Lyme Planning Board Minutes
June 16, 2005
Board Members & Staff: Present: Freda Swan, Dave Swanz, Dick Jones, Jack Elliott, Dan Brand, and Victoria Davis Absent: Jeanie McIntyre
Public: Scott Williams, CLD Engineering Consultants; Lucy Gibson, Smart Mobility; Rod Finley, Pathways Consulting; Greg Hemberger, Banwell Architects; Mark Richardson, Crossroads Academy; Bernie Waugh, Attorney; Jen Behnke, Crossroads Academy; Horace Henriques; and Rob Titus
Freda Swan called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM at the Lyme Center Academy Building. She appointed Dan Brand to sit in place of Jeanie McIntyre.
Item 1: Approval of Minutes: Several minor amendments were made to the minutes of June 9, 2005. Dick Jones made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Dave Swanz seconded the motion, and unanimous agreement followed.
Item 2: Crossroads Academy Site Plan Review Hearing; Map 401, Lot 56; 101 Dartmouth College Highway; Application #05-06: Bernie Waugh submitted a letter to the Planning Board dated June 16, 2005 with comments about Planning Board jurisdiction and suggested conditions of approval. The Board distributed a memorandum from Lucy Gibson of Smart Mobility dated June 16, 2005 evaluating the proposed parking; a letter from Scott Williams of CLD Consulting Engineers dated June 16, 2005 outlining unresolved issues, and two draft versions of the Board’s proposed conditions of approval.
Rod Finley presented amended plans for the proposed Crossroads Academy campus on the new site. Plan page C4 now provides footprint, floor area, and lot coverage information. Victoria Davis questioned why the “access road” between the two campuses is labeled “temporary” in the notes if it is anticipated that the road will remain. The acceleration lanes on Plan C7 have been removed and the turning lanes extended. Plan C8 changes drew comments from Lucy Gibson of Smart Mobility who noted that the turning lane was too narrow at its start. Rod Finley agreed that it was “pinched” near Station 26+00 on the plan. She further commented the travel lanes should be 12’ in width, not the 11’ as shown, although the turning lanes could be 11’ in
width. She added there should be at least a 4’ paved shoulder to provide bike lanes. Rod Finley stated he would amend the plans to address these suggestions, and he added that once the plans are submitted to the State, they may be tweaked again. Mark Richardson stated the school would like to be safety conscious as well. Plan C9 now provides the construction sequence for Phases I and II and shows the “temporary gravel access road” between the proposed and existing campuses. There is now information on the patio material, a note addressing the 2:1 slopes. Rod Finley displayed materials to be used for the stabilization which can be used on a 1:1 slope. Scott Williams stated he would like to see the details on how the stabilization materials will be installed. Rod Finley directed the Board to Plan C16 for details.
Rod Finley explained that the grass treatment swales are required by the State to provide treatment to storm water from a 10 year storm. He added that not many storms each year meet this criterion. The swales for this proposal are designed for 25 year storms. A grass swale has been added on C9 north of the Route 10 parking area to be used after runoff has gone through a stone treatment shown on the plan. Jack Elliott commented that the real risk for erosion is during the construction phase. Rod Finley agreed and stated construction sites are not allowed to discharge water from the site until all water treatment structures are stabilized. The water must be held until that time during construction. He added that a note had been added to install underdrains along the north-south
portion of the access road on a “case-by-case” basis if they hit groundwater during construction. They will put the underdrains on each side of the road. Scott Williams inquired about ledge in the access way near the proposed Middle School. Rod Finley responded that the ledge is just north of the Multi-Purpose Building out of the access way and shown on Plan C9 in the patio area.
Scott Williams asked if there were any borings within the wetlands along the centerline of the north-south portion of the access way between the Middle School and the Multi-Purpose Building. Rod Finley responded they took borings along the centerline of the access way, but they did not take borings within the wetlands themselves. Dick Jones added that the borings were only about 20’ from the wetlands and should indicate the general soil conditions. Scott Williams stated there was something creating wetlands along the proposed access way, and he needs to get a sense of it to verify prevention of de-watering the area. He added he could only understand this if he could work with Crossroads and review the geotechnical data. Dick Jones pointed out that the access way is lower than the
wetland. Rod Finley stated the beaver pond is higher than surrounding ground as shown on Plan C10. He said geotechnical borings showed relatively little groundwater. He feels the surface wetlands are due to Route 10 culverts except for the wetlands closest to Hewes Brook. He and Scott Williams discussed that they could be perched wetlands atop an impermeable layer of soil since the gravel in the gravel pit would normally have taken in the water. Scott Williams again stated he would like to see the geotechnical data and borings information which has not been provided. Rod Finley stated he would provide it though he felt it was a construction issue. Mark Richardson stated the school and the Planning Board have the same interests and wondered if the Board could capture the desired outcome rather than the specifications in the conditions of approval. Dick Jones responded that any construction could cut the impermeable soil barrier
affecting the wetlands, and once it was cut it would be too late. Bernie Waugh stated the applicant had responded to all known questions. Dick Jones responded that the geotechnical data had been requested last week. Rod Finley agreed to provide the data to Scott Williams at CLD.
