PB Minutes 12.19.2005

APPROVED

TOWN OF PELHAM

PLANNING BOARD MEETING

December 19, 2005

The Chairman, Bill Scanza= ni called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm.

The Secretary, Gael Ouell= ette called the roll:

PRESENT:

Bill Scanzani, Peter Mc= Namara, Paddy Culbert, Gael Ouellette, Robin Bousa, Selectmen Representative Victor Danevich (was present, but joined the Board after the meeting had commenc= ed), Planning Director Jeff Gowan

ABSENT:

Christine Medeiros, Alt= ernate Bob Yarmo, Alternate Ken Dunne

ADMINISTRATIVE<= /p>

Map 22 Lot<= /st1:place> 8-20 & 22-9 Fireside Homesteads, LLC – He= ather Lee Lane – Request for Bond Release

Mr. Gowan said a letter had been received from Dufresne-Henry (Town’s Engineer) recommending that the bond be released, except for $5000, to comp= lete some minor work in the spring.

MOTION:

(Culbert/McNamara) To r= educe the bond to $5000 (as recommended by Dufresne-Henry).

VOTE:

(5-0-= 0) The motion carried.

Map 6 Lot 4-185 Detellis, Geoffrey – Ro= cky Hill Road &= #8211; Request for Bond Reduction

Mr. Gowan said a letter had been received from Dufresne-Henry (Town’s Engineer) recommending that the bond only be reduced by $5000. Subsequent to the letter, Mr. Gowa= n had a meeting with Mr. Detellis and a representative from Dufresne-Henry (Seth), went back out, checked items and found that they had missed some work that = had been completed. A revised amo= unt has now been submitted; the recommendation was to reduce the present bond by $59,621.90 which would leave $14,279.10.&n= bsp; Mr. Gowan agreed with the assessment.

MOTION:

(Culbert/McNamara) To r= etain $14,279.10 in the bond (as recommended by Dufresne-Henry)

VOTE:

(5-0-= 0) The motion carried.

Mr. Danevich joined the Board.

Map 38 Lot 1-116 Cormier & Saurman Building, LLC – Litchfield Circle Extension – Request for Bond Reduction

Mr. Gowan said Dufresne-Henry (Town’s Engineer) recommended that the bond= be reduced to $142,745.60 (30% of the original bond).

MOTION:

(Culbert/Ouellette) To = reduce the bond to $142,745.60 (as recommended by Dufresne-Henry)

VOTE:

(5-0-= 0) The motion carried.

NEW BUSINESS

Ma= p 41 Lot 6-138 K&K Equipment – Pulpit Rock Road – Site Plan Review of proposed 120’ x 60’ Wa= rehouse Building for Heavy Equipment Rental

Mr. Scanzani informed that the application had been withdrawn, it will go to the Board of Adjustment and then come back to= the Board.

Ma= p 23 Lot 8-18 PV Limited Partnership/H. Todd Madden – Old Gage Hill Road South – Pr= oposed 2 Lot Subdivision

Mr. Scanzani asked Mr. McNamara to take over as Chairman for the hearing of the application. Mr. McNamara was acting Chairman f= or the following case. Mr. Scanzani stepped down from the Board. =

Ms. Ouellette read the li= st of abutters aloud. There were no persons present who did not have their name r= ead, 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, presented the plan to the Board.&nb= sp; He said they were granted a variance (Case #2332) to cut one lot with 50-feet of frontage. The soil= and topography had been updated and presented to the Planning Director. Mr. Zohdi said the proposed was a straight forward subdivision and went on to review the sheets contained in = the plan submitted. It was noted = that Gove Environmental had done site specific soil mapping.

Mr. Danevich confirmed that the intention was = to simply cut one lot out. Mr. Z= ohdi answered yes. Mr. Danevich as= ked if an additional house would be constructed.&= nbsp; Mr. Zohdi answered no.

MOTION:

(Danevich/Culbert) To a= ccept the plan for consideration.

VOTE:

(5-0-= 0) The motion carried.

MOTION:

(Danevich/Culbert) To a= ccept the waiver for consideration.

VOTE:

(5-0-= 0) The motion carried.

There was no public input.

