim Bates under 674:41 IF THE building permit were granted would it create a violation of the town zoning ordinance, if in doing so would the BOS be creating a variation of the town zoning ordinance?
Bates stated no they cannot create a variation of town zoning.
O’Connell commented that he has problems with this, zoning clearly requires frontage and does a special exception need to be created due to this situation. O’Connell read the zoning and what frontage is etc, he asked how did Attorney Teague feel about this.
Attorney Teague stated this is an interesting question; to fully put the policy in effect there may need some zoning ordinance amendments, on that he would like to review them. Discussion followed.
Adams stated a key factor when thinking of the zoning ordinance you think of setbacks etc., the whole point of RSA 674:41 is to allow this type of building.
Lengthy discussion followed with Teague leading the thought on 674:41
Attorney MacMartin reviewed the zoning ordinance that refers to pre-existing lots and having to follow zoning ordinances by the book.
Kullgren noted that there is a motion on the table to accept the policy as amended by Selectman Adams and a vote should be made.
Voted: in the affirmative. This new policy was unanimously accepted
Policy adopted: Voted: 3-0; the BOS will review this policy every six months and they will further sit down with Planning Board, Fire Chief, ConCom etc., and review this policy and the building permit applications as well.
Adams asked if the people with the building permit willing to wait 30 more days.
Mr. LaGuerre stated he would like this resolved as expediently as possible, he feels he has been very patient.
Dario asked if in the future the BOS are going to ask the PB for comment they need to be very specific as to what they are asking.
Day stated a site walk is needed in her opinion.
Dario asked if they have discussed landmark tonight.
They have not.
Fernald he has looked at the deed to the property in question, he further asked if the town can restrict a 3-season property, this property is near Lake Whittimore it does not have any beach rights, when looking at the road think about it as a year round traveled road.
Attorney MacMartin stated that the surveyor has determined that the property does have beach rights.
Mr. LaGuerre stated he just spent a lot of money to research that matter, and it was determined there are beach rights.
Kullgren reviewed where we are at this point and do we authorize the issuance of this building permit on sections of road particular to the lot owned by Mr. & Mrs. LaGuerre, identified as S3-lot 5.
There will be a site walk on Thursday, May-10, 2007 at 6:00 pm – the Fire Chief, Road Agent, PB, ConCom & BOS will all be asked to attend and be prepared to make comment.
Other Business:
Recycle Mtg. – Reminder: Antrim Town Hall, Monday, May 21 @ 7:00 pm to have Corcoran Environmental present their plans for future. Could include regional recycling.
Misc. Incoming Mail – Review –
FEMA – Selectman Day reported that after the last meeting the next day Catherine spoke with Peter, he came in and Day invited Kent Vincent & Claudia Chase to join her; Hopkins doesn’t handle the FEMA he only coordinates departments. When they met, Claudia imparted her knowledge of what has taken place in Francestown, she stated that time is of the essence, this is a large process and we must make preliminary sheets even when just asking for assistance, that gets you in the queue, at anytime they can come out to visit your town, when they come you must be ready, if you aren’t the process could be even longer, we need to be on top of this.
Mr. Vincent went to Peterborough with Duffy to the FEMA assessment meeting, they have already started the process; the reports are all listed as events, say what the event was, assign the highway time specifically, knowing that it needed to be detailed they wanted to get started.
Vincent & Day met with Duffy, Duffy, Vincent & Fire Chief, Jim Plourde worked on this for several hours this week and things are going well.
All doing a good job, Day stated everyone is all excited about tracking their time and knowing where the funds have been spent.
Spirit – Kullgren asked when would it be ready for the BOS to edit? Kullgren will draft a letter to be printed in the Sprit as the Chairman of the BOS
Floodplain Ordinance – Special town meeting scheduled for May 22nd – 10 am – 7 pm
This will be posted by tomorrow the 9th with proposed amendments
9:00 – Treasurer, Linda Nickerson – Mrs. Nickerson updated the BOS with Treasurer business
· TAN – Still have $123,000 left of the recent TAN
· Memo – the recent memo to Town Clerk helped with timely deposits, “the very next day 5 deposits went into the bank”
· Bookkeeping - Deb & Linda discussed meeting with finance dept. we still haven’t done anything with two sets of books; we need to expedite the meeting. Deb will set up the meeting for Thursday, May 17, at 9:00am
· Scanning checks - Still pursuing scanning of checks
· Investments - Met with NHPDIP (NH Public Deposit Investment Pool) they suggest only Treasurer & Deb have access the accounts, the other people on the signature card should have read only rights. Nickerson asked why doesn’t the town have more money invested in the PDIP, there is no charge for overnight deposits; she will investigate more before she actually invests funds. The simple answer is since Virginia Hilligess; the treasurer’s have not taken advantage of the pool. The investments are the treasurer’s responsibility, not the BOS.
