New Boston, NH - Planning Board Minutes 06/08/04

Planning Board Minutes 06/08/04

The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Peter Hogan. Present were regular members James Nordstrom, Christopher Johnson and Travis Daniels; ex-officio Christine Quirk; and, alternates Bob Furey and Don Duhaime. Also present were Planning Coordinator Nicola Strong and Recording Clerk Suzanne O’Brien.

Present in the audience, for all or part of the meeting, were Raymond Critch, LLS, Tris Gordon, Charles Cleary, Esq., Jeff Kevan, PE, Brian Holt, Donna Mombourquette, Randy Parker, Burr Tupper, John Greenwood, James and Claire Dodge, Daniel Donovan, Jr., Dan Donovan, Ken Lombard, Deb Keiner, Brandy Mitroff, Paul and Shannon Aubin, Steve Chunn, Paul McGuire, Marilyn Moreau, Rick Martin, Bob Todd, LLS, Harlan Hadley, Kim Burkhamer, Paul Carideo, PE, Dave Elliot, Mitch Larochelle, Neil Smith, Jay Marden, Joe Segien, Bill Weston and Sarah Madden.

LULL ROAD CORPORATION

Submission of Application/Public Hearing

Major 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, of Bedford Design Consultants, Charlie Cleary, Esq., and Tris Gordon. An abutter present was Donna Mombourquette. Interested parties were Randy Parker of the Piscataquog Watershed Association and Burr Tupper of the Conservation Commission, Deb Keiner, Ken Lombard and Jay Marden.

The Chairman stated that as this application dealt with two lots only and did not concern any future intent of the applicant to further subdivide and develop this land, that questions or comments from the audience should be brief and limited to the two lots being applied for. He further noted that at the time of the application for further subdivision all applicable rules and regulations would be discussed.

Raymond Critch, LLS, stated that the applicant was submitting a final application to establish one lot of 3.5 acres and a second remaining tract of 55 acres in the location of West Lull Place. Ray Critch, LLS, said this was a straightforward one lot subdivision and felt the applicant had met the Board’s criteria for approval of this application.

The Chairman stated that waivers had been requested. Ray Critch, LLS, asked if these requests were required to be submitted for tonight’s application. The Chairman replied that waivers had already been submitted for the Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and Traffic, Fiscal and Environmental Impact Studies. Raymond Critch added that State Subdivision Approval had been granted, and a letter from the wetland scientist stating that the wetlands had been redelineated along with the Site Specific Soils Map was submitted to the Coordinator.

The Coordinator asked if any grading or filling would be required on the existing woods road to make it a usable driveway. Raymond Critch, LLS, said this would not be necessary. The Chairman wanted to confirm that the applicant intended that the previous driveway for this site

would not be cleared in any way and would remain a wooded location. Raymond Critch, LLS,

LULL ROAD CORPORATION, cont.

said this was the case.

James Nordstrom MOVED to grant the waiver requests as listed in the letter dated May 24, 2004, from Bedford Design Consultants for the Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, Traffic, Fiscal and Environmental Impact Studies and watershed outline

and drainage computations. It was noted that the last line in Mr. Francisco, LLS’s letter was a hold over item from an older letter and not relevant to this application. Christopher Johnson seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

The Chairman wished to confirm that the application was complete.

James Nordstrom asked if the driveway permit was an outstanding issue relative to the application. The Coordinator replied that a driveway permit had not been submitted nor was there one on file for the existing lot. The Chairman asked if the applicant had applied for a driveway permit. Raymond Critch, LLS, replied that they had attempted to find out if a permit was in existence. The Chairman responded that because the recent site walk by the Board determined that the existing driveway should be used by both Tax Map/Lot #3/5 and Tax Map/Lot #3/5-1, a permit was necessary. James Nordstrom asked if this affected acceptance of the application. The Chairman asked the Coordinator if a driveway permit was a requirement for completeness and she stated that it was.

The Chairman stated that the applicant could choose to withdraw the application without prejudice or the Board could deny the application as incomplete. Charles Cleary, Esq., asked if securing a driveway permit could be a condition to approval of the application. The Chairman responded that the applicant should have known that the driveway permit was missing before submitting the final application and that it was their choice to withdraw the application and resubmit or have the application denied by the Board. He added that recent policy dictated not continuing incomplete final applications so that applicants would be more conscientious in securing these items beforehand.

Tris Gordon stated that as the driveway permit issue was only recently brought to his attention he had spoken to the Road Agent one day prior who assured him that he would issue a driveway permit for the lot. He asked if based on this fact the Board would consider acceptance of the application. The Chairman replied that flexibility in this case was not possible and that final applications were required to have all submissions in order to be accepted.

Raymond Critch, LLS, asked how many years driveway permits had been a requirement of the Town. The Coordinator said approximately ten years. Raymond Critch, LLS, noted that this driveway existed ten years prior and thought it might be grandfathered as it had always been used as an access without a driveway permit. The Coordinator stated that when the Town discovers that a permit does not exist for a driveway one has to be applied for by whoever is currently wishing to use that location.

Raymond Critch, LLS, then requested the final application be withdrawn for resubmittal.

Randy Parker of the Piscataquog Wathershed Association asked if a wetlands permit was required for this plan. Raymond Critch, LLS, replied that such a permit existed. Randy Parker

LULL ROAD CORPORATION, cont.

then asked if culverts or drains had been added to the plan. The Chairman responded that nothing was being added to the plan and the driveway permit was to utilize the existing access. Randy Parker asked if the 12 inch culverts on the plans already existed on the site and Raymond Critch, LLS, said they did.

Raymond Critch, LLS, asked if there was an issue with one driveway being used for two

lots. The Chairman stated this was not an issue because the site walk with the Board determined that although it was possible to use the original driveway on the site it was decided that it was more appropriate to relocate it to its current location and that the only issue outstanding was then the absence of the driveway permit.

Donna Mombourquette asked if the proposed driveway would also provide access to the back lot. Ray Critch, LLS, said it would. The Chairman replied that this was the case because further subdivision of the back lot was planned. He added that it was more appropriate to use this access which might be a future roadway instead of impacting the surrounding woods. Donna Mombourquette noted that there was issue with roads located within 250 feet of the middle branch of the Piscataquog River. The Chairman said that issue would be discussed at the time of submission of an application for subdivision of the backland. He noted that constraints on construction practices may make designing the road difficult and the abutters could hope that this access would remain a driveway for two lots only.

Donna Mombourquette asked if easements for the driveway were required. The Chairman replied that easements were not allowed if they were required to develop the lot. He noted that it would be possible to install a driveway on Lot #3/5-1 which is why the Board would allow the use of a shared driveway. Easement language would be required.

Raymond Critch, LLS, asked when the next submittal deadline date was. The Coordinator replied that June 28, 2004, was the submittal deadline for the July 13, 2004, Planning Board meeting.

MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS AND CORRESPONDENCE FOR THE MEETING OF JUNE 8, 2004

2. Driveway Permit Applications for R.J. Moreau Communities, LLC, Wilson Hill Road, Tax/Map Lot #6/32-2, 6/32-3, 6/32-6, 6/32-8, 6/32-18, 6/32-19, 6/32-20, 6/32-21, for proposed driveway, for the Board’s action.

(Copies distributed at May 25^th meeting)

The Chairman began with Miscellaneous Business #2 because John Greenwood of R.J. Moreau Communities, LLC, was present in the audience.

The Chairman stated that he disagreed with the insinuation that the Board was stalling these permits and the subdivision and asked the Coordinator who had made this statement. The Coordinator replied it was Reggie Moreau. From the audience, John Greenwood of R.J. Moreau apologized for Reggie Moreau’s comment and noted that Mr. Moreau’s statements were sometimes inappropriate when he became frustrated over such issues. The Chairman noted that

MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS, cont.

he had been inclined to wait until tonight’s meeting to schedule a site walk for the Board to look at these driveway locations but the Coordinator had talked him out of it and suggested that a drive by would be more appropriate.

The Chairman stated that driveways that began with a higher elevation than the roadway they joined required the Board’s inspection as 3% negative grades off the road were required. John Greenwood replied that the road was currently up to subgrade and that when the asphalt was down and all driveway aprons were in place driveway inspections would be easier to perform. He noted that staking was required given the current stage of the roadway.

The Chairman asked which driveways had potential for sitting higher than the roadway. John Greenwood thought Lot #8 may have this issue. The Chairman replied that the Board was

only concerned with viewing those lots that had potential to sit higher than the roadway. He added that Lot #6 was the only lot that appeared to have a negative grade off the roadway and this negative grade needed assurance past the ditchline. John Greenwood stated he would make sure this was done.

James Nordstrom MOVED to approve Driveway Permit Applications for R.J. Moreau Communities, LLC, Wilson Hill Road, Tax Map/Lot #6/32-2, 6/32-3, 6/32-6, 6/32-8, 6/32-18, 6/32-19, 6/32-20, 6/32-21, for proposed driveways, with the Standard Planning Board Requirements: the driveway shall have 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; and, the driveway shall intersect with the road at an angle of 60-90 degrees. As part of the driveway applications, it is stipulated that final driveway aprons will be inspected by the Board, with Lot #6 being exempt. Any driveway that leaves the road on a positive slope, in that the driveway sits higher than the roadway it joins, shall be inspected by the Board or its designee for compliance. Christine Quirk seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

The Chairman then signed the driveway applications.

2. Approval of minutes of May 11, 2004, with or without changes.

(Copies distributed at the May 25^th meeting)

James Nordstrom noted a correction to page 3, 11 lines from the bottom: “house location is approved” should be “house location as approved”. The Coordinator offered that the sentence could also be shortened and end at “house location” and James Nordstrom agreed.

Christine Quirk stated that her other son was also present in the audience.

James Nordstrom MOVED to approve the minutes of May 11, 2004, as amended. Christine Quirk seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

CLARK HILL REALTY, LLC Adjourned from 05/11/04

Work Session/Design Review

Non-Residential Site Plan Review/Multi-Family Development

Location: Clark Hill Road

Tax Map/Lot #8/118

Residential One “R-1” District

The Chairman read the public hearing notice. The applicant and/or representatives were not present in the audience, however, a letter submitted to the Board by the applicant and read

aloud by the Chairman requested that the hearing be rescheduled in order that several outstanding issues on the plan could be addressed.

James Nordstrom MOVED to adjourn Clark Hill Realty, LLC, Work Session/Design Review/Major Site Plan/Multi-Family Development, Location: Clark Hill Road, Tax Map/Lot #8/118, Residential-One “R-1” District, to July 13, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. Christopher Johnson seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS, cont.

3. Driveway Permit Applications for Nissitissit Development, LLC, McCurdy Road, Tax Map/Lot # 12/19, 12/19-1, 12/19-2, 12/19-3, 12/19-4, 12/19-5, 12/19-6, 12/19-11, 12/19-12, 12/19-13, 12/19-14, for proposed driveway, for the Board’s action.

(Board to drive by prior to meeting)

The Coordinator explained that these driveway permit applications were overlooked at the prior Planning Board meeting at which the subdivision was approved.

The Chairman stated that the Board should inspect driveways that sat higher than the roadway they joined and thought that no more than two lots from those listed should have such grades. The Coordinator suggested that the same type of motion could be made here as in Miscellaneous Business Item #2.

James Nordstrom MOVED to approve Driveway Permit Applications for Nissitissit Development, LLC, McCurdy Road, Tax Map/Lot #12/19, 12/19-1, 12/19-2, 12/19-3, 12/19-4, 12/19-5, 12/19-6, 12/19-11, 12/19-12, 12/19-13, 12/19-14, for proposed driveways, with the Standard Planning Board Requirements: the driveway shall have 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; and, the driveway shall intersect with the road at an angle of 60-90 degrees. As part of the driveway applications, it is stipulated that final driveway aprons will be inspected by the Board. Any driveway that leaves the road on a positive slope, in that the driveway sits higher than the roadway it joins, shall be inspected by the Board or its designee for compliance. Christopher Johnson seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS, cont.

4. Discussion re: second draft of Driveway Regulations distributed at May 11, 2004, meeting. (No Copies)

The Chairman stated that he assumed Board members had read through this draft and asked the Coordinator for a review of outstanding items.

The Coordinator explained that the following questions were initiated by the

Driveway Regulations Subcommittee as suggestions for inclusions that were not yet in the draft.

The first question regarded whether or not the regulations should include language regarding stone walls as boundary markers or should there simply be a reference to the RSA where such requirements were already included. James Nordstrom thought that a reference to the statute was acceptable. The Board agreed.

The Coordinator then asked if the Board thought there should be a section in the regulations that described driveways on Class VI roads where such instances would involve granting a variance to the applicant and the filing of a release of liability. The Chairman thought this section was unnecessary and omitting it would then imply that driveways should not be on Class VI roads. The Coordinator further asked if the text should reference the Town’s Zoning Ordinances regarding Class VI roads. James Nordstrom thought that either scenario was acceptable and added that using the Coordinator’s suggestion would be a helpful inclusion.

The Coordinator stated that the subcommittee thought that the maximum road grade where a driveway met the road should be 8%. She noted that this was not a problem for new roads but wondered how this scenario would work for existing roads that were quite steep such as Meetinghouse Hill Road. James Nordstrom offered that while efforts to conform to the grade standards should be made for all driveways, some existing lands would then require variances. He suggested that language be incorporated into the regulations that recommended an 8% grade only but did not require it.

The Coordinator next noted that placing parking pads at the base of steep driveways used to be a requirement of the Board. James Nordstrom thought this was a good idea that would be difficult to enforce. Bob Furey added that the snow plows could be inhibited by parking pads placed near the shoulders of the roadways. The Board determined that this requirement should not be included in the regulations.

The Coordinator’s next item for consideration involved two-way driveways with an island located in between. She added that she could not think of a scenario in the Town where such a configuration would be necessary or could not be instead addressed by a dividing stripe on the driveway. James Nordstrom thought that island dividers were used more for commercial sites than residential. The Coordinator agreed and thought it a potentially complicating design feature for residential properties. The Chairman concurred stating that this item was not applicable to the Town.

The Coordinator said that the process for enforcing driveway grades needed review as the Board was now involved in inspections of driveways with negative grades. She then asked the Board if they were satisfied with the way the current process worked or should the Road Agent be given the sole responsibility in terms of initial inspection for location. In this way, she added

MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS, cont.

that the Board could then concentrate on more procedural items such as previous approvals, restrictions on the property, escrow accounts and bonding and so on. The Coordinator also wondered if the applicant benefited from the Board’s concentrated involvement in the driveway inspections. James Nordstrom recalled that as recently as two years prior the Board’s main role in driveway inspections focused on land use issues, escrow accounts, and driveway issues from prior subdivisions which he thought more appropriate. The Coordinator asked if the Board should then have authority on final inspections. James Nordstrom replied that the Road Agent was better suited to confirm compliance with construction standards of driveways. He added that no purpose was served if conditions were added to driveway permits that ultimately went unchecked but thought that the Board could certainly step in when the Road Agent or Highway Department was unavailable. Christine Quirk thought that one entity should govern the entire inspection process. The Chairman asked if the Building Department gave final approval on driveway inspections and the Coordinator replied that this was the Road Agent’s job. The Chairman added that the previous Road Agent had not monitored final driveway inspections very closely and the Planning Board had just assumed this role. He thought a requirement be suggested that the Road Agent assume this duty. James Nordstrom thought that the Board should seek the Road Agent’s opinion on the draft driveway regulations. The Coordinator noted that preliminary requirements on driveway designs are always the same in that they call for paving, proper turning radii and angle of intersection. James Nordstrom cited the current situation with R.J. Moreau, noting that drive-by viewing of proposed driveways on an existing road was easier to perform that on a new road. He thought that the Road Agent and Highway Department were better suited to handle the latter situation. The Chairman thought it necessary to get the Road Agent’s opinion to confirm that taking on more inspection work would not be burdensome for him.

The Coordinator’s next item involved including language regarding maintenance of the driveway. The Board agreed that a section should be added.

The Coordinator asked if the same driveway application process should be used for both residential and commercial driveways where there were few commercial properties in town. James Nordstrom thought this was acceptable as commercial properties still required site plan approval.

The Coordinator asked if a Permit to Use would be a good idea and should involve two forms instead of one where sign offs were required at the point of installation and again before use was authorized. James Nordstrom said this was similar to Certificate of Occupancy sign offs and the Chairman added that this method was also followed for septic system installations. The Coordinator added that check boxes could be included on the forms to confirm inspection of all items. The Chairman thought this was a very good idea as it encouraged ultimate accountability which could help to stop positive grades on new driveways. Burr Tupper of the Conservation Commission also liked this idea as accountability would be assured before final permits were issued as there had been cases where negative impacts to wetlands had occurred post construction.

The Coordinator asked if the Board thought the Conservation Commission should be

MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS, cont.

consulted when driveways were near wetlands. She added that currently if driveways were, for example, 15 feet from a brook, consultation with the Conservation Commission was not required. The Coordinator thought that consultation should be stressed somehow in the regulation in order for proper management of erosion control. The Chairman added that the Board could note on driveway permit when they wanted the Conservation Commission’s input. James Nordstrom offered that language for the regulations could say that, at the Board’s discretion, driveways within a certain distance of wetlands areas required recommendations and advice from the Conservation Commission.

The Coordinator stated that the final item was that she needed assistance coming up with a “Materials for Construction” section. James Nordstrom commented that existing gravel roads were held to different standards based on the drive’s exit point whereas a paved driveway always had a paved apron. He added that he would be able to help with language and specifications for this section.

The Coordinator stated that she would compose a final draft and also speak with the Road Agent.

James Nordstrom wanted to ask the Board if there were any concerns with the portion of the regulations that dealt with common driveways as the regulation inferred promoting such driveways. The Chairman thought this was an inaccurate implication. The Coordinator asked the Board to read that section of the regulations and have comments prepared for the next Planning Board meeting as common driveways should be considered in plan designs. The Chairman wished to add that he had no issue with common entrances but more so common driveways. He stated that the Board should read the common driveways section for discussion on June 22^nd.

5. Endorsement of a Site Plan for Paul and Kristi Citak, Tax Map/Lot #2/47, for the Board’s action.

The Chairman and Secretary endorsed the above-noted site Plan.

6. A copy of a letter dated June 1, 2004, from Robert Todd, to Chairman Hogan, New Boston Planning Board, Re: Page land, was distributed for the Board’s review and discussion.

The Chairman stated that this letter fulfilled the Board’s desire to obtain the opinion of a Licensed Land Surveyor for the record as suggested by Town Counsel. James Nordstrom added that if the applicant had secured this letter initially Town Counsel’s involvement would not have been required.

The Chairman noted that Town Counsel’s letter had also confirmed for future cases that a lot divided by a road was not necessarily two lots.

DODGE, JAMES & RUTH (Owners)

DODGE, JAMES (Applicant)

Submission of Application/Public Hearing

NRSPR/Garden & Ice Cream Stand

Location: NH Route 77 a/k/a Weare Road

Tax Map/Lot #5/21

Commercial “Com” District

The Chairman read the public hearing notice. Present in the audience were James and Claire Dodge.

The Chairman stated he had driven by the site and saw the rocks in place for parking delineation along with the ice cream stand in place. James Nordstrom stated he had also viewed

the site one day prior and thought the site construction complied with the plan presented although the mobile ice cream stand structure had not been in place on that day.

The Chairman added that Christine Quirk had wondered about the electrical hookup and noted that lock boxes were available for such structures. James Dodge replied that he had a screw on cover that would be placed over the electrical box.

The Chairman asked if the outstanding fee had been received and the Coordinator replied that it had been.

James Nordstrom MOVED to confirm that James W. Dodge has complied with the conditions subsequent to the approval of the site plan to operate a garden and ice cream stand from property located on NH Route 77 a/k/a Weare Road, Tax Map/Lot #5/21 and to release the hold on the Certificate of Occupancy/Use Permit to be issued by the Building Department. Christine Quirk seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

The Chairman asked James and Claire Dodge when they would be open for business. James Dodge thought they would open the following week on Wednesday or Thursday.

The Chairman and Secretary endorsed the Dodge site plans.

MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS, cont.

7. Discussion regarding letter dated May 24, 2004, to Roger Noonan, from Nic Strong, Planning Coordinator, Re: Planning Board Materials and Deadline for Site Plan.

(Distributed at May 25^th meeting)

The Coordinator stated that she had not yet received a response back from Roger Noonan. The Chairman asked for comments from the Board. James Nordstrom stated that as the letter was sent less than two weeks prior to tonight’s meeting he was willing to wait until the next Planning Board meeting for a response from Mr. Noonan. He added that if no response was forthcoming by the next meeting date the Board should discuss further action.

MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS, cont.

8. Email received May 12, 2004, to New Boston Planning Board, from, Leah Riseman, Re: Whipplewill Road, Berm, for the Board’s review and discussion. (Board to drive by prior to meeting) (No Copies)

The Chairman asked if any Board members had driven by the property. James Nordstrom replied that he had driven by and noticed one or two trees that might need replacement based on the conditions of the original site plan.

The Chairman asked if George Merrill had responded back to the Planning Department. The Coordinator replied that he had not.

The Chairman stated that he had walked on top of the berm and had no concerns, adding that vegetation seemed to have been increased with some trees possibly removed for

maintenance purposes. From the top of the berm, the Chairman stated he could not see over to the Riseman property. The Board asked that a letter be sent to Mrs. Riseman detailing their findings and stating that the berm was in compliance with the requirements of the original site plan approval and is being maintained.

9. A copy of a letter received May 26, 2004, from Dennis Sarette, Building Inspector, to Patricia and Robert Waller, 236 Meadow Road, New Boston, NH, Re: Building Permit/Site Plan, was distributed for the Board’s information.

The Coordinator explained that the Wallers needed to submit a site plan to operate a business from their garage and building inspection for the garage was also required. The Chairman asked what the business entailed. The Coordinator replied that Mr. Waller made automobile emblems and repaired antique cars.

10. A copy of a letter received May 2, 2004, from Dennis Sarette, Building Inspector, to James M. Denesevich & Donna M. Mombourquette, Re: Response to complaint against Lull Road Corporation, for the Board’s information.

The Coordinator explained that this was the response to the letter reviewed by the Board at the May 11, 2004, Planning Board meeting.

11. A copy of a letter received May 28, 2004, from Kenneth L. Horak, US Department of Homeland Security, to Gordon Carlstrom, Chairman, New Boston Selectmen, Re: Town of New Boston’s hazard mitigation plan, was distributed for the Board’s information.

DONOVAN, JR, DANIEL (APPLICANT) & DONOVAN, II, DANIEL (OWNER)

Submission of Application/Public Hearing

Major Subdivision/2 Lots

Location: Bedford Road

Tax Map/Lot #9/63, Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District

DONOVAN, cont.

The Chairman read the public hearing notice. Present in the audience was applicant Daniel Donovan, Jr. and his father, Dan Donovan. Abutters present were Paul and Shannon Aubin and Steve Chunn. An interested party was Burr Tupper of the Conservation Commission.

Daniel Donovan, Jr., stated that there were no substantial changes made to the subdivision plan since the Board had last seen it other than decreasing the number of lots from three lots to two. He added that because there was an issue regarding available access for two back lots his engineer reconfigured the plan to show one 19 acre back lot and one 7 acre front lot.

Daniel Donovan, Jr., stated that the Environmental Impact Study was completed and had been submitted. He added that waivers were being requested for Fiscal and Traffic Impact Studies.

Daniel Donovan, Jr., then asked if the Board could consider his application complete.

The Chairman confirmed with the Coordinator that this site plan had some environmental concerns as it crossed wetlands. He asked the applicant if further subdivision was planned on this site. Daniel Donovan, Jr., replied that no immediate considerations were being made as the current project illustrated on the site plan had a three to four year completion schedule. He added that although the Board’s back lot access concerns negated one of the two back lot on the plans there was now a lot of land there that could be developed in the future. The Chairman asked if the applicant was willing to include a note on the plans stating that no future subdivision of the land would occur. Daniel Donovan Jr., replied he did not wish to do so.

James Nordstrom asked if the applicant held ownership of Tax Map/Lot #9/61 which fronted on Bedford Road and Daniel Donovan, Jr., replied that he did. Daniel Donovan, Jr., noted that Tax Map/Lot #9/61 was located directly across from the Bedford Road entrance to Wilson Hill Road. James Nordstrom then confirmed that the applicant might be able to gain access to the back lots from this property at some future time through consolidation and Daniel Donovan, Jr., said that was the case.

The Chairman stated that an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan would be required for the back lot on the plans but did not see a need for Traffic Impact or Fiscal Impact studies. He noted that the applicant had also requested a waiver on the soils mapping. James Nordstrom asked who had performed the wetland delineation and Daniel Donovan, Jr., replied that it was Schauer Environmental. The Chairman asked if the soils mapping was adequate for Lot #9/63 as it contained a moderate amount of wetlands. James Nordstrom replied that the mapping presented met the Zoning Requirements for contiguous wetlands and he did not think that additional soil delineation would have greater effects. He added that the delineated upland area shown for Lot #9/63 totaled 1.7 acres which satisfied zoning and met the requirements for installation of a septic system.

The Coordinator asked the Board if they felt the submitted site impact analysis from Schauer Environmental contained enough information on sediment and erosion control to satisfy Section V-V of the Subdivision Regulations or would more information be necessary that would pertain to future lot development and siting for buildings. James Nordstrom thought that because the back Lot #9/63-1 was substantially upland and allowed numerous choices for the building site there would be little or no impacts sustained. He added that the front lot had the opposite

DONOVAN, cont.

issue and, therefore, suggested a report should be submitted for Lot #9/63 that accounted for the house, driveway and construction related impacts. Daniel Donovan, Jr., stated that a septic design for Lot #9/63 was prepared for the State’s review and noted that the house would need to be placed in a certain spot due to the shape of the lot. James Nordstrom suggested that an expansion of this septic design could satisfy Erosion and Sediment Control requirements of the Board. Daniel Donovan, Jr., said he would have this completed. James Nordstrom went on to add that the main impact to Lot #9/63-1 would be the construction of its driveway. The Coordinator stated that the driveway construction for Lot #9/63-1 should be included in the expanded design as there was wording in the Subdivision Regulations that suggested this was a Critical Area. James Nordstrom reiterated that as the driveway section of Lot #9/63-1 was the only relevant area of impact, a small design that depicted the driveway entering the lot should suffice.

Burr Tupper stated that there was an issue with standing water on the front lot and a road crossing culvert that drained onto the property. In addition he said there was no culvert to the back lot which also had standing water. The Chairman replied that a site walk was necessary to address issues such as this. Daniel Donovan, Jr., stated that the Road Agent had been out to view the culverts which were packed with dirt. He added that some sort of stone catch was suggested by the Road Agent that would capture this water and let it flow to the wetlands unimpeded. Daniel Donovan, Jr., said he would abide by whatever the Road Agent suggested to address this issue.

The Chairman wished to schedule a site walk. Daniel Donovan, Jr., asked if the Town could request a representative from DES attend the site walk in order that all questions could be addressed at once. The Chairman was not certain this could be arranged as DES had never attended site walks with the Board. The Coordinator replied that DES had requested to attend this site walk to verify that an old causeway on the property had been constructed in accordance with a 1985 permit.

Paul Aubin stated that he had information from the original permit that dated back to 1985 and submitted it to the Board.

James Nordstrom thought that the DES should be contacted to view the property before the Board’s scheduled site walk. The Coordinator stated it would be difficult to secure a representative from DES for an evening or weekend site walk. She suggested that a daytime walk be scheduled with the Conservation Commission. The Chairman wondered if the Conservation Commission could attend both the Board’s site walk and the DES site walk.

Paul Aubin asked if different Traffic Studies were done for single family home developments versus multi-family as he had heard rumors to the latter. The Chairman replied that the Board only dealt with current applications and could not discuss issues regarding future intent that was not shown on the plan before them.

Steve Chunn wished to note that if it became necessary to have a stone causeway constructed to handle drainage issues it would need to be substantial as heavy snows accumulate in the upland areas and drain downward.

Daniel Donovan, Jr., stated that he would like his environmental representative to also

DONOVAN, cont.

attend the site walk. The Coordinator added that the Conservation Commission and DES site walks should be scheduled before the Board’s next hearing for this application on July 13, 2004.

A site walk was scheduled for the Board for June 29, 2004, at 6:30 p.m.

Daniel Donovan, Jr., wanted to confirm that no additional submissions from him were required before the site walk. The Chairman said this was the case.

Paul Aubin asked why this application was originally classified as minor and was now considered a major subdivision. The Coordinator replied that this application became a major subdivision because there was potential for future subdivision due to the size of the back lot. The Chairman added that the back lot was technically feasible for sustaining future home sites

but the future intent of the applicant was not the deciding factor on changing the classification from minor to major.

James Nordstrom MOVED to adjourn the hearing for Daniel A. Donovan II, LLC and Daniel A. Donovan, Jr., Submission of Application, Public Hearing, Major Subdivision, 2 Lots, Location: Bedford Road, Tax Map/Lot #9/63, Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District, to July 13, 2004, at 7:30 p.m. Travis Daniels seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

At 8:40 p.m. the Planning Board took a 10 minute break.

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.

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.

WHITE, TIMOTHY & CHISTNER, CHERYL

Conditional Use Permit/2 Wetlands Crossings

Location: Beard Road

Tax Map/Lot #’s 5/38

Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District

The Chairman read the public hearing notice. Present in the audience was Bob Todd, LLS, who represented the applicant. No abutters were present.

Bob Todd, LLS, stated that the applicant sought a Conditional Use Permit for two wetland crossings for a driveway that accessed a building site on Lot #5/38. He added that a site

walk was performed and one prior hearing held for this application, however, it was still ongoing due to some outstanding items not addressed by the applicant.

Bob Todd, LLS, illustrated the lot configuration as 21.2 acres with 50 feet of frontage on Beard Road. He noted the driveway was located on an easement off the 50 foot strip where access was provided to the adjoining lot and then crossed the first wetland to the building site. Bob Todd, LLS, said the individual crossings contained 3,727 square feet of impact at the first wetland location and 2,150 square feet of impact at the second wetland location. He added that these areas included jurisdictional and local wetland conservation district boundaries with more impact on the local side than the State side.

Bob Todd, LLS, stated that the Wetlands Bureau approved both wetlands crossings several months prior. He stated a standard culvert crossing with rock outlet protection would be installed and standard erosion control and best management practices would be observed during construction. Bob Todd, LLS, explained that construction could not begin until mid July when the wetlands produced low flow or no flow. He noted that the ground was still saturated on the surface at present.

The Chairman asked if there were any comments from the site walk held. James Nordstrom remembered the walk as being quite wet.

The Chairman stated that an estimate for wetland crossing construction was received by D&S Excavation and asked what form of security the applicant wished to submit. Bob Todd, LLS, asked what the security options were. The Chairman stated that a bond, cash or letter of credit could be submitted. Bob Todd, LLS, thought that the choice would most likely be cash. The Coordinator wished to verify the estimated amount of $5,488 for construction of two wetland crossings and Bob Todd, LLS, stated this was correct.

Brandy Mitroff asked what the length of the driveway was. Bob Todd, LLS, replied the driveway length approached 1,600 feet.

The Chairman did not have any further issues. Bob Todd, LLS, confirmed the security amount as $5,500 in round figures and the Coordinator said this was correct. James Nordstrom asked if the security would be provided in cash and what the submittal time frame would be. Bob Todd, LLS, said it would be cash and it could be submitted within 30 days.

WHITE, TIMOTHY & CHISTNER, CHERYL, cont.

James Nordstrom MOVED to accept the application as complete and to grant the Conditional Use Permit and approve the plans of Timothy White and Cheryl Christner, to dredge and fill 5,877 square feet of poorly drained soils for the construction of a driveway on property on Beard Road, known as Tax Map/Lot #5/38, as the four conditions for granting the Permit have been found to exist, subject to the following conditions:

CONDITIONS PRECEDENT:

1. Submission of the financial security in the amount of $5,500 and in the form of cash.

2. Any revisions to the site plan as decided by the Board at the hearing (if applicable). The deadline date for complying with the conditions precedent shall be July 8, 2004, the confirmation of which shall be an administrative act, not requiring further action by the Board. Should the conditions to approval not be fulfilled by the deadline date, and a written request for extension is not submitted prior to 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.

CONDITIONS SUBSEQUENT:

1. Completion of the site improvements as related to the filling of 5,877 s.f. of poorly drained soils for driveway construction, as shown on the approved construction design plan.

2. The financial security shall not be released until the site has been inspected upon notification to the Planning Department by the applicant that the project has been completed, and a compliance hearing is held and confirms that the project has been satisfactorily completed by no later than September 15, 2004.

Travis Daniels 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 Jeff Kevan, PE, of T.F. Moran and Brian Holt of Vista Road, LLC. Interested parties were Jay Marden and Bill Weston.

Jeff Kevan, PE, stated that they had received preliminary approval of the application by the Board at a prior hearing and had also obtained the necessary State permits for Site Specific, Wetlands and State Subdivision Approval. He added that they were now submitting the final

VISTA ROAD, LLC, cont.

application for approval with included permits and drainage reports, etc. Jeff Kevan, PE, asked the Board if they wanted an overview of the plan. The Chairman replied that this was not necessary as the Board was very familiar with this plan.

Jeff Kevan, PE, stated that they had received the Coordinator’s plan comments which were minor technical adjustments to the plan and that no comments had yet been received from the Road Committee. He added that with no major changes since the prior hearing, the desire was to proceed towards the acceptance of the overall plan.

Jeff Kevan, PE, confirmed the areas on the plan where the tie-ins to the existing subdivisions on Inkberry Road and Wilson Hill Road were certain where a right-of-way had been established as part of the previous subdivision. Jeff Kevan, PE, also noted that a “T” intersection was successfully coordinated with the Highland Hills subdivision.

Jeff Kevan, PE, stated that the plan’s road configuration was based on the site’s elevation changes and the road length required to make the road connections work. He added that no additional lots were created in doing this and that the goal was to have a platform created on each

end of the road, and to maintain 8% grades for driveway entrances to the lots. Jeff Kevan, PE, pointed out that a straight road was initially considered through a small break in the wetlands area of the plans, however, the elevation changes required that additional road length be added to the design.

Jeff Kevan, PE, also noted that the lot sizes on this plan were equal in size to, or larger than, neighboring subdivisions.

The Chairman stated that since the last meeting the Fire Wards had notified the Board that they had serious safety concerns regarding the incline and turns of the proposed road. The Coordinator added that she had sent a memo to the Selectmen and Town Administrator regarding the Board’s discussion of the Administrator’s letter of suggestion regarding Road Committee collaboration with Dufresne-Henry, Inc., on the applicant’s road design issues. She added that she had not yet received a response. The Chairman asked Christine Quirk if she had any information on the status of the response. Christine Quirk believed the Town Administrator was coordinating a meeting between the Road Committee and the Town Engineer. Jeff Kevan, PE, asked if the plans had been sent to the Town Engineer. The Coordinator replied that the plans could not be sent until the application was accepted as complete. The Chairman added that a joint meeting between the Road Committee and Town Engineer prevented a double review by Dufresne-Henry, Inc., and excess cost to the applicant. Jeff Kevan, PE, stated that he was very willing to meet jointly with both parties. Christine Quirk thought that the meeting was only to be between the Road Committee and the Town Engineer. Brian Holt asked why a representative from Vista Road, LLC, could not be present as well. Jeff Kevan, PE, agreed that it would be helpful to hear the two party’s concerns first hand. The Chairman agreed and asked the Coordinator if she thought there were reasons the Road Committee would be not be agreeable to this. The Coordinator replied that she saw no reason why the Road Committee would not want Vista Road, LLC, at the joint meeting. She noted the original question was posed regarding only the Road Committee and Dufresne-Henry, Inc.

Jeff Kevan, PE, stated he believed such a meeting would clarify the minimum road

VISTA ROAD, LLC, cont.

standards that had been referenced against this plan by the Road Committee. The Chairman replied that safety standards were the underlying criteria for this road design and the goal was to see a design that had as few slopes and turns as possible. Jeff Kevan, PE, offered that as this road was the connection between two existing flat subdivisions its design would naturally create slower traffic.

James Nordstrom asked what the average slope across the plan was. Jeff Kevan, PE, pointed out one lot with a substantial drop and Brian Holt added that the overall grade slope was between 15 and 18%. Jeff Kevan, PE, noted that the grade straight across the parcel was 10-12% and stressed that they wanted to be as close to this grade as was possible so as not to undercut the wetlands. James Nordstrom added that the applicant had three constraints in designing this plan: a tie in to existing subdivisions, land elevation issues, and wetlands. Jeff Kevan, PE, added that this was one of the only viable alternatives to creating a connection between the two

existing subdivisions. James Nordstrom assumed that many layouts were done to reach this final design and Jeff Kevan, PE, said that was correct. Jeff Kevan, PE, said the first approach was to put a straight road through the 50 foot gap in the wetlands which would have yielded the same

number of lots but presented difficult grades. He added that the proposed road’s curved design was necessary to accommodate changes in elevation. James Nordstrom added that the layout appeared to be a fixed elevation change while sustaining the natural slope. Mr. Kevan, PE, agreed and said the goal was to match grades while minimizing cuts and fills and this road design met that challenge.

