Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
 
Planning Board Minutes 07/13/04
The meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Chairman Peter Hogan.  Present were regular members James Nordstrom and Bob Furey; ex-officio Christine Quirk; and, alternate Don Duhaime.  Also present were Planning Coordinator Nicola Strong, Planning Board Assistant Michele Brown, and Recording Clerk Suzanne O’Brien.
Present in the audience, for all or part of the meeting, were Todd Connors, PE, Steve April, Daniel Donovan, Jr., Paul and Shannon Aubin, Steve and Leslie Chunn, Bob Todd, LLS, Rick Martin, Jay and Dot Marden, Paul McGuire and Marilyn Moreau, Kim Burkhamer, Harlan Hadley, Patrick Golding, Joseph Swiezynski, Andrew Prolman, Esq., John Wawrzyniak, Raymond Critch, LLS, Tris Gordon, Bob Huettner, Charles Cleary, Esq., James Denesevich, Donna Mombourquette, Janet and Dave Chamberlain, Roc Larochelle, Karen Heselton, Bill Rollins, Paul Keiner, Brian Holt, Ernie Thibeault, Paul Carideo, PE, and Brandy Mitroff.
CLARK HILL REALTY, LLC                                  Adjourned from 06/08/04
Work Session/ Design Review
Non-Residential Site Plan Review/ Multi-Family Developement
Location: Clark Hill Road
Tax Map/Lot #8/118
Residential-One “R-1” District

        The Chairman read the public hearing notice.  Present in the audience were Steve April and Todd Connors, PE.  No abutters were in attendance.
        Todd Connors, PE, stated that based on the chronology of this application, the applicant had given considerable thought as to how to proceed with the site plan and wanted input from the Board on conceptual design ideas going forward.  He added that the applicant also wished to withdraw the current preliminary application.
        Todd Connors, PE, stated that they had not addressed the outstanding items discussed at the prior meeting as their main focus was currently the potential for future subdivision of the site and whether or not it was legally feasible.  He noted that a letter received from Town Counsel emphasized that the Town would not enforce the condition of “no further subdivision” that had been placed on a prior plan.  Todd Connors, PE, said that although no deeds were registered with covenants for this site that stated no future subdivision could occur, the prior subdivision plan did make reference to such covenant language.  He added that due to this ambiguity, the applicant wished to pursue the question legally so as to avoid lawsuits down the road should he wish to further subdivide the property.   
        Todd Connors, PE, stated that the second item in Town Counsel’s letter noted that the Town would require the proposed driveway on the site plan be built to Town road standards.  He added that the driveway did meet the Town standard width of 22 feet along with two foot shoulders plus extension for guardrails which was mentioned in previous meetings with the Board.  However, the distance between curves was only 150 feet versus 200 feet and the tangents for the road were too tight at 25 to 50 feet.  In addition, Todd Connors, PE, stated that the proposed driveway entrance platform was shorter that the Town standard of 75 feet and too steep in grade at -10% versus the Town’s minimum of -3%.  He added that these standards were acceptable for a driveway but on the tight side for acceptable roadway standards.
CLARK HILL REALTY, LLC, cont.
                
        Todd Connors, PE, explained that in order to fully conform to Town road standards with the driveway’s entrance at -3%, the road would slope 5-6% for the maximum allowance of 600 feet toward its cul-de-sac and cross a wetland in the interim.  He added that this wetland would sustain substantial impacts as a result of conformance with these Town standards.  Todd Connors, PE, noted that if waivers on road standards were granted on the driveway entrance platform length from 75 to 50 feet in combination with additional length given to the cul-de-sac of 300 to 1,200 feet to increase vertical curves in the road that these impacts could be greatly decreased as elevation of the road would be closer to the wetlands and side slopes would then be reduced.  He asked if such waivers had ever been granted by the Town on other applications.  The Chairman replied that under certain circumstances such waivers had been granted individually on applications but not in combination.  James Nordstrom noted that adding road length for cul-de-sacs was usually allowed when it was assumed that the road would be extended further at some point.  He added that he did not think this was the rationale for this situation and Todd Connors, PE, agreed.  James Nordstrom stated that Subdivision Regulations specified waivers that could be granted by the Planning Board’s and added that he recalled few previous situations where waivers were granted for horizontal curve length and lengths between tangents.
        Todd Connors, PE, asked if the AASHTO Low Volume Rural Local Road Standard had ever been applied to proposed roadways of other applications that came before the Board.  The Chairman asked if that standard dealt with cluster subdivisions as he recalled several waivers granted in that instance.  The Coordinator said waivers to tangents and curves on a proposed road had been granted but not under that specific standard.  Todd Connors, PE, said his question stemmed from the fact that the Subdivision Regulations gave no specifications for the minimum rate of vertical curvature or K value of a road.  He added that AASHTO had published a Low Volume Local Rural Road Standard for roads that saw less than 400 cars per day which allowed for a downsizing of the typical highway standards to paving widths of 15 feet and lower K values.  Todd Connors, PE, stressed that he would not seek waivers on such items but did wonder if the Town had ever applied this lower standard.  The Coordinator replied that the Town Engineer did refer to AASHTO on a plan’s design review to ascertain good engineering practice, however, she did not know if any plan had ever requested the low volume standard to which Mr. Connors, PE, referred.  She added that in regard to the roadway length for a cul-de-sac the Planning Board had discussed extension of this length from 600 to 1,000 feet with the Fire Wards and waivers for extension up to that length had been granted recently by the Board.
        James Nordstrom stated that he understood this application to propose a multi-family build with a long dead end driveway.  He asked what the difference was between this scenario or a condominium development on a long dead end road.  Steve April replied the latter would result in more tax base for the Town.  James Nordstrom added that he favored the condominium scenario over a multi-family residence as ownership was more beneficial to the Town and thought that if certain regulations could be relaxed at the Planning Board’s discretion to allow for such a project then that should be considered by the Board.
        Todd Connors, PE, noted that the unique driveway turn-around on the site plan did not conform to the Town standard for cul-de-sacs as it was slightly larger to allow for bigger trucks
CLARK HILL REALTY, LLC, cont.

such as moving trucks, garbage trucks, etc.  He asked if this design would be considered by the Board or if he should revert to one more in line with Town standards for cul-de-sacs as the design could be easily changed in the site plan’s initial stages.  The Chairman replied that although he could not speak for the Road Agent, he preferred the current roadway design as its larger size would be more easily maintained by the Town.  James Nordstrom asked if the roadway would be maintained by a condominium association should that scenario come to pass.  Steve April stated that in that case the association would be responsible for maintenance of the driveway portion of the roadway and the Town would maintain the Town road portion.  The Chairman added that any roadway the Town was required to maintain would need to meet Town standards in terms of base and asphalt binder materials used to build that roadway.  Steve April said they would not seek a waiver on materials but instead on design issues such as length of curve and distance of platform.   
        Don Duhaime asked if a plowing liability would arise on a road built to Town standards to a certain point which then became a private road at the cul-de-sac.  The Chairman thought that this road design was superior as it appeared to be a roadway that looped around and back onto itself rather than the typical tight cul-de-sac circle.  Don Duhaime said that the plow may not want to turn onto private property.  Todd Connors, PE, said that the point where the roadway became private property would need to be defined in fairness to the plowing contractors.  The Chairman replied that he was reasonably sure that the plow trucks would prefer to drive around the loop onto the private portion of the road for ease of turn-around.  Don Duhaime noted that the Town would be liable if plows damaged the private portion of the roadway.  Todd Connors, PE, agreed this was an issue that needed clarification.  The Chairman stated that this was the reason for the entire roadway being built to Town standards.  Steve April wanted to confirm that if the private portion of the road was not built to Town standards then it would need to be delineated as such and the Town would stop plowing at that point in the road.  The Chairman said this was the case.  Steve April said he had no problem with that stipulation and that would be designated on their new site plan.  The Coordinator stated that she thought Town Counsel’s opinion was that the roadway needed to be built to Town standards whether the project became a condominium or a multi-family.  Steve April asked if that opinion included the driveways.  The Chairman said that he believed the loop should be included in the portion of roadway built to Town standards for ease of plowing and that the private portions would be the driveways and parking lot located off the roadway.  Steve April agreed and asked Mr. Connors, PE, if building the loop portion of the roadway to Town standards presented any design constraints.  Todd Connors, PE, replied that it would not and that he also preferred the current design but could certainly do a cul-de-sac if necessary.  He added that the Town standard issues for the current roadway design were not width and base but curvature of the road and that there was ample time for redesign and discussion for waiver requests as the plan progressed.  The Chairman suggested that the applicant present waiver justifications in future presentations such as a narrower road bed to slow traffic, not a through road, etc.  Todd Connors, PE, noted that future waiver requests were more likely to deal with the allowance for the road to better follow the curvature of the land through the use of horizontal and vertical curves.  He did not foresee a need to alter widths, base
CLARK HILL REALTY, LLC, cont.

