Minutes of the Planning Board
October 24, 2006
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Peter Hogan. Present were regular members James Nordstrom, and Don Duhaime; and, alternate Doug Hill. Also present were Planning Coordinator Nicola Strong, and Michele Brown, Planning Board Assistant.
Present in the audience, for all or part of the meeting, were Sara Hogan, Dave Walker, PE, Burr Tupper, Brandy Mitroff, Roch Larochelle, Cathy Conk Ryder, George Chadwick, LLS, Vincent Iacozzi, Jim Edwards, Jeff Hudson, Connie & Robert Brown, Mark LeBlanc, Earney Mayo, Willard Dodge, Kim & Steve Burkhamer, and Ken Clinton.
DOUGLAS HILL CONSTRUCTION, LLC Adjourned from 09/26/06
Submission of Application/Public Hearing
Major Subdivision/24 Lots
Location: Francestown Road a/k/a NH Route 136
Tax Map/Lot # 5/16
Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District
The Chairman read the public hearing notice. Present was applicant Doug Hill and engineer Dave Walker, PE. Also present was abutter Cathy Conk Ryder.
Dave Walker, PE, began by noting that the Board had not yet acted formally on the waiver request submitted for the cul-de-sac length. The Chairman noted that had been brought to the Board's attention and would be the first order of business. The Board stated that they had granted a preliminary conditional approval based on this design and based on input received at the time from other town departments. The Board also noted that since that time the departments had met and determined that no cul-de-sacs should be approved over 1,000'. It was noted that the cul-de-sac on this plan would be able to stay at 2,900' due to the prior discussion with the Board and the preliminary conditional approval.
James Nordstrom MOVED to grant the waiver request for Douglas Hill Construction, LLC, Tax Map/Lot #5/16 such that the cul-de-sac will be 2,900' long as presented on the plans this evening based on prior discussion at Planning Board meetings. Don Duhaime seconded the motion while noting his concerns regarding the discussion with the Fire Wards the previous evening regarding the 1,000' length limit in the future.
DISCUSSION:
The Chairman pointed out something that occurred to him while looking at the plans. He noted that it would be worse if an applicant approached the Board with a 1,000' cul-de- sac with several backlots or reduced frontage cluster lots off the turnaround with driveways of 600', 800' or 1,000' than if they proposed a 2,000' road. He further noted that the Planning Board had better keep this in mind and determine how best to prevent that from happening.
The Chairman called for a vote and the motion PASSED unanimously.
Dave Walker, PE, noted that they were in receipt of Stantec's review letter and noted that
of the 44 review comments there were 11 that they needed to discuss with the engineer, some of
which involved recommendations rather than requirements. He noted, for example, that Stantec was recommending level spreaders in addition to the treatment swales and that they had already received site specific approval for this plan with no need for level spreaders being mentioned. Dave Walker, PE, went on to say that the town's regulations call for a 2-year frequency storm event to be used in the drainage calculations and the State requires a 10-year storm frequency. He noted that Stantec was asking for 25-year and 100-year analysis based on the bad weather this year.
Dave Walker, PE, noted that he had reviewed the Road Committee's comments and noted that DOT information had already been submitted to the Planning Board. He stated that he would revisit the grading of the entrance to Christian Farm Drive and pointed out that the sight line issues had been addressed for NH DOT. He further noted that concerns with guardrail, access to detention ponds and the drop outlets would be revisited. Dave Walker, PE, also stated that the utility placement design was in hand from PSNH and he would add those details to the plans and cross sections.
James Nordstrom asked if any of the comments from Stantec would require changing the overall approach or layout of the subdivision. Dave Walker, PE, stated that they would not. He noted that one of the concerns was with guardrail at Lot #16. He stated that he had tried to widen the shoulder and flatten out the road in that location to avoid the need for guardrail but he would have to discuss this with Stantec.
The Chairman asked if the bond for the wetland crossing was included in the road bond. Dave Walker, PE, indicated that it was. The Coordinator stated that the office needed a copy of the wetland crossing plan as part of the Conditional Use Permit application.
The Chairman asked the Board to consider if this proposal met the criteria for cluster subdivisions as listed in the Zoning Ordinance. The Board determined that it did.
The Chairman noted that a letter from Dwight Sowerby, Esq., was received regarding the legal documents.
