TOWN OF PELHAM

PLANNING BOARD MEETING

FEBRUARY 7, 2000

 

The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm.

 

The Acting Clerk called the roll:

 

PRESENT:       Jeff Gowan, Paddy Culbert, Michael Soby, Alternate Henry DeLuca, Alternate Victor Danevich, Selectmen’s Representative Greg Farris, Planning Director Vincent Messina

 

ABSENT:        John CaraDonna, Alternate Richard Foote, Alternate Carl Huether

 

The Chairman announced that Mr. Danevich would be voting for Mr. CaraDonna.

 

 

OLD BUSINESS

 

ML 004-137 – Rivier College/Mammoth Road – Proposed 6 Lot Subdivision

 

Mr. Peter Zohdi, Herbert Associates, appeared before the board to present the plan for ML 4-137.  Mr. Zohdi explained that this plan was previously presented to the board by another engineer.  It was tabled for various reasons.  Mr. Zohdi stated that the board conducted a site walk of this parcel approximately 4 years ago.   He explained that this parcel contains 79 acres.  One of the lots has an existing house.  Mr. Zohdi noted that all of the lots are shown with existing frontage on Mammoth Road and Valley Hill Road.  All lots comply with current zoning and subdivision regulations.  The soils were completed by Gove Environmental and the approximate location of each house and leach bed have been shown.  New test pits were dug and witnessed by the Health Agent.

 

Mr. Zohdi stated that they will need to cross the wetlands for a driveway but they will be proposing a bridge crossing versus a dredge and fill permit.  Mr. Gove met with the Conservation Commission last week to present the plan.  All of the wetlands and edge of wet have been flagged.

 

Mr. Zohdi requested that the board consider a final approval on this plan as the existing house is under agreement to be sold. 

 

Mr. Gowan asked for clarification on the acceptance for consideration of this plan.  Mr. Zohdi explained that when Rivier College came before the board with this plan previously, he believes that it was accepted for consideration at that time.  Mr. Soby stated that there were several outstanding issues on the proposed plan at that time and it was withdrawn. 

 

Mr. Messina stated that a favorable letter from the Conservation Commission has not been received relative to the proposed wetlands crossing.  Mr. Zohdi stated that the board could approve the plan subject to the receipt of a favorable letter from the PCC. 

 

Mr. Culbert asked for clarification on the site distance.  Mr. Zohdi explained that the site distances have been reviewed by Mr. Messina and the regulations have been met. 

 

Mr. Zohdi stated that the lot with the existing house has two accesses on Mammoth Road.  One of these accesses will be removed and they will be requesting one joint access to Mammoth Road, one single access to Mammoth Road and one single access to Valley Hill Road (not a State road).

 

Mr. Soby asked if the outstanding issues from the original hearing on this plan had been addressed.  He suggested that prior to any approval, those issues be brought forward and reviewed. 

 

Mr. Zohdi explained that the board requested at that time that the plan comply with site specific soils mapping and that a ground topo be completed.  The site specific soils mapping and ground topo have been completed and the reports submitted to the file.  The wetlands have been flagged as requested. 

 

Mr. Messina explained that this plan was taken and reviewed as a brand new plan.  Ms. Tesch pointed out that the list of abutters was read aloud at the January 3, 2000 board meeting and the plan was date specified to February 7, 2000. 

 

Mr. Zohdi presented and reviewed a conceptual plan for future development of this parcel.  He pointed out potential connections to Longview and Holstein Drive.  Mr. Zohdi’s client is willing to work with the board on these connections.   He noted that a traffic study is currently being conducted by the town’s traffic engineer. 

 

Ms. Deborah Waters, Harley Road, Conservation Commission member, explained that a subdivision plan for this parcel was brought to the PCC by Rivier College many years ago.   Rivier College approached the town to explore whether or not a portion of this parcel could be set aside as open space.  The Conservation Commission discussed the creation of walking trails on the unbuildable portion of this parcel and Rivier’s representatives indicated that the college would be amenable to that request.  The Conservation Commission was in the process of drafting a letter to the college regarding this issue when the property was sold to Mr. Zohdi’s client. 

 

Mr. Culbert reminded the board that they must address the current proposed plan, not the rear portion of the parcel and its development. 