James Nordstrom asked what areas outside of the public right-of-way required easements due to slopes. Mr. Kevan, PE, replied that slope easements could be included on the plans but were not needed in order to build the road. He added that easements required from the Town’s perspective would be for drainage systems, storm water treatment and discharge points. He noted again that the main objective was to match grade while avoiding deep cuts and fills like in the Inkberry subdivision.

James Nordstrom asked if driveway accesses were done for two lots noted on the south side of the plans #6/40-5-4 and #6/40-5-6. Jeff Kevan, PE, replied that they had attempted to match the grade with these lots and follow contours of the land. He added that these lots and one additional lot fronted off Wilson Hill Road which allowed them to support walk out basements. James Nordstrom asked if access to Lot #6/40-5-6 would be affected by the proposed roadway. Jeff Kevan, PE, said it would not.

The Chairman stated that the Board needed to determine if the application was complete and if so it could then be forwarded to the Town Engineer so that design issues could be considered.

The Chairman stated that the covenants and restriction for sprinkler systems and deed language were not submitted. The Coordinator replied that the deed language was the only item of the two not submitted. Jeff Kevan, PE, asked if deeds for each individual lot were required or would a sample deed suffice. The Coordinator replied that a sample deed which referenced the covenants was required.

The Chairman stated that Bond and Security proposal needed to be submitted. Brian Holt

VISTA ROAD, LLC, cont.

asked if the bond estimate form had changes as he had an older form that used unit values. The Chairman replied that this was the same format used.

The Chairman asked the Coordinator if the missing items prevented the application from being complete. The Coordinator said they were indeed required items for a complete application. The Chairman informed the applicant that due to these missing items the application could be denied by the Board as incomplete or the applicant could withdraw and reapply at a later date. Jeff Kevan, PE, asked if the application could be continued pending the two missing items. The Chairman stated that the Board was trying to encourage complete applications and would not support a continuance.

Brain Holt did not know how a bond could be provided before the Town Engineer’s review was complete as the plans could then change. The Chairman replied that the Board only needed a bond estimate. Brian Holt replied that the estimate was $75 per linear foot and asked how the bond estimate form played into this requirement. The Coordinator replied that the bond

estimate was entered on the form based on unit price and could be changed if necessary based on the Town Engineer review. James Nordstrom added that this submittal was a requirement of the Board per the Subdivision Regulations even though the applicant might think its chronology illogical. Brian Holt asked if these two items were those that were recently sent to the applicant. The Chairman replied that these items had always been a requirement in the Subdivision Regulations but could not confirm if they were recently sent to the applicant.

Jeff Kevan, PE, wanted to confirm the type of sample deed required for submittal. The Coordinator replied that the sample deed should state the homes would have sprinkler systems and reference the Declaration of Covenants. She noted that the deed and declaration would be recorded at different times.

Brian Holt and Jeff Kevan, PE, asked if the application filing fee of $1,835 would need to be paid again at the resubmittal of the application. The Chairman replied that the fee would not need to be repaid. Jeff Kevan, PE, wanted to confirm that the two missing items would be submitted with a new application. The Chairman asked the Coordinator to review this procedure. The Coordinator explained that the certified letter fee needed to be sent again to the Planning Department while the existing application remained intact and only the two missing items needed submittal by the applicant. The Chairman noted that this would then make the application complete and it could then be forwarded to Dufresne-Henry, Inc.

Brian Holt asked if another formal hearing was required to hear the application as complete. The Chairman stated this was the case. Brian Holt asked what the time frame was for the next hearing and the submittal deadline date. The Chairman replied that the next hearing could be July 13, 2004. The Coordinator noted that the submittal deadline for this hearing date was June 28, 2004. The Chairman stated that the applicant’s next hearing to accept the complete application should be brief. Brian Holt described the procedure for resubmittal as silly. The Chairman replied that the procedure was a stipulation in the Subdivision Regulations. James Nordstrom stated an alternative solution was denial of the application by the Board. Jeff Kevan, PE, requested to withdraw the application for resubmittal to the Board at a later date.

Jeff Kevan, PE, told the Coordinator he would like to complete the checklist items for the

VISTA ROAD, LLC, cont.

resubmittal so that all issues were addressed at once and the Coordinator replied that this was acceptable.

Jay Marden asked if the plan’s road connection design was a requirement of the Board or could stub circles have been inserted alternately. The Chairman replied that a connection would have been required eventually in this area. Jay Marden said that stub circles at the top and bottom of the planned could have eliminated grade problems. The Chairman stated that the remaining land was intended for development, therefore, this road connection was necessary. Jay Marden replied that 14 lots completed the subdivision and stub circles could have been used in place of the connecting road. The Coordinator noted that the Road Agent, Fire Department, Police Department and Selectmen preferred to not have dead end roads. Jay Marden noted that the alternative of a steeply graded road was questionable. The Coordinator responded that such safety factor questions would be answered during the review process of this plan. Jay Marden responded that he felt the Board theoretically required this road be a connector road and that it was not merely the applicant’s optional choice. James Nordstrom replied that the connector road

scenario was not a requirement of the Board. The Chairman stated that this road was proposed to

the Board by the applicant.

HARVEY DUPUIS FAMILY TRUST

Submission of Application/Public Hearing

Major Subdivision/Lot Line Adjustment

Location: Carriage Road

Tax Map/Lot #12/93, 12/93-22, 12/93-19 & 12/93-21

Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District

The Chairman read the public hearing notice. Present in the audience were Paul Carideo, PE, Mitch Larochelle, Dave Elliot and Neil Smith. Also present were Jay Marden and Bill Weston.

Paul Carideo, PE, of T.F. Moran stated that this was a continuation of the existing subdivision that was ongoing in the approval process and that the applicant wished to bring these 4 lots into conformance with that plan. He added that State permits were still pending for the larger subdivision.

Paul Carideo, PE, illustrated on the plans where Lot #12/93-19’s lot lines would change to conform to the 200 X 200 foot square shown on the plans along with the other lots whose lot lines would be adjusted to conform better to the overall plan for future subdivision to make sure that the proposed future road right-of-way was unencumbered.

The Chairman asked if waiver requests were submitted for Traffic, Fiscal and Environmental Studies. Paul Carideo, PE, stated he did not submit waiver requests as these lots were already in the approved subdivision. The Chairman replied that a waiver request was necessary and that a verbal request with a written follow up was sufficient. Paul Carideo, PE, verbally requested waivers on the Traffic, Fiscal and Environmental Studies with a follow up in writing assured.

