DUNBARTON PLANNING BOARD
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 20, 2002
TOWN OFFICES – 7:00 P.M.
The regular monthly meeting of the Dunbarton Planning Board was held at the above time, date and place with Co-Chairman Kenneth Swayze presiding. The following members were present:
Kenneth Swayze, Co-Chairman (KS)
Alison Vallieres, Secretary (AV)
George Holt (GH)
Carter Higginbotham (CH)
Brian Nordle (BN)
Charles Graybill (CG)
Michael Poirier (MP)
The
Acting Chairman Kenneth Swayze verified with the Secretary that the meeting had
been posted in a timely fashion in accordance with State Law in three public
places throughout the Town and published in the Concord Monitor for one
day.
The
minutes of the previous meeting of February 20, 2002 were accepted unanimously
as written with the following corrections:
Page 1, CH requested that his
statement on the correction of the previous minutes of January 16, 2002 re the
Gelinas property right of way should state that he doesn’t know for sure that
there is only one right of way on the Gelinas property. There may be other ROW’s that he is unaware
of. The ROW in question goes back to the
Town Forest which was previously known as the Whitney property.
Page 8, Al Stuto should be
changed to Al Statuto.
OLD
BUSINESS:
GELINAS LOT
KS noted that
the Gelinas Lot plan still needs to be clarified before signature of the final
mylar. There is some clarification of
the ROW which still needs to be finished.
It was noted for the record that this subdivision had been granted a 90 day extension and the project was well over the time period thereby the Planning Board took the following action:
CH made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board deny the application for the Michel Belanger Proposed Four Lot Subdivison off Old Hopkinton Road without prejudice. Alison Vallieres seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
At this point in the meeting, Kenneth Swayze stepped down and George Holt took over the chair of the meeting.
GH updated the members with what
had gone on since the last meeting.
-
Site walk has been completed. JM,
GH, BN, MP on site walk. Looked at
alternate configuration on Everett Road and also looking at run off. Looked at wetlands and proposed drainage. Board noted it was a good site walk and a lot
of information was gained and questions were asked and answered.
-
Central New Hampshire Regional Planning Commission attended a special
meeting held on March 13, 2002 with suggestions.
-
Selectmen has met with applicants regarding salt issues and Lot 10 and
11
-
GH indicated he was part of the consulting people with regard to the
well samples and standing water samples.
It was noted that a well to bedrock should be dug for accurate
sampling.
-
BOS basically felt that we should not pursue any further on a test
point of view and had discussions with developer and based upon agreement with
developer and BOS, the developer will go at risk and if wells show heavy
contamination at the houses, it will be at their expense. GH noted the wells should be grout sealed. The study may provide false evidence and only
way to test is to put the wells in.
Developer does not have to put hard top down and the road would
intersect but would still upgrade portions of Everett Road and ditches.
GH
noted the objective of this meeting is to reach a consensus from the Board to
the applicant on whether the road should be a culdasac or through road so the applicant can proceed on the final
design and start the permitting process and whether or not if it were a through
road there be a T or curve, etc.
At
this point in the discussion, CG noted the Selectmen had met with the developer
with comments as follows:
-
Town would put the road as a through road and insist that the developer
put in a gate that is computerized that only emergency vehicles could activate
and should be set back 75’ from Everett Road to allow for any traffic to turn
around. Could be opened as a through
road at a later time.
-
BOS would prefer to have the 17 acres incorporated in the individual
lots and not given to the Town.
The
applicants indicated they were waiting for input from the Town but would need
an extension. They indicated they have
had conversations with the abutters.
Felt they would like to give the 17 acres to the Town. They have met with the Zellers twice.
Jacques
Belanger, Surveyor, presented a plan showing a layout of the through road
bearing more to the east involving a land swap with the Town and building a
berm to protect the Zeller property from lights, etc. This would be a continuous sweep instead of
having a stop sign at the T.
In
addition, he presented a plan showing the through road coming out further to
the west below the Zeller’s property.