Mr. Culbert questioned how the lot ended up wi= th short frontage, when the parcel contained seventy-two acres that bordered a= lot of road frontage. Mr. Zohdi s= aid they didn’t want to disturb the golf course. Mr. McNamara said the issue was br= ought up during the Board of Adjustment (area) variance hearing it was explained = that there was no other way to break the one lot out. Mr. Culbert questioned why the lot couldn’t have 200 foot frontage.&nbs= p; He wanted to know how many acres were remaining at the golf course.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Mr. Zohdi said approximately 400-5= 00 acres; to configure another way would have required the golf course to be completely reconfigured. Mr. Culbert was concerned that in the future the golf course would turn into a large development.

MOTION:

(Danevich/Bousa) To app= rove the waiver to Section 10.03(C). <= o:p>

VOTE:

(5-0-= 0) The motion carried.

MOTION:

(Danevich/Ouellette) To= approve the plan as presented.

VOTE:

(5-0-= 0) The motion carried.

Mr. Scanzani rejoined the Board; Mr. Scanzani returned as Chairman.=

OLD BUSINESS

Ma= p 38 & 39 Lot 1-110 Pacheco, Anne & St. Pierre, Charles – 89 Sherburne Road – Proposed = 2 Lot Subdivision & 1-110-1

Mr. Peter Zohdi of Herbert Associates presented the plan to the Board. He said there were two existing houses on the parcel and they wanted to make the lot conforming. A variance was gr= anted for the frontage. Mr. Zohdi reviewed the sheets contained in the plan and outlined the existing and proposed conditions on each of the lots.&n= bsp;

Mr. McNamara asked how far away the alternate proposed septics were from the house locations. Mr. Zohdi said the proposed septic= s were approximately 550-feet. He sa= id there was sufficient distance from the wetland to get systems closer to the existing or future houses. Mr. McNamara asked if the system (draw) could be done with the elevation/distance. Mr. Zohdi answered yes. Mr. McNamara confirmed that the existing well radius contained (entirely) the existing septic system and wanted to know if the applicant would continue using such. Mr. Zohdi answered yes.= Mr. McNamara asked what the pitch = (grade) of the driveway was at She= rburne Road. Mr. Zohdi said the elevation (of the existing driveway) would drop 10%.

Mr. Gowan said the Board previously requested input from the Safety Committee. He said the committee did a field trip and made two recommendations: 1) sign at the end of the driveway be taken down and the legal street address be poste= d; and 2) connection at the end so a truck could access the pond to obtain wat= er as well as to have emergency access to the pond for a boat (in the event of an emergency rescue). Mr. Culbert asked if the Fire Department currently had access to the pond. Mr. Gowan said there was access, b= ut not in the area. Mr. Zohdi said t= he applicant didn’t object to the Fire Department accessing the pond thr= ough the parcel for emergencies; a note would be added to the plan. Mr. Gowan said the area for access should be specifically indicated on the plan. Mr. Zohdi said there was a note indicating ‘no further subdivision’ for either lot 110 or 110-1.

Mr. Culbert asked if the emergency access woul= d be maintained to be used in the winter months. Mr. Zohdi said the area would be maintained because the owners used it.&nbs= p; Mr. Culbert asked if there was any plan to divide the driveway and m= ake two. Mr. Zohdi answered no. Mr. Culbert asked if there was roo= m to make two separate driveways. = Mr. Zohdi answered yes; if more land was disturbed. Mr. Culbert asked if the existing = homes shared a well. Mr. Zohdi answ= ered yes. Mr. Culbert asked if an additional well was being proposed. Mr. Zohdi answered no; it was up to the Board. He said if they did anything in the future, they would build a new well for each lot. Mr. McNamara questioned if the Boa= rd could approve a lot that didn’t contain a well. Mr. Gowan said the Board approved = lots all the time that didn’t have wells; however, in this case there were existing houses and felt it may be appropriate for the Board to require the second well. Mr. McNamara questioned how long the existing system had been in place. Mr. Zohdi said his client said it = was in place longer than twenty or thirty years.&= nbsp; Mr. McNamara said the map showed two wells, one of which was labeled= not in use. The applicant indicat= ed that the well was functioning. Mr. Zohdi said it was connected to the house, but the applicant’s weren’t using it. Mr. Danevich said he was more concerned with the transfer, teardown and rebuild= of the homes. Mr. Zohdi said if = they wanted to build a new home, a current septic approval from DES (that also complied with the Town) would be needed.&n= bsp; Mr. Danevich asked if they would record such on the plan. Mr. Zohdi answered yes. Mr. McNamara asked if it would inc= lude transfer of ownership. Mr. Zo= hdi said they could add a note that a new well would have to be drilled in the event of a change of ownership of lot 110-1.

