= Town of Pelham, NH<= span style=3D'font-size:14.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt'>=

Pelham Conservation Commission<= /o:p>

6 Villag= e Green

Pelham, NH <= st1:PostalCode w:st=3D"on">03076-3723

<= /p>

MEETING OF 6/14/06= &= nbsp; &nbs= p; APPROVED 7/5/06=

Members Present: &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p;

Paul Gagnon, Jay Stearns,= &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp;

Paul Dadak, Lisa Loosigia= n, &= nbsp; &nbs= p;

Glennie Edwards (Alt) &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp;

Chairman Paul Gagnon brou= ght the meeting to order at 7:33 p.= m.

Chairman Gagnon distribut= ed the budget to date with members. = The operating budget for 05/06 was $9,659.&nbs= p; The request by the Conservation Commission was $14,270. The increase was primarily to fund= the prime wetland study. The esti= mated cost for the Mark West study was $8,000.&n= bsp; The budget was not approved which resulted in only $4,250 for that i= tem. The total approved budget was $7,6= 70.00 for the whole year for all of our expenses said Mr. Gagnon. The most that we can expect to spe= nd on the wetland study is around $4,000 to $4,500.

ELECTION OF OFFICERS:<= o:p>

<= /p>

Before the election of of= ficers Chairman Gagnon expressed the need for representation to the Planning Board meetings. In the past, Bob Ya= rmo covered these meetings and carried a big burden with being the Conservation’s chairman and attending the Planning Board’s meet= ings on Monday evenings said Mr. Gagnon. Mr. Gagnon said he would like to distribute the load and have someone other than himself to volunteer to represent the Conservation Commission at these meetings. Voting result= ed in the following being elected:

<= /p>

Chairman, Paul Gagnon

Co-Chairmen & Represe= ntative to Planning Board Meetings, Paul Dadak.

Alternate Representative = to Planning Board Meetings, Jay Stearns

Secretary, Glennie Edward= s

DISCUSSION:

29/7-45, Charaka LL= C, 49 Atwood Road, Construction of new building and fire lane partially in WCD The location of this parcel = is at the intersection of Atwood Road and Livingston Road where the doctor’s office is located. (This case= was not heard – Peter Zhodi was not available this evening due to illness). Mr. Zhodi reported = to Chairman

Gagnon said he reviewed this with t= he ZBA on Monday evening and the ZBA decided that they wished to do a joint site walk. As a result of that mee= ting Conservation Commission members are invited to attend a site-walk at this location on Saturday morning, 9 a.m. with the Board of Adjustment members. The expanded proposed building requir= es a fire lane in the back and the back corner of the building and the fire lane= are in the WCD. Chairman Gagnon a= dvised Mr. Roland Soucy, an interested party for this project who was in the audie= nce, that the Conservation Commission would be involved in the site walk and we would vote on our recommendation to the ZBA at our next meeting. Mr. Soucy left the meeting upon he= aring this.

Lake Water Assessment Program

Member Lisa Loosigian gav= e a report on plans for water testing at our local ponds for the months of July, August and September. SheR= 17;s been in contact with the volunteer coordinator in Concord. She has been attempting to secure the services of someone at the pon= d, specifically Long Pond, who has a boat as she does not have one. She said that Cindy Brunelle who is affiliated with the Parks and Recreation Department has offered to assist her. Lisa reported that she attended the VLAP Workshop in = Concord in May and that a biologist from DES was coming to long Pond on June 28 to train her and some other volunteers. Chairman Gagnon asked Lisa to give an update at the next meeting. Lisa also reported that she had go= tten a response from Mark West of West Environmental about threats to wildlife with construction and roads in the wetlands.&nb= sp; Her understanding from West was that the biggest concern to wildlife= is the loss of connectivity.

