PB Minutes 04.18.2005

APPROVED

TOWN OF PELHAM

PLANNING BOARD MEETING

April 18, 2005

The Chairman, Bill Scanzani called the meeting to orde= r at 7:30 pm.

The Secretary, Gael Ouellette, called the roll:

PRESENT:

Paddy Culbert, Peter McNamara, Gael Ouellette, Bill Scanzani, Robin Bousa, Ms. Christine Medeiros, Selectmen Representative V= ictor Danevich, Alternate Kenneth Dunne, Planning Director Will D’Andrea<= /p>

ABSENT:

None

OLD BUSINESS

Ma= p 32 Lot 1-146 – Spaulding Hill Development, LLC &= #8211; Spaulding Hill Road – Conceptual Discussion – Proposed 19-Lot Subdivision

Ms. Ouellette read the list of abutters aloud. There were no persons present who did not have their name read, or who had a problem with notification. The notification for Francis Cronin was marked ‘not deliverable’ because it was not certifiable in Canada. The file did not contain any writt= en correspondence from abutters. &= nbsp;

Mr. Peter Zohdi of Herbert Associates, representing the applicant, reviewed the plan with the Board. He said he wanted to discuss the r= oad profile and the location of the subdivision (off Sherburne Road) near the old subdiv= ision known as Tamposi’s land. In the past a subdivision was done adding Nicolas Lane and extending Marie Avenue; at that time the Board wanted a right-of-way to Tamposi’s land therefore there was a land transfer to retain the right-of-way. He said Tamposi now wanted to subd= ivide their 90-acres into nineteen lots of various sizes. Mr. Zohdi said he knew the Board w= ould want to discuss the road connectivity and asked if it was preferred to exte= nd the future road (approximately 767feet) back to Spaulding Hill Road. He said they would be using Pennic= huck water, who had already drilled the wells and submitted to the state. He said his client was working with Pennichuck to take over the water system; hydrants would also be added.

Mr. Scanzani wanted to know the length of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Zohdi said fr= om Marie Avenue to the loop was approximately 1675 feet with an additional 3900 feet around the loop. He said it would be sim= ple to take the loop out and add a cul-de-sac to meet the subdivision regulations.

Mr. Zohdi then reviewed the road profile with = the Board. He said he would like = to reduce the amount of cut at the beginning of the proposed road; currently it shows 2%, but he requested a 4% grade.&nbs= p; He said they would like to reduce the cutting (due to ledge). He then discussed the grading (11%= ) for connection to Spaulding Hill Road. The connection from the proposed r= oad to Spaulding Hill Road would be between lots 146-6 and 146-7.

Mr. McNamara asked if lots 146 & 146-13 we= re being left with considerable acreage for further subdivision. Mr. Zohdi said the owner of the pr= operty wanted to have the top of the hill possibly for his own home; there was no further subdivision ‘per se’ planned. Mr. McNamara said his concern was = if the land were capable of further subdivision, he was not sure if there would be= a problem meeting the cul-de-sac regulations. Mr. Zohdi didn’t believe the= lot could be subdivided. Mr. McNa= mara confirmed that Pennichuck did not own the water facility (as it was). Mr. Zohdi said there was no water facility; Pennichuck drilled six wells in the area and got sufficient water= to do the development; they submitted approval to the state, but had not yet received it.

Mr. Danevich noted that conceptual review was non-binding. His preferences = were to have the lot lines squared off; concern regarding lots 2-69-3, 2-65 & 1-161 if cul-de-sac extended (based on distance), with that, he was in favo= r of the connection to Spaulding Hill Road; closer look by Town engineer regardi= ng 11% grading should be reviewed prior to waiver being considered.

Ms. Ouellette asked what the piece of land was= to the left of lot 1-146-3 to Spaulding Hill Road.&nb= sp; Mr. Zohdi said his client owned a narrow strip of land that would be sold to Mr. Roger Montbleau. = It would be part of the subdivision as a land transfer to abutter (to be part = of lot 1-149).

Mr. McNamara asked if there was a geographical reason for lots 146-14 & 15 to be three and four acres respectfully. Mr. Zohdi said the Department of Environmental Services (‘DES’) didn’t allow building with= in the well radius; the two wells proposed for use within the subdivision were located in the center of the proposed loop road each had a 200 foot well radius.

Mr. Culbert asked what the slope was onto Marie Drive= . Mr. Zohdi said it was designed at = 3% for approximately 225 – 250 feet, which may be changed to 100 feet per the Town’s requirement.

