APPROVED

TOWN OF PELHAM

BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING

MINUTES

May 27, 2003

APPROVED – June 10, 2003

CALL TO ORDER

PLEDGE OF ALLEGAINCE

Chairman Lynde opened the meeting at approximately 6:30 pm. 

MINUTES REVIEW

May 13, 2003

OPEN FORUM

None.

APPOINTMENTS

Maple Drive Tree Status

Mr. Gaydos provided a summary of events regarding a tree at the end of a cul-de-sac on Maple Drive.  Some of the residents on Maple Drive had an arborist review the tree, who in turn said the tree was in need of trimming.  The Highway Road Agent obtained an estimate for trimming the tree, which would cost $800.  The person that provided the trimming suggested that the tree be reviewed because he felt the tree may be almost dead.  Mr. Gaydos said that John Ferguson (Town Forester) had previously reviewed the tree and reported that the tree was slowly decaying, but may last a couple more years.  He said that some trimming had occurred and it was found that one of the limbs was hollow inside.  He said the question posed to the Selectmen was if the tree should be trimmed (cost: $800), or removed (cost: $900).  He informed that residents, as well as persons who had signed the petition were notified via mail that the Selectmen would discuss the tree.  The Selectmen reviewed what action had been taken for reviewing the tree.  Mr. Bergeron felt the Selectmen should reconsider their position if there was new evidence that the tree was not safe.  Mr. Lynde recapped the situation for the public that the Selectmen had previously agreed to share in the cost of pruning, but because one of the limbs was found to be hollow, it was believed that further discussion should occur.  He then read aloud Mr. John Ferguson’s (Town Forester) letter dated April 23, 2003.  Mr. McDevitt’s initial reaction was if the tree was safe, it shouldn’t be removed.  He said the Town would always be concerned regarding liability. 

PUBLIC INPUT

Mr. Vincent Mazzaglia, Maple Street provided the Selectmen with a photograph of the tree in question.  He also provided the Selectmen with a copy of a letter dated April 15, 2003 drafted by Mr. Cornelius Smith, Certified Arborist.  Mr. Smith saw no reason for the removal of the tree, but suggested that a good Class A pruning be performed. 

Mr. Michael Blythe, Maple Drive, resided directly opposite the tree, noted that a tree would die within the first five years of the roots being filled over, if it were going to happen.  He noted that the tree in question had blacktop over it for approximately twenty-eight years and was not dead, or falling over.  Mr. Lynde reiterated that the Selectmen had previously reached a decision to work with the residents and not remove the tree.  He said the current problem was that a significant branch was pruned, and it was found to be hollow inside.  Mr. Blythe said he was not an expert, but noted if branched were pruned before the rot reached the core, a tree could be preserved.  He agreed that some of the lower branched needed to be trimmed, but noted the there was still substantial strength in the tree.  Mr. Lynde read aloud the April 15, 2003 letter drafted by Mr. Cornelius Smith, Certified Arborist. 

Mr. Mazzaglia said that he had worked for the Town Highway Department in the past and noted the amount of trees that had been removed after storms and pointed out that the tree in question did not have that type of problem.

Mr. Jason Zakrewski, Maple Drive, recently moved to Maple Drive after researching many areas to reside.  He and his wife were saddened by the fact that the tree in question may be removed.  He wanted to know why the tree was being considered for removal.  Mr. Lynde said that the Highway Road Agent’s opinion was that the tree in question may be dying and should possibly be removed due to safety concerns.  He said the Selectmen were trying to determine how to proceed.  He said the Town was concerned with safety and would have the tree removed if there was an immediate safety threat.  Mr. Zakrewski asked if a tree would be put in its spot if the tree in question were removed.  Mr. Lynde believed the tree would be replaced, if it were removed.

Ms. Maryann Mitiav, Maple Drive was opposed to leaving the tree in question in place.  She felt the tree in question was a danger to society and did not want any casualties due to falling tree limbs.  She was in favor of planting a new tree.  She said most of the branches were dead and would like something more pleasant to look at.  Mr. Lynde reiterated the Selectmen’s position and agreed that safety should be reviewed.  He said there was nothing in Mr. Ferguson’s statement that alluded to the tree being in immediate danger.  Ms. Mitiav was concerned for the public that was unaware of the possible danger of the tree in question.  She ended by saying ‘..let’s save lives, not a tree.’

