SEL20091117

APPROVED

TOWN OF PELHAM

BOARD OF SE= LECTMEN MEETING

MINUTES

November 17, 2009

APPROVED &#= 8211; December 8, 2009

CALL TO ORDER – 6:30pm

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

PRESENT:

Mr. Robert Haverty, Mr.= Douglas Viger, Mr. Edmund Gleason, Mr. William McDevitt, Mr. Harold Lynde, Town Administrator Tom Gaydos

ABSENT:

None.

MINUTES REVIEW

Novem= ber 3, 2009

MOTION:

(Lynde/Gleason= ) To approve the No= vember 3, 2009 meeting minutes as amended.

VOTE:

(5-0-0) The mo= tion carried.

OPEN FORUM

Ms. Charlene Takesian and= Ms. Lori Hogan from the Festival of Trees Committee (a subcommittee of the Pelham Sp= irit Group) came forward to discuss the Festival of Trees that was scheduled to = be held at Sherburne Hall between November 27, 2009 and December 5, 2009. Ms. Take= sian explained what the Festival of Trees was and how it would help raise money = for community events. Information= can be found at www. snhfestivaloftrees .com.&= nbsp; All the sponsors, advertisers and tree donors were thanked for making the event a success. Mr. Gayd= os was also thanked for his help with the details and getting the hall ready and coordinating the efforts with the Police and Fire Departments. The Selectmen were given a personal invitation to attend the event.

REQUEST FOR NON-PUBLIC SESSION

MOTION:

(Viger/McDevit= t) Request for a non-public session per RSA 91-A:3,II, d (possible land acquisition)

ROLL CALL:

Mr. Haverty-Ye= s; Mr. Viger-Yes; Mr. McDevitt-Yes; Mr. Lynde-Yes; Mr. Gleason-Yes

It was noted tha= t when the Board returned, after the non-public session, the Board would continue their public session. The Boa= rd entered into a non-public session at approximately 6:47 pm. Also present was Mr. Gaydos.

MOTION:

(Viger/Lynde) = To seal the minutes of the non-public session indefinitely.

VOTE:

(5-0-0) The mo= tion carried.

The Board returned to public session at approximately 6:55 pm.

APPOINTMENTS

Dr. Frank Bass: Discussion – School Use of Unfinished Classrooms at Town Hall

School Superintendent Dr.= Frank Bass came forward to discuss the possibility of using the six classrooms within = the Municipal Building for Pelham’s special needs pre-school. At present services were being provided to the students from use of portable classrooms provided to the Town by the state under the kindergarten legislation. Dr. Bass said it was known that the kindergarten population would expand and the legislation from the state for= the kindergarten portables would go away. He said by the close of school in the year 2012 the Town would need a more permanent solution for the kindergarten program. He stated they approached St. Patr= ick’s, but unfortunately bringing them up to code was prohibitive. Dr. Bass said they contacted the Selectmen to review the available space.&n= bsp; He stated that Mr. Gleason, Mr. Gaydos, Fire Chief James Midgley, Sc= hool Board Chair Eleanor Burton, the architect and himself reviewed the six classrooms to see what could be done to accommodate the needs of the presch= ool program. The total cost for f= ire protection and building the rooms would be approximately $200,000. Dr. Bass said if the Selectmen were serious about allowing them to move forward, it was hoped that they would consider something like a ten year lease with at least two years notice for= the lease to end.

Mr. Lynde understood the = proposal and stated that the Town would have to determine if it would be beneficial = to the Town. He wanted to know w= hat the alternative was and the associated cost for it. He wanted to know what the avoided= cost would be by using the facility. Dr. Bass said the cost for the Town would increase if they (School District) had to find another location. He said they reviewed alternatives but found they would cost approximately two to four times grea= ter than renovating the space (in the municipal building). Properties in the area have been reviewed, but in talking to the Fire Department, they found them to be cost prohibitive to make them suitable for the program needs. Mr. Lynde understood that the (pro= posed) alternative avoided costs in the vicinity of $200,000.

Mr. Lynde asked if the ar= ea behind the Police Station had been reviewed. Director of Special Services Tina = McCoy stated that they had looked at those areas in the past, but had not looked = at them lately because they didn’t know it was an option to consider. Dr. Bass stated that parking was also a consideration and the location of the s= ix classrooms would have an ease of operation that was considered.

Mr. Viger questioned how = the bathroom facilities would be utilized.&nbs= p; Ms. McCoy stated there were currently no bathrooms in the wing. She said they had reviewed the wat= er lines and commented that it would be a huge upgrade to the facility in the = long term.

