APPROVED

 

TOWN OF PELHAM

PLANNING BOARD WORK SESSION

April 15, 2002   

 

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

 

The Secretary, Bill Scanzani, called the roll:

 

PRESENT:

Victor Danevich, Paddy Culbert, Bill Scanzani, Peter McNamara, Henry DeLuca, Gael Ouellette, Alternate Robin Bousa, Selectmen’s Representative Hal Lynde (arrived shortly after the meeting started), Interim Planning Director Clay Mitchell

 

ABSENT:

 

None.

 

APPOINTMENTS

 

Park and Recreation

 

Mr. Bob Tryon, Director Park and Recreation, and Mr. David Cate, member of the Recreation Advisory Board met with the Planning Board to discuss Park and Recreation’s seven-year plan.  Mr. Danevich said that the Board was seeking formal direction regarding a potential investigation for developing an impact fee for park and recreation. 

 

Mr. Tryon began by reviewing Park and Recreation’s seven-year plan, which was created by using the format from the Office of State Planning’s population figures and census.  He compared what the Town currently had and what facilities should be developed over the next few years.  He said they were lacking with the locations as well as the number of facilities.  He said the seven-year report was based on the anticipated growth of the Town as well as the anticipated increase in population from 10, 914 in 2000 to 17,285 in 2020.  He said the Town currently had shortages in the number of facilities needed, both land space and physical buildings, since the department relied heavily upon the school district.  He said they needed space for non-physical activities. 

 

Mr. Danevich asked if Park and Recreation had given consideration to identifying the general proximity and desirable areas to locate the facilities.  Mr. Tryon said that they had focused on what was presently owned by the community.  Mr. Danevich said the subdivision regulations allowed the Board to investigate the possibility of land donations or contribution toward recreational facilities.  He said one of the concerns was the maintenance of a community park.  He said one of the planning forum discussions on the internet was regarding the division of Towns into zones to begin to amass impact fees for any development happening within a geographic area, which would systematically contribute to some type of facility within the region.  Mr. Tryon said that Park and Recreation had not reviewed dividing the Town, but had focused on the creation of community parks within specific neighborhoods.  He said that a community park should have the following characteristics: 1) approximately two acres, high and dry; 2) flat portion for baseball/soccer field; 3) approximately 10% of area left for small children play area; 4) parking for 10-15 cars; 5) water available (for sprinklers and drinking, not restrooms). 

 

Mr. Cate wanted to know if impact fees could be used to obtain additional help.  Mr. Danevich answered no.  Mr. Scanzani said that an impact fee could be used for building the park or recreational facility, but not the operation of a park.  Mr. Danevich added that land purchase could also be included.  Mr. Scanzani discussed the Office of State Planning’s statistics and believed that there were certain references that didn’t necessarily fit the needs of the Town.  Mr. Tryon discussed the Town’s current field usage and believed that there was a general need for multi-purpose fields.  Mr. Scanzani discussed the CIP.   He noted the importance of Park and Recreation being included in the CIP, so that a valid and defendable impact fee schedule could be created, therefore, some of the cost of the facilities could be paid for with the development that was occurring today which was driving the park and recreation need.  He said that the Envision Pelham surveys noted that the number one and two requests were in the park and recreation area.  He suggested that Park and Recreation’s need be more prominent in the CIP since the voters wanted park and recreation activities.  He said the Planning Board would need a way to facilitate a way to pay for the things without solely using a tax base.  Mr. Danevich said it was critical to create backup data/statistics so that a defendable impact fee schedule could be developed. 

 

Mr. Tryon spoke of the need for funds to have professional people review sites.  Mr. Lynde said that if Mr. Tryon met with the Selectmen the needs of Park and Recreation could be discussed.  Mr. Scanzani discussed the needs for obtaining estimates for the creation of a field so that the estimated value could be figured out in an impact fee.  Mr. Danevich said that it was suggested (by Steve Heucket of NRPC) to have NRPC take the current data and bring it to a more systematic plan.  He believed that the plan should be a master plan with priorities listed in front.

 

Mr. Lynde asked what the population size should be for a community park.  Mr. Tryon said he would review and provide a number.  Mr. Lynde discussed the problem with multi-use fields being used year-round, such as Muldoon, because they don’t have the opportunity to rejuvenate.  He also spoke of the need for indoor facilities. 