Mr. Bergeron asked the residents if there was anytime a limb had fallen.  A woman in the public said that she had contacted the Town during the past year regarding a limb that had fallen and nearly hit her daughter.  Ms. Mitiav said the fallen limb had remained on site for a long time before being removed.

Mr. Bob LaPoint said a limb had come out of the tree in 1997 during a substantial ice storm.  He said small branches may fall, but nothing substantial. 

Mr. Blythe said the only branches that had come off the tree were those hit by moving trucks.

Mr. Brian Peters noted that during the 1997 ice storm he had two trees that came down and nothing happened to the tree in question.

Ms. Dorina Roman said when small branches fell because of the wind, she collected them, and threw them into her yard. 

Mr. Lynde said the Selectmen had previously decided to work with the residents to preserve tree and asked the Selectmen if the decision should stand.  Mr. Bergeron asked the residents if they had given consideration to replacing the tree.  Mr. Mazzaglia reiterated that there was nothing wrong with the tree per the opinion of a certified arborist.  There was a consensus of the Selectmen to have their previous decision stand.  Mr. Blythe asked who would do the pruning.  Mr. Lynde asked that the residents get together and work with Mr. Gaydos.  Mr. Danevich asked to reserve the right to revisit the issue after the tree was pruned. 

Bobula Discussion Re: Planning Department

Mr. Lynde said that the Selectmen had received a report from Mr. John Bobula which the Planning Board had reviewed.  He said the report was the basis for moving forward and asked how to proceed.  It was noted that staff and full-time inspectors would need to be reviewed.  Mr. McDevitt felt that the Selectmen should hold an additional meeting with the Planning Board since they didn’t feel that Mr. Bobula’s draft report accurately reflected their needs or suggestions.  Mr. Lynde reviewed the points of Mr. Bobula’s report that the Planning Board had agreed with.  He then reviewed the main differences the Planning Board had with the report.  There was a brief discussion in which Mr. Lynde said he would contact the Planning Board Chair to set up a meeting, possibly for June 2, 2003. 

Road Naming at Municipal Complex

Mr. Lynde said if the Municipal Complex road/driveway were not named, the Municipal Complex would have an address on Marsh Road.  The Selectmen discussed the alternatives.  Mr. McDevitt said he received a suggestion to name the Municipal Complex road Municipal Drive.  Mr. Derby suggested naming the Municipal Complex road Village Green Circle, or Village Green Lane.  There was a majority vote by the Selectmen to name the road accessing the Municipal Complex.  Mr. Lynde asked that the Safety Committee review any name suggestions that were received. 

* Additional Appointments listed below.

OLD BUSINESS

Municipal Building

Mr. Gaydos reported that during the last week a walk-through of the Municipal side had occurred and a punch list had been drafted, which Breadloaf was addressing.  He said that the mechanical systems had also been reviewed and reminded the Selectmen that regular maintenance should be considered during the budget process, or warrantees may be voided. 

Mr. Gaydos said that the following items (approved by the Warrant Article for the Police) had been delivered, installed and inspected, and now required the Selectmen’s signatures on the manifest -

1) Motorola - part of radio system infrastructure $45,310; 2) Cyber COM - part of the infrastructure that works with the Motorola radio system (towers and electronics) $54,875; 3) two invoices from Rightline - computer rack systems $25,200 and $2,904.02.  The manifest was circulated for the Selectmen’s signature.  Mr. Lynde confirmed that the Selectmen were previously informed of the items.  Mr. Gaydos answered yes. 

He went on to review the type of maintenance that may be needed for the generator and the furnace. 

Mr. McDevitt informed that the trees at the Municipal Complex were in the process of being planted.  He said that donations had been received for over half the trees and wanted people to know that there were still opportunities. 

Mr. McDevitt said that the Sherburne Hall Committee had met and requested permission to remove a frame from one of the cafeteria tables.  He said they would like to assess what was behind the tables.  The Selectmen did not have a problem with the Committee removing one of the tables. 