Mr. Gleason asked what the $200,000 would buy the Town. = He questioned if it would buy the capability to have preschool and kindergarte= n. Ms. McCoy stated it would be for preschool only. Mr. Gleason a= sked if there was an anticipation to bring kindergarten into the building. Ms. McCoy answered no. Mr. Gleason asked if the $200,000 = quote had been made in writing by Marinace. Dr. Bass said it was. = Mr. Gleason stated that the Town’s experience with making renovations ind= icated that it would be a lot more money to make improvements. Dr. Bass stated that the quote he received was $196,000 and included all the costs for renovations (including toilets) as well as fire protection services. Ms. McCoy stated when they reviewe= d the facility in the past (with kindergarten on their minds) they realized the c= ost would be much higher because of the specific requirements for kindergarten. The state doesn’t have the same requirements for preschool. Mr. Gleason confirmed that the ten= year lease would only be for preschool and wouldn’t include expansion for anything else. Dr. Bass and M= s. McCoy said that was correct. = Mr. Gleason asked if they would be constructing a building for kindergarten subsequent to the renovations. Dr. Bass stated that the School Board had not taken a position with regard to a long-term solution for kindergarten; they currently had portables that would last through the 2012 school year. Mr. Gleason was very concerned in regard to the safety issues of the space, specifically with the Police and Fire Department’s access, hea= vy traffic at various times per day as well as having a play area in the proxi= mity of the parking area. He comme= nted if the roundabout was not built, the only egress for the Police would be in= the same location the requested space would be accessed. He recognized the economies for the taxpayers, but was also concerned about the well being of the children bein= g in an area of high (speeding) traffic volume.= He also felt a ten year lease would be a long time to tie up the Pol= ice and Fire Departments.

Ms. McCoy appreciated the concerns with the safety and commented that they had some flexibility with = the start and end times of the programs to try to mitigate the traffic impact.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Mr. Gleason stated that they had no control over the egress of the Police and Fire Departments as they come and= go for emergencies.

Mr. McDevitt saw safety as more of a School Boa= rd responsibility to address. Wi= th regard to traffic in the area, they had the same issues (except for the Pol= ice patrol cars). Mr. McDevitt discussed items he felt the School should know, such as incidental heat in = some areas, a roof leak above one of the classrooms, the windows in that section= of the building are single pane and possibly some asbestos in places not expec= ted (in some of the mortar and floors). He said people watching the meeting might question why the Selectmen aren’t jumping at the chance for the space to be used. He said if the Town was currently u= sing the space for storage of Town records as well as Park & Recreation equipment. He said there was = some storage space next to the Police Department that could be used. Mr. McDevitt said the Town and Sch= ool would have to work out issues such as on-going maintenance costs; he said t= he Town had a cleaning person, but did not have a maintenance person or janito= r.

Mr. Viger said there had = been plans of moving the Cable Department into the building and questioned how it would affect the Town moving forward. Mr. McDevitt said the Town had kept the classrooms because it didn’t have the money and didn’t need them at the time. He said they had been intended for growth space, which was a wonderful thing to have available because the Town offices could grow without having to build a building. He said there was some office space available in the administrative area. Mr. Viger questioned if the Town saw the need within the next ten ye= ars to move the Cable Department. He said the condition of the building wasn’t in good shape and questioned where the Town would go if something were to happen.

Mr. Haverty said the Town= had a need for various administrative offices and wanted to know if they could co-term the space to when the Town would need to utilize it.

Mr. Lynde discussed the possibility of having an added playground and didn’t see it as a major impediment. He said the School Board would have to address the safety and commented that the Police were a= ware of the area. Ms. McCoy stated= that the students they served were three and four years old. She only saw them using the playgr= ound on occasion. From her perspec= tive it was a plus having the Fire Department close by.

Mr. Haverty asked that th= e plans for the space be discussed. M= s. McCoy said architects would look at the draft plan. She said all six rooms would be us= ed but not all for classrooms. There= would be work space, nurses station, regular pre-school classroom, speech and language therapy space and a gross motor room. In addition, there would be a receptionist and space for meeting areas.&= nbsp; Mr. Haverty asked if the meeting area could be used for other Town functions. Ms. McCoy said it = would be available after hours at which time they would have little to no need for its use.

Mr. Lynde asked if the sp= ace was adequate for future growth. M= s. McCoy believed they would be able to utilize the space for quite some time. She liked that the spac= e was on ground level and felt it was viable for a long term solution.

Mr. McDevitt felt the poi= nt made by Mr. Viger regarding the Cable Department was valid.

Mr. Lynde felt the Select= men should consider the additional costs for making room for what currently occupied the space (six classrooms). He said they would have to consider taking advantage of the 10,000SF behind them.

Mr. Viger was having a ha= rd time with the estimated figure for the work to be done. He said it seemed to be an inexpen= sive amount of money to make the changes. Dr. Bass stated that they had Marinace Architects review the space a= nd requested a firm number. The = number received was $196,000.