or shoulders of the roadway.
        Bob Furey asked if this roadway had a potential for future connection to anther parcel of land.  Todd Connors, PE, replied that this scenario was unlikely due to a triangular parcel on Old Coach Road that was deemed to belong to the Town.  Steve April noted that the applicant was likely to Quitclaim that portion of land back to the Town. Todd Connors, PE, added that surrounding topography, properties and wetlands did not lend themselves to additional outlets for the proposed roadway and thought it an unlikely future event.  Bob Furey stated that the unlikelihood of connecting the proposed roadway would be another justification to grant the waivers for town road standards as speed and traffic levels would not increase in the future.
        Todd Connors, PE, asked if withdrawal of an application required a formal procedure.  The Chairman said such a request could be made verbally to the Board.  Todd Connors, PE, stated that legal ramifications needed to be explored before proceeding with a new application.  The Chairman asked if the applicant going to seek legal counsel regarding the future subdivision option.  Todd Connors, PE, said this was the case and that they would like to have that question answered before proceeding with the site plan which already had a lengthy chronology.  The Chairman stated that Mr. Connors, PE, still needed to verbally request withdrawal of the application.  Mr. Connors, PE, requested to withdraw the current application for reconsideration at a later date.

        James Nordstrom MOVED to accept the verbal request to withdraw the application of       Clark Hill Realty, LLC, Non-Residential Site Plan/Multi-Family Development, Location:   Clark Hill Road, Tax Map/Lot #8/118, Residential-One “R-1” District.  Christine Quirk   seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.  
        
DONOVAN, JR, DANIEL (APPLICANT)                 Adjourned from 6/08/04  DONOVAN, II, DANIEL (OWNER)
Public Hearing/Major Subdivision/2 Lots
Location: Bedford Road
Tax Map/Lot #9/63
Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District

        The Chairman read the public hearing notice.  Present in the audience was applicant Daniel Donovan, Jr.  Abutters present were Paul and Shannon Aubin and Steve and Leslie Chunn.
        Daniel Donovan, Jr., stated that he had received the Coordinator’s checklist and agreed that certain items would be included in updated engineering designs on the plans based on those suggested during the recent site walk with the Board.
        The Chairman stated that waivers had been requested for the soils map and Fiscal and Traffic Impact Studies.  The Chairman and James Nordstrom asked if a Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Plan had been submitted as it was discussed at the site walk.  The Coordinator replied that the Board had what was initially submitted with the application, however, it was
DONOVAN, cont.

determined at the last meeting and the site walk that more detailed information was required for the front lot and driveway to the back lot and this is what the Board was waiting to receive.  The Chairman asked Daniel Donovan, Jr., if this information was being compiled and he said that it was.  The Chairman added that this information was necessary in order for the application to be considered complete and Daniel Donovan, Jr., said he understood.  The Chairman stated that the applicant could then voluntarily request to withdraw the application tonight or it could be denied as incomplete by the Board.  Daniel Donovan, Jr., asked if the application could be still be considered active but pending the receipt of the additional information.  The Chairman stated he would review what was needed for the site plan in order to expedite its progression.  He then noted that the soils map would probably not be waivable in addition to the Environmental Impact Study requirement.  The Coordinator noted that the Site Impact Analysis by Schauer Environmental was meant to fulfill the Environmental Impact Study requirement.  The Chairman then stated that the Traffic and Fiscal Impact Studies would most likely be waived.
        The Chairman asked if the applicant intended to make improvements to the causeway located on the site.  Daniel Donovan, Jr., said that his engineer would define the existing crossing and propose improvements.  The Chairman asked what engineer would be used and Daniel Donovan, Jr., replied that it would either be Mike Dahlberg or Peter Schauer based on who was more adept at working on wetland impact issues.
        James Nordstrom stated that the application appeared complete with the exception of the completed Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and the question was whether the Board should continue the acceptance of the application or deny it as incomplete.  The Chairman noted that the applicant was agreeable to either decision and would probably withdraw the application.  He added that the applicant wanted to know the Board’s intentions on granting the existing waivers listed on the application going forward.  James Nordstrom replied that although he would not be agreeable to waiving the Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, he did not have an issue with granting waivers on Traffic and Fiscal Impact Studies as the application was for a two lot subdivision.  He added that the case would be different if further subdivision was applied for in the future on this site which was the assumed intent.  The Chairman noted that the Site Impact Analysis stated that future intended use clearly.
        Don Duhaime asked if zoning changes were necessary on this site for the facility proposed.  The Chairman said a zoning change was not necessary and that the Donovans’ prior facility had been approved without a site plan given its intended use. He asked Daniel Donovan, Jr., if he intended to go forward with a site plan for the intended facility in the future.  Daniel Donovan, Jr., replied that he was unsure as his original site plan had changed from three lots to two and wondered if the back lot would require a site plan.  The Chairman said it could be required or desired by the Board.  Daniel Donovan, Jr., asked if a site plan for a future facility would require items such as building location.  The Chairman replied that it would include anything visible on the property and in the applicant’s case, layout of the facility, pointers and guidelines on parking lot design, etc.  He added that guidelines in this case were likely to exceed those required by the Board as the facility dealt with health care.  The Chairman noted the
example of parking and said that paved parking might not be desired by the Board due to erosion
DONOVAN, cont.

factors.  Daniel Donovan, Jr., replied that paved parking was planned for a future facility due to safety concerns.  The Chairman noted that a twenty space parking lot would not be appropriate for the area and Daniel Donovan, Jr., agreed noting that eight parking spaces were planned.  The Chairman explained that these were examples where a site plan could provide guidance on what the Board would desire.
        The Chairman stated that as there was only the outstanding item of the additional information for the Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Plan in order to accept the application as complete, the applicant should withdraw the current application for resubmission once this information was in hand.  Daniel Donovan, Jr., wanted to confirm that some environmental issues highlighted by the Coordinator during the site walk would also need to be addressed.  The Chairman replied that he had no major concerns with the back lot other than expanding the wetland crossing which would require the appropriate permits and that the front lot needed an expanded septic design, drainage swale and culvert design for the driveway, and so on.
        James Nordstrom asked if all application fees were paid to date and the Coordinator replied that they were.  James Nordstrom then asked what the applicant’s fee liability was when an application was withdrawn and resubmitted.  The Coordinator replied that fees would be charged for certified letters to abutters.  James Nordstrom clarified that the applicant would not be charged an additional fee for reapplying.  The Chairman surmised that the process would go more quickly once the application was resubmitted.  Daniel Donovan, Jr., stated that he anticipated a one to two month lag in getting the necessary updates for the plan from his engineer.
        The Chairman asked if there were any abutters who wished to speak.  Paul Aubin stated that his property was surrounded by the land in this subdivision and asked if the Planning Board had any input regarding the size of the intended medical facility for example a 20, 40 or 60 bed unit.  The Chairman replied that a 13,000 s.f. building was proposed.  Christine Quirk added that the building plan was for 13 residents only.  The Chairman further added that the proposed support staff would number 12 in total with 5 staff members on each shift and 2 from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m.  Paul Aubin stated that he had reviewed Town reports which noted more emergency calls were made to the similar facility of Rose Meadow than any other location in Town and feared the same would be true for this facility.  The Chairman replied that he had heard in passing that abutters to Rose Meadow were not disturbed by its presence in a residential area and felt that the facility was well run and operated in an unobtrusive neighborly manner.
        Shannon Aubin wished to clarify that the Town was not able to legally prohibit further growth of such a facility beyond a 13 bed unit as the site of the back lot would allowed for expansion.  The Chairman said this was an accurate statement.  Daniel Donovan, Jr., stated that because increasing the size of the facility would generate concerns from surrounding abutters he did not plan on doing so.
        Steve Chunn asked what was planned for the front lot on the site.  Dan Donovan, Jr., replied that this would be a residential lot for a 4-bedroom single family home.  Leslie Chunn
asked why the Board considered waiving the Traffic Impact Study if additional traffic was going
DONOVAN, cont.

to be generated from the proposed facility and be in close proximity to the traffic from Wilson Hill Road.  The Chairman replied that the Board realized a traffic impact would occur, however, not a major one such as for a large subdivision.  
        Steve Chunn noted that traffic would be generated from staff and visitors to the facility.  Brandy Mitroff said that the traffic pattern did not parallel one of a hospital and was lesser for resident homes such as Rose Meadow.  She suggested a drive down Briar Hill Road would reveal to those concerned that the disruption they assumed was not evident.  Shannon Aubin thought that the situation would differ on Bedford Road which had many areas of blind spots for traffic.  The Chairman stated that 2 more homes on Bedford Road were not going to cause major traffic impacts and felt that concerns over anticipated traffic increase was unwarranted.
        Daniel Donovan, Jr., requested that his application be withdrawn for reconsideration at a later date.