· Salary – the salary for the Deputy Treasurer was discussed. Linda wants to pay Katherine Heck $15.00/hour, she is checking with the BOS for their thoughts. Brief discussion followed, Nickerson stated she did not take the difference between what was the salary for the treasurer first ¼ of year, she would like to use that for membership to the NHGFOA (NH Government Finance Officials Association) and the remainder to be used for salary for Katherine Heck. Selectmen told Nickerson she could use her budget how she deems appropriate.
Safety Driving Course – Administrative Assistant mentioned the TRIM (Total Risk Management) program which, the town is a member of through the Local Government Center. They are offering a safe driver program, to maintain the lower rate; this program will be mandatory for all town employees who use either their personal vehicle or a town vehicle. It must be completed within 3 years, however they are offering it now and are encouraging all TRIM towns to take advantage of the program. Brochures will be provided to all town employees.
10:00 in accordance with RSA 91A:3 II (c) motion by Selectman Kullgren to enter into a non-public session. Seconded by Adams & Day. No discussion - Voted: Affirmatively
10:13 motion by Kullgren to enter out of the non-public, session. Seconded by Adams & Day. No discussion - Voted: Unanimously. There were no decisions made.
10:14 in accordance with RSA 91A:3 II (a) – Motion by Day to enter into a non-public session. Seconded by Kullgren. Discussion – Administrative Assistant noted that RSA 91A is very specific; the reason for wanting to enter into a non-public is not a personnel matter.
Amended motion by Kullgren to not enter into non-public under RSA 91A:3 II (a). Seconded by Adams & Day.
10:14 in accordance with RSA 91A:3 II (c) – Motion by Day to enter into a non-public session. Seconded by Kullgren. Voted: Affirmatively
RSA 32:10 was briefly discussed, it was recommended to the Administrative Assistant by Paul Sanderson, an attorney at the LGC, the BOS encourage the BAC to review the budget handbook the LGC publishes. We can obtain additional copies for $10.00 each. There appear to be misconceptions as to being able to “run the town as a business”; this book clearly explains that concept, and the fact that we are a non-profit. Discussion followed. Selectman Kullgren would like a memo to the BAC Chair informing him that any communication through the central office will go through the chair.
Greenfield Grizzly – Selectmen reviewed a letter from Parks & Rec. Director, Molly Anfuso regarding the letter previously received from the “Greenfield Grizzly” – No action will be taken at this time.
Budgetary items – Selectmen discussed their top 5 budgetary items; this will be discussed again at a later date.
Action Items:
· Administrative Assistant to contact Choice Computer and explain the supervisor of checklist laptop is having problems with the wireless mouse, ask her to come fix it.
· Letters to be mailed to Mr. Sousa, Ms. Andrews & Mr. Mirabella
· Contact the ConCom, Road Agent & Fire Chief to attend a meeting on Thursday, May 10 at 6:00 pm at the Higgins Lane property to inspect for safety.
· Next agenda discuss a date for a staff round table discussion
· Memo to Bruce Dodge, Chair of BAC
· Top 5 budgetary items lists: Aaron believes that best practices should be last, this is the list the BOS came up with in order of priority.
o 1. Compare Greenfield to other similar towns
o 2. Review the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) & come up with a financial plan w/ recommendations for different financial vehicles (i.e. loans, bonds etc.) at a BAC Meeting. Kullgren wanted it in the minutes that John Halper has done a great job on the CIP and the tool should be used
o 3. Talk to Dept. Heads and review findings with John Halper or provide modifications to him
o 4. Road program of some sort (needs research)
o 5. Best practices.
Selectman Adams stated he would like best practices closer to the top.
Selectmen would like to have the TRC next week at 6:30 for 15 min.
With no further business the Board of Selectmen adjourned the meeting at 10:35 pm. The next scheduled meeting will be Tuesday, May 15, 2007 at 6:00 pm.
| 