 

Mr. Zohdi requested that the board consider approval of this plan as there are people waiting to move into the existing house.  A new leachbed design has been submitted and approved and if the board waits until the next meeting to approve this plan, they will be “right on 65 days”.  He requested that he be allowed to seek approval on just the house lot and the board could “keep the remainder” for approval at a later meeting.  Mr. Zohdi stated that the plan has gone to the Conservation Commission for review and his client is willing to work with them regarding their requests and recommendations.

 

Mr. Culbert suggested that the applicant consider this parcel for open space development if the construction does not begin this year.  Mr. Zohdi stated that his client is amenable to open space development if he can construct it this year.  Mr. Gowan reminded the board that open space development would not be on the ballot until possibly 2001.  Mr. Zohdi stated that he is not at liberty to speak for his client relative to 2001 development.

 

Mr. Farris suggested that the board approve just one house lot by accepting the plan for consideration and then allowing the final lot line to be established for ML 4-137.   Mr. Gowan believes that until the subdivision plan is approved, this is not a lot of record.  He is also not comfortable with pushing this through just because a sale is pending. 

 

Mr. Culbert asked if Mr. Messina has any problems with any of the proposed lots.  Mr. Messina stated that he has no problems with any of the road front lots on this parcel.  Mr. Culbert asked if the Conservation Commission had any problems with the road front lots.  Ms. Waters stated that the PCC has yet to look at and review the final plan for this parcel.  She noted that the PCC typically does not rule on a plan until they conduct a site walk.  Ms. Waters stated that it is hard for her to comment on this plan as it was only brought to the PCC as “discussion”. 

 

Mr. Danevich asked for clarification on the special permit for a driveway crossing.  Mr. Zohdi stated that the special permit request would not effect ML 4-137. 

 

Mr. Gowan suggested that the plan be accepted for consideration, then the board could vote to approve the single lot (ML 4-137).  Mr. Zohdi would then have to bring in drawings of this lot only for signature.  This way, the balance of the plan could go to the Conservation Commission for review, a site walk and a favorable letter to the Planning Board.  Mr. Zohdi agreed with Mr. Gowan’s solution and offered to create a separate mylar for ML 4-137. 

 

Mr. Farris expressed concern for the 65 day clock. 

 

MOTION:  (Culbert/Farris) To accept the plan for consideration.

 

VOTE: 4 – 1 – 0 with Mr. Soby voting No.  The motion carries.

 

MOTION:  (Farris/Culbert) To approve Lot 4-137. 

 

Mr. Culbert stated that, clearly, the intent of this motion is to allow one pre-existing house lot to be cut off and sold. 

 

Mr. Culbert asked for clarification on the mylar that will be signed.  Mr. Zohdi explained that it would show a two lot subdivision – ML 4-137 and the remainder lot. 

 

VOTE:  5 – 0 – 0    The motion carries.

 

Mr. Culbert requested that copies of all the minutes relative to this proposed subdivision be distributed to the board members prior to the next meeting. 

 

This hearing was date specified to March 6, 2000.

 

 

ML 004-137 – Rivier College/Mammoth Road – WCD Special Permit for Driveway Crossing

 

Mr. Peter Zohdi, Herbert Associates, appeared before the board to present the plan for a WCD special permit for a driveway crossing .  Mr. Zohdi explained that the WCD is a ditchline of poorly drained soil running through the property.  He indicated the edge of the WCD.  There are three driveways going through the WCD.   Mr. Zohdi explained that two of the driveways would go over a prefabricated bridge.  By utilizing this bridge, there is no impact to the wetland.  Mr. Gowan explained that these bridges tend to be less invasive and a better solution in the long run for protection of the wetlands. 

 

Mr. Culbert requested that data relative to the proposed bridge be provided to the board for their review.  Mr. Zohdi explained that these specifications and data are typically submitted to CLD but he is willing to provide this information to the board. 

 

Mr. Messina noted that this crossing does not involve roadway construction, it is a driveway crossing.  Mr. Farris stated that the maintenance of this bridge would be the responsibility of the property owner because it is a driveway. 

 

MOTION:  (Culbert/Danevich)  To accept for consideration the WCD special permit for a driveway crossing.

 

VOTE:  5 – 0 – 0  The motion carries.