Mr. Danevich informed that the RFP’s for the data and wiring had been received back.  He said the RFP’s would be reviewed within the next week and brought to the Selectmen with a recommendation.  He said that the last piece of equipment needed to make all the systems work was being reviewed.  Mr. Gaydos asked if there was a budget number needed to acquire the piece.  Mr. Danevich said he didn’t have a number, but was reviewing equipment that would cost approximately $1200.  The Selectmen were in favor of authorizing Mr. Danevich with a budget of $1200 for equipment needed to make the Municipal Complex system work.  Mr. Danevich was directed to work with Mr. Gaydos. 

Mr. Lynde suggested that the Sherburne Hall Committee create a vision of what the hall should look like and then move forward with discussions of what changes would need to occur.  

Board of Adjustment Appointment

Mr. Lynde said that the Selectmen had discussed the applicants for the Board of Adjustment, who had been interviewed at the last public meeting, and were ready to make an appointment. 

It was noted that because of RSA constraints, Mr. Jean-Marc Lapierre would not be able to be appointed to the Board of Adjustment because he was not a United States citizen.  The Selectmen encouraged Mr. Lapierre to get involved and volunteer in other aspects of the Town.    

APPOINTMENTS CON’T....

Torrisi use of Castle Hill Property

Mr. Gaydos provided a brief history of the agreement between the Town and Mr. Torrisi.  He said that subsequent to the agreement, Mr. Torrisi had approached the Planning Board and requested a subdivision using a thirty foot right-of-way for access.  He said that the Selectmen had been notified, and in turn asked Mr. Torrisi to meet with them and show a survey of the area that had been improved (to show compliance of the agreement to not encroach on more than 30ft.).  He said that the Town’s Engineer, TF Moran had been contacted to review the site and provide a survey.  Mr. Gaydos said that Mr. Torrisi’s attorney had requested to clarify the matter with the Selectmen. 

Attorney James Troissi, representing the petitioner Mr. Al Torrisi met with the Selectmen to discuss the right-of-way.  He said it was their position that Mr. Torrisi had the right to use the right-of-way as a Town road if he was willing to improve it to Town specifications in order to access his ten (10) acres of backland.  Attorney Troissi informed that Mr. Torrisi owned ML5-89 (consisting of approximately ten acres).  He said Mr. Torrisi’s predecessor in title was Mr. Houle, who received a right-of-way (in 1937) from the backland to Castle Hill Road.  He said Mr. Houle had an easement/right-of-way over the front land (now part of lot 4 in a current subdivision).  He said in the 1970’s a plan (submitted by Mr. Sarris) came before the Planning Board which didn’t show Mr. Houle’s right-of-way.  After further discussion, Mr. Sarris came back before the Planning Board with a plan that showed a right-of-way (mandated by the Planning Board) for Mr. Houle to access the backland through Castle Hill Road for possible future development.  Attorney Troissi said Mr. Torrisi purchased the backland in the 1990’s, which included the 50ft. right-of-way (previously mandated by the Planning Board) from the backland to Castle Hill road. 

Attorney Troissi reviewed the plans being presented and explained what they depicted.  He then reviewed a booklet of exhibits that he in turn submitted to the Selectmen.  He said based upon the information researched, there was no question that the Town took title to the parcel as a right-of-way to serve the land in the rear now owned by Mr. Torrisi.  He explained in the late 1990’s when Mr. Torrisi was purchasing the property (from Mr. Houle) he desired to place his home on the back land, which required a variance because the back land didn’t have frontage onto a Town road.  He noted at the time, Town Counsel submitted a letter dated March 28, 1998 (Exhibit 10) to the former Town Administrator Mr. Peter Flynn, which stated, in part, that the back lot owner had an implied easement to use the paper street to get his land and the right to develop the paper street, at his expense, as a public highway, if he wishes to do so.  Attorney Troissi then cited a letter sent by Town Counsel to Mr. Flynn advising of a letter sent to the former Planning Director which advised the parcel owner to either apply to the Board of Adjustment for a zoning variance, or construct a road meeting Town requirements with a cul-de-sac giving 200ft. of frontage.  He reviewed RSA 674:41, which reviews options for owners of back parcels of land.  He went on to review sections from minutes of past meetings that he included in the exhibits submitted to the Selectmen that referenced the right-of-way. 

Attorney Troissi then reviewed the issue of the right-of-way width and reviewed the last paragraph of the agreement with the Town which states that the right-of-way will be cleared and maintained (at the expense of themselves or others similarly located on the right-of-way), to a width of not more than 30ft. and to repair and maintain the travel portion of the right-of-way in a good passable condition.  He believed the 30ft. road width was substantially complied with.  He said in order to have a good passable roadway Mr. Torrisi had to transgress whatever inches beyond the 30ft., which he felt was moot since the plan had to go before the Planning Board for review.  Attorney Troissi said he met with the Town Administrator, Planning Director and Highway Road Agent who all agreed that because of the slope, ledge, drainage and the Town’s mandate to have a passable roadway, that Mr. Torrisi did a good job constructing a good passable roadway.  He said that the engineer has assured him that the drainage post-development would be better that pre-development based upon mitigation actions.  He noted that the gravel area was only 12ft. and the improvements on either side were designed to help the situation.  Attorney Troissi read aloud a letter dated April 10, 2003 drafted by the Planning Director Amy Alexander which states her belief that Mr. Torrisi substantially complied with the general intent of the requirements of the 30ft. access easement granted to him.  He ended by submitting the exhibits to the Selectmen. 

Mr. Lynde agreed that there was a 50ft. right-of-way with an agreement for Mr. Torrisi to clear up to 30ft. for access to his property, maintaining a buffer between the driveway and the neighboring property.  He believed the understanding at the time was that a single-family dwelling would be constructed and the 30ft. easement would provide access.  He asked that the drainage be addressed and wanted to know what the reference point would be for correction since the property probably didn’t have a drainage problem before the driveway was constructed.  Attorney Troissi said the drainage would be improved from the pre-construction and post-construction of the proposed subdivision.  Mr. Matt Hamor, Meisner Brem Corporation (engineer) said he didn’t know what the drainage was before the road was constructed, but believed there may have been minimal runoff, and it would be reviewed. 

Mr. Lynde addressed the buffer and said that there had been complaints regarding encroachment up to 40ft. and beyond the bounds of the right-of-way.  He was in agreement that there was a 50ft. right-of-way that provided access to the back parcel of land.  He asked Attorney Troissi if he believed there was a need to obtain the Town’s permission to lay out the road to the back parcel.  Attorney Troissi said the Town’s permission was not needed, as long as the road was brought up to Town standards.  He then addressed the buffer and said that when the plan was reviewed by the Planning Board they would have the right to establish any buffers. 

Mr. McDevitt asked if the Board of Adjustment variance was granted with any conditions.  Attorney Troissi believed that the only condition was the road would have to be maintained by Mr. Houle (who was the owner at the time).  Mr. McDevitt said that the agreement was in place for a 30ft. easement and noted that the Town’s engineer reviewed the site and reported that the disturbance from construction went considerably beyond the allowed 30ft., not just inches beyond.  Mr. Hamor said that the Planning Director was who provided information that work had gone 12” - 18” over the 30ft. and that Meisner Brem Corporation had not provided information referencing 12” - 18”.  Mr. McDevitt said the point was an agreement had been entered into for clearing up to 30ft. and that clearing had occurred substantially beyond the agreed upon 30ft.  Attorney Troissi said to their knowledge clearing had occurred up to 40ft. based upon the topography.  He reiterated that the Planning Director informed that Mr. Torrisi substantially complied.  He said the agreement was for a 30ft. easement to access a single-family home.  He said Mr. Torrisi had not given up the right to come back and request usage of the 50ft. right-of-way (which went with the home).  Mr. McDevitt believed that the agreement had been recorded at the Registry of Deeds on June 30th, book 5961 page 0950.  Attorney Troissi reviewed his documents and confirmed that the agreement was recorded June 30, 1998.  He said that rights had not been given up for usage of the 50ft. right-of-way.  Mr. Lynde said the issue was the violation of the agreement for the 30ft. easement.  There was further discussion regarding the agreement for the 30ft. easement. 

Mr. Derby noted that abutters had complained about the increased drainage onto their property and wanted to know what the drainage plans would be for the future.  Mr. Hamor said a substantial detention facility would be constructed to cleanse the flow, which would then enter catch basins through culverts and would then re-enter the natural drainage patterns beneath Castle Hill Road.  He believed the flow across to Castle Hill Road would be less than what was currently flowing.  Mr. Lynde noted that the Planning Board had regulations that dictated that drainage water flowing could not be greater post-development, than it was pre-development. 

Mr. Danevich verified that the plan had not officially been submitted to the Town.  He said during the conceptual review by the Planning Board there was great debate regarding the elevation profile coming off the hill.  He suggested that further comment be reserved until it was known if the plan could meet Town specifications (i.e. grade, slope, embankment).  He provided a comparison of Mr. Torrisi’s property to the Bear Hill Road (off Mammoth) subdivision.  The difference between the two was that the Bear Hill subdivision was able to be corrected by the applicant obtaining additional land and re-routing drainage to catch basins.  He asked what action was being requested.  Attorney Troissi said he wanted a definitive position, or statement by the Selectmen that the 50ft. right-of-way was recognized.  He reiterated that the plan would have to comply with Planning Board regulations.  Mr. Lynde thanked Attorney Troissi for the information provided.  He said the issue was the agreement with the Town was violated because the easement had been cleared beyond the approved 30ft.  Attorney Troissi understood that the Selectmen believed it would have been more appropriate for Mr. Torrisi to have come back before the Selectmen to request further clearing.  He wanted the Selectmen to understand that going beyond 30ft. was necessary to make a passable road. 

Mr. Lynde believed that the Selectmen wanted a remedy to the violation of the agreement.  Mr. McDevitt believed that the agreement for 30ft. was a substantial barrier to bring before the Planning Board.  He suggested consulting with Town Counsel and then providing the Planning Board with a letter of response.  Attorney Troissi said that the current proposal was the development of the back parcel, which was a different issue than the 30ft. easement.  After a brief discussion it was the consensus of the Selectmen to seek Town Counsel’s opinion before providing Attorney Troissi an opinion.  Mr. Lynde believed that Town Counsel’s opinion could be obtained within two weeks. 

PUBLIC INPUT

Ms. Sandra Crawford, 13 Castle Hill Road, a direct abutter to the 50ftx200ft right-of-way said that there had been extensive clearing of the right-of-way.  She referenced a letter dated June 28, 2002 from former Town Administrator Pat MacQueen which stated the general agreement of the Selectmen, present at the time, was that the property owner had exceeded the approval granted at the time.  She then noted that former Community Development Director Dave Brouillet had issue a cease and desist letter dated June 26, 2002 which outlined the following problems: 1) right-of-way had been cut beyond 30ft. in width; 2) access way not properly maintained; and 3) retaining wall constructed in right-of-way without approval.  The letter stated it was imperative that Mr. Torrisi meet with the Selectmen.  Ms. Crawford said that she had sent numerous letters to the Town and was disappointed that she had received no response.  She said that she and her husband had been residents for twenty-five years and was insulted that they could do nothing about their property being torn up.  She informed that her insurance company informed them that because of the alterations, they now had a dangerous condition on their property, which would not be covered.  Ms. Crawford informed that the retaining wall had been constructed on her property without her permission.  She noted that her driveway was currently hanging in the air and that several valuable trees had been removed.  Ms. Crawford said that she and her husband had been more than patient with the Town and pointed out that the Town owned the right-of-way and Mr. Torrisi only had use.  She discussed the time and money spent researching the issues.  She felt the Town was responsible to respond to the issues and believed the Town was also responsible for restoring their property. 

Attorney Troissi said that a letter would be sent to all the abutters to meet and address all the concerns.  He said that Mr. Torrisi informed that Mr. Crawford had been advised of the improvements in front of a professional tree cutter.  He said that an attempt would be made in good faith to address the concerns of the abutters.  He ended by saying that the right-of-way had been in place for many years and believed that homeowners should be aware of the possibility of future development.  Mr. Lynde said that a buffer had not been maintained as was discussed at the time the agreement was made. 

SELECTMEN’S REPORTS

Mr. Danevich had no report.

Mr. Bergeron said the next meeting of the Water Charter Committee would be held June 12, 2003 in Bedford, NH.  He reported that on Wednesday May 14, 2003 he and the Fire Chief attended a dinner meeting sponsored by the South Eastern New Hampshire Hazardous Material Mutual Aide District which was hosted by the Windham Fire Department.  He said the election of officers was held and a new van was on display. 