Ms. Ouellette asked if there was an easement in place for the well and septic. Mr. Zohdi said they would add a waterline easement from one lot to the other.

Mr. Culbert was uncomfortable with approving a non-conforming lot. Mr. Gowan= noted that the plan had been before the Board of Adjustment. Mr. McNamara said it was before the Board of Adjustment for frontage.

Ms. Bousa asked if notes should be added (with regard to lot 110-1) that indicated the existing house could not be expanded into the Wetland Conservation District (‘WCD’) and that any new house would have to be built outside of the WCD. She said if a new house was built,= there should be clean-up of the existing area.&n= bsp; Mr. Zohdi said he didn’t have an objection to adding a note.

Mr. McNamara questioned if one of the houses w= as within the 250-foot Shore Land Protection Act. To the best of Mr. Zohdi’s knowledge the house on lot 1-110-1 was within 200-feet; he was unsure about= the house on 1-110. There was fur= ther discussion regarding the existing houses and the status of the septic and t= he shared well. There was a gene= ral consensus of the Board that the easiest solution was to have a condition for individual wells. Mr. Zohdi s= aid if he couldn’t meet the condition, the plan would be no good. Mr. Danevich questioned if recordi= ng the plan could be held until the condition was met. Mr. Zohdi said it was important to record the plan and questioned if he could post a bond for such. He said the applicants would sign = any affidavit with the Planning Director indicating if the well was not drilled= in six month, the subdivision would be null and void. Mr. McNamara wanted to have Town&#= 8217;s Attorney provide their opinion. He asked what would happen if the deed was recorded, the well was not dug, and the applicant needed some sort of variance or exception. Mr. Danevich said a public hearing= would be held for revocation of the plan. Mr. Zohdi said the applicant didn’t want to lose the subdivisi= on because of the well. He said = he would be glad to work with the Planning Director and Town’s Attorney regarding the proper affidavit to be signed and the correct note on the pla= n. Mr. Gowan was asked to make a note= on his calendar to check the condition by July 1, 2006. =

Mr. Danevich wanted the Board to consider plac= ing a restriction on any kind of construction/home before the condition being met. There was no objection b= y the Board to place a restriction for construction. Mr. Danevich suggested that the following note be added to the plan: ‘The pre-existing condition remain until the condition of the well on lot 1-110 = is installed’.

Mr. Gowan said an additional waiver would need= to be submitted for Section 11.11 (B),2 well being within the setbacks. Mr. Zohdi said a waiver would be submitted.

MOTION:

(Culbert/McNamara) To a= ccept, for consideration, the waiver to Section 11.02 (B),2 – well radius = (on the existing lot).

VOTE:

(6-0-= 0) The motion carried.

Mr. Ouellette read aloud the waiver requests t= hat had been submitted and accepted for consideration.

MOTION:

To approve the waiver to Section 10.04 (A) – plan scale to be one inch to one hundred feet.

VOTE:

(6-0-= 0) The motion carried.

MOTION:

(Ouellette/Culbert) To = approve the waiver to Section 10.04 (T), 1 – drainage study/calculations.

VOTE:

(6-0-= 0) The motion carried.

MOTION:

(Culbert/Ouellette) To = approve the waiver to Section 11.04 (B), 7, a – less than 50-foot of road frontage on both lots. (ZBA approval – July 11, 2005)

VOTE:

(6-0-= 0) The motion carried.

MOTION:

(Culbert/Ouellette) To = approve the waiver to Section 11.04 (C),1 – building area of lot 1-110-1 not 100’x150’.

VOTE:

(6-0-= 0) The motion carried.

MOTION:

(Culbert/Danevich) To a= pprove the waiver to Section 11.05 (A),1,d – common driveway.