Mr. Scanzani said he wanted the Board’s opinion regarding the proposed loop road, and/or a connection to Spaulding Hill Road. Mr. Zohdi said a right-of-way coul= d be retained from the proposed road to Spaulding Hill Road.&nb= sp; As shown, Mr. Culbert said he would have a hard time supporting the plan. Mr. Scanzani asked if a cul-de-sac was designed if Mr. Zohdi could work the plan. Mr. Zohdi said he probably ‘work’ the plan; if not, he could connect the subdivision; he w= ould work with his client to amend the plan.&nb= sp; Mr. Zohdi said his client’s objective was to not have a road l= ike anything else in the Town. Ms. Bousa noted that the ‘one-way in’ and ‘one-way out’ went back to Marie Avenue<= /st1:address>; she wanted the Board to be clear on the definition. Mr. Zohdi said he could have a cul-de-sac at 2400 feet and add a cul-de-sac, but he wanted to discuss furt= her with his client. Mr. Culbert = said because it was unknown what would happen at lot 146-13, he would like the connecting road, and if not, he would like there to at least be a right-of-= way retained. Ms. Medeiros was in= favor of a road. Mr. McNamara= said he would be in favor of anything that complied with the 2400-foot limit. Ms. Ouellette and Ms. Bousa agreed= . Mr. Culbert said if a cul-de-sac w= as designed, he still wanted a right-of-way.&= nbsp; Mr. Scanzani said he liked the loop road with the connection to Spaulding Hill Road.

Ms. Bousa asked what was beyond lots 2-65 & 1-161. Mr. Zohdi reviewed and discussed the ownership of the lots; he was unsure about lot 2-65. Ms. Bousa felt it was important to= know where the lots lead to. Mr. Z= ohdi said he would highlight that section of the tax map the next time he came before the Board.

PUBLIC INPUT

Mr. Michael Soby, 9 Marie Avenue, recommended that th= e Town engineer take time when reviewing the new road. He said it would be very steep and= there are a lot of rock and ledge in the area.&n= bsp; He was concerned about emergency access onto the road. Another concern was the distance f= rom the proposed road to the homes, wells and driveways to the intersections, w= hich may be in violation.

Mr. James Fischer, 19 Scenic View Drive, discussed his concerns such as water erosion (to which he provided photographs), based up= on the slope of the applicant’s property. He discussed the problems he curre= ntly had with water on his property. Mr. Fischer said he needed a buffer from the proposed subdivision to stop furth= er erosion of his property. He n= oted everyone in the area had more than one well and was unsure what would happen with further development. Giv= en the opportunity, Mr. Fischer would gladly tie in to Pennichuck water. Blasting was also a concern.

Ms. Eleanor Burton, Spaulding Hill Road, said her quest= ion was about water and wanted to know the location of the proposed Pennichuck wells. Mr. Zohdi said the wel= ls were already in place; he showed the location and discussed the testing that Pennichuck did and submitted to the state.= Ms. Burton said if blasting would occur in the area, she was concern= ed what would happen to the vein of water that serviced her home. Mr. Scanzani said there would defi= nitely have to be a blast survey.

Mr. Chris Dargue, 35 Spaulding Hill Road, wanted to k= now who would be responsible for the connected portion of Spaulding Hill Road because there w= ere a lot of sharp curves and steep grades. He has small children and was concerned with increased traffic. Mr. Scanzani said the Town would be responsible for the road once it was built to Town specifications. Mr. Dargue said there was a blind = curve and steep slope at his driveway and reiterated his concern with increased traffic. Mr. Scanzani said the Board would walk the site and see if there were additional improvements that may need to be done. He said = at this point the plan was preliminary.

Mr. Bob Lamoureaux, Blueberry Circle, who was not an ab= utter, discussed the proposed wells. He felt the abutters should be notified when the wells were tested to see if t= here were any problems. He discuss= ed a situation that occurred in Dra= cut, MA in which abutters ran ou= t of water during well testing. Mr. Scan= zani said the wells were community wells serviced by Pennichuck, not by individu= al wells. Mr. Zohdi said when the wells were pumped, they notified the immediate abutters and monitored the area. He said the water compa= ny had to comply with state regulations.

There were no further questions.

DI= SCUSSION

Pl= anning Board Initiatives and Goals 2005 and<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Site= Plan Regulations

A copy of the Planning Board initiatives and g= oals from 2003 was handed out to Board members.= Mr. Scanzani said he wanted input from the members within the next w= eek if there were other items that should be added to the list. He said during the past year the B= oard had worked hard with updating the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning. Mr. Scanzani wanted the update pro= cess to start earlier so the Board could update items that should be updated suc= h as multi-family housing better defined (in site and subdivision regulations), = as well as any further subdivision and zoning changes. A master list should be created and possibly split into sub-committees to complete tasks.