Mr. Derby informed that as he previously requested, the Police mailbox had been moved.  He said the CIP met with Mr. Jerry Boucher who was seeking funds ($1,000,000) for land for the co-operative school.  He said with the interest rates so low, it may be better to bond.  He noted that land was being reviewed and pointed out that for parking alone, eleven acres would be needed. 

Mr. McDevitt said that an anonymous person offered their time share at Pollard Brook Resort (for November 16 - 23) as a donation for the winner of a drawing which.  The drawing would consist of those who donated to the Sherburne Hall Fund.  He asked that the Selectmen discuss at the next scheduled meeting.  Mr. McDevitt said that the Household Hazardous Waste Collection (held May 3rd) had twenty-five Town residents that took advantage of the collection.  He said the next collection would be held June 5, 2003 at the Nashua Transfer Station. 

Mr. Lynde informed that the Planning Board met May 19, 2003.  He reviewed the items discussed at the meeting. 

Mr. Derby noted that the application had been received and recommended by Highway Agent Don Foss to hire Mr. Tim Borders as a full-time Operator One.  Mr. Lynde noted that Mr. Borders had been interviewed by Mr. Foss, and Mr. Gaydos agreed that there were no problems. 

Robin Road, Honey Lane update

Mr. Gaydos provided a brief history of the road and explained that it was not yet Town owned due to certain outstanding issues.  He said the residents have had the opportunity to discuss their issues.  He said that the as-built plans had been reviewed and would now need to be compared to what was built. 

Mr. Peter Zohdi, Herbert Associates, said that his firm had done the original design for Irene Drive, Honey Lane, and Robin Road.  He said that he had been notified that there was a major problem, and had since compiled an as-built.  He said that he reviewed the site with Building Inspector Roland Soucy and believed he knew what some of the problems were.  He went on to discuss the items that could be easily resolved.  He requested that the Selectmen grant a two-week time period to work with TF Moran (Town Engineer), Mr. Gaydos and the developer Mr. Mahoney to try to come up with a resolution to the problems.  He noted that some of the problems may not be able to be resolved, such as if a home was built too low. 

Mr. David Jordan, TF Moran (Town Engineer) said that as-built surveys had been done on certain drainage areas.  He said at first review, the plan compiled by Herbert Associates appeared to be substantially similar to the TF Moran plan.  He wanted to opportunity to compare the two plans and review at the site where problems were occurring.  He said the original design would be reviewed closely and noted that TF Moran would continue working with the Town and Mr. Zohdi to come up with solutions. 

PUBLIC INPUT

Mr. Tim Fraize, Noela Avenue suggested that the punch list composed in September, 2001 be reviewed for items still not completed.  He noted that Mr. Zohdi made a comment, during a meeting in January 2002, that the drain under Honey Lane was not constructed property.  He asked that the drain be reviewed.  Mr. Fraize said that there was a pipe in front of the leach field, which he did not feel was correct.

Mr. Scott Orlando, Robin Road, voiced his concerns with the water issues.  He received a comment that his house may have been placed too low.  He said that all the water from the road ended up in his leach field, which caused him concern because of possible premature leach field failure.  He said that the previous Planning Director had shown him a letter that stated the developer and the builder were to work together and re-grade the front of his property.  He wanted to know the status for that work.  He informed that the culvert and easement on his property didn’t have water running through, even during heavy rain storms, and wanted to know its purpose. 

Mr. Lynde said the approach to reviewing the plan sounded good.  Mr. Zohdi asked permission from Mr. Fraize to walk his property with Mr. Jordan and Mr. Gaydos.  Mr. Fraize said he previously granted permission to access his property.  He asked that he be notified, so he could be present when his property was being reviewed.  Mr. Orlando also granted permission to access his property, and requested that he be contacted when it was being reviewed.

Mr. Lynde asked who would be paying for TF Moran.  Mr. Gaydos said the Town was paying for the services.  He would know more once the plans were reviewed.  Mr. Lynde said he appreciated Mr. Jordan and Mr. Zohdi for working with the abutters.     

NEW BUSINESS

None.

TOWN ADMNISTRATOR’S REPORT

Mr. Gaydos had no report.

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:50 pm.

                                                                                          Respectfully submitted,

                                                                                          Charity A. L. Willis

                                                                                          Recording Secretary