Lyme Planning Board Minutes
August 11, 2005
Board Members & Staff:
Present: Dave Swanz, Dick Jones, Jeanie McIntyre, Jack Elliott, Dan Brand, and Victoria Davis Absent: Freda Swan, Don Dwight, and Ben Kilham
Public: Earl Strout; Kathleen Allden; Doug Holler, Dartmouth Skiway; Scott Barthold, Sno.matic Engineering; Russell Barnes.
Dave Swanz opened the meeting at 7:00 PM and appointed Dan Brand to sit as a member in Freda Swan’s place.
Item 1: Approval of Minutes: Minor amendments were made to the minutes of the July 28, 2005 meeting. Jeanie McIntyre made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Dan Brand seconded the motion, and unanimous agreement followed.
Item 2: Continued Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Approval Hearing for Beverly Strout; Map 201, Lot 83; Application #05-11; Possible conversion to retail at 4 Britton Lane: Earl Strout had e-mailed a new summary sheet which was distributed to the Planning Board members. Dick Jones submitted a summary with proposed precedent and subsequent conditions of approval (see attachment). The precedent list includes the provision of a survey to show the proposed parking and the zoning districts. Earl Strout pointed out that there is already a fire alarm system reporting automatically to Hanover Dispatch in place. Dick Jones responded that the fire protection requirements are taken from the letter from Mike Hinsley, Fire Chief. Earl Strout pointed out that he had already submitted
a plan showing his parking and the zoning districts. He added that the shown parking is probably all within the Lyme Common District though it is not clear on his plan. Dick Jones responded this is why a survey is required, since it is difficult to tell the location of the proposal in relation to wetlands, other conservation districts, and zoning districts. Dave Swanz added the maps must be clear for their review, and everyone must follow the regulations which require these plans. He added that although the Board had deemed the application complete, they had not determined that the plans were adequate. He also stated that the Strouts may need to get approval from the ZBA. Earl Strout asked how much of Britton Lane he should address for dust since he is not the only abutting owner to the private road. Dick Jones pointed out that the condition states, “control dust generated on Britton Lane by vehicles accessing the property.” Earl Strout stated he may have Jimmy Jenks apply
calcium chloride.
Jeanie McIntyre stated the estimated traffic count from Earl Strout’s information is 242 trips per day. She would like to see a maximum traffic count limit imposed by the Planning Board so if there is a problem in the future, the traffic can be measured to see if the count is being exceeded. She felt this would be fair to the Strouts as well as the neighborhood. She added she is not worried about what the Strouts will allow in the buildings, but a future owner should have limits. Dan Brand stated the traffic count provided by the Strouts seems very reasonable and could be incorporated as a condition. The Board determined a new condition providing a maximum of 150 round trips (300 one way) per day could be imposed in the final conditions. Dick Jones voiced his objection to a
traffic volume limitation because it was not provided for in the site plan regulations that only included standards for parking spaces and because of the difficulty in enforcing such a condition.
Dick Jones suggested changing his draft conditions to allow retail on one floor of Building 1 instead of limited it to the second floor. Earl Strout stated he would like to move some of his parking. Victoria Davis responded he should see her for a permit to do this. Jeanie McIntyre commented that before the Strouts plan for additional parking in the Rural District, they should review the conservation districts to insure it would be allowed. ZBA approval might be required.
Dave Swanz asked for public comment. Kathleen Allden stated she appreciates the Board’s concern for the increased traffic and for considering her concerns provided in writing and orally at a previous meeting.
Jeanie McIntyre stated she did not believe the Board could approve this proposal without having seen the modified plans which they are requiring. Dick Jones responded that the Board had approved the Crossroads Academy proposal with precedent and subsequent conditions, and he felt they were appropriate in this case. Jeanie McIntyre stated the maps are normally the basis for review, and the Board should review them before a formal decision is made. Earl Strout agreed to extend the review period since the 60 days may be up by the time he comes back to the Board with the new plans. The hearing was continued to September 8, 2005 for around 8:00 PM. If the plans are not ready, the hearing will be continued again.
Item 3: Dartmouth Skiway continued Site Plan Review Hearing; Map 414, Lot 58; Application #05-13; Snow-making expansion, trail improvement, and parking lot lighting:
Dave Swanz stated they had not heard from the public at the last meeting, so he invited the public to speak. Russell Barnes, an abutter to the skiway, presented his concerns in writing. He stated there has been discussion of a parking lot run-off plan for a few years, and yet nothing has been implemented. He stated that Pathways Consulting had drawn up plans as a result of a State visit to the snow-making pond. He added that he has no negative comments about the proposal as presented, but it still does not address the precipitation run-off from the parking lot. Doug Holler responded that they had Bret Ryan work on the parking lot either last year or the year before, and the current plan does address run-off. Russell Barnes countered that the run-off plan is for the ski slopes, but not
for the parking lot. He added that he had seen two loads of gravel brought to repair the run-off damage to the parking lot. He said if the Skiway wants to expend money for repairs, that is fine, but he it is not fine if the gravel is running off into the stream and increasing turbidity. He noted that the waterbars installed by Bret Ryan are not effective and a long-term solution needs to be implemented.
In response to Jeanie McIntyre, Doug Holler stated there is a parking plan which has never been implemented, and there is no time schedule for implementation. The State only required that they have a plan, not that they implement it. He added that the plan has never been submitted to the Planning Board for review. Jeanie McIntyre wondered why the Board has never required this before, and felt it might have been an oversight since the Conservation Commission had expressed concern about the parking lot run-off in the past. Scott Barthold stated the application is specifically for mountain work with no proposal for the parking lot. In addition, he added, the proposal before the Board has a very similar drainage swale as shown on the parking run-off plan. Jeanie McIntyre responded that the
current application includes parking lot lights. Jack Elliott added that the Board has to look at the entire site as a whole and not in pieces. Dick Jones stated the parking lot study should be presented to the Board.