Mr. Gleason said safety w= as still a concern. He asked if any th= ought had been given as to what mechanism would be used to control the costs for = that portion of the building (i.e. electricity, heating). Dr. Bass said there were a number = of ways to work through it, such as setting a percentage; it would be a negotiated. Mr. Gleason said = consideration should be given to the fact that the space had previously been proposed for= use by the Cable Department and for use as a studio for public use. He said another consideration (hig= h on the list) was the space being used for public and government meetings. He said it would be nice to retain= the ability to expand, which would be lost.&nb= sp;

Mr. McDevitt wanted Mr. G= aydos to find out if there were any additional costs associated in relocating storag= e.

Mr. Lynde felt that the p= roposal was a low cost solution from the taxpayer’s point of view. He said the Town should look at th= e area as to how it could be utilized and fit the Town’s needs. He said (by default) the Police we= re currently using it for storage, but there was a lot of space available for = the Town’s use, if they chose to. He felt it should be reviewed as a possible location. He said the cost for the storage s= hould also be considered.

Mr. Gaydos didn’t f= eel there would be any large (additional) cost other than man power. He was interested to know if Marin= ace had provided detail when the cost estimate was provided. He said if the Board was intereste= d in moving forward the details (such as access doors being moved and how the fi= re alarms would tie into the panel) should be reviewed. Ms. McCoy stated that a fire engin= eer looked at the six classrooms, the associated costs were taken into account = when Dr. Bass worked with the architect. She agreed that certain details would need to be worked out with the Town. Dr. Bass said there wou= ld need to be discussions to keep the best interest of both parties in mind wh= en reviewing the plans; this could be done in tandem with Mr. Gaydos. He said he needed a general consen= t from the Selectmen in order to get the detail being requested.

Mr. Haverty asked what ty= pe of timeframe the school had to meet their objectives. Dr. Bass said they would like to have the space up and running as of July 1, 2010. He said there were a number of possibilities that would allow for it to occur by that date.

Mr. Viger asked if the fu= nds would be brought forward as a warrant article or spent out of the existing school budget. School Board C= hair Eleanor Burton said it would have to come up at the = School District meeting (for funds available as of July). Mr. Viger confirmed that to be the= School District meeting in March; the general elect= ion on a warrant article. Ms. Burton answered yes. Dr. Bass stated that there were other ways to do it and it may not end up as a warrant. He s= aid the School Board had yet to determine what would make the most sense going forward. Mr. McDevitt stated = that the Town was required to have a warrant in 2010 if they were to lease space= for a term greater than one year. Dr. Bass said whatever position the School Board decided upon would be shared w= ith the Selectmen. He though it w= ould be good if both boards came together.

There was a brief discuss= ion how to proceed. Mr. McDevitt said= the Selectmen would need a lot of details as to what the proposed changes to the space would be.

Ms. Burton stated that th= e School Board needed to know if the Selectmen would entertain the project. She said if there was no interest,= they didn’t want to expend additional money for the architect to come up w= ith detailed plans. She questione= d the Selectmen if they had unlimited funds, how and when they would use the space. She said other questio= ns such as maintenance and utility costs should be known before a commitment w= as made. Mr. McDevitt said the assumption was that the tenant would pay for the incremental costs for use = of the space. He said if the Sel= ectmen voted yes, it would indicate there was good faith (of both parties) going forward.

Dr. Bass felt having a go= od faith effort moving forward would be a good approach. The details and costs could then be further reviewed/discussed. <= /p>

Although Mr. Viger had so= me reservations regarding the overall costs and safety issues, he felt the rig= ht thing to do for the Town was to reduce costs and make that space available = to proceed. Ultimately, he felt = since a warrant for a multi-year lease would be put before the voters, the voters= would have the opportunity to speak in March (2010). Mr. Haverty agreed that ultimately= , the decision was the voters. In advance, he would like a detailed plan for what would be done to the building.

Mr. Viger made a motion t= o give the School Board permission to move forward. Mr. Haverty clarified that the Sel= ectmen were simply saying the School Board could proceed with the plan in general;= as the plan develops there would be additional discussions. The Selectmen did not make a decis= ion as to the lease period or length of the commitment; it was a good faith effort.

MOTION:

(Viger/McDevit= t) To give the School Board permission to move forward with their plan to renov= ate the six classrooms with the provision that the voters get say on the lease process on the March (2010) ballot; also provided that the Selectmen get = the details requested relative to the costs so they could work with the Schoo= l to determine the impact to the Town.

VOTE:

(5-0-0) The mo= tion carried.

Ms. Burton asked if the S= electmen wanted a conceptual plan. Mr. Haverty said the Selectmen would like a fairly detailed plan from the archi= tect showing what the space would look like and be provided with the associated costs. Mr. Gleason said there= would need to be sufficient detail so the impacts to the building could be analyzed. Mr. Gaydos listed a number of items that would need to be reviewed in detail. He said the next step would be to = compose a list of items to be addressed and to solicit the Fire Chief’s comme= nts regarding fire safety code items. Dr. Bass suggested setting up a meeting with Mr. Gaydos, Ms. McCoy, Marinace and the Fire engineer to determine what level of detail was needed= to move forward. Mr. Haverty ass= umed a subcommittee would be set up to monitor the project and asked if one or two Selectmen could be part of that committee.= Dr. Bass didn’t see it as being an issue; he would bring it up= to the School Board at their next meeting.&nb= sp; He asked that the Selectmen lean strongly toward a long-term (10 yea= r) lease.