There is now a note on Plan C9 that the ski trails within the campus area will be eliminated, and the trails from the pedestrian trail north to Shoestrap Road will remain. Freda Swan asked if the ski trails would be available for the public and if the snow machine trail would remain. Rod Finley stated there are no plans to change the route or the public access to the snow machine trail. Mark Richardson stated the school is evaluating the insurance impact of opening the ski trails to the public.
Freda Swan stated there is not enough snow storage provided. Rod Finley responded that Phil Harrison had worked with the school maintenance folks to develop a snow storage plan which had been submitted to the Planning Board on April 8, 2005 in a memorandum entitled, “Description of Existing and Proposed Operations.” He added that as excess snow builds up, they can truck it to the athletic field on the north end of the campus. They can also add snow storage during Phase I at the existing campus. He said they determined the area of the parking areas and access way and designated 20% of that area for snow storage away from the parking areas and roads.
Plan C10 shows storm water moving from the south to the north to the treatment structures in and around the athletic field. There are three treatment swales shown on C10 and one on C9 for a total of four treatment swales for the entire site. Rod Finley described a swale as a very wide, flat ditch with a minimum of 100’ in length. The intent is to slow the water down to one foot per second. He added they need to be maintained to make them work properly. Freda Swan asked how a condition could be posed to require maintenance. Scott Williams stated the Town could delineate methods of and times for maintenance. Rod Finley responded that the maintenance usually only requires rakes, shovels, and re-seeding. He felt it would be reasonable to add a condition that the swales are
maintained for proper function. Scott Williams said he thought the Town should have more specific conditions since the storm water will be entering public waters (Hewes Brook). That way the Town would have “something to go back on” instead of leaving it open for the applicant to interpret.
Rod Finley stated Plan C11 will eventually be the grading plan which will be submitted to the State. Freda Swan pointed out that the culvert under Route 10 now goes directly into the wetland. Rod Finley stated they have improved the area by going from a 1:1 slope to a 1:2 slope and have lengthened the culvert by 10’. Freda Swan responded that by lengthening the culvert, it now dumps untreated water directly into the wetland rather than running on the ground first for minimal treatment. Both Dick Jones and Jack Elliott stated the culvert had pretty much been going directly into the wetland anyway and across bare soil. Scott Williams suggested installing a higher culvert headwall instead of lengthening the culvert and possibly curving the outflow end toward the north away from the
wetland. He suggested a rip rap apron at the end of the culvert if lengthening it. Mark Richardson stated he hoped the Planning Board would consider cost when making requirements. Rod Finley stated the culvert costs $30/foot and a four-foot headwall coasts about $1,000—a 10-foot headwall would cost substantially more. Freda Swan asked if the location of the culvert had passed through NH DES review, and Rod Finley responded that it had.
Rod Finley addressed another concern stated by Scott Williams which was the leakage of the dumpster. He evaluated putting the dumpster in a concrete pad with three sides tipped away from the wetlands and determined this would store rain water and ice. He decided a scored pad or covering the dumpster would be a better solution. Jack Elliott said he did not think it was an important issue considering the innocuous types of waste the school would have. Jean Benhke stated they do not have a liquid problem with their current dumpster. Freda Swan stated they could at least build a ramp so any leakage would travel to the parking lot and not the wetland.
Rod Finley discussed the lighting as shown on Plan SL1. Freda Swan asked that a legend be added to the plan to describe the types of lighting. There was a table provided, but she stated this could get lost and it would be much better to have the information on the plan itself. Rod Finley stated all the lights are “dark sky friendly,” will be turned off when not in use; and there are now lights at the Shoestrap Road parking area which are shown on Plan C10.
Jack Elliott noted that one building shown on Plan A4.01 had a maximum height of 38’4”. The height regulations in the zoning ordinance were read, and Greg Hemberger stated the building met the regulations because the height of the building will be 35’ from the average finished lot grade at the building line.
Freda Swan went through the points addressed in Scott Williams’s letter which had been distributed. Point 1 is to see the geotechnical information which Rod Finley has agreed to share. Point 4 is to ensure consistency between NH DES site specific plans and the plans submitted to the Town. Rod Finley stated he has submitted the new plans to Ridgely Mauck at DES. Dick Jones stated he would still like to see review of 3:1 or greater slopes. Point 9 requests information about maintaining drainage structures. This will be added as a condition. Point 10 is to provide information about meeting the Americans with Disabilities Act. Freda Swan pointed out that there is a Site Plan Review Regulations requirement to provide handicapped access parking in Appendix A. Dave
Swanz suggested making a condition that the plan must meet ADA standards. Points 2 (underdrain and stabilization), 3 (road profile grading and drainage for connector road), 5 (slope stabilization), 6 (construction schedule), 7 (pedestrian safety during construction), 8 (dumpster leakage), 11 (loading area on plan), and 12 (pedestrian access from Shoestrap parking) had been met that night or at the previous meeting.