OTHER: Chairman Gagnon received an email = from Cindy Brunelle who is on the advisory board of the Parks and Recreation. Her concern is erosion at Muldoon Park near the kiddy playground area where there is a road that has had run-off due to the heavy rains and is running into a vernal pool. Recreation Direction Darren McCarthy asked if the Conservation Commission might have grant money available so as to put hay bales in this location. Chairman Gagnon sta= ted that we do not have grant money but there may be some money available soon = from the timber cut project scheduled there soon. Member Jay Stearns said that he wo= uld be at Muldoon Park this weekend and would check = it.

PRESENTATION:

West Environmental Pro= posal for Wetland Inventory and Evaluation Phase Two.

Mark West gave a visual presentation. Mark had been a= sked to review the proposed wetland inventory for the entire town and try to identify the prime wetlands so that the Commission can put them on the ball= ot to be accepted as prime wetlands. Currently there are 7 or 8 prime wetlands that have been defined as prime wetlands. There are far= more than that said Chairman Gagnon that could be potentially defined as prime wetlands. Mr. West said that students from UNH had worked on a prime wetlands project for Pelham quite a= few years ago. He doubts that that particular study was accurate due to the way the studies are conducted, i.e= ., a student that may be completely dedicated to this type of study versus a stu= dent that wasn’t, etc.

Mr. West reported that his company started a wetlands inventory a year ago; it took a while to get the photographs and to do the interpretation and now some decisions need to be = made on what is the next step. He = explained what the process is in preparing a wetlands inventory and designation. Mr. West made reference to Chagnon Lane and Leonard Drive area and said this is the biggest wetland and is related to Beaver Brook and immediately jumps to the top of the list because of its size and diversity. Chairman Gagnon as= ked Mr. West to advise what the difference is in protection for a wetland versu= s a prime wetland. Mr. West said = his wetland boundaries appear to be quite different from what the students mapping indicates. He will look at pr= evious studies to see how the students did their reports and whether they did photo interpretation in determining their accuracy. One of the criteria for determinin= g a prime wetland is that the area must be at least 50% of poorly drained soils. It can have more, but = it can’t have less than 50% of poorly drained soils. Prime wetlands are higher function= ing wetlands and tend to be the more important ones. Soil surveys and USGS maps, waters= heds, and surface water supply are studied prior to evaluation of a wetland to determine the qualification for a prime wetland status. Mr. West said the more he engages = the Conservation Commission the more we understand functions, the more we can understand what the public is most concerned about in our town. Mr. West said that in the course o= f his study if he sees postings of “no trespassing” he does not go on= to the property. The Commission = needs to rank the wetlands with a high, medium or low rating in order to move forward. The bigger the wetla= nd the higher the rating he says.

Chairman Gagnon asked Mr.= West to bring us up to date what he has done for Pelham so far? He said it might be more productiv= e if we could discuss this in non-public session where we would be working off specific maps that show present prime wetlands and to advise how we might s= pend out limited dollars that we have left.&nbs= p; Obviously, said Mr. Gagnon, we would come back to this forum into pu= blic session and present what has been done already. Mr. West said that he has mapped a= bout 50 wetlands in Pelham to date. Some of them on the soils map show one big wetland said Mr. West. He continued to say that when you examine the aerial photo interpretation, there are 3-4 pieces. Mr. West said that we have some ve= ry nice wetland complexes, a lot of wetlands in the town, and we have a significant amount of wetlands that have been compromised by residential development. They have roads = in them, houses right up near them and some wetlands have big homes with the backyard being the wetland. Mr. West stated that he has a completed invento= ry of all wetlands that are over 2 acres unless we purchase the $500 worth of photography that show differently. There are some clear focus areas that we could come up with to get started on the next phase of evaluation with a limited budget. Mr. West said he had an evaluation= price almost $9,000 or $8,600 for 45 wetlands.&n= bsp; If we did less it would come down according to how many wetlands were evaluated. If we wanted to ta= ke, like we did with the UNH students, do a phase 2 and 3 for a smaller number = of wetlands then he would have to come up with a price for the evaluation phase and then the prime wetland designation phase.