 

 

ML 006-185 – Mahoney, Thomas/Irene Drive/Phase II – Proposed 20 Lot Subdivision

    

 

     Mr. Peter Zohdi, Herbert Associates, appeared before the board to present Phase II of the subdivision plan for ML 6-185.  Mr. Zohdi referred to the tax map sketch of ML 6-185 and pointed out the existing Irene Drive extension.  He located Robin Road and the cul de sac, its connection to Honey Lane and the final connection to Noela Avenue.  Mr. Zohdi explained that this is the last phase of this subdivision.  There are 20 house lots proposed in Phase II.  Mr. Zohdi has had an initial meeting with CLD relative to the road design and drainage. 

 

Mr. Zohdi stated that James Gove, Gove Environmental, met with the Conservation Commission regarding the wetlands on this parcel.  He referred to page 10 of the plan showing where the additional wetlands exist.  Mr. Zohdi pointed out the 22 acre parcel that they intend to leave as one lot. 

 

Mr. Zohdi stated that a traffic study was conducted by CLD on this project and submitted to the board for their review.  It was the traffic engineer’s opinion that signage was indicated at the beginning of Irene Drive and at the sharp curve on Marsh Road.  The applicant is willing to install this signage. 

 

Mr. Zohdi noted that a proposed lotline change is being negotiated between his client and Mr. Bergeron’s existing lot on Marsh Road.

 

Mr. Zohdi stated that this proposed subdivision is still going through the review process with CLD.  They are waiting for the board to take jurisdiction on the plan prior to completing a final review. 

 

Mr. Farris asked for clarification on the granting of lots in consideration of completing Irene Drive Extension.  Mr. Zohdi explained that the board granted approval on Phase II of this subdivision (23 lots)  subject to the entire road being constructed.  The applicant was not to come back for Phase II of this subdivision until after November 1999.  Mr. Culbert explained that the applicant was instructed to construct the entire road prior to coming back for Phase II.  The board granted the 23 lots over a two year period because they wanted this road constructed first. 

 

Mr. Farris expressed concern with the extremely sharp curve in Marsh Road at the intersection of Noela Avenue.  He noted that this curve is not only sharp, it “dips down” and he is concerned about the site distance on a straight line.

 

Mr. Soby feels that this is a prime risk location and should be considered for police monitoring.  He is also concerned about the shape of a few of the proposed lots.  Mr. Soby referred to the backyards of the homes on Noela Avenue and expressed concern about the potential runoff of water from the wetlands along Honey Lane to these yards.  He asked if there were any way that Honey Lane could be rerouted to avoid the wetlands. 

 

Mr. Zohdi reminded the board that it was their suggestion to connect this road to Noela Avenue.  His client is willing to construct a cul de sac with a narrow, gated fire access road over to Noela Avenue.   He understands that the board is concerned with the potential length of this roadway and fire safety is an issue.   Mr. Zohdi further explained that, if the board wishes, Honey Lane can be rerouted to better avoid the wetlands in this area. 

 

Mr. Zohdi stated that a cross culvert has been proposed to deal with the drainage from Honey Lane.  He noted that there would be no negative impact to the drainage on the properties along Noela Avenue. 

 

Mr. Gowan agreed that the board has been encouraging developers to connect roads, according to the Master Plan’s recommendations.  He added that it does not always work out that way.   Mr. Soby stated that the proposed connection is a potential safety hazard to the residents of the town. 

 

Mr. Messina explained that improvements could be made to this proposed intersection such as decreasing the slope to the intersection.   Mr. Gowan stated that CLD would have many issues to scrutinize on this plan.

 

Mr. Farris requested that CLD look at the potential impact of the runoff from Lot 6-193 to the existing wetlands.  He expressed concerned for the new lots being proposed behind the existing lots that are already having problems with water.  Their only runoff is into the wetlands. 

 

Mr. Culbert requested that CLD review this plan and decide whether there are any improvements that the developer could make that will help alleviate some of the drainage problems the abutters are currently experiencing.  Mr. Zohdi offered to work with CLD and the Planning Director to resolve these problems to the best of their ability. 