VOTE:

(6-0-= 0) The motion carried.

MOTION:

(Culbert/Ouellette) To approve the waiver to Section 11.11,C – one test pit for lot 110 rather than two.

VOTE:

(6-0-= 0) The motion carried.

MOTION:

(Culbert/Ouellette) To approve the waiver to Section 11.11(B),2 – well radius

VOTE:

(6-0-= 0) The motion carried.

There was no public input.

MOTION:

(Danevich/Culbert) To approve the application (as a conditional approval) contingent upon: 1) the satisfaction of note = #4 on page 3 that states that each lot could be serviced by individual wells= and septics; the conditions of the existing parcel and structures shall remai= n in tact until the conditions are satisfied on, or before July 1, 2006; 2) no= te on plan stating proper lot identification (sign at the end of the driveway taken down and identified as particular numbers on Sherburne Road - no lo= nger a named road); 3) note on plan regarding access from the end of the exist= ing driveway to the pond for emergency; 4) no further subdivision on either of the lots per the note contained on the plan, as well as per the Board of Adjustment’s decision; and 5) note on the plan regarding the easeme= nt (for the existing water line from one lot to the other until for the time being until the second well is drilled).

VOTE:

(6-0-= 0) The motion carried.

Map 29 Lot<= /st1:place> 7-44-1 KDS Properties, LLC – Atwood Road – Site Plan – Proposed 20-uni= t, 55 years of age and older Adult Community

Ms. Ouellette stepped down.

Mr. Peter Zohdi of Herbert Associates presented the plan to the Board. He sai= d at the last meeting, the Board decided to walk the site and review cross walks; direction was given and they tried to update the plans as to what was decid= ed (at the last meeting). He rev= iewed the new notes that had been added to the plan. Mr. Scanzani said during the site = walk there was a discussion regarding the applicant having Town Forester Dan Cyr consult regarding the removal and preservation of trees. Mr. Zohdi said they would add a no= te on the plan. Mr. Gowan said he s= poke with the property owner, who was fine with consulting Mr. Cyr.

Mr. Culbert asked if it was possible to add buffering greenery (along = Dutton Road) to the landscaping plan so headlights didn’t go into the occupant’s windows. Mr. Zohdi said they would add such= to the plan. Mr. Scanzani said t= here was a discussion regarding the existing tree line inside the stone wall and adding low lying shrubbery (in front of the whole property) to buffer noise= . Mr. Zohdi had no objection and wou= ld add such to the plan.

Mr. McNamara confirmed that the lighting presenting to the Board at the last meeting was contained in the plan. Mr. Gowan answered yes.

There was no public input.

The Board questioned if there were any waivers. Mr. Zohdi noted that= there were two waiver requests needed: 1) 248-22 (L) scale of plan to be 1inch equal 40feet; and 2) paving within 25-= feet of a leach field.

(The B= oard accepted the following two waivers in case they had not addressed previousl= y; however, the Board had actually approved the two waivers at the October 17, 2005 meeting)

MOTION:

(McNamara/Culbert) To a= ccept, for consideration, the waiver to 248-22 (L) – scale of plan to be 1 inch equals 40 feet.

VOTE:

(5-0-= 0) The motion carried.

MOTION:

(McNamara/Culbert) To a= ccept, for consideration, the waiver to 248-32 (d) – allow paving within 25-feet of a leach field.

VOTE:

(5-0-= 0) The motion carried.

Mr. Scanzani reiterated that the following not= es needed to be added to the plan: 1) addition of low-lying shrubbery to be ad= ded along the existing tree line on the inside of the stone wall to dull sound;= 2) addition of shrubbery to screen headlights from Dutton Road; and 3) to allow the Town Forester Dan Cyr to consult regarding the removal and preservation= of trees. Mr. Gowan asked that t= he blinking light meet the manual uniform traffic control devices. Mr. Zohdi answered yes.

MOTION:

(McNamara/Culbert) To a= pprove the plan conditioned upon: 1) add note stating addition of low-lying shrubbery to be added along the existing tree line on the inside of the s= tone wall to dull sound; 2) add a note stating addition of shrubbery to screen= headlights from Dutton Road; 3) add a note stating to allow the Town Forester Dan Cy= r to consult regarding the removal and preservation of trees; and 4) the blink= ing lights shall meet the manual uniform traffic control devices.