This would involve wetlands and additional crossing of wetlands. In addition the slopes are greater.
CG
noted that the Selectmen’s point of view is they would prefer to have
connecting road at a T. CG noted the
Selectmen have been trying to get additional land from the developer for a salt
shed. Plans are uncertain at this
time. Don’t agree with the sweep.
Jacques
Belanger noted there was 35’ of frontage which could be squeezed to the Town
Parcel. He would have to reconfigure the
lots to see the layout.
Board
asked if there was a possibility in changing alignment of lots if we can change
the slope from 8% to 5%. Jacques
indicated he would try but we would start losing lots.
It
was indicated the developer did not want to consider a PRD.
CH
indicated he was not in favor of a through road. Stated the salt shed is not the
responsibility of the developer. The
Town should get on it. Regarding police
and fire access via Mansion Road, the Town needs to correct this problem. This is a separate issue. They can make it so it will be a safe turn. We should not tie that intersection in as a
major point. Trucks will be going down
that road tonight. If it so bad, why do
we let our trucks go down there now.
Stated he lives on Gorham Pond Road and it is a through road from Route
114 to 13. There are speeding signs
up. Talked for several years about speed
enforcement, etc. We are not going to have
adequate coverage. When people move in,
I wonder which way they would vote if they want this as a culdasac or a through
road. Regarding the neighborhood
concept, we are talking about, I know everyone on our road but don’t know cars
traveling on the road. Selectmen have
been in contact with the developer. We
are kind of out of the loop on this.
BN
stated his opinion was the exact opposite.
In favor of a through road. This
is a medium density district. We have a
Master Plan. Trying to concentrate growth to create a
village. Trying to prevent sprawl. Growth will be concentrated. Dunbarton formed this frontage on two lots
without making it a through road. Route
13 is a DOT ROW . The 8% grade on the
road is acceptable. With regard to where
Mansion Road meets with Route 13, the Town ought to think about fixing it. With regard to the 17 acres, there are
National Groups that spend large amounts of money to acquire conservation land. Boggles my mind that we won’t accept it for
nothing. Regarding the Town Garage, I
don’t know. If these lots are selling
for $100,000, the Town ought to tear down the Salt Shed and sell the lot and
add money to it and build a Town Shed in a place where the Master Plan dictates
Town services, etc.
AV
stated she felt this should be a through road.
She stated she listened to a public hearing on March 11, 2002 regarding
a convenience store near the Old Fort Estates Road and heard testimony from the
residents that the possibility of blocking the only way in and out was a hazard
for police and fire protection. In
addition, the Master Plan notes problems with culdasacs and encourages through
roads. It is not good planning to not
make it a through road.
Comments
from the applicants:
-
Noted their first try had been a culdasac and there were safety issues
with the police and fire protection.
-
Noted they were able to move the entranceway onto Mansion Road away
from the Tarsa Property.
-
Planners say it should be a through road.
Comments
from the public:
Abutters
as follows and noted all had been notified by certified mail:
Janet
Zeller Revocable Trust, Diana Jenkins – Present. Stated she was not obviously in favor of a
through road. If it becomes a through
road, I am adamantly opposed whether it is gated or not. We all know the gate will come down. Have concerns re the proposed sweep. Will be 85’ between the edge of our
road. Wouldn’t want to be in the middle
of the curve. It has been said that
houses create ten trips per day. This is
a total of 140 trips a day. Now this is
the easiest way and there will be more traffic.
What is the future growth.
It
was indicated that you can’t tell what will happen in the future.
CG
indicated the Planning Board would be amiss in not have access roads in all
directions. This would be an
outlet.
CH
asked if the Board of Selectmen have the final authority to change. It was indicated the BOS has the final
approval on the acceptance of the road design.
Diana
Jenkins – Stated she understands the developer was able to move the road on the
Mansion Road end. I would request we
have similar consideration on moving the road away from our driveway.
