Lyme Planning Board Minutes
February 24, 2005
~
Board Members: Present: Dave Swanz, acting Chair, Jeanie McIntyre, Jack Elliott, Dick Jones and Dan Brand.~ Absent: Pete Bleyler.~~ Dan Brand was appointed to sit for Freda Swan.
Staff: Absent: Victoria Davis
Public: Eleanor Mudge, Moby Mudge, John Mudge, Jodie Rich, Brian Rich, and Jack Nichols.
~
Item 1: Approval of Minutes of the January 27, 2005 meeting: Jeanie McIntyre changed the word "stated" to "believed" in the first line of the last paragraph of page 2 of the draft minutes. Jack Elliott moved to accept the minutes as amended, Jeanie McIntyre seconded the motion, and unanimous approval followed.
~
Item 2: John Mudge informal meeting on Lots 27, 29, 35 and 38, all on Map 403: Acting Chair Dave Swanz informed the attendees at this informal, and the one following, that anything said on either side at these hearings is not binding on anyone!
~
Lot 35 is a 34 acre woodlot, bought in 1962. It is in current use, and the Mudges~have no plans to build on it. It was subdivided in 1954 to create the lot. There is a long tongue of land that takes up most of the frontage of the adjacent lot 36. The Mudges seemed to simply want to know if lot 35 is a lot of record. Since the subdivision happened before zoning, this seems to be the case.
~
Lot 27/29 is now one lot. Lot 27 is about 61 acres and lies to the west of River Road, while Lot 29 is about 80 acres and is across River Road. Most of Lot 27 is~already under a conservation easement, and the question is whether they can subdivide 27 from 29 and keep/put all of 27 in a conservation easement? The answer is probably yes, subject to more discussion below. If they wanted to build on 27, they probably could, even though it is probably all agricultural soil. They would have to adhere to state shoreline and wetlands protection rules, however.
~
Lot 29, which they call "N/S Loop and Mount Mudge": The long frontage of this lot on River Road is very steep, so a house at or near the north end of lot 29 would need a long driveway off the frontage on Lamphire Lane. The house would be in a deeryard, and the driveway would be steep in places. There seemed to be too many obstacles to putting a house in this location, and the Board advised against it.
~
"Pasture Lot", a part of the south end of Lot 29: Can they subdivide about 10 acres off of Lot 29 and build a house here? Yes, lots of record, such as Lot 27/29, get a "freebie," meaning they can get one subdivision without any of the subtractions for steep slopes, etc.
~
The final advice given the Mudges was to (preferably) subdivide the "pasture lot" from 27/29 first and avoid the subtractions and the need for engineering calculations to jump through the necessary wickets. Then, subdivide 27~from 29, which should be easy since all of 27 will be in conservation, and a new buildable lot is not being created. Or, they could put a conservation easement on 27 first, and subdivide 29, and 27 from 29 all at the same time.
~
Item 3: Jodie and Brian Rich Informal Meeting - Lot 18, Map 421: This 105 acre lot has a lot of frontage on a class VI road, Old Dorchester Road, but no frontage on a class V or better road. The Riches~want to have their son, Tyler,~build a house on this lot. They could access (new) Dorchester Road via a driveway or access road across neighbor, Jack Nichols`, land. Nichols (also present) has apparently already agreed to grant the Riches~a 30 foot wide right of way easement across his land for a driveway. There is already~some sort of a~driveway there now. The problem is that a driveway can only serve two lots, and this driveway already serves two other lots, or is planned to. The Board recommended that Nichols give the Riches a 50 foot right of way which would allow an "access road" (or
"service road") to be built which can serve up to four lots. The actual driveway would not have to be any wider, just the right of way. The access road would be reclassified as a service road, and the planning board, and possibly the Selectboard would have to approve it. The planning board members did not think this would be difficult. There was discussion that the 50 foot right of way easement should be very specific about the lots and residences~to be served (e.g., one for the son Tyler), one for the parents, and two for the Nichols. Also, the right of way cannot use the Class VI road, but can cross it. If the right of way uses the Class VI road, there will be "extra hoops" to jump through.
~
Item 4: Community Attitude Survey discussion: Dick Jones has given Vickie his comments. Colin High, who does surveys professionally, designed the previous survey. He recommended keeping some of the questions the same from survey to survey to get information on changes in community attitudes, and to benchmark the survey. The question is whether Colin still lives in town. Dan Brand, who also does survey work, volunteered to find out and work with Colin on the next survey questionnaire. Discussion followed on the purposes of the new survey. Capital improvements prioritization was agreed to as very important, as was whether to expand the Lyme Common zoning district. Playing fields should be added to the list of capital improvements listed on the survey form. We should all get comments on the questionnaire to Vickie
ASAP.
~
Item 5: Site Plan Review Regulations Amendments: No discussion.
~
Item 6: Excavation Regulations Amendments: These will be discussed when both Freda Swan and Vickie Davis are present.
~
Other Business: Vickie has made "administrative changes" to the zoning ordinance to match the amendments
~
All agreed to change the planning board fee schedule to $3.00 per notice instead of $2.90, and Vickie will send a letter to the Selectboard for their approval.
~
The date for the Public Hearing for PSNH tree work on scenic roads has been set for March 24 at 8:45 PM.
~
Septic system restrictions in zoning. There was some discussion on this. All agreed on the need to have someone or two come in and brief us on the effect of new technologies on septic systems. However, the board was split on whether this should be someone who makes their living from septic system work (e.g., a designer or someone from the state), or~should it be~someone with "more independence." Preference was given for the latter, or even both, but if an independent cannot be located, we will settle for the former.
~
Long Term Business: No discussion was held on this.
~
The meeting adjourned at 9:40 pm.
~
Submitted by,
Daniel Brand
Planning Board Alternate Member
~
| 