Dr. Bass will keep the Se= lectmen posted on the results from the School Board meeting.

Historical Building Repair Update: Roland Soucy

Town Building Inspector R= oland Soucy came forward to discuss a basic scope of work (and budget numbers) th= at had been put together regarding the outside repairs to the Historical Building= . The items listed were roof repairs, remanufacture windows (between now and the spring), rebuild dormer windows (sashes, new components) and purchase storm windows for the main floor.

Mr. Viger asked if the do= rmer windows would be addressed prior to winter. Mr. Soucy said they would need to = be addressed temporarily and put new windows in during spring.

Mr. Gleason wanted to kno= w the total cost for doing the work outlined.&nb= sp; Mr. Soucy stated the work and materials could cost approximately $30,000. Mr. Gleason asked wh= at the labor costs would be. Mr. Sou= cy said that would come during phase two.&nbs= p; He said the goal was to not use all the money. He said the key to the project was= the roof.

Mr. Lynde questioned if t= he additional money to complete the work would need to be appropriated. He asked if the proposed windows w= ould retain the historic aspect to the building. Mr. Soucy said the windows were accepted by the National Historical Society.

Mr. Gleason believed if t= he $30,000 were expended out of this year’s budget, that the additional money (needed for the project) be allocated in next year’s budget if possible. Mr. Soucy felt it w= as important to have the additional money for the second phase of the project.

Mr. Haverty asked if the = roof repair would be done by a specific vendor; he wanted to know because the To= wn had a bid policy. Mr. Soucy s= tated all the items were fairly specialized, especially the roof. He said there were two contractors= in Town who were specialized to do the roofing work. He noted that all the contractors = he was speaking to were from Town.

Mr. Gaydos stated that Mr= . Soucy would be the Town’s point of contact (the general contractor). The people hired would be hired by= and work for Mr. Soucy. He asked = if the Selectmen would consider waiving the bid requirements because of the specia= lty vendors.

Mr. Lynde said he would l= ike documentation as to why certain vendors were chosen to have a basis for the decision in the event it was questioned in the future. Mr. Soucy said he was standing beh= ind the numbers provided and was trying to get the work done for less money.

Mr. McDevitt felt it woul= d be a good idea to waive the bidding in this instance because the workers would recognize and appreciate the historic nature of the building. He trusted Mr. Soucy to get the be= st possible price. Mr. Haverty n= oted that the bid policy was a self-imposed policy by the Board and could waive = it at their discretion. Mr. Glea= son agreed with Mr. McDevitt and agreed to waive the bid policy in this case.

There was a general conse= nsus by the Selectmen to waive the bid policy and allow Mr. Soucy to proceed.

Mr. Gaydos said he would = like to allocate $30,000 out of the budget. He wanted to know if the Selectmen were comfortable with the plan. Mr. Soucy said as the work progres= sed he would generate an invoice based on the schedule of values as submitted.

Mr. Gleason asked that Mr= . Gaydos confirm that the balance of the money needed to complete the project could = be allocated from the 2010 T= own Building budget. Mr. Gaydos said once phase one was completed, they would have a good idea for what was needed to complete phase two.

MOTION:

(Lynde/Gleason= ) To allocate the $30,000 toward the work at the Historical Society and to support the restoration plan presented and discussed by Mr. Roland Soucy

VOTE:

(5-0-0) The mo= tion carried.

New Council on Aging Appointments: Barbara Ward, Gayle Plouffe a= nd Rosemary Shawver

Senior Center Director Sue Hovling submitted a letter to the Selectmen indicating that the Council on = Aging voted three new members and were submitting their names to the Selectmen for approval.

MOTION:

(Viger/Lynde) = To accept the recommendation to appoint Barbara Ward, Gayle Plouffe and Rose= mary Shawver as members of the Council on Aging with a term expiring April 30, 2010

VOTE:

(5-0-0) The mo= tion carried.

Mr. Gleason noted with th= e newly appointed members, the Council on Aging had fifteen members filling the available positions.

Article K Waiver: = Map 31 Lot 11-227, 40 Woekel Circle Owner: Loretta Woekel Rev. Trust of 2002, William Zorn Trustee

The Selectmen convened as= the Board of Health with Deputy Health Officer Paul Zarnowski as Chairman who brought the meeting to order.