        James Nordstrom MOVED to accept the verbal request to withdraw the application of       Daniel Donovan, Jr., Major Subdivision/2 Lots, Location: Bedford Road, Tax Map/Lot      #9/63, Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District.  Christine Quirk seconded the motion and        it PASSED unanimously.

RIGHTWAY BUILDERS, INC.                 
Submission of Application/Public Hearing
Major Subdivision/4 Lots
Location: Beard Road and NH Route 77 a/k/a Weare Road   
Tax Map/Lot #5/29 & 5/52
Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District

        The Chairman read the public hearing notice.  Present in the audience were Rick Martin, President of Rightway Builders, Inc., and his surveyor Bob Todd, LLS.  Abutters and interested parties present were Jay Marden, Kim Burkhamer, Paul McGuire and Marilyn Moreau, Patrick Golding, Harlan Hadley, Janet and Dave Chamberlain and Roc Larochelle.
        Bob Todd, LLS, explained that at the previous meeting with the Board Lot #30 was included on the subdivision plan although it had been conveyed to another owner and the Board had allowed a continuance of the applicant’s site plan in order that the proper name change could be made.  This completed, Bob Todd, LLS, stated that the property in question, Tax Map/Lot #5/29 and 5/52 was now located on the north and south side of Beard Road and no longer fronted on Route 77 but was parallel and adjacent with the former Sizemore residence.  Bob Todd, LLS, stated that Lot #5/52 on the opposite side of the site would be combined with Lot #5/50 to the east and would have a lot line adjustment in the future in order for a major access way to be constructed.  He added that the zoning requirement of 50 feet of frontage was currently included on the back lot, Lot #5/52.
        Bob Todd, LLS, stated that a revised Road Dedication had been submitted listing the
second owner and two title sources.  He added that the plans were revised per the Coordinator’s
RIGHTWAY BUILDERS, INC., cont.  

checklist and the Condition of Title was submitted which contained language for sprinklers as noted in the deeds.  Bob Todd, LLS, felt that the application was now ready to be considered
complete and noted that he did have some waiver requests which applied to the entire subdivision.  
        The Chairman stated that waivers were requested for the Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and Traffic, Fiscal and Environmental Impact Studies.  He asked if the Deed Language was received and the Coordinator said that it was.  The Chairman said that justification for these waivers was outlined in a memorandum dated May 24, 2004, from Bob Todd, LLS.

        James Nordstrom MOVED to accept and grant the waivers regarding Right Way       Builders, Inc., Submission of Application/4 Lots, specific to Certified Erosion and
        Sediment Control Plan and Traffic, Fiscal and Environmental Impact Studies, requested   
           in the letter dated May 24, 2004, prepared by Bob Todd, LLS.  Christine Quirk seconded      
           the motion and it PASSED unanimously.  

        James Nordstrom MOVED to accept the application of Right Way Builders, Inc., Major      Subdivision/4 Lots, Location: Beard Road and N.H. Route 77 a/k/a Weare Road, Tax        Map/Lot #5/29 and #5/52, Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District, as complete.          Christine Quirk seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

        The Chairman asked if the driveway for Lot #5/29-2 had been altered for better sight distance as discussed at the site walk with the Board.  Rick Martin replied that he had moved the driveway up.  Bob Todd, LLS, asked if this change required a revision of the driveway application.  Rick Martin clarified that the driveway was made wider but its location was unchanged.  
        The Chairman asked if any driveway entrances were plotted higher than the roadway and Rick Martin said they were not.
        The Chairman stated that the covenant that contained the sprinkler language would be sent to Town Counsel.  He asked the Board and the Coordinator if there were any further issues and there were none.  Rick Martin stated that he did not foresee any problems with Town Counsel’s review of the covenant language.  Bob Todd, LLS, asked if the proposed dedication had been sent to Town Counsel and the Coordinator replied that it would be sent.
        The Chairman asked if any abutters were present.  Kim Burkhamer wanted to confirm that the waivers granted were for the 4 lots only and that erosion and other measures would be considered for the future subdivision of Lot #5/50 and 5/52.  The Chairman said this was the case.
        Marilyn Moreau and Patrick Golding were both interested in the future subdivision of Tax Map/Lot #5/50 and 5/52.  The Chairman noted that this would be a separate application at a future date.  Bob Todd, LLS, stated that there would be 28 lots as part of that subdivision.

        James Nordstrom MOVED to approve the application for the Major Subdivision of Land
RIGHTWAY BUILDERS, INC., cont.

        of Right Way Builders, Inc., Beard Road, Tax Map/Lot #’s 5/29, & 5/52, subject to:

        CONDITIONS PRECEDENT:
1.              Submission of a minimum of four (4) blue/blackline copies of the revised plat,          including all checklist corrections and any corrections as noted at this hearing.
2.              Submission of a suitable mylar for recording at the HCRD.
3.              Approval of the language of the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions       regarding the installation of sprinkler systems in each house in the subdivision        and deed language that would incorporate that requirement, by Town Counsel, the         cost of which shall be borne by the applicant.
4.              Submission of executed Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions regarding      sprinkler systems.  The cost of recording at the HCRD shall be born by the      applicant.
5.              Approval of the language of the Quitclaim Deed regarding the conveying of a 50  foot strip of land to the Town of New Boston, by Town Counsel, the cost of      which shall be borne by the applicant.
6.              Submission of executed Quitclaim Deed.  The cost of recording at the HCRD       shall be borne by the applicant.
7.              Submission of a Certificate of Bounds set confirming that the monumentation has         been placed as on the final plat to be recorded at the Hillsborough County      Registry of Deeds (if necessary).
8.              Payment of any outstanding fees related to the subdivision application, including       the cost of recording documents at the Registry of Deeds.
The deadline date for compliance with the conditions precedent shall be September 15, 2004, the confirmation of which shall be an administrative act, not requiring further action by the Board.  Should compliance not be confirmed by the deadline date and a written request for extension is not submitted by that date, the applicant is hereby put on notice that the Planning Board may convene a hearing under RSA 676:4-a to revoke the approval.
        Bob Furey seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

        James Nordstrom MOVED to approve Driveway Permits 04-46, 04-47, 04-48 and 04-49,        with the standard Planning Board requirements:  The driveway intersection with the road         shall be joined by curves of twenty-foot (20’) radii minimum.  The driveway shall       intersect with the road at an angle of 60-90 degrees.   Christine Quirk seconded the motion     and it PASSED unanimously.

BECK’S CUSTOM HOMES                             
Submission of Application/Public Hearing
Minor Subdivision/3 Lots
Location: Beard Road and NH Route 77 a/k/a Weare Road
BECKS CUSTOM HOMES, cont.

Tax Map/Lot #5/30
Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District

        The Chairman read the public hearing notice.  Present in the audience were Rick Martin and Bob Todd, LLS.  Abutters and interested parties present were Kim Burkhamer, Paul McGuire and Marilyn Moreau, Patrick Golding, Jay Marden, Harlan Hadley, Janet and Dave Chamberlain and Roc Larochelle.
        Bob Todd, LLS, stated that the lot on this application was originally part of the previous application of Rightway Builders, Inc. and was being submitted under the new name of Beck’s Custom Homes.  He thanked the Board for their allowance to make this name change while keeping the prior application active.
        Bob Todd, LLS, stated that the plans were submitted to the DOT for driveway approval and a permit on the lot had been received and that State Subdivision Approval had also been received.  In addition, he stated that the deed had been revised and reviewed under the current previously accepted application for Right Way Builders, Inc.  Bob Todd, LLS, added that the Coordinator’s checklist items were addressed and that waivers were requested for the entire subdivision in his memo dated May 24, 2004, specifically for Traffic, Fiscal and Environmental Impact Studies and Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Plan.
        The Chairman asked if the deed language had been submitted.  The Coordinator explained that because this application was now for a 3 lot minor subdivision, fire fighting water supply was not applicable, therefore, language regarding sprinklers was not required.  Bob Todd, LLS, asked if this meant that Note #15 on the site plan should be deleted and the Coordinator said this was the case.

