TOWN OF PELHAM
AUGUST 6, 2001
The Chairman, Victor Danevich called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm.
The Secretary, Bill Sacanzani, called the roll:
PRESENT: Peter McNamara, Alternate Gael Ouellette, Bill Scanzani, Victor Danevich, Paddy Culbert, Selectmen’s Representative Hal Lynde (arrived at approximately 8:00 pm), Henry DeLuca (arrived at approximately 7:30 p.m.) Interim Planning Director Clay Mitchell.
ABSENT: Jeff Gowan
Map 11 Lot 96, 97-1, & 97-2 Fehmel & Dallaire – Campbell Road – Proposed 1 – Lot Subdivision for Approval
Mr. Danevich asked the Interim Planning Director, Clay Mitchell to bring us up to date on this application.
Mr. Mitchell stated this application was first reviewed on June 4, 2001, where the applicant was asked to produce information and the Planning Board denied a waiver request for soil information and lot size calculations. The Applicant was on the Agenda for the July hearing and was not present, and has made no further contact with Mr. Mitchell.
The applicant was not present for today’s meeting.
Mr. Danevich stated the Board accepted to continue the case and tried to make contact with the applicant to get them back on the Agenda with no success.
MOTION: (Culbert/Scanzani) To deny the application based on no further contact by the applicant and failure to meet the subdivision regulations for soil survey.
VOTE: (7-0-0) The motion carries.
Map 3 Lot 130, 130-1 & 1302 A & A Realty Trust, Andrew Graham Trustee- Mammoth Road- proposed 17 Lot Subdivision for Approval
Mr. Peter Zohdi, Herbert Associates, presented new plans regarding the traffic, environmental and economic studies. Mr. Danevich requested Mr. Zhodi to describe the changes that were made to the application.
Mr. Zohdi stated that since the last meeting, Clay Mitchell had concerns that some of the lots might not comply based on the slope peaking 15-25%. After doing a color plan, two lots did not comply. Mr. Zohdi agreed to take the lot line out which brought the plan to 16 lots instead of 17. Lots 4 & 5 both become Lot 4.
Since the last meeting, Mr. Zhodi met with abutter Mr. Coleman. They walked the site and Mr. Zhodi showed Mr. Coleman where the future right of way will be and believes some of the problems were resolved with Mr. Coleman.
Mr. Zhodi met with CLD who had concerns regarding the site distance coming to Mammoth Road. Since the road was moved from the previous plan, they agreed to do some ditch line work on both sides of Mammoth Road and clear some trees.
Mr. Zhodi spoke with the Traffic Engineer from CLD and believes the only recommendation is to have a warning sign on Mammoth Road.
Mr. Zhodi stated at the last meeting that Mr. Jeff Gowan requested the Environmental study be submitted two weeks in advance. Mr. Zhodi submitted the study three weeks in advance. He believes they have complied with everything the Board had requested, as well as, all the information Clay Mitchell has requested. Also, Mr. Zhodi will comply with CLD’s request to add two formal catch basins on the road that will be added to the plan.
Louise Casseres of CLD presented to the Board a traffic impact evaluation. Ms. Casseres stated CLD conducted an (ATR) count across Mammoth Road in the vicinity of the site, which revealed that 73% of traffic was traveling southbound in the AM peak hours and 68% was traveling northbound in the PM peak hours. She noted that 14 will be using the site driveway and two will have direct access to Mammoth Road. She stated a total of 20 trips (5 entering, 15 exiting) in the AM peak hour. A total of 19 trips (12 entering, 7 exiting) in the PM peak hour. All movements out of the proposed drive, as well as, the northbound lefts into the drive, operate at Level of Service “B” or better for all scenarios. Also, under the build conditions, CLD accessed the need for left turn treatment. She stated volumes are not high enough to warrant a left turn lane, therefore, no left turn treatments are proposed or required at this time. Next, Ms.Casseres addressed the site distance issue. She stated the site distance to the south was measured approximately 425 feet and exceeds all design criteria.