James Nordstrom MOVED to release a copy of the letter from Dwight Sowerby, Esq., Drescher Law Office, concerning the legal documents for Douglas Hill Construction, LLC, Tax Map/Lot #5/16, to the applicant.
Don Duhaime seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
Don Duhaime noted that the Fire Wards seemed to have a concern with sprinklers vs. cistern for this subdivision. The Board noted that the determination to use a cistern had been made early on in the process and they were comfortable moving ahead with the 30,000 gallon fiberglass cistern proposed. It was noted that there was not much water supply in the area.
Doug Hill asked about the town's consulting engineer and how the switch to Northpoint Engineering might affect his plan. The Coordinator thought that it might make more sense to have the rest of the plan review completed by Stantec and the construction monitoring taken on by Northpoint. Doug Hill thought that he would prefer to take the whole plan to Northpoint
Engineering to have them complete the plan review. He noted that he understood this might take a couple of extra weeks. He noted that if he was adjourned to the meeting of the 28th he would still have time to extend the Board's deadline for action if need be.
James Nordstrom MOVED to adjourn the application for Douglas Hill Construction, LLC, Tax Map/Lot #5/16, N.H. Route 136 a/k/a Francestown Road, to November 28, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. Don Duhaime seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
This will be an informational session with Vista Road, LLC to discuss the potential development of Tax Map/Lot# 6/33 & 6/40-2, Byam Road, Wilson Hill Road and River Road a/k/a NH Route 13. Adjourned from 09/26/06
Doug Hill took a seat at the Planning Board table. The Chairman read the public notice. Present were Vincent Iacozzi, Thibeault Corporation and George Chadwick, LLS.
Vincent Iacozzi began by presenting overview maps of the other Thibeault Properties that would be brought before the Board for discussion in the future. He noted that Tax Map/Lot #3/57 on the northerly side of Parker Road was 35 acres +/-; Tax Map/Lot #6/14 on the southerly side of Parker Road was 124 acres +/-; and, Tax Map/Lot #6/45 on River Road was 109.76 acres. Vincent Iacozzi noted that the two larger parcels had the potential for development along the lines of what he had presented to the Board for Tax Map/Lot #6/40-2 & 6/33 at the previous meeting. He noted that there may be the option of open space or public uses like a school.
Vincent Iacozzi stated that he had questions on how to proceed with his idea for development of Tax Map/Lot #6/40-2 & 6/33 whether it be by variance or a vote at town meeting or if neither of those worked out going back to the 55 lot proposal that had been previously submitted. He noted that after the last meeting he had met with the Conservation Commission to go over the same basic presentation he had made to the Planning Board and he had hoped that at this evening's meeting he could get some feedback from the Planning Board as to how to proceed.
James Nordstrom stated that as far as the proposal for Tax Map/Lot #6/40-2 & 6/33 was concerned, the obvious issue was that the current zoning ordinance did not allow what was being proposed. He stated that one option was to apply to the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) for a variance. He noted that another option might be to approach town meeting to rezone the land. Vincent Iacozzi stated that if he applied to the ZBA for a variance but was not successful he would not have time to propose a warrant article to go to town meeting. He did not want to be in a position where none of these options worked out and he had to go back to the 55 lot plan that was already engineered.
Some discussion took place regarding the affordable housing that would be a part of this plan and how the marketing of the project would have to be part of the proposal. Vincent Iacozzi noted that the concept of 'affordable' was relative but it would be no good if he designed a project of affordable housing or over-55 housing and existing town residents could not afford to
live there. He noted that with so much land to develop, Thibeault Corporation would be before
the Board for a long time and wanted to do the right thing.
Doug Hill stated that it seemed obvious that Thibeault Corporation wanted to go ahead with the new concept rather than the 55 lots. Vincent Iacozzi stated that there were cost issues with the slopes on the lot and the new proposal would allow self-contained drainage in the steep slope area. He also noted that the 55-lot proposal was not necessarily aesthetically pleasing or marketable. He pointed out that even though the plan showed 81 - 82 units there were only 22 buildings rather than 55 lots with 55 buildings. Vincent Iacozzi noted that with the 55-lot concept the houses would all have to be 4 bedroom to get a reasonable return on the investment. He noted that the 55-lot plan was already approved at NH DES and that he had then looked at the cost of
development of the steep lots that all needed Stormwater Management Plans and revised the idea so that on the new plans that area would be used only for the community water system to be governed by the homeowners' association.