Member Jay Stearns asked = Mr. West what the process was to have a wetland deemed a prime wetland. Mr. West explained that the town digitizes them, puts them on the tax maps, advertises a joint public hearing with the Planning Board and invites abutters to discuss and ask questions.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> It then goes to a vote on a warrant article with either a yea or nay. If voters approve the prime wetlands then a report is sent to the st= ate and the state accepts the designation.&nbs= p; It then becomes a state designation and is a joint partnership. It becomes more difficult to impac= t it and it becomes more difficult to impact around it said Mr. West. He says it’s a big issue wit= h some of our current wetlands having a great deal of residential building around them. If you have a prime wet= land and a person owns up to the prime wetland and has something like a lawn, and they were just going to put a deck on their house, that’s not going to impact it said Mr. West. If i= t were a case of the owner planning to sub-divide and build another house, letR= 17;s say 25 feet from the wetland you already have some local set-backs. It would then go to a public hearing. You want to preserve= the wetland value that is already there said Mr. West. West also said there is nothing worse than working with old maps and old information. The newer maps are so much more accurate. Mr. West pointed ou= t our current prime wetlands on the map that are the color purple. Chairman Gagnon ended the discussion by saying he wants the Conservation Commission to come= to an agreement about putting language that supports prime wetland designation= s on the warrant article so that it can be voted in March (’07). He said if we don’t have eno= ugh money to move forward with all 75 wetlands (classification – low medi= um and high), pick out the best. It may take us 2 years because we don’t have enough funding. Mr. Gagnon said he would like to go along with Mr. West’s recommendation for the top 20, as he is the exp= ert in this field.

Member Loosigian had a qu= estion relative to impact on lakes and ponds related to nutrient loading and leaky septic systems. She asked if = those are the same concerns that are for wetlands, i.e. residential impacts. Mr. West said those are some of th= e same concerns. Mr. West said that = is why, in some towns, they have wetland setbacks as well as shoreline setbacks. Some towns adopt th= eir own local shoreline regulations.

Member Mrs. Edwards said = she wished to give an example of a problem in the lower part of the town in the= Mammoth Road area and is a concern to her. She = said it was brought to life this past storm that we had. She said that the whole developmen= t was under water. If that had been designated as a prime wetland, and that particular developer came in and the Planning Board at that time gave permission to develop this area and the Conservation Commission had real concerns and had not supported the construction of homes in this locale, can a report be made to the state by = the Conservation Commission and can the state step in and put a halt on the permitting or not? Mr. West s= aid the state has an obligation to engage in any work being done adjacent to a prime wetland. Once you, the Commission, notifies them and the application comes in and it is adjacent t= o a prime wetland, then the state has to go through the prime wetland process s= aid Mr. West. The state can affec= t how much development occurs in and adjacent to the prime wetland. Once the state accepts your design= ation they are now responsible for protection of that wetland said Mr. West. Sometimes towns create a bigger bu= ffer to prime wetlands than the state sets.&nbs= p; Mrs. Edwards asked if it might become a court issue. Mr. West responded that it becomes= a permitting issue with the state. The state scientist gets involved.&= nbsp; The developer must come up with clear and convincing evidence that t= here is no net loss of functions and values of that prime wetland. Mrs. Edwards asked if the process = is a lengthy one should the Conservation Commission intercede. Mr. West’s comments said the lengthiness would most likely be related to the fact that there are public hearings involved. If it̵= 7;s a low impact it might be waived by the state.

MINUTES APPROVED: 2/15/06 and 3/15/06

MOTION to go into Non-Pub= lic session to discuss proposed land purchase in accordance with RSA 91-A-A: 3.=

MOTION to adjourn meeting= – 8:50 p.m.

Next meeting scheduled fo= r July 12.

&n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Respectfu= lly submitted,

&n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; = ; &n= bsp; Glennie Edwards, Recording Secretary