 

Mr. Gowan read aloud the following statement received from member John CaraDonna:

 

“I did meet with Mr. and Mrs. Fraize of Noela Avenue to discuss their concerns.  They do have some very legitimate drainage concerns.  I would like to suggest that culverts be designed under the proposed road to alleviate all water that drains from Marsh Road and Jean Guys through the Fraize property and ultimately into the wetland.  As proposed, I will not support this plan because no effort is made to divert the proposed road from the wetland.  I would support this plan if the proposed road from Noela was diverted to the right after the Fraize’s rear boundary connecting to the area of the proposed cul de sac.  To hug this major wetland with a road for the purpose of maximizing the usable land is unacceptable to me.  Also, I met with Chief Fisher and he was not an advocate of a fire road in this particular situation due to the length and number of homes currently on Irene Drive.”

 

Mr. Zohdi stated that they are not attempting to maximize the number of lots in this subdivision.  He pointed out that a 22 acre residue parcel is being left at the request of the board.  Mr. Zohdi stated that they would be glad to construct a cul de sac as suggested by the board. 

 

Mr. Farris noted that any fire road would have to be maintained by the town. 

 

Mr. Danevich stated that this file is lengthy and dates back to July 20, 1998.  Most of the issues fall into four categories.  They are drainage concerns, safety concerns as far the traffic on Marsh to Noela Avenue, the WCD and how Honey Lane will effect this WCD.  

 

Mr. Farris asked how wide is the buffer between the road and the wetland.  Mr. Zohdi stated that it is approximately 30 ft. to the edge of the wetland. 

 

Mr. Gowan read aloud a letter dated January 21, 2000 from the abutters.  (Attachment #1).

 

PUBLIC INPUT:

 

Ms. Alicia Hennessey, Conservation Commission Chairman, stated that Mr. Gove, Gove Environmental, proposed that Honey Lane not be connected to Noela Avenue in order to further protect the wetlands.

 

Mr. Tim Fraize, Noela Avenue, asked for clarification on the left turn warrant being marginal as stated in the traffic report by CLD.  Mr. Paul Konieczka, CLD, traffic engineer, stated that he was responsible for conducting this traffic study for the town.  Mr. Konieczka explained that the comment about the “marginal left turn warrant” does not refer to the site distance.  An analysis was conducted relative to the need for a left turn treatment at either the entrance to Irene Drive or Noela from Marsh Road.  The criteria and standards established by the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) were utilized.  It is a function of the amount of traffic on the main line and how many left turns you have as a percentage of the total advancing traffic.  With these numbers, it has been projected that the left hand turn warrant at Noela was “marginally satisfied” at 20 turns per pm peak hour.  Mr. Konieczka explained that this percentage is “right on the cusp” of where the warrant would be based upon the total traffic on Marsh Road in the year 2008.  A left hand turn lane would require the widening of Marsh Road in this area and it would encourage even more traffic.  Currently, drivers must slow down to the posted speed to allow for the left hand turn to be made.  Therefore, it was CLD’s recommendation not to construct a left hand turn lane at this point of Marsh Road.  

 

Mr. Gowan asked for clarification on a “left hand warrant”.  Mr. Konieczka explained that a left hand warrant is based on three criteria or standards - the amount of opposing traffic to the left hand turn, the amount of advancing traffic and the percentage of the advancing traffic that is actually going to make the left hand turn.  He stated that if there is a high volume of traffic opposing the left hand turn, there are not enough gaps left and traffic backs up behind them.  This can disrupt traffic flow along the entire roadway.  AASTO guidelines stated that if you meet the “warrant”, you would consider a bypass shoulder that allows the traffic to go around the vehicle attempting to make the left hand turn. 

 

Mr. Konieczka explained that the counts were done in July 1998 and “seasonal correction factors” are utilized.  Based on studies in the Pelham area completed by the NRPC, the average growth rate on the roadways is 1.9% per year.  The July counts were factored accordingly and the analysis completed. 

 

Mr. Konieczka further noted that the speed limit on Marsh Road was dropped from 40 mph to 30 mph three years ago.  Stopping site distance at 30 mph is 200 ft.   Stopping distance at 40 mph is 325 ft.   The available site distance at the intersection of Marsh Road and Noela Avenue is 420 ft.

 

Mr. Messina explained that warrant is a set of criteria that say the amount of traffic at a certain point establishes the need to redesign an intersection.  This warrant “marginally” meets the need to redesign the intersection. 

 

Mr. Konieczka explained that if the posted speed limit is being exceeded by vehicles, it is an enforcement issue.  Mr. Fraize noted that the report states that the average speed on Marsh Road in this area is 40 mph but the criteria is based on a 30 mph posted speed limit.  Mr. Konieczka agreed that the site distance is based on a posted speed limit of 30 mph. 

 

Mr. Fraize asked for clarification on the estimate of 70% of the cars leaving Noela Avenue turning north.  Mr. Konieczka explained that according to the location of the houses, it is easier to exit the development at this point.  Mr. Fraize stated that currently, there are only three families exiting at this point.  

 

Mr. Fraize presented a revised plan that would loop Honey Lane and provide a gated, fire access road that would connect it to Noela Avenue. 

 

Mr. Paul Bergeron, 173 Marsh Road, 25 year resident of the area, stated that the number of accidents at Noela Avenue and Marsh Road have been minimal. 

 

Mr. Raymond Belleville, 176 Marsh Road, stated that there have been a countless number of  accidents at this intersection and it is extremely dangerous.  His driveway is directly across from Noela Avenue.  Mr. Belleville cannot support additional cars at this intersection.

 

Ms. Linda Bronson, 5 Noela Avenue, asked for clarification on the right hand turns being made into Noela by vehicles traveling North on Marsh Road.  Mr. Konieczka stated that the number of right hand turns being made are minimal.  Ms. Bronson explained that turning into Noela at this point is very dangerous because the traffic is traveling so fast and that the drivers swerve into the opposite lane of traffic to go around.  Mr. Konieczka explained that the volume of traffic does not warrant a change and that this analysis was based on peak hours of travel. 

 

Mr. Belleville stated that the vehicles do not travel at 30 or 40 mph, they go 50 to 55 mph on Marsh Road. 

 

Mr. Zohdi referred to Mr. Fraize’s revised road plan and stated that if the Fire Chief agrees with the construction of an access road, he would be glad to do it.  He believes that more direction could be sought at the site walk on this issue. 

 

Ms. Pat Fraize, 2 Noela Avenue, agrees with Mr. Belleville.  She stated that the last accident at that intersection was on New Year’s Eve.  Ms. Fraize stated that there are numerous accidents at this point on Marsh Road and making a right hand turn into Noela is very dangerous. 

 

Mr. Fraize asked if the board had access to accident records from the Police Department.  Mr. Gowan explained that the board could try and possibly retrieve this data through CLD’s review.

 

Mr. Harold Lynde, Jeremy Hill Road, stated that he had spoken to members of the Police Department and they agree that this is a dangerous curve.  Mr. Lynde explained that the average speed in this area is 40 mph and that the board must base their decision on that fact.  He does not believe that it is an issue of enforcement. 

 

Mr. Culbert stated that the posted speed limit is 30 mph and it should be adhered to.  He believes that it is an enforcement issue.  The town needs to either enforce the posted speed limit or re-post it to 40 mph.  Mr. Lynde believes that the board needs to address the safety of the town residents.

 

Mr. Soby agrees with Mr. Lynde and referred to RSA 307-2 where it states that it is the responsibility of the Planning Board to address the safety and well being of the town residents.  The primary issue is not speed, it is what can the board do to minimize the impact. 

 

Mrs. Carol Bergeron, 173 Marsh Road, stated that there have been numerous accidents at this point on Marsh Road.  It is a safety issue for all residents. 

 

Ms. Bronson stated that she has been forced to drive her children to and from school each day because the bus stop is too dangerous.   

 

Mr. Kenneth Dorrance, St. Margarets Drive, explained that this is a case of “variable speed tolerance”.  According to his professional opinion, you cannot “tag” someone for 35 mph in a 30 mph zone. 

 

Ms. Fraize asked for clarification on the “land swap” between the applicant and the Bergerons.  Mr. Zohdi explained that the Bergerons wished to purchase an amount of land from the applicant.  He indicated the revised lotline on the plan. 

 

Mr. Fraize asked why the “swampy area” at the end of Noela was not shown on the plan.   Mr. Zohdi stated that this area would be viewed at the site walk. 

 

Ms. Deborah Waters, Conservation Commission member, asked if the “circle idea” would satisfy all of the board’s concerns.  Mr. Gowan stated that the board needs to conduct a site walk and input must be sought from the Fire Chief. 

 

Mr. Soby stated that an outstanding issue is drainage in this area.  Mr. Farris stated that the board cannot do anything with this plan until it is accepted for consideration.  Mr. David Brouillet, CLD, stated that it is very helpful for the abutters to attend the site walks in order to give input to the engineers and board members. 

 

Mr. Zohdi suggested that he, Mr. Messina, the Fire Chief and some members of the board meet and come to a final resolution on the revised plan.  He is willing to revise the plan as shown if necessary.

 

Mr. Soby expressed concern with the odd shaped lots, specifically Lot 49, 47, 61, 63 and 64.   Mr. Zohdi offered to rework the configurations of these lots.  

 

Mr. Danevich expressed interest in the proposed fire road as a way to reduce further impact to the wetland. 

 

MOTION:  (Culbert/Danevich)  To accept the plan for consideration.

 

VOTE:  5 – 0 – 0   The motion carries.

 

 

ML 001-161 – Estate of Charles Jack/Greenmeadow Estates/Greenmeadow Drive – Proposed 9 Lot Subdivision

 

Mr. Michael Grainger, Engineer for the applicant, appeared before the board and requested that this hearing be continued.

 

 

ML 007-010 – Crown Atlantic Company LLC/27 Old Lawrence Road – Site Plan for Proposed Removal and Replacement of Telecommunications Tower

 

Attorney Thomas Hildreth, McLane, Graf, Raulerson & Middleton, Nashua, N.H., representing Crown Atlantic Company LLC, appeared before the board to present the site plan for the telecommunications tower on ML 7-10.   Mr. Hildreth explained that this is a continuation of a hearing held on January 3, 2000.  At that time, they were proposing to replace the existing tower.  Mr. Hildreth explained that they have decided to revise the site plan again with a modification of the existing tower in place.  There is a device referred to as a “power mount” which is utilized to achieve additional vertical height above the power pole.  The manufacturer, Pirod, has confirmed that Crown Atlantic can retrofit the existing lattice style tower with a power mount.  The power mount runs down the center of the existing tower and provides the additional 17 ft. of necessary vertical height.  Mr. Hildreth explained that because of the way the power mount joins to the existing structure, it reinforces the existing structure.  This 17 ft. will bring the tower to its full 180 ft. height. 

 

The Conservation Commission has provided Crown Atlantic with input and a letter has been submitted to the file for the board’s review.  Mr. Hildreth presented the following proposed conditions to address the Conservation Commission’s concerns:

 

1.                  Minimize loss of mature trees during construction.

2.                  Remit any profit from lumber taken during construction to Town forestry Fund.

3.                  Plant trees to replace any lost to construction in order to minimize impact of those removed, said replacement trees to be reasonably satisfactory to the Conservation Commission.

4.                  Prepare consolidated landscaping plan for review and approval of the Conservation Commission.

5.                  Install and maintain appropriate sedimentation and erosion control devices during construction to protect adjacent wetlands.

6.                  Pay to have trees killed by last summer’s forest fire cut down and removed with proceeds from lumber sales to be remitted to the Town Forestry Fund (cap on expense to be incurred by Crown Atlantic at $2,000).

 

Mr. Hildreth stated that they will confine their work to the footprint as shown with a modest bump out at the rear of the equipment shelter and follow the recommendations of the PCC.  He requested that the board consider approval of this site plan.

 

Mr. Farris requested that a note be made on the plan that no generators will be utilized unless it is an emergency situation.  He stated that there should be a separate electrical source and no generators should be brought in to establish the new service.

Mr. Messina stated that town counsel has reviewed the applicability of the existing special exception.  This is a pre-existing condition but a building permit and review process would be required.  According to the new regulations, the applicant can increase the height to 199 ft. if they wish.

 

Mr. Messina stated that town counsel has also reviewed the liability issue relative to the damage done by the fire.  The liability goes back to the owner of the property and would be pursued through their insurance company.  Mr. Messina noted that the damages incurred to fight this fire were covered by insurance.

 

Mr. DeLuca asked if any provisions had been made for fire or police use of this tower.  Mr. Hildreth stated that the fire and police are invited to utilize the tower depending on the type of equipment they will utilize.  Crown Atlantic is willing to accommodate them if necessary.

 

Mr. Gowan stated that Mr. CaraDonna submitted his comments to the board for review and that they have been covered in the discussion.

 

Ms. Alicia Hennessey, Conservation Commission Chairman, asked if the Board of Selectmen intend to contact the welding contractor regarding the damages incurred by the fire.  Mr. Farris asked that Ms. Hennessey contact the Town Administrator to work on this issue.

 

Ms. Deborah Waters, Conservation Commission member, stated that the original site plan for this site was approved with stipulations but the landscaping was never properly completed.  Mr. Farris suggested that the applicant review the original landscaping plan and follow the direction and recommendations of the PCC.  

 

MOTION:  (Soby/Danevich)  To approve the site plan subject to a note being made on the plan that no generators will be utilized in except in a normal capacity for emergency situations and for use in standard testing procedures. 

 

VOTE:  5 – 0 – 0  The motion carries.

 

(Mr. Culbert left the meeting at 10:15 pm)

 

 

 

ML 009-136-001 – Weber/Simpson Road – Proposed 2 Lot Subdivision

 

This hearing was date specified to the February 24, 2000 board meeting.

 

 

ML 006-250 – Fosse, Arthur Jr./133 Marsh Road/Elston Estates – Proposed 7 Lot Subdivision

 

This hearing was date specified to the March 6, 2000 board meeting. 

 

 

The Chairman announced that Mr. DeLuca would be voting for Mr. Culbert. 

 

 

 

 

 

HEARINGS/NEW BUSINESS

 

ML 13-84 – New England Pentecostal Church/327 Gage Hill Road – Site Plan for Proposed Addition to Existing Building

 

The Clerk read aloud the list of abutters.

 

MOTION:  (Farris/Soby)  To date specify this hearing to the March 6, 2000 board meeting.

 

VOTE:  5 – 0 – 0   The motion carries.

 

 

 

ML 12-203 – Schlapp, Frederick & Suzanne/Shephard Road/Mulberry Wood Estates – Proposed 20 Lot Subdivision

 

The Clerk read aloud the list of abutters.

 

MOTION:  (Farris/Soby)  To date specify this hearing to the March 6, 2000 board meeting.

 

VOTE:  5 – 0 – 0   The motion carries.

 

 

 

ML 005-83 – Carter, James & Connie/23 Castle Hill Road – Proposed 2 Lot Subdivision

 

The Clerk read aloud the list of abutters.

 

MOTION:  (Farris/Soby)  To date specify this hearing to the March 6, 2000 board meeting.

 

VOTE:  5 – 0 – 0   The motion carries.

 

 

ML 001-057 – Whittaker, Barbara/ Mammoth Road – Proposed 7 Lot Subdivision – Preliminary Conceptual Review

 

This hearing was not heard by the board.

 

 

 

MINUTES REVIEW – January 20, 2000

 

MOTION:  (Farris/Danevich)  To accept the minutes of the January 20, 2000 meeting as amended.

 

VOTE:  4 – 0 – 1 with Mr. Soby abstaining.   The motion carries.

 

 

 

 

SITE WALK AGENDA

 

The board will conduct a site walk of the following parcels on Saturday, February 19, 2000 at 8:00 am:

 

                        ML 4-137        Rivier College/Mammoth Road/Proposed 6 Lot Subdivision

 

                        ML 6-185        Thomas Mahoney/Irene Drive/Phase II – Proposed 20 Lot Subdivision

 

 

 

Mr. Danevich stated that he is researching the creation of a web page for the Planning Board.  He asked for input from the members and the Recording Secretary.  There are many different options for creating this web page.  Mr. Gowan suggested that the board consider putting the Master Plan and the CIP on this site. 

 

Mr. Messina explained that according to the RSA’s, the primary focus of the Planning Board is planning issues, not the “nitty gritty of engineering issues”.   Professional engineers are hired by the town to cover those issues.  Mr. Gowan stated that there is an element of “problem solving” that is a responsibility of the board  that goes beyond the guidelines given. 

 

 

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

MOTION:   (Soby/Farris)  To adjourn the meeting.

 

VOTE:  5 – 0 – 0   The motion carries.

 

The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 pm.

           

                                                                                    Respectfully submitted,

 

                                                                                    Susan J. Tesch

                                                                                    Recording Secretary