 

Mr. DeLuca asked if it would be helpful to Mr. Tryon if they knew exactly where the parcels were, so that they could review what needed to be done on the property.  Mr. Tryon said it would be helpful because not all parcels were clear enough to simply add a field. 

 

Mr. Culbert was not an advocate of neighborhood parks, but would rather, in lieu of having an acre or two, like the developer to voluntarily give money to the recreation department for them to utilize.  He said he was an advocate of having larger regional parks.  He asked if the municipal building would help for indoor meeting space.  Mr. Tryon said that there was more than one group that needed to utilize the space.  He said he could review further. 

 

Mr. Danevich discussed the request by residents for a skateboard park.  Mr. Tryon said a skateboard park was listed as number six on the priority list.  Mr. Scanzani told Mr. Tryon to fill out a CIP for and return it for consideration. 

 

Mr. Danevich said the Board was in agreement to pursue the investigation, research and potential development of an impact fee to support Park and Recreation.   

 

MOTION:

(Culbert/McNamara) To direct Mr. Bob Tryon and the Recreation Advisory Committee to begin working with the CIP to help develop the seven-year Park and Recreation plan.

 

VOTE:

(7 - 0 - 0)  The motion carries. 

 

Mr. Danevich discussed the process for implementing an impact fee schedule.

 

Joint discussion with the Conservation Commission regarding roles and responsibility

 

Mr. Bob Yarmo, Chairman - Conservation Commission introduced the members of the Conservation Commission.  Also present was Ms. Bobby Jean Wilder of West Environmental. 

 

Mr. Danevich discussed the role of the Planning Board.  Mr. Scanzani discussed the need for an EIS, which would identify parcels that might need to be protected.  Mr. Yarmo said the Natural Resources Inventory was near completion.  He was hopeful that the mapping would be done within a month.  He said there was a conservation fund and they needed to start planning how the money would be spent.  He noted that the studies were in the process of being compiled.  Mr. Yarmo discussed the need for clerical support.  He discussed the issues the Conservation Commission was working on to better expedite information.

 

Mr. Yarmo said that the main concern of the Conservation Commission was the lack of information contained in the environmental reports.  Mr. Danevich said that the two important issues were 1) finalizing the Natural Resources Inventory; 2) standardized EIA approach.  He suggested that Conservation’s EIA proposal be included as an appendix to the subdivision regulations. 

 

Mr. Yarmo noted the importance of a consultant working for the Town, not the developer.  There was a brief discussion regarding how, and by whom, plans were reviewed.  Ms. Wilder felt that having one person review a plan helped maintain consistency.  She recommended that the developer have someone compile an EIA and then have the Town choose a specific person to do an additional review.  Mr. Mitchell said that the statutes provided the Board with the authority to take any professional information and have it sent out to a third party for review and have it funded by the developer.  There was a discussion regarding plans already received by the Planning Department.  Mr. Mitchell will review plans received and determine which plans will be sent out for third party review (based upon if the plans were submitted under the old or new regulations).  Mr. Culbert asked what the credentials would be for the third party company.  Mr. Mitchell said that they would have to be at least a soil scientist and wildlife biologist and others for more specific reviews.  Mr. Culbert asked that a wetland scientist be added. 

 

Mr. Danevich asked the Board to review the proposal and provide commentary to Mr. Mitchell.  Mr. Mitchell will materially reorganize and reformat the document into the subdivision regulations for possible adoption during the May 20, 2002 meeting.  Mr. Danevich explained the posting process. 

 

Mr. DeLuca discussed the process of obtaining professional opinions and asked if the New Hampshire Fish and Game were considered professional.  Mr. Danevich answered yes and said that they were a recognized resource.  Mr. DeLuca said there was a recent application discussed in which there appeared to be conflicting information.  He wanted to know how the Board could determine if the applicant was being truthful with their reports.  Mr. Scanzani said it was the Board who made the final decision based on the information provided to them.  Mr. Mitchell said that the Board did not have to agree with its own experts.  Ms. Wilder believed that the Natural Resources Inventory would cover most of the information. 

 

Mr. Danevich asked that any changes be submitted to Mr. Mitchell within five days so that the Board could post and review during the May 20, 2002 meeting. 

 

Mr. Culbert said that he reviewed plans for road connectivity and life/safety. 

 

Mr. Lynde suggested that Mr. Yarmo draft a memo to the Selectmen (through the Town Administrator) informing of his needs. 