Mr. Zarnowski read aloud = the requested waivers to Article K as follows: 1) Section 295-17 – conver= sion of seasonal system to year-round; 2) Section 295-16 – leach bed 125ft. from pond (100ft. proposed); 3) 295-16 – leach beds 75ft. from poorly drained soils (55ft. proposed); 4) Section 295-16 – 75ft. to open drainage (35ft. proposed); 5) Section 295-16 – septic tank 50ft. to open drainage (35ft. proposed).

Mr. Shane Gendron of Herb= ert Associates, representing the applicant, came forward to discuss the request= ed waivers. He began by providin= g a brief summary and history of the lot. He stated that Gove Environmental had been hired to do all the flagg= ing and review the ditch line. He= said they had a meeting with Mr. Zarnowski and had put a plan together. He said Mr. Zarnowski had made some comments about the plan, revisions were made and the plan was then submitted with the waiver requests to the Board.&nbs= p; Mr. Gendron reviewed the setback distances being requested. They wanted to meet all the state requirements to be able to go for year-round conversion.

Mr. Gendron told the Boar= d that a variance was granted in 2007 to raze and reconstruct a building closer to t= he shore and move it back to comply with the Shore Line Act; the septic had be= en proposed in the gravel area of the driveway. He then reviewed the packet of information provided to the Board. <= /span>He read aloud the letter submitted from Gove Environmental who delineated the wetlands on the lot being discussed. Mr. Gendron indicated that they were proposing the Clean Solutions septic design and provided a detailed description of how it worked for the Board.

Mr. Viger reviewed the le= tter from Attorney Patricia Panciocco (applicant’s legal representative) a= nd questioned what was meant by “Since this Property is a non-conforming lot, careful scrutiny of those hardships = is requested and required to prevent an unconstitutional taking.” Attorney Panciocco said it meant if= the property was rendered valueless (or reduced) with no public benefit associa= ted with that particular diminution of value; in other words, the failure to provide a public benefit prevents the application of a regulations and minimizes the value of the property. She stated that a setback or restriction couldn’t be adopted without having a purpose that benefited the public and believed the Board h= ad to review these items case by case.

Mr. Haverty questioned if= they would diminish the property value by not allowing the waivers, or would the property value be increased by granting the waivers. Attorney Panciocco said that would= be a matter of opinion. She discus= sed the area and stated there were a number of properties that had illegally converted septic systems, some had legally converted systems and there were seasonal dwellings. She said = in looking at the tax records she saw a mixed area. She felt if an applicant made a reasonable request and there were compensating measures taken to ensure that the purpose of the regulation was not frustrated, that application should receive due consideration.

Mr. McDevitt speculated i= f the change from seasonal to year-round was not being discussed, and the system failed, the applicant would still be in front of the Board. He wanted to know if this was the = case if the applicant would be seeking a similar solution. Mr. Zarnowski said if the system h= ad failed, the applicant would be seeking the same waivers (#2 - #5). Mr. Gaydos asked if the property w= ere to remain seasonal if the owner would not be allowed to pump the existing hold= ing chamber. Mr. Zarnowski said t= hey would be allowed to pump, but the Department of Environmental Services (= 216;DES’) viewed holding chambers as a last resort. Mr. Gaydos noted when Chunky̵= 7;s Cinema was being discussed pumping was an alternative. Mr. Zarnowski said pumping was an alternative (as a temporary measure) to take care of a failed system; they would be much better off getting a viable system in place. He said in this case the holding t= ank was replaced approximately five years ago.= Mr. Gaydos asked if the property was currently a seasonal property.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Mr. Zarnowski answered yes. Mr. Gaydos asked if the applicant = was required to do to get a year-round occupancy. Mr. Zarnowski answered yes. They n= eeded a DES approved septic system, otherwise they couldn’t convert per the state regulations.

Mr. Gaydos questioned how= the present application differed from the recent case discussed by the Board (M= r. Cavanaugh) that had no improvements and they wanted to make improvements to further utilize the property. Mr. Gle= ason said in that application, the applicant had no house on the property and was seeking to get the water from an adjoining property.

Mr. Gleason asked for con= firmation that the proposed system would be an improvement and provide a better protection to the wetlands. M= r. Zarnowski answered yes. The proposed Clean Solutions system would replace the existing holding tank. The state regulations would be met= , the waivers were needed to comply with the Town regulations. Mr. Gleason commented on the varian= ce granted for the property and questioned if there were any stipulations to t= he approval. Attorney Panciocco = stated that the area variance was for the setback of the front stairs; the require= ment was 30ft. the requested was 25ft. There was a discussion regarding the seasonal aspect of the property, but the Notice of Decision didn’t impose any condition that the prope= rty remain seasonal. Attorney Pan= ciocco noted that the plan submitted to the Board showed a future septic system. Mr. Gleason reviewed the requested waivers and again asked for confirmation that the proposed would be an improvement over the current system. Attorney Panciocco answered yes.&nb= sp; She felt it was worthwhile to note that to the extent allowed, the design proposed that three bedroom system be installed even though the home will be a two bedroom home with no plans to enlarge. Mr. Gleason asked if the design wa= s approved by the state. Mr. Gendron sai= d the Board would have to grant approval prior to the plan being submitted to the state. He commented that the existing system was a holding tank located exactly 50ft. off the lake and 3= 5ft. from the existing water supply well. They proposed to pump the tank, crush it and fill with clean fill. The proposal was to move the tank = back to comply with the distances to the lake.&= nbsp; Mr. Gendron said they pushed as much as they could on the lot and believed (as far as the state was concerned) there would be no issues with = the proposal.