NEW BUSINESS

Ma= p 41 Lot 10-346 – Kevin Armstrong – Bridge Street – Site Plan Review – Proposed Storage of Logs in relation to a Logging Business

Mr. Scanzani informed that the applicant reque= sted that the hearing be postponed until May 2, 2005. The Board granted the request.

Ma= p 35 Lots 6-113, 113-1 & 113-2 – KLN Construction/Don Nicolls – Conceptual Discussion of Proposed Site Plan to consolidate three lots into = one lot and propose to construction of a 15,600SF building to be used as a dry goods store

Ms. Ouellette read the list of abutters aloud. There w= ere no persons present who did not have their name read, or who had a problem with notification. The file did not contain any written correspondence from abutters.

Mr. Peter Zohdi of Herbert Associates, representing the applicant, reviewed the plan with the Board. He said in the late 1980’s t= he land was subdivided into three lots at the corner of Old Bridge Street South and Route 38, site plans had been approved a couple of times, but nothing h= ad been built; later a site plan was done for Mr. Don Nicolls and a unit was built. He reviewed the specif= ics of the site including the current drainage.&n= bsp; Since then, Mr. Nicolls has purchased the abutting two lots and Mr. Zohdi was presenting the site plan for those lots. Mr. Zohdi said the plan was to com= bine the existing lot and abutting two lots.&nb= sp; He noted there was an existing building and driveway (with access fr= om Route 38). He then reviewed t= he proposed plan, showing the parking and 15,600SF building. He said the wet areas were flagged= by Gove Environmental and would show the plan at a later meeting. He discussed the drainage and said= it would be further reviewed with his client.= He noted that the proposed building would like the Stone Cottage building across the street, which his client also owned. Mr. Zohdi said one reason he came = before the Board was to find out if the Board wanted the access to be from Route 3= 8, or from the existing access; he would rather not have a curb cut (though it= was believed they had enough area for a curb cut).

Mr. Scanzani believed one concern (after the t= hree lots were combined) would be making sure that the abutter buffer on the existing buffer was fixed as well as making sure there was a buffer along t= he back of the parcel. He said he wanted to make sure that the existing fence was repaired properly. He also wanted to make sure there = was a noise buffer due to the cutting that would occur. Mr. Scanzani said he wanted to see= the distance between the lot access and Old Bridge Street South. Mr. Zohdi said there was approxima= tely 55ft.-60ft. from the existing culvert to a future access. He invited the Board to view the s= ite.

Mr. Danevich preferred the access to be from t= he existing access, rather than an additional curb cut onto Route 38.

Ms. Ouellette wanted to know if delivery trucks would be coming in from Ol= d Bridge Street South.= Mr. Scanzani said they currently did for the existing building. He was concerned with the access f= rom Route 38 and the site distances from driveway accesses. He noted that the road was narrow heading south on Route 38. Ms. Bousa said any driveways across the street may further complicate the situation.

Mr. McNamara confirmed that the proposed would= be a dry goods store. Mr. Zohdi answered yes. Mr. McNamara as= ked if there were any specific uses in mind. Mr. Zohdi said they didn’t know who the tenants would be, which was the same case as the Stone Cottage (which is also a dry goods building). Mr. McNamara wante= d to know the intensity of the traffic, hours etc. Mr. Zohdi said he would speak with= his client, but didn’t believe his client would have any idea at this point.

Mr. Dunne said if the building was a store, a tractor trailer could not access. Mr. Zohdi said it was not designed for that purpose. Mr. Dunne asked if the applicant w= as hoping for a professional building. Mr. Zohdi answered yes.

PUBLIC INPUT

Mr. John Lyon, Bridge Street, submitted a leaflet = to the Board that showed the drainage, which he further discussed. He said there was a stream that we= nt through the applicant’s property, to his property and further went in= to Beaver Brook. His main concer= n was the diversion of water flow from the east of Route 38 onto the west side. He said he began making the state = aware of water situation beginning in 1988. Mr. Lyon reiterated his concern of water diversion affecting not only him, but also residents further down. Mr. Zohdi said the culvert was shown on the plan and asked that the Board walk the site. He said = Mr. Lyon was correct, the water flowed for approximately 10-11 months out of th= e year. He said one reason he didn’t= want the additional curb cut onto Route 38 was because he didn’t want to disturb the culvert. He said = the Planning Director and the Town Engineer would be reviewing the drainage des= ign; the pre- and post-development drainage had to remain the same.