 

CLD review of subdivision regulations

 

Mr. Tom Sommers, CLD met with the Board to discuss proposed changes to the subdivision regulations.  Mr. Danevich asked that Board members review and provide comment within the next week.  Mr. Sommers discussed the bond format document.  There was a brief discussion regarding bond release schedule and what percent should be retained.  Mr. Danevich asked that signage (both temporary and permanent) be included in the construction process.  Mr. Scanzani asked that the length of road be included on the form. 

 

Mr. Sommers will forward the document via e-mail for comments.  Mr. Danevich will post a meeting for adoption on May 20, 2002. 

 

The Board discussed traffic studies.  Mr. Danevich said that the Board would publish its opinion for public review. 

 

Mr. Scanzani asked that road/pavement width be noted on the form.  Mr. Mitchell noted that the Safety Committee saw no need for 26’ wide roads.  Mr. Danevich disagreed.  He said that when cars were parked on both sides of a 26’ wide street, it was difficult for a car to pass, not to mention safety equipment. 

 

Mr. Sommers recommended that flown topography would be allowed with stipulated requirements.  Mr. Culbert discussed the past problem with flown topography.  Mr. Sommers felt that if it were to be included, guidelines would need to be stipulated.  Mr. Danevich asked him to come up with a proposal. 

 

Bond reduction/release

 

ML 8-22 - Gaudet Lane - request for bond release

 

Mr. Mitchell said that CLD (Town Engineer) had investigated and recommended the bond be reduced to $38,000 (37% will be retained). 

 

MOTION:

(Scanzani/Culbert) To reduce the bond to $38,000, per CLD’s recommendation.

 

VOTE:

(7 - 0 - 0)  The motion carries. 

 

MINUTES REVIEW

 

April 1, 2002

 

MOTION:

(Culbert/Lynde) To accept the minutes of the April 1, 2002 Board meeting as amended. 

 

VOTE:

(7 - 0 - 1)  The motion carries.  Mr. DeLuca abstained. Ms. Bousa voted.

 

DISCUSSION

 

Mr. Lynde informed that the Selectmen would interview three applicants for Planning Director.  He said that the Selectmen conducted interviews for Town Administrator and had reached a decision regarding the position. 

 

Mr. Lynde asked the Board to reconsider its actions regarding the decision for the V & G Development/Dutton Road subdivision based upon questionable representations made by the applicant.  He discussed correspondence from Mr. Eric Orff of NH Fish and Game (who is a wildlife biologist).  He said that Mr. Orff noted the importance of the southerly connection because it connected two separate wildlife areas.  Mr. Lynde said that the Board heard testimony from the applicant who said that Mr. Orff had not walked the site.  He told the Board that he had a conversation with Mr. Orff who informed him that the applicant’s representative had not spoken with him, and in fact he had walked the area and made written recommendations in October 2001.  Mr. Lynde asked again that the Board reconsider its actions based on questionable testimony.  He said the Board had received testimony from an expert in the field that rebuts the statements of the applicant. 

 

There was a brief discussion regarding the conflicting testimony and if the Board would take any additional action.  Mr. Lynde questioned if the proposed new road design would affect additional abutters that would need to be notified.  Mr. Danevich said that the Board had acknowledged the issue, discussed it and made a determination at the previous meeting regarding abutter notification. 

 

Mr. Danevich said he would schedule an agenda item for the May 6, 2002 meeting.

 

REQUEST FOR NON-PUBLIC SESSION

 

MOTION:

Request for a non-public session per RSA 91-A:3,II,e (legal matters).

 

ROLL CALL:

(6 - 0 - 1) Mr. Danevich-Yes, Mr. Culbert-Yes, Mr. Scanzani-Yes, Mr. McNamara-Yes, Mr. DeLuca-Yes, Ms. Ouellette-Yes, Mr. Lynde-abstained.

 

Mr. Danevich noted that when the Board returned, after the non-public session, the Board would not take any other action publicly, except to seal the minutes of the non-public session and to adjourn the meeting.  The Board entered into a non-public session at approximately 9:20 pm.  Also present were Interim Planning Director Clay Mitchell and Alternate Ms. Robin Bousa.

 

The Board returned to public session.

 

MOTION:

(    ) To seal the minutes of the non-public session indefinitely.

 

VOTE:

(     )

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

 A motion was made and seconded to adjourn the meeting.

 

The motion was adjourned at approximately      pm.

 

                                                                                                Respectfully submitted,

 

                                                                                                Charity A. L. Willis

                                                                                                Recording Secretary