Lyme Planning Board Minutes
June 2, 2005
Board Members & Staff:
Present: Freda Swan, Dick Jones, Jack Elliott, Dan Brand, and Victoria Davis
Absent: Dave Swanz and Jeanie McIntyre
Public: Joanne Foulk, Village at DCH; Phil Harrison, Mark Richardson, & Horace Henriques of Crossroads Academy; Rod Finley & Scott Hazelton, Pathways Consulting; George Turner, Banwell Architects; Lucy Gibson, Smart Mobility; and Scott Williams, CLD Consulting.
Item 1: Crossroads Academy Site Plan Review Hearing Site Visit: Board members and attendees met at the proposed Crossroads Academy new school site at 7:00 pm for a site visit. Rod Finley and Scott Hazelton guided the group beginning at the bottom of the current construction road near the new Hewes Brook bridge. Rod Finley explained that the existing soil banks will be leveled and 26,000 to 28,000 yards of material will be shifted around to “balance the site.” The elevation of the lower areas of the site will be raised by approximately four feet. Additional fill will be needed for the widening of Route 10 to accommodate additional traffic lanes.
Generally, the eastern portion of the property will have an above ground drainage system, and the western portion with the buildings primarily has a subsurface drainage system. All runoff will be directed to the north to treatment areas before entering the wetland system or brook. The grade along the eastern side of Hewes Brook will slope easterly away from the brook. Grass swales at the northern end of the developed area will slow the storm water down to about one foot per second so the particles are deposited into the swales before entering the wetlands. The swales must be routinely maintained to clean out the debris. French drains around the buildings will collect water in a subsurface yard drain system which transports the water to the north to a lawn area for treatment before dispersing
into Hewes Brook. The swales can only accommodate up to 10 cubic feet per second by State mandate. According to Scott Hazelton, the proposed drainage system will accommodate a 25-year storm.
Rod Finley and Scott Hazelton stated no sedimentation will leave the site during construction due to erosion controls such as perimeter site fencing along Hewes Brook and fencing anything down gradient and due to settling pools. These preventive measures are required by NH DES as conditions to the wetlands permit.
Board members were taken up to Route 10 and brought down the proposed access way through abundant poison ivy to the proposed parking lot near Route 10. It was stated that the ski trail between Route 10 and the proposed buildings would be reclaimed. The site visit ended at 8:00 pm and attendees moved to the town offices to continue the hearing.
Item 2: Crossroads Academy Site Plan Review Hearing: Freda Swan appointed Dan Brand to sit for Jeane McIntyre. Freda Swan inquired when the 65 days are up for the Board to make a decision about this application. Victoria Davis responded it would be about June 16th.
Lucy Gibson of Smart Mobility submitted a draft memorandum dated June 2, 2005 to attendees. Her firm had been hired by the Planning Board to review the potential traffic for the site. Lucy Gibson summarized her memorandum with the conclusion that a shared single driveway would be the better alternative:
1.) Design of Turning Lanes: She compared the proposed turning lanes with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards for a 55 mph road. The “taper” of a travel lane as it widens to accommodate a turning lane is a 15:1 ratio and 165’ length per AASHTO. The proposed Northbound taper ratio and length is substantially less and the proposed Southbound taper is substantially more than the standard. The AASHTO deceleration lane length is 680’. Both the proposed Northbound and Southbound deceleration lanes are much too short. She felt there should also be a queuing length for two cars waiting to turn across Southbound traffic in the Northbound turning lane. However, she went on to say that having the access
entrance to the present Crossroads site (assumed to be sold to another entity in the future) so close to the access entrance of the proposed Crossroads site creates a difficult situation in providing adequate, safe entry to either site. 2.) The acceleration lane for southbound traffic exiting the proposed Crossroads site should be eliminated. It is not necessary for the estimated traffic flow and might encourage drivers to exit Crossroads during on-coming traffic instead of waiting until there is a safe gap in traffic. 3.) She evaluated the possible traffic concerns once Crossroads has established its new school and a possible business takes over the existing Crossroads property. Her assessment is that alternatives to two access ways should be “vigorously explored.” 4.) She provided pages from the NH DOT website which discourage multiple curbcuts in close proximity for safety reasons. 5.) She stated the plan
does not seem to take advantage of possible shared parking between the current site and the proposed site for special events which will require occasional greater parking demands.
Phil Harrison stated that Crossroads Academy has been discussing another possible alternative with the Village Condo Association Board to convert the current Crossroads Academy building to residential rather than commercial. The access would be the current access for the Village south of the current access for Crossroads Academy. The current access to Crossroads could be fenced off from Route 10 and used only for emergency access. They have also been discussing changing the property line to give Crossroads more land for its proposed site. They have had an architect look at the current Crossroads building, and it was determined that it could be converted into residential units. Freda Swan cautioned that they should determine how many units could be developed in the building as it could
influence their decision. The Board was pleased with this alternative
Phil Harrison expressed concern about how to access the proposed site since the conversion from the current school site to the new school site would be completed in two phases. In phase I, they would complete 95% of the infrastructure work as well as construct the multi-purpose building. The classes would still be held at the existing site. Rod Finley stated they have looked at a connector access way from the existing Route 10 access way down to the new site as well as a connector access way from the proposed Route 10 access way up to the existing site. Freda Swan stated it would be up to them whichever way works better, but she would much prefer one access way and possibly keep it out of the wetlands district.
Scott Williams of CLD Engineering Consulting submitted the preliminary findings about the proposed Crossroads site plan to attendees in a letter dated June 2, 2005. His firm had been hired by the Planning Board to evaluate the engineering aspects of the proposed plan: 1.) The proposed upper parking lot requires a substantial amount of fill up to 20’. He suggested moving the proposed access way north by at least 100’ so the grade of the access way would come into the lot at a more gentle slope (currently proposed at 10%) and require less fill to raise the parking lot up to meet the access way. Some proposed slopes are as much as 2:1 along the access way and upper parking lot. He suggested Pathways provide more details of the stabilization plan to insure permanent stabilization. He recommended erosion control blanketing or riprap as possibilities. Some of the steep slopes could also be lessened if the access point were moved northerly previously suggested. 2.) He expressed
concern that protected pedestrian walkways be provided to separate construction from non-construction activities until the project is completed. 3.) The proposed access road between the circular loading/parking area north to the parking area above the proposed multi-purpose building shows a significant cut in some areas making them lower than the wetlands east of the road; 4.) It is not clear how much snow storage area is shown on the plans and if they meet the Town requirement that they equal at least 20% of the road and parking surfaces. The snow storage areas are too far from the parking areas and most of the access way. Transporting the snow could deposit some of it along the access way embankments where they could cause erosion and destabilization issues and melt down to the wetlands. 5.) The plans do not show designated Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) required parking spaces and pedestrian access walkways. 6.)
Stormwater drainage discharge outlet pipes are shown on the plan as discharging toward wetland areas without treatment before entering the wetlands. 7.) Clogging of closed stormwater drainage system should be addressed. 8.) CLD suggests that the long-term configuration of the ski trail system should be considered as part of the current application. 8.) There is no pedestrian access walkway shown to the remote parking lot. 9.) CLD suggests that measures be provided to contain leakage of the trash dumpster north of the Lower School Building.
Freda Swan asked if CLD had reviewed the drainage calculations for the culverts connecting wetlands. Scott Williams responded that they did not as it was not clear if the access way configuration would remain or be changed. He added that they would have a look. Freda Swan pointed out that there is snow storage shown in the wetland buffer and wondered if the Board would allow this. Scott Williams also pointed out that the access way did not widen where it was shown to be a loading area between the Middle School and the Multi-purpose Building. Phil Harrison pointed out that the pedestrian trail would connect to the existing trail where it has two approved wetlands crossings.
Freda Swan stated the next step is up to the applicant and inquired if they would have revised plans for the June 9th meeting. Phil Harrison was amendable to the proposed changes and stated they would have the plans ready. Jack Elliott added that though there are several changes, they are not substantial.
The Board discussed the possible location of Fringed Gentian which is listed as “threatened” by the NH Heritage Bureau. Phil Harrison stated that Ben Kilham had visited the site where the gentian had previously been found and determined the area is overgrown. The Board decided this was not a Planning Board concern. The Board had also been interested in reviewing the site as potential wood turtle habitat as pointed out by Ben Kilham. Victoria Davis called and described the site to David Carroll, a turtle expert who felt this certainly could be wood turtle habitat. He recommended a site evaluation by a turtle expert, and he suggested Dr. Sarah Turtle at Plymouth State University. Dr. Turtle responded to an inquiry that she would be willing to research the site for habitat, and
she agreed that there seemed to be habitat potential due to the cold water stream, wetlands, and availability of gravel or sunny areas for nesting. However, the zoning ordinance only allows the Planning Board to require protection for species listed as “threatened” or “endangered.” The wood turtle is not listed, but as Dr. Turtle pointed out this is likely because there is so little information available about the wood turtle. NH Fish & Game staff expressed the same position stating that it takes years for a species to become listed. Phil Harrison stated that the school would voluntarily evaluate this for part of its science curriculum, and he would contact Dr. Turtle for assistance. Horace Henriques added that the school has a very good science program, works with the Vermont Institute of Natural Science (VINS), and has the resources to look into the wood turtle habitat.
Item 3: Approval of Minutes: Dan Brand made a motion to approve the minutes of the May 26, 2005 minutes. Jack Elliott seconded the motion, and unanimous agreement followed.
Item 4: Other Business: Victoria Davis pointed out that the hearing for the Subdivision Regulations and Curb Cut Regulations (formerly Driveway Regulations) would be noticed, and any additional comments or changes regarding the amendments should be made by Board members.
Victoria Davis presented a letter and sketch from John Mudge. He requested a “sense of the Board” whether or not they would require a perimeter survey of his family’s 104 acres if they were to subdivide off about 15 acres and put the remainder into conservation easement. Board members agreed that they would probably waive this requirement.
The meeting adjourned at 10:00 pm.
Submitted by,
Victoria Davis
Planning & Zoning Administrator
Tentative Meeting Agenda for June 9, 2005:
7:00 Crossroads Academy Site Plan Review Hearing
Tentative Meeting Agenda for June 23, 2005:
7:00 Subdivision Regulations and Curb Cut Regulations Public Hearing
7:45 Newton/Dickey Continued Lot Line Adjustment Hearing
8:15 Informal Meeting with Jeff Hinissin (Map 403, Lot 9)
8:40 Site Plan Review Hearing for Earl Strout (Map 201, Lot 83)
Tentative Meeting Agenda for July 14, 2005:
7:00 Informal Meeting with Bill Wohlforth (Map 414, Lot 9)
7:30 Minor Subdivision Hearing for Town of Lyme (Hwy Garage/Cemetery M201 L110)
| 