Ms. Lynn Day, who resided on the corner of Lucy Avenue= and Old Bridge Street South<= /st1:Street>, opposed the proposal of combining the three lots. She said the first time she came b= efore the Board was in 1998, when Mr. Nicolls was putting in a dry goods store. At that point the Board was questi= oned what a dry goods store was, however no definitive answer was given. Ms. Day discussed the type of busi= nesses that were Mr. Nicolls’ tenants (a motorcycle shop, car detailing and = an insulation company). She said= there were problems with noise late in the evening and early in the morning, profanity being yelled and garage doors being slammed. She said rocket scientists lived i= n one of the houses purchased by Mr. Nicolls and there were loud noises from rock= et fuel being tested. She didn&#= 8217;t feel the abutters should put up with what was going on. Ms. Day said there was a bonded is= sue to provide eighty arbor vides to provide a buffer, which was not provided; a f= ence was installed, but at this point was falling down. She said the abutters had no priva= cy and no buffer. She didn’t b= elieve the applicant was going to put a professional building in.

Ms. Barbara Gendy (who resided at her mother’s house), 3 C= hagnon Lane, agreed with Ms. Day’s testimony. She wanted to know where the gasol= ine and oil from the car and motorcycle shops were going. She said she checked with the Fire Department regarding the rocket scientist and was told that he was state licensed. She discussed the f= ence, trees and retention pond that were supposed to be maintained, but were not. She said Mr. Nicolls sig= ned a waiver that he had no intent to cut any trees on ML113-2 , however all the trees had been cut. She said blasting had occurred but the Fire Department had not been notified. Ms. Gendy then circulated photogra= phs of the fence, the back area showing no trees were planted, retention pond, motorcycle shop, car refurbishing building, and the rocket scientist’s house. She then discussed the problems that had occurred in connection with her well water. She had water tests done before and after the building was constructed and had dramatic differences. She discussed situations that she believed were caused by the changes in the water, such as her daughter being diagnosed with diabetes, her mother being diagnosed with cancer and both her and her neighbor having animals (from different litters) being diagnosed wi= th both diabetes and cancer. Ms.= Gendy asked that the Town protect the residents.= She submitted water tests (for VOC) and is awaiting the results. She believed there was something w= rong with the water because it was too much of a coincidence. She asked if the land was going to= be built up as high as the previous KLN building. Mr. Zohdi said there would be some grading, but the proposed building would not be as high. Mr. Scanzani asked if Ms. Gendy ha= d VOC tested in the past. Ms. Gendy= said she had tested her water, but not for VOC because the bike shop was not the= re yet. The reason she was doing additional tests now was because after speaking with neighbors and hearing their stories of health issues she believed there may be a relation.

Mr. Joe Fournier, Chagnon Lane, (who was one house aw= ay from being an abutter) said they had been maintaining two drainage ditches = (one on each side of his house) because of the increase in water flow. He had a lot of data from previous meetings (in connection with the previous building) that showed what had not been done. He didn’t be= lieve adding another building would improve the abutter’s situation. He wanted the definition of a dry = goods store clarified. He submitted photographs for review that showed the original building being constructed = as well as recent items such as the fire lane (which did not go around the building), a Valvoline plastic canister and white drums (laying over). Mr. Fournier said he intended to h= ave his water tested and would make the results available to the Board. He asked for a definition of ̵= 6;dry goods’. Mr. Zohdi said = the definition of ‘dry goods’ was a term used by the state in connection with septic capacity (and not have big use of water). He said he didn’t know the tenants, but said they were complying with the state DES ‘dry goods’ store. He said w= hen he comes in to the Board, he would give an approximate definition of the tenan= ts; he noted that tenants could change and it would be up to the Code Enforceme= nt Officer if the Board’s approval would be needed. Mr. Scanzani said there was no definition of dry goods within the Town’s Zoning, Subdivision Regulat= ions or Site Regulation; because the parcel is zoned business, anything thatR= 17;s allowed in the business district is technically allowed on the parcel. He said Mr. Zohdi was providing th= e DES requirement for septic requirements. Mr. Fournier confirmed that anything that used a lot of water was not considered dry goods. He felt= it was a loose interpretation that was misleading. He wanted to make sure that it didn’t happen again.