Mr. Haverty said the new = system was an improvement on the old system given the condition that it would move from a seasonal to a non-seasonal property. Mr. Zarnowski said that was correc= t; the biggest issue was the conversion aspect.&n= bsp; Mr. Haverty said the thing that made the system a significant improvement had to do with changing the property from seasonal to full time= . He said if the property were seaso= nal, a hold tank would be an acceptable septic.&n= bsp; Mr. Zarnowski said it would be acceptable, but would need to be pump= ed every couple weeks dependant upon how often it was occupied. Mr. Haverty reviewed the Zoning Bo= ard of Adjustment meeting minutes (dated September 10, 2007) where Mr. Lance Ouellette confir= med that the building would remain seasonal and Mr. David Woekel said it would remain seasonal. He wondered = if the spirit of the variance took into consideration that the dwelling remained seasonal. Mr. Gendron said he= would question whether a holding tank was a viable situation for any property whi= ch was only as good as the person maintaining the system.

Mr. Gleason questioned if= there was an environmental effect in the event the waivers were not granted and t= he property remained seasonal with a holding tank. Mr. Zarnowski said there would be = no effect as long as there were no leaks in the septic tank. He was not aware of the tank being inspected, but knew it had been replaced approximately five years ago.

Mr. McDevitt stated it wasn’t the Board’s responsibility to grant waivers to help peop= le improve their property. With = that said, he felt if the Board went on record and didn’t approve the waiv= ers, it would send a message to people that a holding tank was a preferable solution. He felt holding tan= ks around the pond was a bad idea. He felt the best public health solution was to approve the waivers although it bothered him that by doing so it would help the owner improve the value of their property.

Mr. Gaydos believed the c= oncern was addressed by the fact that Mr. Zarnowski had the ability to request regular pumping reports to show that the system was being pumped. He said he was thinking of the pre= sent case based on the recent case where the lot had no improvements. Mr. McDevitt said in that case, th= ere was no home on the property, it was a piece of land. Mr. Zarnowski said he received a l= etter (regarding the other case) that the application was withdrawn without prejudice. Mr. Gaydos stated = that the applicant in that case was intending to return.

Mr. Lynde asked if the ho= use had been made smaller. Attorney Panciocco stated she noted that fact in her letter based on the Zoning Board’s minutes (of September 10, 2007). Mr. Ge= ndron said they knew that the house had been taken away from the shore line to ma= ke it more compliant with the Shore Line Regulations. Mr. Lynde got the impression from = the Zoning Board’s minutes that the footprint was made smaller, but the o= wner added a second floor. Mr. Zar= nowski believed the house was a single story.&nbs= p; He said the original house was in poor condition. Mr. Lynde also noted that the minu= tes indicated that the property would stay seasonal when the variance was granted. He didn’t have= a problem granting the four waivers to Section 295-16 because the proposed wo= uld be a better system.

Mr. Zarnowski noted that = there was no difference between a seasonal and year-round system in regard to des= ign criteria.

Attorney Panciocco assure= d the Board that the applicant was not adding a year-round system for the benefit= of enhancing the value of the property. She explained the applicant’s personal situation. She stated that they had already co= mmitted to signing up with the company for professional monitoring of the system. She said they would be happy to se= nd the reports to the Town as the Health Inspector may require. She noted that they hired a wetland scientist to ensure that there was no public threat posed by what was being proposed. Attorney Panciocco commented that under RSA 674:19 non-conforming lots and their use were protected under state statute. She said the Town was allowed to control it to a certain extent and noted that = in January, 2009 the Supreme Court ruled that the change of a rental unit (seasonal to full time/year round occupancy) was not a substantial change in use. She said the trend seeme= d to be to install improvements that were enhanced, similar to what was proposed= to allow reasonable use of property. She said they had gone to great extent to ensure that the property d= idn’t threaten the public.

Mr. Lynde proposed that t= he Board approve the four waiver requests under Section 295-16 and hold off a decisi= on on Section 295-17 so the Board would have the opportunity to review their p= rior record of how they treated anything similar.

