Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
Conservation Commission Minutes 11/10/09
Conservation Commission
November 10, 2009
Approved December 8, 2009

Members Present: Katheryn Holmes, Chair; Eric Unger, Vice-Chair; Bill Annable; Chuck Crickman; Suzanne Levine

Ms. Holmes called the meeting to order at 4:47 p.m.

ADMINISTRATIVE

Minutes

The Commission reviewed the minutes of October 13, 2009 and made corrections. Mr. Crickman made a motion to approve the minutes of October 13, 2009 as corrected. Mr. Unger seconded the motion. All in favor.

Conservation Commission (CC) Roles and Responsibilities

There was discussion regarding the role of the Commission and the extent of influence and oversight authority regarding cutting in the buffer zone, shore land protection, and DES permits.

Ms. Holmes said one of the challenges facing the CC is oversight, particularly in the area of cutting in the buffer zone. There was discussion about how to proceed with oversight activities.

Regarding cutting in the buffer zone, Ms. Holmes suggested that Mr. Unger utilize written notification to property owners suggesting conservation measures, restrictions on stumping trees, planting a rain garden, and “plant a tree if you take a tree”. Additionally, she recommended sending a copy of the Shoreland Protection Act to property owners who make application to cut in the buffer zone.

Ms. Holmes said property owners should understand what the buffer zone does – it filters phosphorous and nitrogen so the two elements do not go into the lake. Over-contamination of phosphorous and nitrogen kill lakes, she said.    

The Town requirements regarding cutting in the buffer zone are the same at the state requirements, namely a 50 foot buffer zone. Mr. Unger questioned who enforces that – the Town or DES.

Ms. Holmes said the Selectmen review all applications to cut in the buffer zone.

Ms. Holmes raised the question of the CC’s role as the “eye and ears” of the Department of Environmental Services (DES) and the extent to which the CC may exercise oversight. She said if the CC does not agree with a DES decision, the CC may write its objection to the DES.

Ms. Holmes raised the question of the CC’s role and responsibilities regarding protecting the shore land, cutting in the buffer zone, and offer advice regarding DES Wetlands Bureau applications.

Mr. Crickman said the DES has a PowerPoint presentation that is available to Commission members and suggested that the Commission members view it. Ms. Holmes concurred. Ms. Levine suggested that the Selectmen also view the presentation.

Mr. Unger said it was his understanding that the “eyes and ears” of the DES fell to each town. It was suggested that Ms. Holmes contact the DES for guidance on “eyes and ears” oversight and how to follow through on backing up established regulations.

INTENTS TO CUT

Mr. Unger said there were no Intents to Cut to report. However, he received three applications to cut in a buffer zone. Applications for “Approval to Cut in the Buffer Zone” are sent to the Town Office.

  • July 10, 2009 from David Lapp, 103 Bay Point Road, Newbury, to remove one (1) dead birch tree, hazardous to neighbor’s boat house. Tax Map/Lot # 007 / 166-398.
  • October 20, 2009 from Sybil Rowe, 328 Bowles Road, Newbury, to remove one tree on property that has caused the porch to buckle. Tax Map/Lot # 016 / 339-227.
  • October 26, 2009 from Michael H. Sheft, 20 Highland Avenue, Newbury, to remove four (4) trees that contribute to an overgrowth of trees on the property, resulting in moisture/mold in the house, physical damage to the roof from falling debris. Removal of trees would promote a healthier long term optimal tree growth and coverage. Bartlett Tree Experts, Woodstock, VT employed to remove trees.
COMMUNICATIONS

Ms. Holmes reviewed the following communications from the NH Department of Environmental Services (DES) with the Commission:

  • August 4, 2009 from Susan J. York, York Revocable Trust, 40 Echo Cove Road, Newbury, a Minimum Impact Expedited Application to repair an existing “Y” shaped docking structure, Tax Map/Lot # 16 / 650,066.
  • August 17, 2009 to Susan York, York Revocable Trust, 40 Echo Cove Road, Newbury, a Notice of Administrative Completeness Minimum Impact Expedited Application regarding Wetlands File Number 2009-01696, Tax Map/Lot # 16 / 650,066, to repair an existing “Y” shaped docking structure.
  • September 8, 2009 from John R. Greenwood, 48 Lake Avenue, Newbury, a Minimum Impact Expedited Application to extend an existing seasonal dock, Tax Map/Lot # 16A / 324-426.
  • September 28, 2009 to Susan York, York Revocable Trust, 40 Echo Cove Road, Newbury, a Wetlands and Non-Site Specific Permit 2009-01696. Subject to project specific conditions. Tax Map/Lot # 16 / 650,066.
  • October 5, 2009 to Emerson Cottage Trust, 336 Bowles Road, Newbury, a Shoreland Impact Permit 2009-01843, to “Impact 2,866 square feet to move an existing house away from the reference line and reconfigure parking and driveway to more nearly conform to RSA 483-B.” Subject to project specific conditions. Tax map/Lot # 16 / 324,246.
  • October 14, 2009 to John Greenwood, 48 Lake Avenue, Newbury, a Request for More Information, File # 2009-02097, to extend an existing seasonal dock. Tax Map/Lot # 16A / 324-426.
  • October 14, 2009 to Hodan Properties, Inc., Newbury Station Boat Club, 985 Route 103, Newbury, a Notice of project Reclassification from expedited review to review as a standard application. Tax map/Lot # 20 / 270,364.
  • October 14, 2009 to James K. & Phylliss McDonough, 56 Gerald Drive, Newbury, a Shoreland Impact Permit 2009-02147, to “Impact 330 square feet for the purpose [of] constructing new pervious patio and repairing an existing retaining wall. Subject to project specific conditions. Tax map/Lot # 29A / 130,437.
  • October 21, 2009 to Bill Goetzenberger, 179 Bay Point Road, Newbury, a Shoreland Impact Permit 2009-02260, to “Impact 2,250 square feet to construct a new garage and realign driveway.” Subject to project specific conditions. Tax map/Lot # 6 / 072,068.
  • October 23, 2009 to James K & Phylliss McDonough, 56 Gerald Drive, Newbury, a Wetlands and Non-Site Specific Permit 2009-02151, to “Repair in kind and reduce a[n] existing 35 linear foot retaining wall to 26 linear feet, replace the existing northerly retaining wall in kind, relocate the southerly retaining wall to the north 9 feet, and add native vegetation to the impacted areas, on Chalk Pond, in Newbury.” Subject to project specific conditions. Tax Map/Lot # 29A / 130,437.  
OLD BUSINESS

