Members Present: Members
Absent:
Alicia Hennessey,
Chairperson
Paul McLaughlin
Rick Cummings
Bill Cookinham
Debbie Waters, Alternate
Hal Lynde, Selectman
Don Paquin
Bob Yarmo
Alicia Harshfield
A special meeting of the
Conservation Commission was held upstairs at the Pelham Town Hall on Wednesday,
April 19, 2000 for a reconsideration of vote concerning the permit application
on Area A wetlands at Green Meadow Drive.
The meeting was called to
order at 8:53 p.m. by Alicia Hennessey, Chairperson.
Green Meadow Estates, Tax Map 33, Lot 161
Alicia Hennessey explained
that at the last Conservation meeting held on April 12, 2000 there had been
some confusion regarding the vote on a Dredge and Fill permit on impact Area A,
a 13,049 square foot wetland area at Green Meadow Drive. She felt it was appropriate to ask for a
reconsideration of vote.
A motion was made by Don Paquin to reconsider the
Dredge and Fill permit for Green Meadow Drive at Area A voted upon at last
meeting, given the lateness of the hour and further input from residents. The motion was seconded by Rick
Cummings. All in favor: Alicia Hennessey, Alicia Harshfield, Rick
Cummings, Bob Yarmo, Don Paquin. None
opposed. Paul McLaughlin and Bill
Cookinham abstained. Vote is 5-0-2. The motion is passed.
A vote was not taken from
Debbie Waters as an alternate since all other board members were present.
The chairperson, Alicia
Hennessey, opened the reconsideration meeting for discussion. Attorney Bernard Campbell of Salem, NH
appeared as counsel for the developer.
Mr. Campbell requested a copy of the minutes from the last meeting and
was told they were not completed. He
wanted it on the record that the time period had passed for the minutes to be
available. This did not allow him a copy
for review, nor his client. The
Commission stated that a videotaping of the meeting had been done which was the
permanent record of that meeting.
Attorney Campbell asked the
Chairperson how this reconsideration was prompted; had there been a telephone
call to the Chairperson for this request.
Hal Lynde stated that the Chairperson had been advised, by a phone call,
that a member wanted the opportunity to reconsider this vote and Mr. Campbell
agreed that this was allowed under general rules of procedure. Mr. Lynde added that the board had decided
to post tonight’s meeting and Attorney Campbell stated he or his client had
been notified by phone. Mr. Campbell
asked if the board needed to post for General Hearing or what the rules of
procedure were in this regard. Debbie
Waters said that the State bureau would receive the pending permit along with a
letter of Conservation’s recommendations.
The zoning ordinance says that special permits are granted if there is a
favorable recommendation from Conservation.
Alicia Harshfield read the zoning ordinance 307-40 under Article 7. Hal Lynde stated that since a vote was had
for reconsideration, a public hearing was not needed.
Bernard Campbell agreed but
stated that his client did know the boards’ concerns and asked if someone could
explain. Bob Yarmo offered that he had
abstained from the vote taken last week given the lateness of the hour and
length of that particular meeting. He
felt the matter had not been considered enough and had since been on a site
walk of the property as last week had been his first meeting as a new
member. Alicia Hennessey stated that
Mark Jacobs had come before this board last December so some members had input
from that meeting and were present tonight.
Attorney Campbell asked if
there was something specific the board needed to have addressed in this
matter. Alicia Harshfield stated that
she had been on the site walk, had attended the meeting last December but was
not present at the April 12th meeting.
Mr. Campbell asked if Ms. Harshfield had viewed the videotape from last
week’s meeting and she replied no.
Attorney Campbell stated that he would like to be sure everyone knew
what had been presented at that last meeting.
At this point, Hal Lynde asked Attorney Campbell if another hearing was
needed and Mr. Campbell allowed that the hearing had been held last week but
asked what questions a member had at this point.
Alicia Hennessey stated
that member Don Paquin felt there was much confusion over the vote taken at the
last meeting. Hal Lynde reiterated that
the hour was very late, after midnight, and that there was confusion. Attorney Campbell stated that neither he nor
his client were here to make further presentation but rather to address and
answer concerns of the Commission.
Don Paquin asked if there
was any other access to parcel without crossing a wetland area. Bernard Campbell responded that the Planning
Board had dictated where the access could be.
Don asked how long the road would be without teacup and Mark Jacobs,
engineer, answered 800 feet or more.
Alicia Harshfield stated that the jurisdiction of this Commission was to
rule on environmental impact which Deb Waters then reiterated. Ms. Harshfield spoke to the issue of levels
of impact. Mark Jacobs said the
wetlands are protected because they act as filters. Hal Lynde stated he believed the basic problem is that initially
the property was to include an extended cul-de-sac and Planning Board required
it be looped. He added that the
Conservation Commission was now faced with having to look at the largest
wetland crossing they had encountered to date.
Attorney Campbell stated that the issue then becomes whether the
applicant has minimized the wetland impact and asked if applicant did the best
they could with presentation at the last meeting. Mark Jacobs says he understands it is a large impact area for
members to consider but that the permit should not be denied based on it being
the largest they had encountered.
Alicia Harshfield states
that she believes there are alternatives such as ending the cul-de-sac. Mark Jacobs responds that this is not a
viable option based on socio-economical issues. Alicia Harshfield asks why the developer could not go around the
wetland area in question. Mr. Jacobs
explains that the right of way was established from an earlier development
about 20 years ago and not the fault of his client. He says that this option is viable if you consider environmental
impact only. Attorney Campbell
interjects that his client did what was required by the town’s Planning Board
and added that the Conservation Commission and Planning Board needed to come
together on this issue. Hal Lynde
comments that this board considers conservation issues only but Mr. Jacobs
instructs that zoning regulations say you need to consider issues other than
solely conservation.
Alicia Hennessey offers
that the question of access to the whole area should have been addressed by
Planning. Mr. Jacobs comments that
having Wyndridge Circle (a/k/a Green Meadow Drive) connect to Scenic View Drive
would have been a good solution. He
added that perhaps the best planning was not accomplished but that it was not
the fault of the applicant. Mark Jacobs
read the regulation and stated that Conservation Commission has to approve
under the same regulation standards as the State. Attorney Campbell added that the Commission was in the position
to weigh applicant’s permit application beyond just the wetland impact. Debbie Waters says she would argue that an
alternative is a cul-de-sac. Alicia
Harshfield states that yet another alternative would be bridging and Rick
Cummings agrees, adding elevated causeway as well. Hal Lynde suggests that everyone agree to differ rather than
debate and says that it was not the board’s intent to make applicant go back
and forth between Planning and Conservation.
Mr. Lynde
adds that this Commission
is legitimately concerned with the wetlands issue and that a difference of
opinion exists. Mr. Lynde believes it
would be reasonable to review the State regulations. He adds that the board respects all the work that went into the
presentation by Mr. Jacobs and others at the last meeting. Mr. Lynde stated that an issue was Planning
Board wanting no cul-de-sac and Conservation seeing it as alternative. He is not sure what would be gained from
further debate. Mark Jacobs states that
they have been to the Planning Board twice on this matter and that Planning is
not eager to repeat past mistakes.
Bob Yarmo queried whether
this whole neighborhood is one whole road and Mr. Campbell responds with a yes,
explaining that there is a single connection off Mammoth Road. He adds that this plan connects a loop in
the area. Bob Yarmo concludes that the
result is just a bigger road and Mr. Campbell agrees. Mark Jacobs addresses the conservation
easement and question of resulting increase in value to property. He repeats that his client is willing to
revisit this prior to Phase II with Conservation. Hal Lynde questions whether this project would be better with
cluster zoning and Mark Jacobs responds that it would still be an access
issue. He adds that the Planning Board
may require a connecting road later if the next area is developed.
A motion is made by Rick Cummings that the
Commission accept wetland crossing in Area A with conditions outlined at the
April 12, 2000 meeting. Bill Cookinham
seconds the motion.
Mark Jacobs seeks to
clarify that this vote is regarding Area A only and further questions the
erosion control condition. Alicia
Harshfield asks if this vote is to approve the crossing to which the
Chairperson responds affirmatively.
A vote was had.
All in favor: Bill
Cookinham. All opposed: Alicia Hennessey, Alicia Harshfield, Don
Paquin, Rick Cummings, Bob Yarmo. Paul
McLaughlin abstains. Vote is
1-5-1. The motion does not pass.
Alicia Hennessey explains
that a letter will be sent to Planning Board and NH Wetlands Bureau stating the
Commission does not approve or recommend the Dredge and Fill permit for Area A,
with rationale given, such as the alternative options the members
suggested. Bill Cookinham asks if the
Commission can send a letter to Planning Board asking for a cul-de-sac. Alicia Harshfield states that she
understands the safety concerns of the Planning Board but believes the
environmental impact is greater. Hal
Lynde offers that the Conservation Commission wishes to avoid wetland
impact.
Vincent Messina, Planning
Board Director, explains that at this time Bowley Road is the only access but
there are plans for two more in the future.
Bob Yarmo states that he heard no mention that the Planning Board was
aware of the wetland but Mr. Messina assured him that they were aware of it and
had been on a site walk of the property.
Hal Lynde states that access from the north or the west may be sought in
the future and that he believes poor planning created old and possible future
problems. Mr. Messina spoke as to how
these decisions are made. Attorney
Campbell states that his client will pursue the State application and do what
Planning requires. Alicia Hennessey
offered that the board understood the difficult situation. Attorney Campbell says he wishes there had
been a more favorable recommendation and added that he would like the minutes
of this meeting and the April 12th meeting as soon as possible.
Discussion:
Bob Yarmo brings up the two
plans recently reviewed and what the intervening process might be. Hal Lynde suggests the board use the twenty
question guideline the State utilizes.
Alicia Harshfield states that it can be obtained from the Dredge and
Fill permit application; each member has a copy.
Bill Cookinham advises that
there will be a public hearing on April 26, 2000 with Tennessee Gas Pipeline at
Pelham High School beginning at 7:00 p.m. and that TGP will be before the Board
of Selectmen on April 25, 2000.
Paul McLaughlin would like
to request that the Board of Selectmen take the proper action to have a
recording secretary present for taking of minutes at the Conservation
meetings. Hal Lynde states that the
Commission should themselves secure a secretary. Alicia Hennessey explained that there had been a miscommunication
about this issue. Mr. McLaughlin added
that the meeting began with Attorney Campbell requesting a copy of the minutes
and they should have been available to him.
Hal Lynde explained that even though there should be typed minutes, the
videotape of the meeting was the permanent record.
Bob Yarmo said he would
like to comment on the Route 38 site and stated that he had not seen a better cause
for a cease and desist order given the erosion control situation there. Planning Director Vincent Messina responded
that the situation had recently been much improved with no ciltation present
now. The purpose of curbing for erosion
control on the road was discussed. Bob
Yarmo says that the erosion control he saw did not correct the problem and Mr.
Messina states that what counts is the condition of the area today. He suggested any member could visit the site
and the improvements would be very visible.
Mr. Messina added that an onsite manager and DES would be at the site
once a week to insure no further wetland impact occurs.
The Planning Director
stated that while Planning was sensitive to wetland areas, there was not an
adequate staff (2 full-time and 1 part-time presently in Planning Dept.) to
police every development. Mr. Messina
had been in this position for approximately eight months and urged Conservation
to allow him the time to make changes and improvements and to acknowledge that
this was being undertaken now. Paul
McLaughlin said that Conservation would want to prevent problems rather than
have to address them later. He added
that the board was getting frustrated with promises made versus end results and
that he felt this had gone on long enough.
Mr. McLaughlin emphasized that Pelham has to stand together and not put
up with wrongdoings. He felt that
Planning, Board of Selectmen and Conservation should work together.
Vincent Messina suggested
that CLD should present a new checklist outlining the monitoring and review
processes. He added that the design
process has undergone changes in the past six months. The Planning Department website contained all the requirements,
could identify cases and how they had been handled. Mr. Messina emphasized that subdivisions will be built to plan,
including permanent water treatment. He
said that it was not in place today but the current situation was
temporary. Alicia Hennessey observed
that some 50 year old trees had already been cut in the Route 38 development
mentioned. Vincent Messina stated that
the WCD was not being encroached. He
added that the Planning Department does monitor this. Mr. Messina said that he can assure the board that the design
presented will equal the end result of construction on future
developments. A discussion was had
regarding bonds. Bob Yarmo stated that
he would like to see developing done responsibly. Mr. Messina agreed but added that the Planning Department had to
look at the total impact to the town.
Hal Lynde suggested that
Planning and Conservation get together to look at how future developments are
being handled to avoid potential problems in future years and Mr. Messina
agreed. Some discussion was had on the master
plan and open space zoning ordinance development. Alicia Hennessey stated she would like to encourage the public to
join the Open Space Committee. Paul
McLaughlin said he wondered about the devotion to community with some people
who appear before the Conservation Commission.
Hal Lynde stated his belief that Conservation had a great board and
could look forward to a positive future.
A motion was made by Paul McLaughlin to
adjourn. Alicia Harshfield seconded the
motion. All in favor: Alicia Hennessey, Alicia Harshfield, Don
Paquin, Paul McLaughlin, Bill Cookinham, Rick Cummings, Bob Yarmo. Vote 7-0-0.
The motion is passed.
The meeting was adjourned
at 10:35 p.m.
Minutes transcribed by,
Kathleen A. Carr,
Recording Secretary Approved: May 10, 2000