Conservation Commission
Site Visit at The Fells
May 17, 2010
Approved June 8, 2010
Members Present: Katheryn Holmes, Chair; Eric Unger, Vice-Chair; Bill Annable, Chuck Crickman, Suzanne Levine, Members; Dick Wright, ex-officio.
Ms. Holmes called the meeting to order at 3:15 p.m.
Karen Zurheide, executive director, The Fells accompanied Commission members on the site visit to The Cottage and the location of the proposed seasonal dock.
Ms. Zurheide told Commission members that the proposed seasonal dock is intended to accommodate the needs of the members of the Lake Sunapee Rowing Club, noting that the Club used The Cottage access to the lake last summer. She said the Club is currently looking for alternative locations for the 2010 season, adding that The Fells board of directors (BOD) voted to allow the Club the same access as last year. She added that a Shoreline Ad Hoc Policy Committee is being formed at The Fells to develop policies for shore line use at The Fells.
Ms. Zurheide said it is her opinion that The Fells BOD will not approve installing a seasonal dock this year. Regarding the DES permit, she said the BOD has three options: tear it up and tell the state to cancel it; sign the permit and move forward with the installation; or sign it and keep it for possible use in the future. She said the BOD’s approach to the shore line use at The Fells is very conservative.
Commission members investigated the shore line site noting the rocky shallow access, the existing dock, the fragile ecological condition of The Cottage and the surrounding woods, and the negative impact on the surrounding woods of increased human access.
Mr. Unger questioned whether granting access to the Rowing Club members means granting access to any other member of The Fells who might want to row. Ms. Zurheide said that is reason for establishing a shore line use policy.
There was discussion about the spirit of the Hay legacy, notably the conservative approach to human access, preservation for migratory birds, and the maintenance of a pristine refuge.
There was discussion about the most recent deed and the property boundaries contained therein. Ms. Zurheide said she would locate the deed and find out the location of the boundaries.
Mr. Wright said that if the existing dock is replaced with a seasonal floating dock some trees will have to be cut down to provide access. He recommended keeping the DES permit for possible future programs at The Fells.
Mr. Unger made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Levine seconded the motion. All in favor.
The meeting adjourned at 3:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Meg Whittemore
Recording Secretary
Conservation Commission
May 17, 2010
Approved June 8, 2010
Members Present: Katheryn Holmes, Chair; Eric Unger, Vice-Chair; Bill Annable, Chuck Crickman, Suzanne Levine, Members.
Ms. Holmes called the meeting to order at 4:31 p.m.
Ms. Holmes appointed Mr. Annable as a voting member for this meeting.
Ms. Holmes reviewed the history of the permits from the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) pertaining to The Fells, noting that in 2009 an application was made to DES for a permit to enlarge the existing parking lot. That application was later withdrawn by The Fells. A separate application was submitted to DES from The Fells regarding the installation of a seasonal dock. Ms. Holmes said the latter application is the topic under discussion.
Ms. Holmes said this meeting is to review the information and research gathered regarding the proposed seasonal dock at The Fells and to determine the Commission’s response to same. She noted that the information and research includes the presentation of concerns by Harvey and Nancy Cohen, abutters to The Fells, at the May 11, 2010 Conservation Commission meeting, the meeting with Karen Zurheide, executive director, The Fells during the site visit on May 17, 2010, and the discussion and review of the DES Wetlands and Non-Site Specific Permit 2009-02034 to The Fells to install a 5 ft. x 40 ft. seasonal dock accessed by a 5 ft. x 10 ft. seasonal dock in a “L” shaped configuration on Lake Sunapee in Newbury.
Ms. Holmes recommended formulating a list of the Commission’s concerns regarding this project and including it in a letter sent to the Cohens, the Board of Selectmen, and The Fells. Ms. Holmes said, to date, she has spoken to Ms. Zurheide and June Fichter, executive director, Lake Sunapee Protective Association regarding participation in the proposed Shoreline Ad Hoc Policy Committee at The Fells, the impact of allowing access at The Fells to the Lake Sunapee Rowing Club, and the ongoing potential for future use and/or development at the shore line location of the proposed seasonal dock at The Fells.
Ms. Holmes asked Mr. Unger for his opinion on the situation. Mr. Unger said installing a dock and having it used is an invitation further use and development. He questioned such development as being in opposition to the intent of the Hay’s legacy.
There was discussion regarding the intent of the Hay legacy regarding the use of The Fells property.
Mr. Crickman noted that Ms. Zurheide indicated to him on the site visit that the intent of the Hay legacy remains intact as it applies to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife portion of the property and The Fells property. How the intent applies to the governance of The Fells remains unknown. He suggested the most recent deed be pulled and examined. He offered to research the original deed to compare content.
Ms. Holmes asked Mr. Annable for his opinion on the situation. Mr. Annable said he was opposed to the Rowing Club using the site for access to Lake Sunapee. He referred to Condition # 3 in the DES permit list of Project Specific Conditions which reads as follows:
This shall be the only structure on this water frontage and all portions of the dock shall be at lease 20 feet from abutting property lines or the imaginary extension of those lines into the water.
He noted that the permit references the seasonal dock only and does not mention the existing dock at that location. He added his disappointment at how DES has handled this application. He said his opposition to the project includes the negative impact on the natural conditions at the site, the presence of loons (an endangered species) and the likelihood that no one from DES made a site inspection of the property prior to issuing the permit. He said the area is governed by the Shoreland Protection Act and should be applied universally to any proposed project that is presented to the DES for consideration.
There was general discussion regarding the proposed project and its potential impact on the shore line and the adverse effect on future development at that location.
There was further discussion of the DES permit and the approval process involved.
Mr. Annable said the DES permit needs clarification on Condition # 3 (above) and Condition # 7. Condition # 7 reads as follows:
This project has been screened for potential impacts to known occurrences of rare species exemplary natural communities in the immediate area. Since many areas have never been surveyed, or have received only cursory inventories, unidentified sensitive species or communities may be present. This permit does not absolve the permittee from due diligence in regard to state, local or federal laws regarding such communities or species.
Ms. Holmes said she will call DES to find out why the permit was issued in light of the informational error in Item # 3. Additionally, she said she will get clarification on the content of Condition # 7.
Mr. Annable made a motion to oppose the DES permit 2009-02034 due to conservation and ecological concerns for sensitive species or communities that may be present on this protected area and the fact that there is already an existing dock on the water frontage which is in violation of Condition # 3 of the permit. Mr. Unger seconded the vote. All in favor.
Ms. Holmes asked the Commission to consider amending the current procedure governing site visits. She suggested that site visits include more than one member of the Commission. The Commission agreed to discuss the question at the next meeting.
Mr. Unger made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Annable seconded the motion. All in favor.
The meeting adjourned at 5:41 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Meg Whittemore
Recording Secretary
| 