        James Nordstrom MOVED to approve the waivers for Beck’s Custom Homes,   Submission of Application/3 Lots, specific to Certified Erosion and Sediment Control    
           Plan and Traffic, Fiscal and Environmental Impact Studies, requested in the letter dated    
           May 24, 2004, prepared by Bob Todd, LLS.  Christine Quirk seconded the motion and it        
           PASSED unanimously.  

        James Nordstrom MOVED to accept the application of Beck’s Custom Homes, Minor   Subdivision/3 Lots, Location: Beard Road and N.H. Route 77 a/k/a Weare Road, Tax        Map/Lot #5/30, Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District, as complete. Christine Quirk    seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

        Jay Marden asked if this application was for three lots or two.  Bob Todd, LLS, replied that it was for three lots.  Jay Marden then asked Bob Todd, LLS, if he could outline the lot lines on the site plan.  Bob Todd, LLS, illustrated where the lot lines were on the plans.
        Jay Marden asked about a curious rectangular enclosure noted on the plans and Bob Todd, LLS, stated that this was a natural stone wall enclosure.  Per Mr. Marden’s request, Bob
Todd, LLS, then noted where the proposed driveways were located on the plans and added that
BECKS CUSTOM HOMES, cont.

DOT approval had been received.  Jay Marden asked what the distance of the driveway on Lot #5/30-1 was to the enclosed stone wall and if this was considered a wet area.  Bob Todd, LLS, replied that the distance was 220 feet by 220 feet and that a wetland did approach the stone wall enclosure which is why the house for that lot would be built closer to Route 77.
        Jay Marden wondered if the applicant would consider a 100 foot scenic or wildlife corridor easement in that low lying area that would parallel the eastern line of the site running north to south.  Bob Todd, LLS, replied that although he agreed with Mr. Marden’s theory he did not think benefits would be gained in this scenario as an unconnected island of land would result if the remainder of the surrounding land was developed.  He added that more appropriate wildlife corridors should be sought in major subdivisions that came later.  Jay Marden thought that a precedent should be set now to begin the establishment of wildlife corridors.  Bob Todd, LLS, said he was inclined to agree if a connection could be made but did not see that possibility in this case and noted that the Conservation Commission usually did not like to take on small areas that would not serve the outcome sought.  He added that such issues should be addressed in the Master Plan where a policy for open space and studies to discuss the layout of wild life corridors could be instituted.  Jay Marden replied that a lot of land would already be subdivided before the Master Plan was completed as was evident in other subdivided areas in town.  Bob Todd, LLS, stated that the applicant did not have any interest to establish such a corridor in the location mentioned.  The Chairman confirmed that Mr. Todd’s statement should be taken as a “no” on the part of the applicant.  Bob Todd, LLS, reminded the Board that such an easement would need acceptance and monitoring.
        Kim Burkhamer asked what the plans were for the area in question as it was a natural drainage area.  Rick Martin replied that this piece of land was considered unusable.  The Chairman pointed out that although Jay Marden was looking for a legal way to protect the land it was already theoretically protected because of its negative development status.  Rick Martin noted that no filling or digging would take place in the area and Bob Todd, LLS, stated that a setback from the wetlands area to the building area was warranted.
        Marilyn Moreau asked if the State had approved the driveway proposed off Route 77 as speeds go to 50 m.p.h. in that area of roadway.  Bob Todd, LLS, said the speed of the road was not a factor for approval and that precautions entering and exiting any driveway located on a main road were necessary.
        The Coordinator asked why Lot #5/30-2 had a tail shaped portion on the plans.  Bob Todd, LLS, replied that the Zoning Ordinance stated that two 200 foot squares were required to fit on a lot that fronted on two roads.  He explained that the frontage for Lot #5/30-1 on Route 77 was eliminated so that the lot only needed to support one square.  James Nordstrom asked if the lot line could be extended to Route 77 so that the additional square would fit.  Bob Todd, LLS, replied that a lot would be lost as a result of that adjustment.  James Nordstrom said the scenario made no sense.  Bob Todd, LLS, agreed and said that it was the interpretation of the law, although he did not think the initial intent of the ordinance was to require two squares.
        Jay Marden stated that if Beck’s Custom Homes and Right Way Builders were unwilling
to grant scenic easements in this case he hoped it would be considered in the later 28 lot
BECKS CUSTOM HOMES, cont.

development that was intended by the applicants.  Rick Martin said he did not have an issue with that consideration.  Bob Todd, LLS, agreed that if a piece of land was large enough to be considered for such an easement that the Conservation Commission would probably be willing to adopt it as well.

        Christine Quirk MOVED to approve the application for the Minor Subdivision of Land      of Beck’s Custom Homes, Inc., NH Route 77 a/k/a Weare Road, Tax Map/Lot #5/30,  subject to:
        
        CONDITIONS PRECEDENT:
1.              Submission of a minimum of four (4) blue/blackline copies of the revised plat,          including all checklist corrections and any corrections as noted at this hearing.
2.              Submission of a suitable mylar for recording at the HCRD.
3.              Approval of the language of the Quitclaim Deed regarding the conveying of a 50  foot strip of land to the Town of New Boston, by Town Counsel, the cost of      which shall be borne by the applicant.
4.              Submission of executed Quitclaim Deed.  The cost of recording at the HCRD       shall be borne by the applicant.
5.              Submission of a Certificate of Bounds set confirming that the monumentation has         been placed as on the final plat to be recorded at the Hillsborough County      Registry of Deeds (if necessary).
6.              Payment of any outstanding fees related to the subdivision application, including       the cost of recording documents at the Registry of Deeds.
The deadline date for compliance with the conditions precedent shall be September 15, 2004, the confirmation of which shall be an administrative act, not requiring further action by the Board.  Should compliance not be confirmed by the deadline date and a written request for extension is not submitted by that date, the applicant is hereby put on notice that the Planning Board may convene a hearing under RSA 676:4-a to revoke the approval.
        Bob Furey seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

        James Nordstrom MOVED to approve Driveway Permits 04-050 and 04-051, with the   standard Planning Board requirements:  The driveway requires two inches (2”) of winter  binder (pavement) to be applied to the driveway to a minimal distance of twenty-five feet       (25ft) from the centerline of the road.  The driveway intersection with the road shall  be joined by curves of twenty-foot (20’) radii minimum.  The driveway shall intersect   with the road at an angle of 60-90 degrees.  Christine Quirk seconded the motion and it         PASSED unanimously.



13-15 HOPKINS ROAD, INC (APPLICANT)
SWIEZYNSKI, JOSEPH (OWNER)              
Submission of Application/Public Hearing
Major Subdivision/9 Lots
Location: Salisbury and Hopkins Roads
Tax Map/Lot #13/15
Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District