David
and Deborah Foster – Not Present
Martha
Hammond – Not Present
Randolph
and Lisa Bauer – Not Present
Albert
Statuto – Not Present
Jeff
and Bronda Crosby – Present. Stated that
regarding the gate issue, he didn’t think it will last. It will be a hassle in the winter for the
guys plowing snow. Town will not want to
invest money. I imagine the people that
live there would be the first people to request that it be opened. It does make good sense for a through road
for future growth. There is the Sturh
property in the back with no frontage.
Regarding the issue of the land (17 acres), I agree with Brian. It is great that people want to give it. That potentially could be a house lot in the
future. If it is given to the Town, it
far outweighs the amount of tax money we would be getting from it. I just think it is crazy to think that taxes
are going to make any difference.
With
regard to the salt issue, the well at the Town Garage has been tested. I think cutting the road closer to the Town
garage would bring up issues. If you
were to do this, what would the name of the road be. Should bring it to a T.
Jacqueline
Kennedy – Not Present
Kathleen
McDonald – Not Present
Mark
and Gretchen Andrews – Not Present
Nancie
Stone (represented by Kenneth Swayze) – Stated there was merit to both road
systems. With temporary barriers, the
residents will be the first to petition for the barriers to be brought
down. It is politically stupid to put up
this gate. Go with the through
road. Through roads makes better sense
for Dunbarton.
Regarding
the salt shed, we have an opportunity to have a solution. A buffer zone is not the job of the
Town. This developer has the right to
develop his land. This is a pre-existing
facility. The Town has certain rights also. These lots need to have a look taken at them
but we will reserve this for another meeting.
Mark
Tarsa – Not Present
Schauer
Environmental Consultants – Not Present
W.
G. Howard and Associates – Not Present
J.
E. Belanger Surveying – Present
Town
of Dunbarton – Present
Other
members of the public:
Carl
Mesenzeff – Stated that Old Fort Estates and Flintlock Farms are neighborhoods
because there was no through road. The
Town uses it as a public park. The same
thing happens with Old Fort Estates. It
is a lot safer for the residents living there.
There is a lot of room to go around in the road in case of access for
emergency vehicles. I would opt for a
culdasac. Moose Point was paved at the
request of the Fire Department. These
twelve homes would surely opt for a non through road. People who speed in our neighborhood, we know
who they are.
Ron
Slocum – Stated with a gate with a computerized system, will there be a backup
process. It is eventually going to be
gone. Need some kind of manual process
where anyone can go there at anytime. It
is a waste of energy for the developer.
Temporary gate which stays open.
Stated he grew up in upper State New York at dead end road and there has
never been a case that we never could not get up the road. Chief of Police has said it is not as
important as Mansion Road and Route 13.
Now all of a sudden we are talking about a through road. If I lived in that neighborhood, I would not
want it as a through road. Either make
it a through road or a culdasac. We should do it right the first time. A gate won’t work. There is a sense of security when it is a
dead end street. Children can play in
the street. If this is to be a through
road, make the decision now and don’t pay twice for the road but putting in a
gate. You have two choices and someone
has to move this issue along.
David
Breault – Stated he agreed with what Ron Slocum said. Make it one way or the other for the
developer. A culdasac for the people
want to live on that road. When I wanted
to live in the area, I looked at a driveway 300-400 feet long so I could be way
off the road. There is an advantage to
living on a culdasac which far outweighs a fire truck having to get down the
road. I am for a culdasac. The Zeller’s must be heard without taking
this into the forefront of a decision.
People who live here now should be given consideration.
Brian
Little – This issue came up seven years ago when it was talked about making it
a through road. It was abandoned at that
time as a through road. I have sat here
with 40-50 people who did not want it to be a through road. Say 50 people make the decision. If the people don’t want this, the people
don’t want it. Give them the
choice.
Jeff
Crosby – The Class VI part of Everett Road, where does it start.
After
discussion, it was noted that the Class VI part of Everett road starts at
Zeller’s driveway.