Site distance to the north measured approximately 310’. Ms. Casseres made the following recommendations: 1) clear vegetation to the north of the site drives to potentially improve sight distance to the north; and 2) to install advance warning signs including a street nameplate.
Mr. Scanzani informed Ms. Cassesers that the existing driveways on Mammoth Road are coming off Mammoth Road as part of our approval process. The two corner lot driveways are being removed and are coming onto the proposed road for safety reasons. Mr. Scanzani asked Mr. Zhodi if they have the ability to do work on the north side lot that has an existing home on it. Mr. Zhodi answered yes that his client owns it. Mr. Scanzaini asked if we could cut to past the end of the driveway to give better site distance coming out of that road. Mr. Zhodi pointed out the problem area and stated that they own the area and will clear the area as part of the Boards requirements. Also, Mr. Brouillet from CLD said the ditch line in front of the lot be well defined and do more construction. Mr. Zhodi has no objections to that.
Mr. Scanzani expressed concern that the area on the curve stays clear and nothing is to be planted, so that the site distance remains safe on the state highway. Mr. Danevich would like a 20’ easement drawn in.
Mr. Zhodi responded he has no objection to adding a 20’, 30’or 40’ easement. Mr. Scanzini asked
Ms. Cassesers if a 20’ clearing straight back to the corner of the lot would solve the site issue?
Ms. Cassesers answered it would probably provide enough site distance to meet design criteria.
Mr. Scanzani then asked if they would be able to see to the end of the lot. Ms. Cassesers answered that with a 20’ clearing she would presume so, yes.
Mr. Danevich stated when he did the first site walk, it was recommended to put a permanent easement on that property for site distance purposes. He then asked if there were any more questions for the Board regarding traffic.
Mr. Danevich recapped the denial of the previous application with CLD regarding safety concerns. He then asked Mr. Brouillet to walk us through his concerns from the previous plan and how they are addressed differently with the new plan.
Mr. Brouillet of CLD described the profile that was not approved. He stated that what they provided was station 1 was the center line of Mammoth Road that had 2% going down and went to 3% for approximately 50 feet then got into a vertical curve and went off to 10%. Therefore, cars coming down Mammoth Road did not have ample time to stop. This is the plan that was not approved because of: 1) safety concerns 2) Mammoth Road being a heavy traveled road 3) ice in winter 4) site distance. Mr. Brouillet stated the applicant did not offer any alternatives to remedy that site distance. Mr. Brouillet then described the new plan as having a -2% slope for approximately 150 feet then goes to a +2% slope and then transitions from a 6% slope approximately 300 feet up to a 10% slope. This gives 200-250’ stopping distance before hitting the intersection. Mr. Brouillet pointed out Mr. Delucas previous concern regarding the 10’ foot fill side slope that is now an 8-foot fill with 3 to 1 side slopes and is a definite improvement with the new plan.
Mr. Danevich asked Mr. Brouillet if he had any remaining concerns regarding safety. Mr. Brouillet did not.
Mr. Brouillet and Mr. Zhodi are working on some drainage issues. He had Mr. Zhodi add some catch basins closer to the cul-de-sac, rearrange the configuration of some catch basins and also suggested trying to grade the detention area so it fits the natural contour of the land.
Mr. Scanzani expressed concern of water coming off the new road onto Mammoth Road especially in winter. Mr. Brouillet stated that they are going to stop the curbing well before it gets to Mammoth Road and that will force the water to flow into the street side ditches on Mammoth Road eventually into a catch basin. Mr. Scanzani again stressed the importance that no water come onto Mammoth Road that can freeze in the winter. Mr. Culbert asked about the possibility of putting steel grates at the end of the road where the water went into a trench. Mr. Zhodi responded that there is more drainage pre-development than post development.