        The Chairman read the public hearing notice.  Present in the audience were Joseph Swiezynski, Bob Todd, LLS, and Andrew Prolman, Esq.  Abutters and interested parties were  John Wawrzyniak and Jay Marden.
        Bob Todd, LLS, briefly reviewed the history of the application.  He stated that previous work sessions had led to the approval of the design review and that final plans had been submitted and reviewed by Town agency staff.  Bob Todd, LLS, added that changes had been made to the plans based on checklist items received from the Coordinator and correspondence from other agencies.  He then submitted the road entry permit prepared for the proposed road to the Coordinator.
        Bob Todd, LLS, stated that the road naming process had been initiated and a phone conversation with John Bunting had initiated a letter to the Selectman who then sought review by the Fire Wards.  He added that although a name was yet to be approved, several had been proposed and Mr. Bunting was in favor of the name Kettlehole Lane.
        Bob Todd, LLS, said that final plans for the road had been submitted and there existed a memo of understanding between the Selectman and the applicant regarding costs for improvements to Salisbury road.  He added that the Fire Wards had recommended a condition of title statement to reference sprinklers which had been submitted. The Coordinator said she did not receive a copy of this and Bob Todd, LLS, stated he would provide it.  
        Bob Todd, LLS, explained that Note #16 was added to the plans to reference sprinklers which the applicant was agreeable to.  The applicant also requested latitude for the possibility of a mix of homes styles such as duplexes and single family homes on the project.  In anticipation of the mix, Bob Todd, LLS, added a sentence to the end of that note which read “Single family dwellings constructed on this subdivision are not subject to this condition.” as a cistern was located at the junction of Hopkins Road which the applicant felt should satisfy the Fire Wards requirement for water supply.  He noted that sprinklers had been suggested when the plan took the direction of duplexes only considering the distance to the fire station.  Bob Todd, LLS, understood that this note would need the review of the Fire Wards once again.  The Chairman thought that the Town would want sprinklers in either case as they served as a suppression system.  Christine Quirk added that the Fire Wards were concerned about the distance from the site to the fire station and thought that the preference would be for all homes in the development to sustain sprinklers.  Joseph Swiezynski replied that he was willing to sprinkler all homes in the subdivision.  Bob Todd, LLS, then clarified that Note #16 would remain without the qualifying sentence at the end.
        Bob Todd, LLS, explained that Attorney Prolman had composed conditions for a covenant to the deeds for lot #’s 15/7 and 15/2 where the kettle hole area would be set aside for
SWIEZYNSKI, cont.

perpetuity of non disturbance.  He added that these conditions would be forwarded to Town Counsel for review.  Bob Todd, LLS, suggested that monuments be placed at the corners of this kettle hole area so it could be easily located which would aid in the enforcement of the covenant.  He added that the protection area encompassed most of the steep slopes on the sides of the kettle hole.
        The Chairman asked how property owners would know what the kettle hole was or be discouraged from filling it in.  Bob Todd, LLS, thought that the name of the road might raise consciousness along with the reference made in the two deeds and their covenants.  Brandy
Mitroff suggested its location be marked with a sign.  Jay Marden asked how the covenant protected the kettle hole and thought a scenic easement might be more appropriate.  The Chairman replied that the covenant stated that the kettle hole could not be disturbed or changed in any way and read that portion of the covenant where this was defined.  Jay Marden thanked the Chairman for the clarification.
        The Chairman stated that a waiver had been requested for the Environmental Impact Study.  James Nordstrom asked if the SWPP Plan had been prepared and Bob Todd, LLS, stated that copies had been submitted.  He added that the Coordinator had believed the drainage computations were deficient, however, he pointed out that these calculations were in the SWPP Plan rather than the road design plan and detailed calculations before and after construction.
        James Nordstrom asked why a waiver was requested for roadway cross sections.  Bob Todd, LLS, replied that they had not provided cross sections every fifty feet as was the standard.  He noted that the road was only 350’ long and a typical cross section had been provided.  James Nordstrom said this would need the review and opinion of the Town Engineer and the Coordinator concurred.  James Nordstrom stated that the road design appeared straightforward with construction details adequately included.  He agreed that cross sections might not be necessary every 50 feet but was interested in the Town Engineer’s opinion.  The Coordinator noted that deferring that waiver would not affect the completeness of the application and the Board was agreeable to that.

        James Nordstrom MOVED to accept the waiver request for the Environmental Impact         Study requested in the letter dated June 4, 2004, prepared by Bob Todd, LLS.  Christine         Quirk seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

        James Nordstrom MOVED to accept the application of 13-15 Hopkins Road, Inc., Major      Subdivision/9 Lots, Location: Salisbury and Hopkins Roads, Tax Map/Lot #13/15,  Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District, as complete.  Christine Quirk seconded the     motion and it PASSED unanimously.
 
        The Chairman asked if the road plan design could now be forwarded to Dufresne-Henry, Inc.  The Coordinator said that it could and that the legal documents would be forwarded to Bill Drescher, Esq.
        The Chairman asked if any abutters were present.  John Wawrzyniak commented that he
SWIEZYNSKI, cont.       

hoped the design of the development would be tasteful and noted that he understood that development was inevitable.
        Attorney Andrew Prolman asked if the Board could review the requirements for recording road bonds and sureties as some communities required that they be in place prior to construction.  The Coordinator replied that these items be in place before the mylars were recorded and that the Town accepted cash, letter of credit or performance bond with legal language forwarded to Town Counsel for review.

        James Nordstrom MOVED to adjourn 13-15 Hopkins Road, Inc., Major Subdivision/9
        Lots, Location: Hopkins and Salisbury Roads, Tax Map/Lot #13/15, Residential-   Agricultural “R-A” District, to August 10, 2004, at 7:00 p.m.  Christine Quirk seconded         the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

        Andrew Prolman, Esq., asked if conditional approval could be granted subject to Town Counsel’s review of the legal documents and the Chairman said it could.

At 9:00 p.m. the Planning Board took a 15 minute break.
                
LULL ROAD CORPORATION   
Submission of Application/Public Hearing
Minor Subdivision/2 Lots
Location: West Lull Place
Tax Map/Lot #3/5
Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District

        The Chairman read the public hearing notice.  Present in the audience were Raymond Critch, LLS, Tris Gordon, Bob Huettner and Charles Cleary, Esq.  Abutters and interested parties present were James Denesevich, Donna Mombourquette, Bill Rollins, Paul Keiner, Jay and Dot Marden and Karen Heselton.
        Raymond Critch, LLS, stated that the applicant wished to subdivide one lot of 3.1 acres that included the existing house from the remaining 55 acre tract of Lot #3/5.  He added that at the previous meeting with the Board the driveway permit was missing and they now wished to resubmit the application with the driveway permit.  Ray Critch, LLS, added that the permit had been signed by the Road Agent.  
         Ray Critch, LLS, did not believe there were any other outstanding issues on the application.  He mentioned that lot corners had been set at the site.
        
        James Nordstrom MOVED to accept Lull Road Corporation, Major Subdivision/2 Lots,        Location: West Lull Place, Tax Map/Lot #3/5, Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District, as        complete.  Bob Furey seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

LULL ROAD CORPORATION, cont.

        The Chairman noted that it was determined at the site walk with the Board that the existing driveway should be used by both Tax Map/Lot #3/5 and Tax Map/Lot #3/5-1.  
        Raymond Critch, LLS, explained that the soils report for Site Specific Soils Mapping explained the change in wetland delineation from the winter mapping to the spring mapping.  The Coordinator said the Board should discuss this change.  James Nordstrom asked if the applicant could expand on the difference between the two delineations.  Raymond Critch, LLS, showed where the area was originally delineated and noted that it was a very thick low lying area that was under two or three feet of snow at the time of the original mapping.  He explained that upon better viewing of areas of vegetation in the spring this area was redelineated to follow
the edge of the abandoned driveway instead of traveling all the way across.  The Chairman wanted to confirm that the new delineation was already on the subdivision plan and that the applicant had only added a new note of description to the plan.  Ray Critch said this was the case as the wetland delineation had been changed prior to the last meeting.
        The Chairman asked if the Board had any issues with the subdivision plan and there were none.  The Chairman then asked if there were any comments from abutters and stressed that comments must pertain to the two lot subdivision only and not the applicant’s future intent for the development.  James Denesevich asked if the easement was approved for the driveway for the 55 acre lot, would there be any limitations to how many houses could go on that lot.  The Chairman said the driveway would currently serve as access to the existing house on the lot, however, when that lot was subdivided in the future the driveway would become a road.
        Bill Rollins asked how the radius boundaries shown on the plans for West Lull Place were determined.  Ray Critch, LLS, replied that best fit curving was used to accommodate the existing stone walls in that area.  The Chairman thought it was a better solution to follow the natural curves of the landscape.  Bill Rollins said he was curious as he was thinking about future road improvements.
        Donna Mombourquette asked how the related Town ordinance for one lot and one driveway related to the application.  The Chairman explained that a lot must have the ability to support a driveway on its own frontage.  He noted by example that if wetlands crossed the frontage of a lot and the driveway was not able to go through that frontage then an easement would not be granted on another lot to provide access.  The Chairman continued that in the applicant’s case an easement would be granted because the current driveway better fit the landscape of the lot.  He noted that when the future proposed road was constructed the driveway would no longer need an easement.  He noted that tree cutting was also avoided by granting this driveway easement which would maintain the character of the neighborhood.
        Paul Keiner asked for an overview of the reasoning behind the proposed driveway and its intent to become a future road.  The Chairman explained that if Lot #3/5 was sold today the driveway would be used for access to both lots, however, if the applicant instead chose to subdivide Lot #3/5 that driveway would need to become a road to access the subdivided lots.  Paul Keiner thought that when and if the road was proposed its design plan would need to be closely scrutinized.  The Chairman agreed and noted that the current application was a minor one compared to what major design could come later.  He added that the Town was trying to prepare
LULL ROAD CORPORATION, cont.