Ms. Gendy asked how many businesses were inten= ded to go into the proposed building. Mr. Zohdi said he was unsure. He reiterated if the business changed, they had to present the busin= ess to the Town for review. Ms. G= endy said she would like the abutters to be provided with a clearer definition of dry goods.

Ms. Janice Fournier, <= st1:address w:st=3D"on">Chagnon Lane, submitted to the Boar= d a correspondence packet dating back to 1984.= She discussed the type of information contained in the packet. She didn’t feel that a motor= cycle shop was a dry goods store. S= he also discussed the problems with the current tenants/businesses.

Ms. Gendy provided the Board with a business c= ard from the motorcycle shop. Whe= n she questioned the tenants about not having a sign, one responded something abo= ut the Town not allowing it, the other said the landlord (Mr. Nicolls) didn= 217;t want a sign. She said the Tow= n was not aware of the motorcycle shop.

Ms. Day said she would like a traffic study done. She discussed current t= raffic problems. She questioned if t= he property would be rental, or if it would be business condominiums. Mr. Zohdi did not know. Mr. Scanzani said currently there = was only one proposed entrance and the Board seemed to prefer that there was no= cut onto Route 38. He said the To= wn engineer would review the traffic situation.

Mr. Fournier discussed the traffic situation at Brooks, which he felt would parallel the Old Bridge Street South intersectio= n onto Route 38.

Mr. Scanzani said the buffer to the residential zone would be important. He s= aid the entire site would be reviewed including the existing stockade fence that was in disrepair. For the pub= lic’s information, Mr. Scanzani discussed what the Planning Board would review and said if there were additional concerns, residents should inform the Planning Department/Code Enforcement. =

Mr. Dunne suggested that the Board review a specific definition of dry goods. Mr. Scanzani was unsure if the Board should define dry goods since it was a term used by the DES specifically for septic design and was too broad= a category; the Town’s zoning clearing defines what is allowed. Mr. Culbert was dismayed that the = arbor vides were not planning and said he would want 6-foot arbor vides planted f= or an immediate screening. Mr. Scanzani said the Board should review how buffers were maintained.

Ms. Medeiros asked if there were any issues wi= th flooding across the street with the storage area. Mr. Zohdi was not aware of any problems.

Mr. Scanzani suggested that the Board walk the site when the plan was submitted.

MINUTES

March 21, 2005=

MOTION:<= o:p>

(McNamara/Ouellette) To approve t= he March 21, 2005 meeting minutes as amended.

VOTE:

(7-0-0) The motion carri= ed.

April 4, 2005

The applicant for the May Lane case submitted a packet containing changes they would like to be made to the minutes. Ms. Ouellette said if the minutes = were going to be used in a civil case she wanted them to be verbatim, rather than amending the Board’s minutes to the way someone else remembers them to be. Mr. McNamara said the min= utes were not supposed to be verbatim, but rather to fairly accurately reflect conversation, testimony and the Board’s deliberation. He said if there was litigation, or other controversy down the road, both Ms. Taris and Mr. Luke Hurley could t= ake issue with what was included in the minutes; unless there was something contrary to the memory of the Board he didn’t feel they should be changed. Ms. Ouellette questi= oned what the Board had to provide. Mr. D’Andrea said by statute, minutes only have to reflect who made what motion and what the outcomes were; what the Board has for minutes far excee= ds the state’s requirements. Ms. Ouellette said the applicant could get a copy of the tape. Mr. D’Andrea answered yes. Ms. Ouellette said the Board was n= ot held to doing anything, other than approving the minutes as received and saw them. Mr. Culbert added as th= e Board believes them to be. Ms. Ouel= lette said if the applicant wanted anything different, they would go from that po= int further. Mr. Scanzani said typically the Board’s minutes summarized and preferred to continue al= ong that trend.

MOTION:<= o:p>

(McNamara/Culbert) To approve the= April 4, 2005 = meeting minutes as amended.

VOTE:

(7-0-0) The motion carri= ed.

DATE SPECIFIED PLANS – <= st1:date Month=3D"5" Day=3D"2" Year=3D"2005" w:st=3D"on">May 2, 2005:<= o:p>

Map 41 Lot = 10-346 – Kevin Armstrong – Bridge Street – Site Plan Review – Propos= ed Storage of Logs in relation to a Logging Business

ADJOURNMEN= T

MOTION:<= o:p>

(Culbe= rt/McNamara) To adjourn the meeting.

VOTE:

(7-0-0) The motion carri= ed.

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:30 p.m.

&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Respectfully submitted,

&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Charity A. L. Willis

&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Recording Secretary