Heather Storlazzi-Ward of Gove Environmental services addressed the Board regarding the environmental impact. Ms. Storlazzi-Ward handed out the Environment Impact Assessment to the Board. She characterized the property as being a small habitat parcel that is not unique to Southern New Hampshire. She stated that some of the habitat impacts would be 1) intolerant wild life species would move into the surrounding forested area 2) the more tolerate would stay and take over the area. The habitat impacts would be: 1) fragmentation 2) deep cuts 3) potential soil erosion 4) potential increase in predation by tolerant wildlife species (raccoon, skunk) and domesticated animals (cats, dogs) 5) removal of large mast producing trees. She then concluded that nothing unique or significant would be impacted from the developmental standard removal of the less tolerant wild life species. Mr. Danevich asked Ms. Ward if there was anything different that could be done to offset some of her concerns. She recommended leaving as many mass-producing trees as possible.
Mr. Danevich reviewed the Boards concerns: 1) economic study 2) traffic study 3) drainage concerns.
Mr. Danevich addressed Mr. Coleman regarding his concerns about the easement from one of the temporary cul-de-sacs and how it would access his parcel off to the side. Mr. Coleman answered he met with Mr. Zohdi and Mr. Sullivan they walked the site and addressed his concerns. Mr. Coleman showed them were the well was. Mr. Coleman had no other concerns.
There was no conservation input regarding waiver requests for the two cul-de-sacs.
Mr. Scanzani questioned the lot size calculations. Mr. Zohdi explained how the lot sizes are measured. Mr. Danevich requested a map plan showing all of the slopes. Mr. Zohdi will provide a color plan for the approval process.
Mr. Danevich asked Mr. Mitchell, the Interim Planning Director to comment. Mr. Mitchell stated the regulations are not clear. His concerns are: 1) Are these lots suitable given the size and the nature of the land? 2) Are people going to buy these lots with an acre of land with no land? 3) We need to provide lots that people can live on 4) we need to produce lots that meet technical requirements and the regulations, but in addition to that, provide lots people can live on.
Mr. Danevich asked if there was any public input regarding this parcel. There was no public input.
Mr. Danevich expressed his concern regarding lack of lot size calculations. Mr. Mitchell said Mr. Zohdi can and will produce a technical plan that will comply with regulations. Mr. Danevich asked Mr. Mitchell if this falls into administrative. Mr. Mitchell said no he does not believe so and that this will require further Board review.
Mr. Mitchell expressed his concern about useable lot size on lots 3-130, 3-130-6, 3-130-7, 3-130-16 & 3-130-17. Mr. Scanzani said that lots 3-130-6 & 7 slope away from the road and 3-130-16 & 17 slope down off of the hill towards the road. Mr. Scanzani expressed his concern over the yard drainage coming off onto Mammoth Road. His idea was to maybe have a slope and then to level off so that won’t happen.
Mr. Lynde stated he does not believe the cul-de-sacs to be temporary. Mr. Danevich said that the Board had Mr. Zohdi change from a permanent cul-de-sac to a temporary cul-de-sac because of the potential to develop the adjacent parcel.
Mr. Scanzani is looking for more of the following information for the next meeting. Mr. Scanzani’s concerns on this particular plan is the 20 foot wide drainage /slight distant easement on 3-130-2 which would go along the front property line. He thinks we need to put a note on the plan that increases the road crown to assure that the water run off goes from the middle of the road to the sides. Also to meet with the Fire Chief so that we can put on the plan, the location and size of the cisterns prior to approval. He would like to see the lot size calculation. Mr. Scanzani would like to see how lots 3-130-16 & 17 are going to be graded to make sure the drainage does not go back onto Mammoth Road.
Mr. Danevich requested that Mr. Zhodi update the plans with the following information: 1) to update the 25’ easement on the first parcel on Mammoth Road for site, distance, drainage and etc. 2) the notation for the cisterns on location 3) physical location marking of home on lot 4) increase the road crown 5) a very specific write up 3-130 3-130-6, 3-130-7, 3-130-16, 3-130-17 to address the usability concern.