for this possibility by granting the easement for this driveway as it was a better location.
        Dot Marden asked what would be the case if someone purchased the lot with the existing house and did not want the driveway to be used as a future access to the subdivided land from Lot #3/5.  Raymond Critch, LLS, said the ownership of the driveway remained with Lot #3/5 and an easement was granted to the lot with the existing house.  The Chairman asked what the case would be if the supposed owner of Lot #3/5-1 did not want to give up their driveway easement.  Raymond Critch, LLS, replied that the legal documents for the property included language that said that lot would have another entrance in the future.  Dot Marden commented that this would need to be disclosed to a potential buyer for that lot and Raymond Critch, LLS, said it would be necessary.

        Christine Quirk MOVED to approve the Subdivision Plan prepared for the Land of Lull     Road Corporation, West Lull Place, Tax Map 3 Lot 5, for the subdivision of one new lot,         Tax Map/Lot #3/5-1, leaving remaining acreage, subject to:      
        
CONDITIONS PRECEDENT:
1.              Submission of a minimum of four (4) blue/blackline copies of the revised plat,          including all checklist corrections and any corrections as noted at this hearing.
2.              Submission of a suitable mylar for recording at the HCRD.
3.              Digital plat data shall be submitted per Subdivision Regulations Section IV-F, 3.
4.              Review and approval of the easement language for use of the driveway on Lot             #3/5 by Lot #3/5-1, by Town Counsel, the cost of said review to be borne by the         applicant.
5.              Submission of the executed driveway easement for recording at the HCRD, the     cost of which shall be borne by the applicant.
6.              Submission of a Certificate of Bounds Set confirming that the monumentation has         been placed as on the final plat, to be recorded at the Hillsborough County     Registry of Deeds, if necessary;
7.              Payment of any outstanding fees related to the subdivision application and/or   the recording of documents with the HCRD (if necessary).
8.              Upon completion of the conditions precedent, the final plans and mylar shall be         signed by the Board and forwarded for recording at the HCRD.
The deadline date for compliance with the conditions precedent shall be September 15, 2004, the confirmation of which shall be an administrative act, not requiring further action by the Board.  Should compliance not be confirmed by the deadline date and a written request for extension is not submitted by that date, the applicant is hereby put on notice that the Planning Board may convene a hearing under RSA 676:4-a to revoke the approval.
        James Nordstrom seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.


VISTA ROAD, LLC 
Submission of Application/Public Hearing
Major Subdivision/14 Lots
Location: Inkberry and Wilson Hill Roads
Tax Map/Lot #6/40-5
Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District

        The Chairman read the public hearing notice.  Present in the audience were Brian Holt and Ernie Thibeault of Vista Road, LLC, and Paul Carideo, PE, of T.F. Moran.
        Brian Holt presented a brief overview of their current projects which were adjacent to the site for this application.  He noted that the applicant’s recent application for Hutchinson Road Development had been before the Board one month prior and that Hutchinson Road connected Inkberry Road and Wilson Hill Road.  Brian Holt added that Wilson Hill Road was under construction and Inkberry Road was being prepared for final paving in two weeks.
        Brian Holt stated that the applicant was instructed by the Board at the last meeting to provide a Road Bond Estimate and Warranty Deed.  He noted that the warranty deed contained the Declaration of Covenants and language for sprinklers which was referenced by a note on the plans by T.F. Moran.  He then submitted additional copies of these plans to the Board.
        Brian Holt felt the application was ready for acceptance and that further discussions with the Board could ensue after that.  He added that a meeting with Amy Alexander of Dufresne-Henry, Inc., Nicola Strong, John Riendeau and himself had yielded comments which were taken under consideration by the applicant.  The Chairman stated that upon reading Amy Alexander’s review letter it appeared Amy Alexander had many comments.  Brian Holt agreed and said these comments were appreciated and most helpful to the applicant.

        James Nordstrom MOVED to accept the application of Vista Road, LLC, Major       Subdivision/14 Lots, Location: Inkberry and Wilson Hill Roads, Tax Map/Lot #6/40-5,     Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District, as complete.  Bob Furey seconded the motion    and it PASSED unanimously.

        The Chairman asked the Coordinator if she had any details to present from the meeting with Amy Alexander and Brian Holt.  The Coordinator replied that it was suggested that the proposed development be approached from the top of Wilson Hill Road with a cul-de-sac as the platform in that area was most suitable for an entrance and that the road would then dead end instead of connecting through to Inkberry Road as originally planned.  She added that there had been consensus at this meeting that if the original road plan moved forward it would have a multitude of issues.
        Brian Holt then revealed the alternative cluster/open space plan to the Board.  He noted that Vista Road, LLC, did not originally consider a plan of this design as they thought the Town’s maximum cul-de-sac length was 600 feet and this design would require a cul-de-sac length of 1,000 feet.  The Chairman replied that the 600 foot cul-de-sac length was frequently
waived for applications.  Brian Holt responded that he had been unaware of that fact.
        Brian Holt explained that the alternative cul-de-sac design would yield up to 17 acres of
VISTA ROAD, LLC, cont.  

open space where the design calculation required 10.6 to 11 acres.  He further noted that the applicant was proposing 14 or 15 lots even though calculations allowed up to 18.
        Brian Holt noted that members of the design discussion meeting were also impressed that the alternative design would not disturb Inkberry Road.
        The Chairman and Christine Quirk were interested in what the proposed road grades would be for the alternative design.  Brian Holt said the grades would begin at the platform entrance at the required -3% grade, transition between 6 and 7 % in order to get down into the development and level out at 3% to the cul-de-sac.  He added that minimal excavation was
required for this project which was a most suitable one for the terrain.
        The Chairman stated that this was one of the cleanest and simplest plan designs he had seen in some time and wondered if it had any drawbacks.  Brian Holt said that Ernie Thibeault would offer more detail and added that the applicant would want to request a waiver to the buffer or the equivalent on Wilson Hill Road which would remain a public road for access to this proposed development.
        Ernie Thibeault stated that in light of the fact that the original application had been active for a lengthy period of time and the knowledge of the Board’s and other agencies disapproval of that design even though Subdivision Regulations design requirements were adhered to, they had developed this alternative design at their own cost in the hopes of pleasing the Town.  He added that they were willing to go forward with this concept and if so would request waivers on the 100 foot buffer to become 50 foot setbacks and the length of the cul-de-sac hoping that an application for this design would progress in a timelier manner than the prior one.  The Chairman replied that the length of cul-de-sac was a frequently waived item and in this case a good probability because of the added challenge of building on the hill and the absence of the design issues of the prior design.  The Coordinator added that the request for a buffer waiver was actually a ZBA issue which would require a variance and was not a waivable item by the Planning Board.  The Chairman stated that the Planning Board could send a letter of recommendation to the ZBA that this variance be granted.  He recalled a setback issue with another application where the Planning Board recommended relief for the applicant and the ZBA did follow through with a variance.
        The Chairman stated that the plan appeared to be a reasonable one and asked where the additional lot noted on the plans would go.  Ernie Thibeault said a long extended driveway could replace the entrance of the formerly proposed road from Inkberry Road as Vista Road, LLC, owned that right of way location.  The Chairman asked if that lot would be in a flat area and Brian Holt replied that as long as they stayed down in the corner of the site it would be.  The Chairman noted that the lot would need to be a five acre lot because it would be a back lot which left only 12 acres of open space instead of 17.  Ernie Thibeault replied that they would still be over the calculation for required open space.
        Brandy Mitroff asked how much of the buffer needed to be waived for this proposal and Brian Holt said they were asking for 50 foot setbacks instead of a 100 foot buffer.  Brandy
Mitroff thought that a negotiation might be to eliminate the additional back lot at the corner of
Inkberry Road.
        Jay Marden asked what would be planned for the 12 to 17 acre piece of open space.  
VISTA ROAD, LLC, cont.  