Doug Hill asked how the other two larger Thibeault properties came into play. Vincent Iacozzi stated that because of their reading of the newly updated Master Plan with the mention of multi-family districts, etc., they thought that their property might lend itself to such a type of development. He thought that an overlay district could be created for the three larger Thibeault parcels to allow this type of development to take place. He went on to say that the Board and the Conservation Commission had been interested in land for governmental uses such as schools or recreational use of open space and these large pieces of land could have such areas set aside as part of their development. Doug Hill asked if the same kind of density as shown on Lot #6/40-2 and 6/33 was
proposed for the other larger parcels. Vincent Iacozzi said that for the larger parcels the same kind of density would be sought. The 35 acre parcel may, however, only lend itself to 4 or 5 lots due to the terrain.
Brandy Mitroff asked how big the #6/40-2 and 6/33 piece was. Vincent Iacozzi stated that it was 198.36 acres with 120 acres proposed for open space and that the road would link to the back of Swanson Road in the Highland Hills subdivision. Doug Hill asked about phasing proposals for the subdivision, noting that 81 units was a lot of new homes. Vincent Iacozzi stated that Thibeault Corp. would be building the units themselves and noted that in a recent project in Hudson they had 400 approved units and after 6 years they had completed 240. Doug Hill extrapolated that to mean that this proposed subdivision in New Boston could, therefore, be done in a year and a half. Vincent Iacozzi stated that the road would have to be built all at once and that market forces
would determine how many units would be sold per year. He thought that it would probably take 3 years to build out this subdivision. He predicted that the affordable units would go first and the higher end units would take longer. He further noted that there would be over-55 units in each section with deed restrictions to keep them that way.
The Coordinator noted that the plan proposed crossing Wilson Hill Road with the new road. She pointed out that the Board of Selectmen had wanted to keep Wilson Hill Road open and Thibeault Corp. should keep that in mind when designing this project. The Chairman suggested that Thibeault Corp. approach the Selectmen as soon as possible to discuss this matter. George Chadwick, LLS, stated that Wilson Hill Road was very steep and probably unpassable in a couple of locations. The Coordinator stated that she was just passing along the information
that had come from the Selectmen when the Highland Hills subdivision was approved as part of which it was noted that Wilson Hill Road could not be closed off to through traffic. George Chadwick, LLS, noted that there was a 10' elevation change from one side of their proposed road to the other down Wilson Hill Road.
Doug Hill stated that the Board had to resolve the zoning issue first. George Chadwick, LLS, stated that was why they were present before the Board. He stated that if they chose to apply for variances they wanted to know that the Planning Board supported the idea behind the plan. He then stated that if the Planning Board thought they wanted to look at the town as a whole then an overlay district on the March Ballot was the way to go. George Chadwick, LLS, stated that they could prepare such an overlay if the Board wanted them to. The Chairman stated that he preferred the proposed plan over the 55-lot design. He also thought that the applicants would be better off not going to the ZBA. The Coordinator pointed out that there was no way the Planning
Board could prepare an overlay district proposal in time for town meeting next March. James Nordstrom also noted that if the Planning Board did not directly sponsor the proposal they may not support it on the ballot.
The Chairman suggested that the applicants could write the proposed overlay district. Vincent Iacozzi agreed, noting that the district would encompass the three larger pieces of land shown to the Board this evening and that it could be written so that only parcels over 100 acres, for example, would be eligible for this type of development. He noted that approaching it this way the Town would have input into the type of development for these parcels of land. The Chairman thought that the applicant could write the suggested warrant article and the Planning Board could review it without making a commitment that they would endorse the proposal.
Don Duhaime stated that he liked the original proposal for the 55 lots. He thought that plan was over-demanding with 55 lots and did not like the idea of expanding to 81 units on that land. Doug Hill thought that the idea tied in with the Master Plan although he did not know how receptive the townspeople were going to be to a proposal involving a possible 250 units. George Chadwick, LLS, stated that the overlay district would have to be proposed for a whole area of town not just one lot. He noted that in some towns petitioned articles had to have a comment from the Planning Board if they are in favor of the proposal or not. The Coordinator clarified that it was state law that once a petition to change the zoning was submitted the Planning Board had to hold a
public hearing on it and then determine if they would support the proposal or not. That determination had to be included on the ballot.
Vincent Iacozzi returned to Don Duhaime's comment, noting that this proposal actually had fewer bedrooms than the 55-lot subdivision. George Chadwick, LLS, stated that they could craft an ordinance that the town was comfortable with that did not increase the density of the subdivisions. The Chairman pointed out that the Board was divided at this time about the Thibeault Corp. proposal.
Brandy Mitroff noted that the Master Plan included mention of a town wide overlay district for multi-family use and also mentioned affordable housing. She noted that the overlay district was supposed to include consideration of soil types, slopes, and so on. Brandy Mitroff cautioned against Thibeault Corp. writing an ordinance for the Board or presenting a petition because they would run the political risk of being voted down because of who was making the proposal. She thought that the potential follow-on effect of that could be that an overlay proposed by the Planning Board for the same thing might also get shot down. Brandy Mitroff also noted that the topic was on the Planning Board's list of things to do but was not one that was chosen for this year. She
thought it likely that the Board would work on it next year.
Vincent Iacozzi stated that this was why they had brought the concepts in to show the
Board. He noted that if there was no consensus they could be before the Board in December with the 55-lot concept. Burr Tupper agreed with Brandy Mitroff that this topic was not far off from Board discussion. He noted that the Board was working on two subjects this year - wetlands and cluster - and would begin work on other things next year. He noted that any zoning proposal would come from the townspeople and be endorsed by the Planning Board and would have much more chance of passing.
The Chairman still thought that Thibeault Corp. could write something up and have it be considered as part of the discussion when the Board got to work on the issue. He also noted that their input during any committee's work on the proposed ordinance would be valuable to make sure the ordinance was usable by those who would be using it.
SHB PROPERTIES, LLC Adjourned from 09/26/06
Submission of Application/Public Hearing
Major Subdivision/7 Lots
Location: Pulpit, Bedford & Campbell Pond Roads
Tax Map/Lot # 12/65
Residential-One “R-1” District
The Chairman read the public hearing notice. Present was Jeff Hudson of SHB Properties, LLC, and Jim Edwards, from Meridian Land Services. Also present were abutters Robert and Connie Brown.
Jim Edwards stated that he had received plan review comments from Stantec and the Road Committee. He noted that the road had been designed based on leaching basins but based on Stantec's comments they had changed the plans to use standard basins with interconnecting pipes and detention basins. He noted that this was a pretty small subdivision so this was not a major impact and did not change the configuration of the subdivision. Jim Edwards went on to say that he hoped that with the change to the drainage detention method the Board could issue a conditional approval.
James Nordstrom asked if it was possible to abandon the closed drainage design and look at open drainage for this subdivision. Jim Edwards stated that they needed to collect water at the intersection but that it was possible to bring it into the flow system. James Nordstrom stated that he was asking because the Highway Department always expressed a preference to see open drainage in terms of long term maintenance and if they were going to be changing the plans anyway regarding the detention basins, they could take a quick look at this idea too. Jim Edwards stated that it might be possible and he would look at it.
The Chairman noted that the Board needed to see revised plans and that they were also waiting for the legal document review from Town Counsel. Jim Edwards asked if they should send the revised plans directly to Stantec. The Coordinator replied that was fine as long as a copy of everything came to the Town as well.