VOTE:

(5-0-= 0) The motion carried.

Ms. Ouellette returned to the Board.

AD= MINISTRATIVE

Ma= p 20 Lot 3-130 AGAN Realty Corp. – Bear Hill Road – Proposed scheduling of Site = Walk to assess road conditions and drainage issues

Mr. Gowan said there was approximately a dozen catch basins on the steep hill; = the road was prepped in October, however the paver declined to do the final pav= ing (because of liability) due to weather.&nbs= p; He said he spoke with the Highway Road Agent Don Foss to discuss the mitigation of the basins being raised.&nbs= p; In the last rain event the mitigation didn’t work. Mr. Gowan said he spoke with Mr. P= eter Zohdi of Herbert Associates and was in agreement that the catch basins would need to be cut out and lowered to base coat. Mr. Zohdi said he didn’t kno= w any other solution than lowering the basins and raising them after winter. Mr. Gowan said there was another i= ssue with the culverts not connecting properly on Mammoth Road. He discussed what solution was bei= ng reviewed. He said the state c= ame on Friday to correct the situation. Mr. Gowan suggested that the Board should review the site. Mr. Scanzani said there was a lot = on top of Bear Hill that was creating a problem for two other lots below it. Because the vegetation was removed= , the water was coming off the hill, down the driveway of an abutting property, filling the swale and an area in front of two houses with no place to go.

There was further discussion about the area and the situation. Mr. Zohdi said he had to review th= e site (with Mr. Gowan) to see what part could be taken care this winter; and what couldn’t be taken care this winter could be taken care of in the spri= ng. Mr. Scanzani believed a site walk = should be done.

A site walk was scheduled for January 7, 2006 at 9:00am= , on site (weather permitting).

DI= SCUSSION

Ro= ads to be considered for acceptance at Annual Town Meeting: Slavin Drive Extension; Appleleaf Road; Cara Lane (1^st phase only); Carlisle Lane; Gala Court; Garland Drive; Green Meadow Drive; Heather Lee Lane; Holstein Drive; Longview Drive (lot 4-140 only); Meadowview Lane; Nature’s Way; Quail= Run Lane; Stonepost Road; Trailside Road;

Mr. Scanzani read aloud the list of roads to be considered at Town Meeting. Mr. Gowan said he and the Highway = Road Agent Don Foss went out and reviewed each of the roads. He said there was still a substant= ial bond being held for Quail = Run Lane and there was still off-site improvements to be done. He said a bond was also still bein= g held for Heather Lee Lane.

Mr. Culbert said he would have a problem approving Longview Drive and Meadowview Lane. Mr. Gowan said the work to be done= was in the phase I section. There= was a brief discussion regarding what section of road was being addressed. It was brought up that there was a section of Longview Drive<= /st1:address> that had a bond in place, but nothing had been done by the developer to cor= rect a number of issues. To ensure= the Board was discussing the correct section of road, Mr. Gowan was asked to pu= ll the plan for the next meeting. Mr. Gowan said he would have the plot plans available for the January 5, 2006 meeting.

There was an agreement to take Q= uail Run Lane off the list; Longview Drive and Meadowview Lane will be reviewed further.

MINUTES

October 22, 2005

MOTION:

(Danevich/McNamara) To = approve the October 2= 2, 2005 (site walk) minutes as written. =

VOTE:

(3-0-= 0) The motion carried. Ms. Ouellet= te and Ms. Bousa abstained. =

November 7, 2005- deferred. = &nb= sp;

SITE WALK

January = 7, 2006 –

Map 20 Lot = 3-130 AGAN Realty Corp. – = Bear Hill Road – Proposed scheduling of Site = Walk to assess road conditions and drainage issues

ADJOURNMENT

MOTION:

(Culbert/Danevich) To a= djourn the meeting.

VOTE:

(6-0-= 0) The motion carried.

The meeting was adjourned= at approximately 9:44 pm.

&n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Respectfully submitted,

Charity A. L. Willis

&n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Recording Secretary