Brian Holt replied that this land could be dedicated to the Town, be open space monitored by the Conservation Commission or a homeowners association.  He noted that Town regulations would dictate how this piece was labeled.  Brandy Mitroff asked if this open space connected to the remaining land left from the Dodd property which would make it an attractive piece.  Ernie Thibeault said that it did.  The Coordinator stated that this land abutted the back of the lots on the proposed new road, not the open space.  Ernie Thibeault agreed and said that this connection with the Dodd land was not contiguous open space.  Brian Holt added that a trail placed between these pieces could still make it a usable recreational piece for the Town.
        Ernie Thibeault stated that they wanted to consider both the Dodd/Thompson land and the land for this project when they evaluated what could be set aside or deeded to the Town given that the amount of land in this area owned by Thibeault Corporation and its associated companies was about 250 acres.  He added that Eric Mitchell, LLS, had calculated that the total acreage would allow for 95 lots according to the cluster regulations; 77 on the Dodd/Thompson land and up to 18 on Hutchinson Road.  Ernie Thibeault further noted that although 61 acres were required to be left as open space they were willing to increase that to 115 acres.  He stated that this was land that was hilly and rolling but nonetheless very good usable land that also provided access to the back lands.  Ernie Thibeault said that they were trying to work in good faith with the Town and were willing to deduct 25 buildable lots from their calculations in order to make this open space available.  He added that the value of those lots would have been approximately $2.5 million.
        The Chairman stated that the only lot he questioned was the proposed lot in the middle of the 17 acres of open space and questioned why Lot #’s 1&2 were so much bigger than the other lots.  Brian Holt replied that this was due to the standard 100 foot buffer requirement which they would seek a waiver on.
        James Nordstrom asked how the reduction in the buffer requirement would benefit Lot #’s 10-14.  Brian Holt replied that it would allow for access to the homes from the higher side of the property.  Ernie Thibeault added that this would give the option for walk out basements and flatter driveway grades.  He said they had not known that they would need to address the ZBA regarding the buffer.  The Chairman stated that if he was allowed to waive the buffer he certainly would.  Brandy Mitroff wanted to clarify that only Lots #’s 10-14 required the buffer waiver and Brian Holt said this was true.  The Coordinator said she was not sure the reduction of the buffer would work as the Zoning Ordinance stated that “…no dwelling, accessory structure, collector or service roads or parking areas shall be permitted within the designated buffer area, however, primary roads are permitted to cross the buffer.”  She was, therefore, unsure if driveways could cross the buffer area.  James Nordstrom replied that a waiver to the complete buffer conditions off Wilson Hill Road would most likely be sought.  Ernie Thibeault they would adhere to the setbacks of 50 feet but would seek to eliminate the buffers required for the cluster design.
        The Coordinator asked if a lot of fill would be required to construct the driveways for the lots off Wilson Hill Road.  Brian Holt said only 6 or 8 feet of fill would be needed which was
minimal.  The Coordinator asked if the case would be the same for the other side of the proposed road and Brian Holt said it would.
VISTA ROAD, LLC, cont.  

        Jay Marden stated that he was very impressed by the applicant’s new proposal as it showcased their flexibility in offering open space land to the Town.  Ernie Thibeault concluded that because land development was inevitable open discussion between parties was what they preferred.
        The Chairman asked if the applicant needed to approach the ZBA directly or if the Board should intervene on their behalf.  The Coordinator recalled past applications where the ZBA had been flexible in accepting a memo of direction from the Planning Board regarding issues of this nature.  The Chairman asked the Board if there was consensus that a waiver on the buffer requirement was desirable.  James Nordstrom thought there was a compelling argument to not only have the buffer requirement relaxed but eliminated based on the criteria presented by the applicant.  The Chairman pointed out that the Town owned the abutting property (the road) that the buffer was deemed to protect.  Paul Carideo added that lots on the nearby R.J. Moreau development mirrored the proposed buffers of this design.  
        The Chairman added that the only contrast would be the difference in acreage and Brian Holt said this was true.  Jay Marden asked what the lot sizes were and if they were under one acre.  Brian Holt replied the lots were approximately 1.5 acres in size.  
        James Nordstrom noted that the applicant would still need to obtain conventional Subdivision Approval from the NHDES and the lot sizing would be dictated by that agency’s approval.  Ernie Thibeault agreed.  
        The Chairman said that with the exception of Lot #17 he liked the overall design.
        Brian Holt wished to note that the applicant would pursue the ZBA issue and deal with the Planning Board simultaneously so as not to slow the application process.  Ernie Thibeault thought the buffer waiver should be a straightforward technicality for the ZBA.  The Chairman explained that the ZBA did not act in a waiver fashion but through variances which were slightly more involved than a waiver.  Paul Carideo asked what the meeting schedules were for the ZBA along with hearing notices.  The Coordinator replied that the ZBA met the third Tuesday of every month with 7 days notice and the Planning Board met the second and fourth Tuesday and required 10 days notice.  Brandy Mitroff asked if the ZBA held special meetings in the interest of timing.  The Coordinator did not know if this was done.
        Paul Carideo, PE, thought that if the application was sent to the ZBA the following day they might get on the schedule for the ZBA hearing.  The Coordinator said that the applicant should contact Laura Todd of the ZBA to confirm.  
        The Chairman thought that a letter of recommendation should be sent from the Board to the ZBA and that there should be Planning Board representation at the ZBA hearing for this applicant as well.
        Christine Quirk stated that she would like to bring a copy of the new proposed design to the Selectmen’s meeting the following Monday and Brian Holt said he would provide her with copies.

        James Nordstrom MOVED to adjourn Vista Road, LLC, Major Subdivision/14 Lots,    Location: Inkberry and Wilson Hill Roads, Tax Map/Lot # 6/40-5, Residential-
VISTA ROAD, LLC, cont.  

        Agricultural “R-A” District, to August 10, 2004, at 7:30 p.m.  Christine Quirk seconded         the motion and it PASSED unanimously.                   
        
MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS AND CORRESPONDENCE FOR THE MEETING OF JULY 13, 2004

1.              Approval of the minutes of May 25, 2004, and June 8, 2004, with or without changes.
        (Distributed at the June 22, 2004 meeting)

        James Nordstrom MOVED to approve the minutes of May 25, 2004, and June 8, 2004,         as written.  Bob Furey seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

2.      The minutes of June 22, 2004, were distributed for approval at the meeting of July 27, 2004, with or without changes.
        
3.      Signature required for Site Review Agreement for Ronald and Marilyn Sizemore    (owners) and Paul Sizemore (applicant), Tax Map/Lot #5/29-1, NH Route 77 a/k/a Weare    Road, Sizemore Truck & Auto, by the Planning Board Chairman.

        The Chairman signed the Site Review Agreement.  

4.      Signature required for Subdivision Agreement for Richard and Annrose Freeman, Tax       Map/Lot #3/54, 240 Riverdale Road, by the Planning Board Chairman.

The Chairman signed the Subdivision Agreement.
        
 5.     Signature required for Subdivision Agreement for Nissitissit Development, LLC, Tax      Map/Lot #’s 12/17, 12/18, and 12/19, by the Planning Board Chairman.
        
        The Chairman signed the Subdivision Agreement.

6.              Endorsement of Subdivision Plans for Nissitissit Development, LLC.
                The Chairman and Vice Chairman stated that they would endorse the Subdivision Plans at the end of the meeting. (James Nordstrom endorsed the plans in Secretary Travis Daniels’ absence)
                
7.              A copy of a letter dated July 1, 2004, from Morgan Hollis, Gottesman and Hollis, to     Nicola Strong, Planning Coordinator, Re: Waldorf Estates, Phase III, Foxberry Drive,    Tax Map/Lot #8/84, was distributed for the Board’s discussion.

        The Chairman thought that this letter should be forwarded to Town Counsel and James
MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS, cont.   