James Nordstrom asked if the abutter's driveway on Pulpit Road was still an issue. Connie Brown stated that the matter was not resolved but they were trying to figure the situation out. The Chairman asked if the Board of Selectmen was involved in this matter. Connie Brown stated that they were going to meet with the Selectmen but were still working on an agreement and would wait to meet with them until after such an agreement was in place. James Nordstrom stated that it would be important in the final vote of the Board to have this issue resolved. The Chairman noted that if the Board of Selectmen did nothing with Pulpit Road then nothing would change with the driveway. Connie Brown stated that the Board of Selectmen were planning on discontinuing that
portion of Pulpit Road and they did not want to be left with no legal access. Jeff Hudson stated that they had spoken with the Selectmen at the beginning of this process who had advised that they speak directly with Bill Drescher, Esq. He noted that they had done so and had laid out an action plan for the issues that could come up with Pulpit Road depending on how the Selectmen wanted to handle the situation. He further noted that they did not consider this to be their problem. James Nordstrom stated that without the proposed subdivision no one would be contemplating discontinuance of any portion of Pulpit Road and this would not be an issue. Connie Brown agreed that SHB Properties were not the ones closing the road but noted that they had set into motion all the factors that had led the Selectmen to agree to close the road which left the Browns with no legal access. James Nordstrom thought that SHB Properties may not be responsible for providing the
resolution to the driveway issue but he would be more comfortable acting on the subdivision application knowing that the situation had been resolved. The Chairman suggested that all parties meet with the Board of Selectmen to resolve the matter.
Jeff Hudson asked the Board about placing boulders to prevent traffic from using Pulpit Road into Bedford. After some discussion the Board determined that the suggestion to place the boulders on the new cul-de-sac was not permissible and that placing them at the town line would serve no purpose. The Board's determination was that no such barrier should be installed as they did not see that motorized traffic was an issue in this location; they did not want to block the Class VI road that the Selectmen wanted to keep open; and they wanted to allow the walkers, horseback riders, etc., to still enjoy the area.
James Nordstrom MOVED to adjourn the application of SHB Properties, LLC, Tax Map/Lot #12/65, Bedford, Pulpit and Campbell Pond Roads, to November 14, 2006, at 8:30 p.m. Don Duhaime seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
INDIAN FALLS, LLC Adjourned from 10/10/06
Compliance Hearing/Major Subdivision/14 Lots
Location: Bedford, McCurdy & Campbell Pond Roads (Indian Falls Road)
Tax Map/Lot # 12/89
INDIAN FALLS, LLC, cont.
Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District
The Chairman read the public hearing notice. Present were Mark LeBlanc and Earney Mayo of Indian Falls, LLC.
The Chairman noted that the Planning Board had held a site walk and Stantec had been on-site to verify that all issues were taken care of and had sent a letter dated October 24, 2006, that the Board had only just received outlining some remaining issues. The Planning Board Assistant gave Mark LeBlanc and Earney Mayo copies of said letter. The Chairman noted that the real problem in his opinion was the drain at the beginning of Indian Falls Road which did not seem to drain properly and which flooded the roadside area causing the materials underfoot to be spongy. He noted that his concern with this situation was that the road bed could be compromised over time. Earney Mayo stated that the area was designed by Sandford Engineering and approved by Stantec to be a
catch basin with an outlet to the grassy area by the road. James Nordstrom noted that he had observed the area the previous Sunday (October 22, 2006) in dry conditions and he could not park on the shoulder due to the wetness of the material. He noted that the whole area was "mush". Earney Mayo pointed out that there was no cracking in the asphalt. The Chairman wondered if something had not been built to specification or had failed or filled in since construction because there was an obvious problem.
The Coordinator retrieved the subdivision plans from the office and the Board reviewed this area on the plans along with Mark LeBlanc and Earney Mayo. Earney Mayo explained that the grassy area alongside the road in the location indicated by the Chairman and James Nordstrom was designed to hold water to slow it and filter it before it reached Campbell Brook. Doug Hill thought that perhaps there was not enough of an area there to treat the water without it backing up and potentially undermining the road. He noted, however, that it did appear to have been built to design.
Earney Mayo stated that he had changed the area alongside Bedford Road three times to meet the needs of the Road Agent and Stantec and he was upset to see a comment in the latest Stantec letter regarding the use of filter fabric under the rip rap because that had not been agreed to. James Nordstrom confirmed that generally filter fabric was not needed under the 4" minus rip rap used in the ditch.
Earney Mayo stated that the culvert headwalls had been mortared as required and James Nordstrom confirmed that he had seen that this had been done. Looking once again at Stantec's letter, Earney Mayo stated that he did not know what was being referred to as the creases in the road. He went on to say that he would take it upon himself to fix the swale if something needed to be done and remove the silt from the catch basins and come back before the Board again for their compliance.
Mark LeBlanc asked to talk about the maintenance bond. He noted that the bond estimate was in the amount of just over $400K and it only cost $200K to build the road. He proposed that the maintenance bond be 10% of the actual cost not the estimate. Doug Hill noted that bond estimates were very conservative in most cases. The Chairman thought that the cost of the bond had to be enough to repair any issues that may arise and suggested that the Board and the applicant compromise on the amount and "split the difference". The applicants and the Board agreed that the maintenance bond amount should be $32,000.
Earney Mayo asked who was going to inspect any repairs they make to the road. Going through Stantec's letter, the Chairman stated that the Board agreed that filter fabric would not be needed under the rip rap in the ditch; the Board would inspect to make sure that the silt in the catch basin and rip rap outlet protection apron was removed; the Board would inspect to see that the grass and top soil disturbed around the swale work was repaired; the Board would check that the three catch basin's sumps were cleaned; the Board agreed that the mortar in the culvert headwalls was satisfactory, although not pretty; and the Board would look at the creases in the pavement. He noted that if a site walk could be scheduled it would be but otherwise the Board would do drive by inspections of
the site.
James Nordstrom MOVED to adjourn the compliance hearing for Indian Falls, LLC, Tax Map/Lot #12/89, Indian Falls Road, to November 14, 2006, at 9:00 p.m. Don Duhaime seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
RIGHT WAY BUILDERS, INC.
GARRETSON, DONALD E.
Public Hearing/Request for extension on conditions precedent deadline
Location: Beard Road
Tax Map/Lot # 5/50 & 5/52
Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District
The Chairman read the public hearing notice. The applicant was not present. Present in the audience were abutters Steve & Kim Burkhamer and Tom Clapp and interested party Willard Dodge.
The Chairman noted that the applicant was seeking an extension to the deadline for the completion of conditions precedent for the major subdivision approval because the Planning Board's decision was being appealed to the Superior Court.
The Chairman asked if the abutters had any questions. They did not.
Don Duhaime MOVED to extend the deadline for the completion of the conditions precedent for Right Way Builders, Inc., and Donald Garretson, Tax Map/Lot #5/50 & 5/52, Beard Road, for one year to November 1, 2007. James Nordstrom seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
At 9:30 p.m. the Board took a short break.
Miscellaneous Business and correspondence for the meeting of October 24, 2006, including, but not limited to:
1. Approval of minutes of September 26, 2006, with or without changes, distributed at the October 10, 2006, meeting. (No Copies)
James Nordstrom MOVED to approve the minutes of September 26, 2006, as written. Don Duhaime seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
Ken Clinton asked if he could speak to the Board about the Twin Bridge Management subdivision and the meeting the Planning Board had with the Fire Wards the previous evening. The Coordinator noted that this item was #15 on Miscellaneous Business. The Board determined that they would jump ahead to that item.
15a. Discussion, Re: road design for Twin Bridge Management, LLC, Tax Map/Lot #2/62 and #3/3, per Fire Wards meeting of October 23, 2006.
15b. Minutes of October 23, 2006, meeting with the New Boston Fire Wards, for the Board’s information.
James Nordstrom noted that representatives of the Planning Board, Highway Department, Fire Wards and Police Department had met the previous evening and had determined that there would be no further support for cul-de-sac waiver requests for roads over 1,000'. The Chairman noted that very compelling reasons were stated at the meeting. Ken Clinton stated that his clients just needed to know which direction to go in for their proposed subdivision. He further stated that if long cul-de-sacs were not permitted, his clients would seek to join the proposed roads into a loop road. James Nordstrom noted that this would involve a wetland crossing.
The Chairman suggested that as part of the engineering of this project the applicants should consider getting expert advice on how to install this crossing with the minimal amount of impact to the wetlands and with an eye to maintaining the wildlife habitat in that location. Ken Clinton stated that NH Fish and Game were involved now when wetland crossings were proposed to the state and part of their requirements would be for an environmental report to be completed for the property. He hoped that if the crossing designed met the State's requirements the Town would not require something different. He suggested that the applicants might be better served by bringing a design back to the Board rather than a full blown finally engineered plan. The Board agreed. Ken
Clinton then told the Board that the environmental report would be sub-contracted out so that no one could accuse Meridian Land Services of skewing the data to suit their client.
The Chairman noted that there had been a lot of talk about having less density in the subdivision. Ken Clinton stated that the applicants had heard all those comments from the Board and that now the road layout issue was resolved they would move into looking at lot layout. He noted that they would look at the Town's ordinance allowance, what could be considered reasonable and what the Board would prefer. He further noted that the nature of the business was to start with what the regulations would allow and then make accommodations. James Nordstrom pointed out that the Conservation Commission and Open Space Committee would be opposed to the wetland crossing proposal. Ken Clinton stated that he was aware of their opinions and noted that the process would be more
difficult without the Conservation Commission's support. He thought that perhaps an innovative crossing design might make the difference.
2. Discussion, Re: Town of New Boston Draft Earth Removal Regulations.
The Coordinator noted that these regulations were distributed at the last meeting and the Board was to read through them to see if there were any changes that should be made. She noted that the Selectmen were supposed to be doing the same thing so that the regulations could then be sent to Bill Drescher, Esq., and Southern New Hampshire Planning Commission (SNHPC) for their review and then to the public for input. The Coordinator went on to say that a town meeting vote would be needed to allow the Selectmen to continue to run the day-to-day aspects of the gravel pits because the Planning Board was supposed to be in charge of the whole process.
James Nordstrom noted that he had a couple of comments. He noted that he had concentrated on the Excavation Plan section, being familiar with plan preparation. On Page 13, he stated that he agreed that numbers 10 & 16 should be included: #10 required the identification of any aquifer areas on the plan and #16 was to include the flood elevation line where applicable. Also on Page 13, James Nordstrom had mixed feelings about #3 which would require property lines to be located with bearings and distances. He noted that this might be difficult in some locations but not necessarily an unreasonable requirement. He stated that he had seen situations where the boundary lines were shown by a certified surveyor but were based on reference plans not an on-ground
survey. James Nordstrom noted that, of course, it was necessary to know where the boundary of the property was located. Doug Hill asked how, without the boundary being precisely located, the setbacks could be placed properly.
On Page 14, #22 was regarding showing snow removal plans and storage locations on the plans. James Nordstrom stated that this could be important depending on the property if, for example, the area was an aquifer recharge area. He agreed with including the rest of the italicized suggestions #25 - 31 on Page 14 of the draft. James Nordstrom then noted that on Page 15, in the Maximum Excavation Limit section, a blank needed to be filled in to indicate the distance that the final excavation grade should be from documented seasonal high water table. He thought the minimum should be something greater than 15" and noted that 24" seemed to come up quite often. The Coordinator noted that the existing Groundwater Resources Conservation District included either
4' or 6' as the height to remain above the water table for an excavation. James Nordstrom wondered how that information would be gathered - from federal government information or test pits. He noted that in some situations 18 " or 24" may be appropriate. Willard Dodge thought that each pit should be analyzed separately. James Nordstrom agreed, noting that if there was a documented recharge areas present the depth should be increased.
The Chairman stated that the Board of Selectmen should comment on the draft and then it should be sent for review with Town Counsel and SNHPC.
3. Discussion, Re: Planning Board Calendar for December 2006 & January 2007.
The Coordinator noted that the petition period for zoning ordinance amendments was from November 13, 2006, to December 13, 2006. She went on to say that the last date for public hearings on the zoning ordinance was January 16, 2007, which was not a regular Planning Board meeting night. She also noted that the second meeting in December would fall on the 26th and she was anticipating that the Board would probably not want to meet on the day after Christmas. The Board confirmed this to be the case. The Coordinator asked the Board if they wanted to change the meeting dates in January to be the first and third Tuesdays of the month so as to be on time for the last possible zoning hearing on the 16th or if they wanted to stick to the second Tuesday
in January and add a special meeting on December 19th for the first zoning ordinance amendment public hearing. The Planning Board determined that they would hold a second meeting in December on the 19th that would be for zoning ordinance matters only - no hearings, and the second zoning public hearing would be on January 9th, a regular meeting night.
The Coordinator reminded the Board that they were waiting until the end of the time period to hold these hearings to allow the sub-committees working on the Wetlands Conservation District and the Cluster Regulations the maximum time to present their proposals.
4. Email received October 17, 2006, from Keith Diaz, requesting a extension on the conditions precedent, 23 Arrowwood Road, Tax Map/Lot#12/35-10, for the Board’s action.
Keith Diaz was requesting additional time to complete the conditions precedent to the above-noted subdivision so as to be able to post the bond for the wetland crossing and the stormwater management plan since he had no immediate plans to build his house.
Don Duhaime MOVED to grant the extension requested by Keith Diaz for the conditions precedent to the subdivision of Tax Map/Lot #12/35-10, Arrowwood Road, to January 30, 2009. James Nordstrom seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
5. Schedule a compliance site walk for Highland Hills, Tax Map/Lot #6/32 and discuss bond reduction/maintenance bond for vegetation, for the Board’s action.
The Coordinator noted that some of the seeding of the ditches and shoulders had not taken place until recently and Amy Alexander, Stantec, was concerned that the grass would not catch this late in the season. Amy Alexander wanted to know if the performance bond should be reduced, keeping back the amount needed to guarantee the seeding, or if that amount should be
included in the maintenance bond required for the project. The Board agreed that the amount for
the security for the seeding should remain in the performance bond and the maintenance bond should be separate.
The site walk was scheduled for Saturday, November 4, 2006, at 8:30 a.m. with an inspection of Indian Falls Road after that.
14. Discussion, Re: as-built plan per requirement for Highland Hills Subdivision and in general.
The Coordinator noted that the as-built plans for this subdivision had been prepared showing the road improvements only and Amy Alexander, Stantec, was requesting that drainage details and underground utilities be added. The Coordinator noted that Ray Shea from Sandford Surveying and Engineering was questioning this requirement since he had not included those details on other as-built plans.
The Board determined that the as-built plans should include all drainage and should show the underground utilities. James Nordstrom suggested that the above-ground boxes and pedestals should be mapped and the installer of the utilities could be contacted to indicate the criteria were that were used for installation of the wiring.
6. Email received October 16, 2006, from Sandi Van Scoyce, to Nic Stong, Planning Coordinator, Re: attending November 14, 2006, Planning Board meeting to discuss Livable, Walkable Communities Action Plan for New Boston, for the Board’s information.
The Coordinator noted that this item was scheduled on the Board's agenda for November 14, 2006, at 7:30 p.m.
7. Letter copy received October 16, 2006, from Alteration of Terrain Program, Department of Environmental Services, to Town Clerk, New Boston, Re: application for Site Specific Permit, was distributed for the Board’s information.
8. The minutes of October 10, 2006, were distributed for approval at the meeting of November 14, 2006, with or without changes.
9. The minutes of October 3, 2006, were distributed for approval at the meeting of November 14, 2006, with or without changes.
10. Endorsement of a Site Review Agreement for Ragamufen’s Properties, LLC, New Boston Tavern, 35 Mont Vernon Road, Tax Map/Lot #19/6, by the Planning Board Chairman.
The Chairman endorsed this Site Review Agreement.
11. Memo dated October 24, 2006, from Nic Strong, Planning Coordinator to the Board, Re: New Boston Tavern, Septic System, was distributed for the Board’s information.
12. Planning Board Chairman signature required for a letter dated October 24, 2006, addressed to David Preece, Executive Director of SNHPC.
The Chairman signed this letter formally asking the SNHPC to prepare a grant application to the State for their well-head protection program
13. Discussion, Re: Wetlands Conservation District and Cluster Residential Development Sub-Committees.
The Coordinator noted that the Board had determined that they would work on the Wetlands Conservation District and the Cluster Development Regulations this year for potential Zoning Ordinance amendments. She noted that at the Open Space meeting on October 16th some people had volunteered to be on the sub-committees to do this work. She noted that the Wetlands committee would be Jed Callen, Burr Tupper and Ken Lombard, as well as herself and Jack Munn, SNHPC, and the Cluster committee would be David Ely and Willard Dodge, as well as herself and Jack Munn, SNHPC. She noted that these committees might be fluid as other people had expressed an interest but might not be able to attend all the meetings.
James Nordstrom stated that he would volunteer for the wetlands committee. Don Duhaime and Bob Furey expressed interest in the cluster committee.
James Nordstrom MOVED to appoint the sub-committees as noted above understanding that there may be a few changes to the make-up along the way. Don Duhaime seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
At 10:30 p.m. Doug Hill MOVED to adjourn. Don Duhaime seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Nicola Strong
Planning Coordinator
Minutes approved:
| 