Mr. Lynde made a motion to approve the four waivers to Article K, Section 295-16 as follows: 1) Section 295-16 – leach bed 125ft. from pond (slightly greater than 100ft. proposed); 2) 295-16 – leach beds 75ft. from poorly drained soils (55= ft. proposed); 3) Section 295-16 – 75ft. to open drainage (35ft. proposed); 4) Section 295-16 – septic tank 50ft. to open drainage (35ft. proposed). He said he would make a separate m= otion to postpone action on Section 295-17 until the Board had the opportunity to review their history in dealing with the particular item.

Mr. Gleason believed if t= he waivers were granted then the waiver to Section 295-17 would become a moot point. He compared this case = to the case heard by the Board that was a vacant lot with no existing system on the lot. He felt the waiver shoul= d be granted and didn’t feel a precedent would be set by doing so.

Mr. Gaydos questioned how= many people had come forward requesting that their seasonal property be converte= d to year-round with the Board granting the waivers. Mr. Zarnowski said there were two = on the applicant’s street that he knew of.&= nbsp; Mr. Gaydos stated that the Board had already set a precedent.

Mr. Lynde stood by his mo= tion to approve the waivers recognizing the great benefit that the changes would ha= ve to the Town and the property.

As he stated earlier, Mr. McDevitt believed from a public health aspect, if the Board didn’t approve the waivers there would be an opportunity for mischief.

The Board discussed how t= hey would handle the waiver request to Section 295-17. Mr. Zarnowski commented that there= was no ‘seasonal’ use in zoning; it was simply called ‘residential’.

MOTION:

(Lynde/McDevit= t) To approve the four waivers to Article K, Section 295-16 as follows: 1) Sect= ion 295-16 – leach bed 125ft. from pond (slightly greater than 100ft. proposed); 2) 295-16 – leach beds 75ft. from poorly drained soils (55ft. proposed); 3) Section 295-16 – 75ft. to open drainage (35ft. proposed); 4) Section 295-16 – septic tank 50ft. to open drainage (35ft. proposed).

VOTE:

(4-2-0) The motion carried.= Mr. Haverty and Mr. Viger voted = no.

Mr. Zarnowski stated that= the Board would need to make the determination whether the waiver to Section 29= 5-17 was relevant. Mr. Gleason didn’t feel that the waiver to Section 295-17 was relevant now that t= he Board voted to approve the other waiver requests because the property complied. There was a brief discussion regarding how the Board should proceed with the request.

Mr. Gendron discussed the= waiver request and told the Board that when he sent the application to the state, = they would view it as year-round because it had a septic system and met all the energy and building codes. He= asked for clarification and how he would handle his application to the state.

Mr. Lynde didn’t re= call having that type of waiver request come before him; therefore he didn’= ;t know what type of precedent he would be setting by deciding that question.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>

Mr. Haverty questioned wh= at mechanism the other properties on the street used to do their conversion. Mr. Zarnowski believed one came be= fore the Board and included the seasonal to year-round clause. He believed they had come to the B= oard approximately 3 years (+/-) in the past.&n= bsp; He suggested seeking legal opinion on Section 295-17 or get history = on how the Board voted on the other cases.&nb= sp; Mr. Lynde said if the Board had voted regarding 295-17, he wanted to= see the case.

Attorney Panciocco questi= oned if the properties (that had previously come before the Board) were seasonal properties when they applied or if they had already been made year-round dwelling units and now were coming to the Board for a septic system. Mr. Zarnowski said the properties = were seasonal. Attorney Panciocco commented that the distinction was that the applicant’s home was a year-round dwelling and built to be so.&nb= sp; She stated even with the zoning variance there was no precedent effe= ct; the Supreme Court had come out and stated that. She noted zoning boards weren̵= 7;t bound by prior decisions because each application is considered on its individual merits.

The Board decided to put = off making a decision until the next meeting to be able to seek an opinion.

MOTION:

(Viger/Haverty= ) To table the decision regarding the waiver request to Section 295-17 to the next meeting. <= /p>

VOTE:

(6-0-0) The motion carried.

MOTION:

(Haverty/Viger= ) To adjourn the Board of Health meeting.

VOTE:

(6-0-0) The motion carried.

The Board of Health adjourned. The Selectmen reconvened.          =

Town Warrant Article Voting

Mr. Haverty stated that t= he Selectmen had previous discussions regarding the warrant articles they would present and believed the intent at this point was to vote in regard to them. Mr. Gaydos said the wor= ding of certain articles would be circulated for review. Mr. McDevitt asked if the Selectmen would have an additional vote when the proper wording was submitted to them. Mr. Gaydos said the obj= ective was to be able to go to the Budget Committee on Thursday with the warrant a= rticles. Mr. Viger said the expectation of = the Budget Committee was that they would review the warrant articles this Thurs= day and have their vote the following Monday.&= nbsp; Mr. Gaydos said the information in some of the articles would change, such as the fire station number because they weren’t in receipt of the updated number. Mr. Viger didn’t know how the Selectmen could vote regarding the warrant articl= es without seeing the final wording. He discussed a situation that had happened in the past where the int= ent of the article was changed due to a wording issue.