Nordstrom agreed, adding that the issue was a condition of land inspection that should have been included at the time of Subdivision Approval.  The Chairman stated that the Road Agent needed to be informed of this situation as well.
        The Chairman then asked if there was a limit on how much land was to be opened during construction at any given time.  He thought that Waldorf Estates was very open.  The Coordinator noted that according to the State’s Site Specific Permit, only five acres could be open at any given time.  She added that Amy Alexander of Dufresne-Henry, Inc., had brought this issue to the attention of the DES when the site was being worked on at the beginning.
        Bob Furey asked for a definition of “open”.  The Coordinator replied that open land was anything that was disturbed during construction.  She added that if a developer proceeded with clear cutting and grubbing including lot development and road construction they could be in danger of exceeding the five acre maximum of open disturbance.  Bob Furey asked what the time frame was for such a process.  The Coordinator replied that the developer was responsible for keeping to the 5 acre guideline as the project moved along regardless of its pace.  James Nordstrom noted that once a disturbed area was stabilized it was removed from the five acre calculation.
        The Coordinator stated that she could ask Seth Potter, the inspector from Dufresne-Henry, Inc., to review the Waldorf Estates situation.
        
8.      Copies of draft notices were distributed for the Board’s information.

                The Coordinator explained that these notices would be posted as notification that plan reviews would incur a cost at Dufresne-Henry, Inc., while she was out on leave.  She noted that they would be sent to surveyors as well, if the Board approved their content.  The Board deemed the notices appropriate and thought they should be posted and distributed.

9.      A copy of a letter dated July 8, 2004, from Jane Carr, 120 Christie Road, to the Board, Re: home business, was distributed for the Board’s discussion.
        The Coordinator noted that Jane Carr had been approved in 1995 for a family day care business in her home and when her recent correspondence had been received it had been assumed that the discussion of relocating her business had meant the day care.  Ms. Carr apparently construed the discussion to mean a new business of selling arts and crafts, which she had never been approved for.
        James Nordstrom stated that a change of use from that which was approved on Jane Carr’s existing site plan was the issue and that her letter noted that the building inspector had approved an additional barn constructed on the site for the new business.  The Chairman agreed and stated that Ms. Carr would need a new site plan if she desired to change her type of home business.

10.     A copy of a letter dated June 30, 2004, from Burton Reynolds, Town Administrator, to

MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS, cont.

        Robert Furey, Planning Board alternate, Re: Planning Board appointment, was distributed for the Board’s information.

11.             A copy of a letter dated June 29, 2004, from Burton Reynolds, Town Administrator, to    Bob Frain, New Boston Postmaster, Re: Pearson Lane, was distributed for the Board’s     information.
        
12.     Daily Road inspection reports dated June 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 7th from Dufresne-Henry,       Inc., Re: Waldorf Estates, Phase III, were distributed for the Board’s information.
13.     Daily Road inspection reports dated June 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and 11th, from        Dufresne-Henry, Inc., Re: Highland Hills, were distributed for the Board’s information.
14a.    A copy of the minutes from the Master Plan committee of June 23, 2004, was distributed  for the Board’s information.
        The Coordinator suggested that a Planning Board member should attend Master Plan committee meetings while she was on leave as there were often instances of misinformation that needed correction before subsequent meetings took place.
14b.    A copy of a memorandum dated June 28, 2004, from Nicola Strong, Planning        Coordinator, to the Master Plan Committee, Re: response to items from June 23, 2004,
        minutes, was distributed for the Board’s information.

15.     A copy of the minutes from the Master Plan committee of July 6, 2004, was distributed for the Board’s information.

16.             A copy of excerpts from Goffstown Route 114/114A Corridor Management Study, was         distributed for the Board’s information.

        The Coordinator stated that she also forwarded copies of this excerpt to the off shoot groups formed from New Boston Speaks that were working on downtown improvements.
                
17.     Read File: Public Hearing Notice for July 15, 2004, from the Town of Lyndeborough Planning Board, Re: construction of a wireless service facility.  

19.             A copy of a letter dated July 12, 2004, from Richard Freeman to the Board, Re: extension        request to conditions precedent, was distributed for the Board’s review and discussion.

        The Coordinator explained that an extension date still needed to be assigned by the
Chairman and the Chairman suggested the date of November 17, 2004.
MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS, cont.

        James Nordstrom MOVED to extend the date of compliance for conditions precedent for     Richard and Annrose Freeman, Tax Map/Lot #3/54, Riverdale Road, to November 17,         2004.  Christine Quirk seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

20.             A copy of an article from the July/August issue of Town & City magazine titled, Class VI        Roads and Maintenance Issues, was distributed for the Board’s information.

21.     The Coordinator stated she had an update on Roger Noonan who said that he was overextended by his personal work and wanted to modify, not withdraw, his site plan.  She added that he also wanted to continue as a Planning Board alternate.
        The Chairman    objected to both of these ideas as Mr. Noonan had not made any effort to address the Board regarding either issue.  He asked the Coordinator what the Board’s options were.  The Coordinator replied that the Board could suggest to the Selectmen that Mr. Noonan no longer be considered a Planning Board alternate due to lack of attendance.  Regarding the site plan compliance, she added that the Board could call for either a compliance or revocation hearing.  The Chairman asked what steps were necessary for the compliance hearing.  The Coordinator stated that the compliance hearing would determine if Mr. Noonan’s site plan was in or out of compliance based on verification of items on the site plans being evident at the site itself.  James Nordstrom thought that an applicant procedurally had to initiate a compliance hearing by their request and that the Planning Board could only initiate revocations.  The Coordinator added that the cost of a revocation hearing was borne by the Town and would require noticed letters sent to abutters.  The Chairman asked how many abutters were involved for this site plan.  The Coordinator thought that four abutters were involved.  
        The Chairman thought that a revocation hearing should be scheduled for August 10, 2004, and that this might motivate the applicant to respond to the Board.  The Coordinator asked the Chairman if he was agreeable to the applicant amending his site plan.  The Chairman replied that it depended on what the applicant wished to amend and added that he felt the site was already in compliance.  James Nordstrom agreed that a notice of a revocation hearing should be sent to the applicant with a deadline date for his response to the Planning Department as to whether he wanted a compliance hearing or amendment to the site plan.  
        James Nordstrom thought the Selectmen should be contacted regarding the status of Mr. Noonan’s attendance as an alternate for the Planning Board with the Board’s suggestion that he not continue in this role.  The Chairman agreed that the Board should recommend Mr. Noonan’s removal from the alternate position.  James Nordstrom said that when Mr. Noonan was present for meetings his contributions were beneficial to the Board.  
        
18.     Discussion Re: proposed amendments to the Subdivision and Site Plan Review      Regulations distributed at June 22, 2004, meeting.

        The Coordinator asked if there were any comments or additions to these amendments and
if the Board thought they were ready for Town Counsel review and public hearing.  The
MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS, cont.

Chairman stated that he preferred a legal review before a public hearing was held and James Nordstrom agreed although he predicted no significant changes would be made to its content.  
        The Coordinator said upon speaking with Rene LaBranche of Dufresne-Henry, Inc., he thought the section on concrete cisterns should be removed but she did not see any harm to leaving it in as a choice to the applicant.  James Nordstrom thought that if the standards were still correct and the use of that type of cistern was still a viable option he saw no reason to eliminate it from the amendments.
        The Coordinator asked if the Board thought that the Road Bond Estimate form should be in the Rules of Procedure with other Town applications rather than in the Subdivision Regulations so that when the numbers needed to be changed a public hearing would not be necessary.  James Nordstrom thought this would be easier procedurally for the Planning Department although the majority of applicants were used to seeing the estimate attached to the Subdivision Regulations.  He added that if the other Town applications were already included in the Rules of Procedure that it should not be an issue.  The Coordinator added that when an applicant came to the Planning Department to apply for a subdivision they would be given a copy of the Subdivision Regulations, Town applications and, if required, the Road Bond Estimate form.  James Nordstrom thought this procedure was acceptable.
        The Coordinator stated that the Road Agent was reviewing the Driveway Regulations and his comments should be available by the next Planning Board meeting date.  James Nordstrom said that he and Bob Furey had spoken but not compiled anything regarding the materials for driveway construction and were interested in John Riendeau’s comments on the construction specifications as many scenarios were possible.
        The Coordinator added that Bill Drescher, Esq., had informed her that the Driveway Regulations were a Planning Board ordinance issue which required a public hearing by the Board but not a Town meeting vote.

        At 11:00 p.m., James Nordstrom MOVED to adjourn.  Christine Quirk seconded the  motion and it PASSED unanimously.

Respectfully submitted,       
                                                     
Suzanne O’Brien
Recording Clerk                                                                         Minutes Approved: