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.
PUBLIC INPUT
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.
VOTE: (6-1-0)
DISCUSSION:
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.
MINUTES REVIEW
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.
Respectfully
submitted,
Charmaine
M. Goyette
Recording
Secretary