Map 4 Lot 137 Meadowview Estates- Discussion of proposed location of pump station
Mr. Zhodi handed out to the Board plans for the proposed pump station that will get water to the subdivision. Mr. Zhodi pointed out where the proposed building will be. Mr. Zhodi said it will be a sound proof building. Mr. Zhodi said the three developers would split the cost of the booster station. Mr. Zhodi said that that there is back up power that is stored in the building. Mr. Danevich asked if there were any security lighting, alarms or sirens. Mr. Zhodi responded he did not know. Mr. Danevich brought up the subject of landscaping. Mr. Zhodi said he spoke with the Vice President of Pennachuck Water. He said that if the Board approves the station, he would supply Mr. Mitchell with a landscaping plan.
There was no public input.
MOTION: (Scanzani/Culbert) To approve the installation of the pump house as shown on the plan subject to the applicant working out an acceptable landscaping plan with the Planning Director.
VOTE: (7-0-0) The motion carries.
Map 13 Lot 167 Beaulieu Realty Trust, Georgette Dumont aka Georgette Beaulieu Trustee- Plower Road- Proposed Special Use Permit to convert a duplex into condominium form of ownership.
Mr. Scanzani read the list of abutters aloud. There were no persons present whom did not have their name read.
Attorney Dave Groff was present to represent the owner Georgette Dumont. He described the duplex that was constructed in the past two months. He provided the Board with a copy of the RSA and the Pelham Code that relates to the special permit. Mr. Groff is looking for a special permit to convert the duplex into a condominium.
Tina of 15 Powell Road expressed concern about future condominiums being built on the Lot. Mr. Danevich said they could not put any future developments on this land without subdividing the land, which requires Board approval.
MOTION: (Culbert/Scanzani) To accept the application for consideration.
VOTE: (7-0-0) The motion carries.
MOTION: (Culbert/Scanzani) To approve the special permit to convert to a duplex.
Mr. Scanzani thinks the Board should request a copy of the condominium agreement. Mr. Culbert does not think it is required. Attorney Groff said it will be on record and can be obtained at the Registry. Mr. Scanzani’s concern is what is stated in the condominium documents relative to how the common areas are treated and whose maintaining them and how. Attorney Groff replied each owner is responsible for his or her condominium.
Mr. Danevich listed the four applications that will be heard on August 20, 2001: Map 10 Lot 10-2; Map 9 Lot 9; Map 13 Lot 118 & 119; Map 12 Lot 41 & 43
Map 10 Lot 352 Neil Fineman – Currier Road & Island Pond Road – Proposed 16 Lot Subdivision for Consideration.
Mr. Scanzani read the list of abutters aloud. Mr. Joe Norkiewicz of 14 Island Pond Road was present at the meeting and did not receive notification. Mr. Danevich explained the procedure on how notification problems are handled. He stated two separate abutters were not notified and by State Law the Board cannot take jurisdiction or hear this plan.
Mr. Danevich identified Susan and Eric Larson in addition to Mr. Norkiewicz as not receiving abutter notification in compliance with State Law.
Mr. Danevich asked if Susan or Eric Larson were present. They were not present. Mr. Danevich went on to say that the Board will not hear this case. The Board will re-notify the abutters and discuss this application at the August 20, 2001 meeting.
July 16, 2001
MOTION: (Scanzani/Culbert) To approve the minutes from the July 16, 2001 meeting as amended.
VOTE: (7-0-0) The motion carries.
Mr. Culbert read a list of Bonds that were ready to expire. Mr. Mitchell stated that when a Bond expires, a check will be sent to the town. Mr. Danevich asked that the Bonds be reviewed in the next few weeks. Mr. Mitchell reviewed the Bonds from the Bond book and explained the terms to Mr. Culbert.
Mr. Mitchell stated he was meeting with the Selectman to discuss the future of the Planning Department with regards to: 1) space 2) hardware 3) software 4) equipment 5) and where money should be spent to make the Planning Department more efficient.
A motion was made and seconded to adjourn the meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:07 pm.
Charmaine M. Goyette