HARVEY DUPUIS FAMILY TRUST, cont.

James Nordstrom MOVED to accept the waivers verbally requested by Paul Carideo, PE, with a follow-up to be made in writing. Travis Daniels seconded the motion and it

PASSED unanimously.

James Nordstrom MOVED to accept the application for Harvey Dupuis Family Trust,

Minor Subdivision, Location: Carriage Road, Tax Map/Lot #12/93, 12/93-19, 12/93-21

& 12/93-22, Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District, as complete. Christine Quirk

seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

The Chairman asked if there were any changes to driveways on the plans. Paul Carideo, PE, said the driveway proposals remained the same.

The Chairman asked if the lot line changes would affect existing easements. Paul Carideo, PE, replied that an easement would change on one lot and that he would provide documentation. The Chairman wished to verify that the 200’ squares would fit on Lot #12/93-21

when the new road was constructed. Paul Carideo, PE, said he could show that lot conformity on the plans or a mark up but that he could assure the 200’ squares would fit.

The Coordinator asked if the different parcel sizes could be notated with acreage detail and also asked if “Z” marks could be added to show the changes to the lot lines. Paul Carideo, PE, replied that he would make these changes.

The Chairman asked the Coordinator if these changes were considered administrative.

The Coordinator replied that they were.

James Nordstrom asked what the total revisions were to the plans. Paul Carideo, PE, replied that areas with parcels would be notated with “Z” markers, a draft easement would now be on two lots versus 1 previously, proposed driveways would be shown on the plans and a note added to the plan based on the waivers requested and granted.

James Nordstrom MOVED to approve the Minor Subdivision, Lot Line Adjustment Plan for Harvey Dupuis Family Trust, for Tax Map/Lot #12/93, 12/93-19, 12-93-21 & 12/93-

22, Carriage Road, subject to:

CONDITIONS PRECEDENT:

1. Submission of a minimum of three (3) blue/blackline copies of the revised plat, including all checklist corrections and any corrections as noted at this hearing and any waivers granted;

2. Submission of the mylar for recording at the HCRD.

3. Payment of any outstanding fees including the cost of recording the mylar at the

HCRD.

4. Submittal and receipt of an easement deed which may need review by Town Counsel at the applicant’s expense.

The deadline date for compliance with the conditions precedent shall be June 21, 2004, confirmation of which shall be an administrative act, not requiring further action by

HARVEY DUPUIS FAMILY TRUST, cont.

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.

Travis Daniels seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS, cont.

12. Daily road inspection reports dated April 28^th, April 29^th, May 3^rd, May 4^th, May 6^th,

May 7^th, May 10^th, May 11^th, and May 12^th, from Dufresne-Henry, Inc., Re: Waldorf

Estates, were distributed for the Board’s information.

13. Daily road inspection reports dated April 28^th, April 29^th, May 3^rd, May 4^th, May 5^th,

May 6^th, May 7^th, May 10^th, May 11^th, May 12^th, May 13^th, and May 14^th, from Dufresne-

Henry, Inc., Re: Highland Hills, were distributed for the Board’s information.

14. A copy of a letter received June 2, 2004, from the State of NH, Department of Transportation, to the Town of New Boston, Re: Driveway Permit, was distributed for the Board’s information.

15. A copy of a June, 2004, New Boston Bulletin article, Re: New Boston Speaks Action Group Updates, was distributed for the Board’s information.

16. A copy of a letter dated June 4, 2004, from Greg Begin, New Boston Police Chief, to Nicola Strong, Planning Coordinator and to the Board, Re: Hopkins Road Subdivision, Tax Map/Lot #13/15, was distributed for the Board’s information.

17. A copy of a letter dated June 4, 2004, to Brent Armstrong, from Burton Reynolds, Town Administrator, Re: Southern NH Planning Commission appointment, was distributed for the Board’s information.

18. Discussion, Re: Lynn Strong’s site plan to expand her existing daycare facility at 643 North Mast Road.

The Coordinator explained that she had asked Michele Brown to review this site plan for procedural purposes as Lynn Strong was her sister-in-law and noted that if the Board preferred that she was not involved in the review she would step aside. James Nordstrom asked if the Coordinator felt her involvement would be a conflict of interest and the Coordinator replied she did not. The Board had no issue with the Coordinator remaining active in this review.

MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS, cont.

19. A copy of an e-mail received June 3, 2004, from David Ely, Re: Master Plan Committee meeting minutes of June 2, 2004, was distributed for the Board’s information.

The Coordinator explained that she attended this meeting and the group now understood that other chapters of the plan needed to be written before the Future Land Use chapter was written and that the Master Plan needed to contain reference to an issue before an ordinance was written to govern same.

The Coordinator stated that Bill Weston was present in the audience and a member of the Master Plan Committee.

The Coordinator stated that the Steep Slope Ordinance would be worked on by a subcommittee group of the Master Plan Committee as they felt it was important to address this item early on and because reference was already included in the Master Plan to protecting steep slopes. She added that James Nordstrom would also provide input on the writing of this ordinance and the meeting date to do so was on June 29, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. in the Town Hall.

20. A copy of Wetlands and Non-Site Specific Permit dated June 3, 2004, for Inkberry Road, RJ Moreau Company, Inc., was distributed for the Board’s information.

21. Read File: Public Hearing Notice for June 14, 2004, from the Town of Dunbarton, Re: personal wireless facility.

22. The Coordinator stated that Michele Brown wished to know if the Board preferred to

receive e-mails or phone messages regarding items such as site walk notifications as she was trying to ascertain how best to daily run the Planning Department during the Coordinator’s maternity leave. The Board agreed that e-mails did not work for them and phone messages or memos worked best. Christine Quirk added that she did not object to receiving notifications in her mail slot either.

23. The Coordinator stated that she would be attending an advanced seminar on Fiscal Impact Analysis at the Franklin Pierce Law Center on June 9, 2004, to see how other Towns were addressing this issue by the use of the use of different models, multipliers, etc. James Nordstrom asked who the presenters were at the seminar. The Coordinator replied that some of those listed were Charles Wharton, Peter Bartlett and Bruce Mayberry.

At 10:30 p.m., Travis Daniels MOVED to adjourn. Christopher Johnson seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.

Respectfully submitted, Minutes Approved: 7/13/04

Suzanne O’Brien, Recording Clerk