Lucy Gibson stated she did not believe the Site Plan Review regulations parking requirement of 0.3 parking spaces per auditorium seat for the Multi-Purpose Building to be adequate for a full school function. She stated that the Crossroads plan shows 134 spaces of which 16 spaces must be allotted for the classrooms leaving 118 spaces for assembly use. She estimates that with the peak enrollment of 160 students, there would be about 128 families attending an all school function. In this case, there would not be enough parking for all of the cars even if each family arrived in just one car. Jean Behnke stated the school only has one all school function at Christmas. Other functions are for only a part of the school. She asked if the access way is wide enough to accommodate parking along
its edge, and Lucy Gibson responded that it is not. Jean Behnke asked if they could just use the existing playing field as overflow parking. Freda Swan responded that it is still not clear if this area would be part of the new campus or not. Dave Swanz suggested that limited parking could force people to carpool. He added that big facilities like stadiums do not provide parking for each potential attendee. Lucy Gibson responded that those facilities have alternative transportation available. Dave Swanz felt carpooling is alternative transportation. Dan Brand stated the Board needed to be realistic and use national information including number of persons per vehicle. Lucy Gibson added that Crossroads could provide a detailed plan to shuttle people to major events, organize carpooling, or provide more parking. Greg Hemberger stated there is another area off Shoestrap Road which could be used for overflow parking which is not shown
on the map. Freda Swan stated they need to add it to the plan, and if they are willing to be responsible for establishing adequate overflow parking, the Board would probably allow it. Lucy Gibson added it is unfortunate there are no nearby facilities to share parking for big events, and that it would also be unfortunate to build a parking lot for just one event.
Freda Swan stated the Board must have an extension for review as the Board had just received new information tonight and at the last meeting a week ago. Dick Jones stated he would still like to see the construction drawings for 3:1 or greater slopes. Scott Williams stated he is comfortable with the responses given at this meeting. Dave Swanz asked what happens if NH DOT turns down the Route 10 improvements. Dick Jones responded that Crossroads would have to reapply with a new plan. Bernie Waugh stated the applicant needs to know what requirements need to be met before a permit can be issued. Freda Swan responded that the Board would not require all State and federal permits be issued as it is an on-going process as long as Crossroads understands it is their risk. Bernie Waugh and
Crossroads representatives agreed that construction before all final approvals would be at their own risk. Freda Swan stated the applicant still needs to send the Route 10 plan to NH DOT with the 12’ travel lanes, 11’ turning lanes, and 4’ minimum shoulders; describe overflow parking on the plans, provide geotechnical information to CLD, make a note on the plans that the structures are not within the flood plain according to FEMA, show lighting information on the plans, and provide an estimate for site work including Route 10 work to be used in determining the bond security needed. Victoria Davis also mentioned there may be money needed to pay for Planning Board consultant monitoring during the construction phase.
Greg Hemberger asked if the Board could approve the foundation for the Multi-Purpose Building so they could begin the concrete work while waiting for the next meeting. After much debate, Dick Jones made the motion to approve the foundation construction of the Multi-Purpose Building and only this portion of the site plan review application with the applicant at risk for approval of all other aspects of the application before the Board. Dave Swanz seconded the motion. After some discussion of the motion, Dick Jones “called the motion” to get a vote. Dave Swanz seconded the motion, Dan Brand abstained, and the motion passed in the affirmative. Dick Jones restated his original motion. Dave Swanz seconded the motion, Dan Brand abstained, and the motion passed in the affirmative.
Freda Swan asked the applicant for a 30 day extension. Jean Behnke of Crossroads agreed. The hearing was continued until Thursday, July 14, 2005 with no set time though it is anticipated to be around 7:45 pm.
The meeting adjourned at 10:30 pm.
Submitted by,
Victoria Davis
Planning & Zoning Administrator
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 Becky Wheeler (Map 403, Lot 9)
8:40 Site Plan Review Hearing for Earl Strout (Map 401, Lot 31)
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)
7:45 Crossroads Academy Site Plan Review hearing
Tentative Meeting Agenda for July 28, 2005:
7:00 Informal Meeting with Cynthia Bognolo; Convert residence to office (M201, L12.2)
7:30 Community Attitude Survey Discussion
8:30 Hillside & Ridgeline Conservation District Discussion
| 