The Board discussed how t= hey would proceed. The Board deci= ded to review the articles and to call a special meeting on Wednesday evening to v= ote regarding the wording. Once t= hey vote, the articles would be forwarded to the Budget Committee for their rev= iew on Thursday.

The Selectmen then review= ed the proposed warrant articles and discussed their opinions on each.

The Pawn Shop Ordinance w= as addressed. Mr. McDevitt comme= nted that it would be lengthy (and had to be).&= nbsp; He stated it was an advertisement for either changing the Town’= ;s charter, or asking the voters to give the Selectmen the ability to pass ordinances.     &= nbsp;

It was reiterated that the Selectmen would meet on Wednesday evening to vote regarding the warrant articles.

OTHER BUSINESS – Discussions

Delegations of Article K Hearings

Mr. Gaydos said the Selec= tmen are the Board of Health. He discu= ssed with Town Counsel the idea of delegating Article K hearings to a group appointed by the Selectmen. T= he Selectmen (as the Board of Health) would only hear appeals from that committee.

Mr. Haverty questioned if= the subcommittee would need a Selectmen representative, or if the review could = be delegated entirely to the committee. Mr. Gaydos said the entire thing could be delegated.

Mr. Lynde stated that he wouldn’t support the proposal because of the importance of Article K.

Mr. McDevitt showed the viewing public a plan s= et, which he said were beyond him. He felt the Selectmen should consider delegating the review to experts.

Mr. Viger agreed with Mr. McDevitt, but also felt there was value in non-expert opinions. He believed collectively, the Board asked good questions that got them to a decent end result.

Mr. Gleason said while he= found the cases tedious, he also found a benefit in hearing them and understanding the impacts to the Town. He a= greed with Mr. Lynde and felt they were important enough to continue to hear the cases and participate in the decision process.

There was a general conse= nsus to continue hearing Article K cases.

Credit Card Acceptance for Tax Collector

Mr. McDevitt said the que= stion had been raised as to why the Town Clerk/Tax Collector didn’t accept credit cards. He noted there = would be fees involved, but felt the Selectmen should hear from the Town Clerk and Treasurer to see what other towns were doing. He said another thing to review wo= uld be to look into electronic bill payment. Mr. Gaydos was asked to speak with the Town Clerk (and Treasurer) and ask them to investigate the possibilities and come back to the Selectmen wi= th a recommendation.

Open area Cul-de-Sacs

Mr. McDevitt stated that = he would like to show the Board what other communities have done in open areas and cul-de-sacs. He said some of = those areas in Town have created a problem and a solution should be determined.

Itinerant Vendor Ordinance

Mr. Gaydos stated that the Town’s ordinance confused many sections of the statute. He said it should be

re-written to conform to = the statute. He said he would find out if it co= uld be adopted by the Selectmen, or if it required a vote at Town meeting.

Pawn Shop Ordinance

This was discussed earlie= r. Mr. Gaydos told the Selectmen that the Police Chief had an additional ordinance (parking) to update and present to the Board.

TOWN ADMINISTRATOR’S / SELECTMEN’S RE= PORTS

Mr. McDevitt, Mr. Viger and Mr. Gleason had no reports.

Mr. Lynde reported that t= he Pelham High School Building Committee met and were waiting for a decision by the School Board as to what they would do.= He also told the Selectmen that he spoke with Mr. Bill Pultar to add= ress the concern he kept coming to the Board for. He believed there had been a lot of confusion generated from past history that was now clarified.

Mr. Gaydos told the Selec= tmen that the request to go for a best and final offer (to service the Transfer Station) had improved the last set of bids that came in; the final analysis= was still to be done.

REQUEST FOR NON-PUBLIC SESSION

MOTION:

(McDevitt/Lynd= e) Request for a non-public session per RSA 91-A:3,II, a and b (Personnel; Hiring of any person as an employee)

ROLL CALL:

Mr. Haverty-Ye= s; Mr. Viger-Yes; Mr. McDevitt-Yes; Mr. Lynde-Yes; Mr. Gleason-Yes

It was noted tha= t when the Board returned, after the non-public session, the Board would not take = any other action publicly, except to possibly seal the minutes of the non-public session and to adjourn the meeting. The Board entered into a non-public session at approximately 10:30 pm.

The Board returned to public session at approximately 11:23pm.

MOTION:

(McDevitt/Glea= son) To seal the minutes of the non-public session indefinitely.

VOTE:

(5-0-0) The mo= tion carried.

ADJOURNMENT

MOTION:

(McDevitt/Glea= son) To adjourn the meeting.

VOTE:

(5-0-0) The motion carried.

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 11:23 pm.

            =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =          Respectfully submitted,

            =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =          Charity A. Landry Willis

            =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =          Recording Secretary