Russell Barnes said some engineers on the Skiway site had told him they only had authorization to deepen the pond and not to improve the parking lot for run-off. Doug Holler stated the Skiway will be proceeding with dredging the snow-making pond, and they have submitted notification to the Conservation Commission.
The Board discussed a schedule for construction. It was noted that the Board had previously asked for a “master plan” of proposed projects and the current proposal is an excellent plan. However, there was some discomfort in not knowing a construction schedule. Scott Barthold stated the Skiway should not have to come back to the Board every time they want to extend the snow-making pipes. Jeanie McIntyre responded that the Board appreciates their efforts and having a concept of future projects is good. However, she added there needs to be a schedule so the Board knows what projects are needed for environmental or safety issues, and that they are scheduled for more immediate completion than other long-term projects such as snow-making.
Victoria Davis stated if the Board were to approve the plan, she would issue a building permit which could be renewed annually until the project was done. However, she pointed out that if any changes in the town’s regulations were made, this might impact whether or not a permit could be renewed. Jeanie McIntyre reiterated that there is a problem approving the entire application without addressing stormwater issues. She added that the application is good, but it is only part of the story without addressing wetlands and parking lot run-off. Jack Elliott pointed out that the lack of lighting could be considered a zoning violation. Dick Jones suggested that perhaps the engineering firms who have worked on this project might get together to address stormwater for all aspects of the site. Scott Barthold asked for a list of issues which the Skiway should address prior to meeting with the Board again. The Board determined there are several issues: 1.) parking run-off (submit plan);
2.) pond expansion and water supply for snow-making; 3.) submittal of permit copies or application copies from DES and other appropriate agencies; 4.) determination of wetland issue where more water is proposed to be diverted there from the additional snow-making proposal; and 5.) a construction schedule.
Doug Holler stated the Holt’s lift and moving the pole barn are pressing problems. Jeanie McIntyre responded she did not feel comfortable addressing only part of the plan. Dan Brand asked if the proposal could be handled as two separate applications so the drive terminal and pole barn could be considered separately. Jeanie McIntyre responded they might be able to approve the terminal and barn if they had assurance the parking lot issue would be addressed. The hearing was continued to August 25, 2005 at around 8:00 pm.
Item 4: Informal Meeting with Peter Treadwell and David & Karen Keane; Map 408, Lots 75.1, 75.2, & 75.3; Franklin Hill Road: Karen Keane presented the John Wing subdivision plan which had been approved by the Planning Board a few years ago. She said they would like to protect the “meadow” from development if they sell their lot(s). She and David Keane bought John Wing’s house and own lots 75.1 (with the existing Wing house) and 75.2 (a new lot with a designated building envelope). Peter Treadwell and his wife own lot 75.3 (a new lot with a designated building envelope). The Treadwells would like to annex lot 75.2 to their lot with a minor adjustment to straighten out the lot line to follow the stone wall. They would like to eliminate the building
envelope on lot 75.2 and move the building envelope on lot 75.3 closer to the road so it is not blocking the view from the Wing house and is not encroaching so far into the agricultural area.
The Board discussed the ramifications of changing the conservation easement held by the Town which encompasses much of lot 75.1 and all but the building envelopes on lots 75.2 and 75.3. It was determined that Town Counsel should be asked if this would require a vote at town meeting. Victoria Davis will contact Town Counsel. Jeanie McIntyre pointed out that only a zoning easement had been needed, but John Wing had put a conservation easement on the property which seems to be unclear as to what it is protecting. Jeanie McIntyre suggested that the lots could still be merged and a deed restriction preventing development of lot 75.2 could be imposed though it would not be as permanent a protection as a conservation easement.
Item 5: Crossroads Academy Gravel Pit Restoration Bond: Victoria Davis explained that Rich Insurance would like to know if the Town will require the gravel pit restoration bond to be renewed. She pointed out that the Town now has a letter of credit for $100,000 from Ledyard Bank on behalf of Crossroads Academy for site mitigation if necessary. Jack Elliott made a motion to send a letter to the Rich Insurance Agency to allow the bond to expire. Dan Brand seconded the motion, Jeanie McIntyre abstained, and the remaining members were in agreement.
Item 6: Other Business: Jack Elliott stated he has been approached by more than one applicant who has appeared before the Planning Board to say the experience was intimidating and the Board members had been rude during the meeting. He felt the Board members just get used to the meetings and tend to talk all at the same time. Jeanie McIntyre stated she has noticed that the decorum of the Board has declined. Board members agreed that more effort should be made to make applicants’ experiences with the Board more positive.
The meeting adjourned at 10:00 pm.
Submitted by,
Victoria Davis
Planning & Zoning Administrator
Tentative Meeting Agenda for August 25, 2005:
7:00 LLA Hearing for Luane Clark and Karl & Charlotte Furstenberg; Map 408, Lots 61.2 & 58; Pout Pond Lane
8:00 Continued Site Plan Review Hearing for Dartmouth Skiway
Tentative Meeting Agenda for September 8, 2005:
7:00 Continued Site Plan Review Hearing for Beverly Strout
8:00 Site Plan Review Regulation amendments
9:00 Hillside & Ridgeline Conservation District delineation
| 