Wild Goose Update

Ms. Holmes reported on a meeting with the NH Department of Transportation (DOT) regarding the safety issues surrounding the proposed Wild Goose Boat Ramp. The meeting was organized by Dennis Pavilcek, Town Administrator, and included representatives from DOT, Sunapee, New London, and Newbury, including the Newbury Police Chief and Fire Chief. The group made a visit to the site to review the realities of safe entry and exit, along with the issues surrounding runoff due to a steep slope.

Ms. Holmes said the group was thorough in its site examination and was reminded that the last traffic study done for the area was ten years ago. She said that the Town Administrators from Sunapee and New London mentioned that they are part of the response team when traffic accidents occur in Newbury and expressed their belief that there will be more accidents if the boat ramp project is allowed to move forward.

Town Forest

Mr. Crickman reported on research he has conducted concerning the Newbury Town Forest. He reviewed the Sunapee Forest Management Plan, particularly the Sunapee Town Forest Project Schedule 2008-2010, and said it shows a comprehensive approach to town forests. He said is may be a useful resource for the Commission as it continues to advise the Town concerning the establishment of a Town Forest.

Commission members raised several considerations concerning a Town Forest: the need for an overseer; budgetary funding; self-supportive strategies; and, the possibility of implementing conservation easements.

There was general discussion about funding the project. Commission members were encouraged to read The Nitty Gritty of Conservation Finances, by Carol Andrews and Dijit Taylor, due for publication in December 2009.  

Ms. Holmes encouraged Commission members to review Mr. Crickman’s research for a continuation of the discussion at the CC’s December 2009 meeting.

NEW BUSINESS

Ausbon Sargent Land Preservation Trust (ASLPT) Meeting with Area Conservation Commission Chairs

Ms. Holmes shared with the Commission the information presented and discussed at the ASLPT meeting. She said many of the Chairs attending the meeting were actively involved in the areas of cutting in the buffer zone, shore land protection, and DES permits.  

She said many of the CC Chairs of neighboring communities were grappling with property owners skirting the DES/Shoreland Protection Act fees.

Ms. Holmes said the complaint form currently used by the Town should be reviewed to make it more user-friendly. She also intends to talk with Bill Weiler, former Conservation Commission Chair and current member of the Newbury Planning Board, concerning the CC’s roles and responsibilities.

New Member Search

Ms. Homes encouraged Commission members to consider recommendations for new members to the Conservation Commission.


Request for Proposals (RFP)
 
Ms. Holmes discussed the RFP for the Quabbin-to-Cardigan Land Conservation Grants, thought to expire in 2009. [The RFP has been extended to 2010]. She read from the RFP as follows:
The area is part of a large two-state region that spans 100 miles from Quabbin Reservoir, MA, northward to the southern boundary of the White Mountain National Forest in NH. The region is bounded to the east and the west by the Merrimack and Connecticut River Valleys. Encompassing approximately two (2) million acres, the Quabbin-to-Cardigan region is one of the largest remaining areas intact, interconnected, ecologically significant forest in New England and is a key headwater of the Merrimack and Connecticut Rivers. Launched in 2003, the Quabbin/Cardigan partnership is a collaborative effort of 27private organizations and public agencies working on land conservation in the two Quabbin-to-Cardigan states. The partners share a vision of consolidating their permanent protection of the regions’ most ecologically significant forests, and key connections between them for wildlife passage and human recreation. The Quabbin/Cardigan partners worked for more than three years to develop the Quabbin-to-Cardigan conservation plan which combines state-of-the-art natural resource science consensus vision of the partners’ organization. Completed in 2007, the Q2C [acronym for the Quabbin-to-Cardigan plan] plan was to identify approximately 600,000 acres of conservation focus areas that represent the region’s most ecologically significant forest. These conservation focus areas represent about 30 percent of the two (2) million acre region and are currently 39 percent protected. An additional 400,000 acres, or 21 percent of the region, have been identified as supporting landscapes that buffer and link the core area and are currently 26 percent protected. To the extent which proposed policy protects land in the Quabbin/Cardigan conservation focus area, supporting the landscapes will be primary criteria used to assess the application for funding.    

There was discussion about the Andrew Brook Trail Head and its proximity to the Quabbin/Cardigan “supporting landscapes”. Ms. Holmes said she will follow up with Chris Wells regarding that.

Mr. Unger made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Holmes seconded the motion. All in favor.

The meeting adjourned at 6:40 p.m.    

Respectfully submitted,

Meg Whittemore
Recording Secretary