It
was noted this was a Planning Issue and the road is not passable beyond
Zeller’s driveway. In the event that
someone does develop, it would need to be upgraded.
The
Board noted that this would be a good time to obtain an easement for future
road improvements on Everett Road. Would
ask for at least a ten foot easement on the applicant’s side of the road.
AV
stated that basically the Zeller’s property has already been developed because
it had been subdivided into three lots in the past. Even though there is no houses on those lots,
we have to look at the future. A hundred
years from now things will be different.
None of us will be here but there will be development. We have to provide for it now. There will be
development on Everett Road, etc. It is
not good planning not to have a through road.
Jeff
Trexler – Stated that we need a permanent solution. We are not going to be here forever. Hope the Planning Board is aware that someone
will be buying the Zeller’s lots. This
is a medium density district. Glad I am
not on the Planning Board.
Applicants
– Asked if Everett Road accessed onto the Town Forest. It was indicated the Town would have to buy
property to get connection.
David
Breault – With regard to Zeller’s, we don’t know when they will develop
lots. Certainly Sturh property would
like to see some sort of culdasac for future planning. Old Fort Estate and Flintlock Farms good
examples. We can’t cross roads to talk
to our neighbors. The Town doesn’t want
more police on force.
Diane
Jenkins – Stated you can’t make everyone happy. Just want to strongly state that there will
be an impact to having the road end up in front of our house.
KS
noted the road should be a through road and should have a T at the end to stop
traffic. Could move it further down away
from the Zeller’s property line. Maybe
that is not conceivable. Should take it
away from the driveway.
Applicant
- Want to make this amendable to the Town.
Just don’t see moving the road west into the wetlands as a plausible
solution. Would love to fix this
problem. I sympathize with the Zeller’s
but it is a difficult situation to fix.
At
this point in the meeting, it was decided to do a “straw” vote to find out the
feeling of the Planning Board members.
Members voting as follows:
Charles Graybill – Through road
with a T
Alison Vallieres – Through road
with a T
Brian Nordle – Through road with
a T
Carter Higginbotham – Culdasac
Michael Poirier – Abstained
BN
– If the Town doesn’t accept the 17 acres after they agree to donate it, it is
beyond my belief.
CG
noted that we can’t demand land of the applicant. The BOS and the developer have been working
out a way to shift the alignment of the road.
GH
noted that with a T with a stop sign it would slow traffic down.
Applicant
noted there was still the headlight issue with the Zeller’s. Will do everything to shift the road to the
west. For the record, we have offered to
create a vegetation/shrubs barrier on their land to cut the headlights
down.
GH
– Asked how about moving the road to the east.
Applicant
– Willing to make sure the building occurs as far south on Lot 19 from the Town
Garage. Have been trying to do it.
CG
– Would hope the developer would take down trees along Everett Road to widen
it.
Diane
Jenkins – Stated that headlights are an issue but traffic would be her biggest
concern.
CG
noted other issues with the Selectmen with Everett Road as follows:
BN
– Noted that DOT surveying may be able
to locate their ROW on Route 13. If we
could just get Everett Road ROW, DOT may be able to help.
The
question was asked about the timing of the new Town Shed.
CG
noted that a year ago before the March Town Meeting, the Selectmen charged the
Road Agent to put this information together for this year’s agenda. Talk of a 75’ x 75’ garage.
It
was noted that the Board needs to revisit looking at the maximum buildable area
on each lot.
It
was noted for the record that the Board would request a 90 day extension from
the Board of Selectmen for the proposed 14 acre subdivision located off Everett
Road and Mansion Road.
MOTION:
CG
made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board accept the “straw” poll taken
on the through road and T intersection as it applies to the Weston Proposed 14
Lot Subdivison on Everett Road. BN
seconded the motion and it passed by a majority as follows:
CG – Yes
AV – Yes
BN – Yes
CH – Yes
MP – Abstained
The
Board advised the applicants they need to have the plans including road plans
advanced to the Consulting Engineer for technical recommendations 15 days in
advance of the next meeting.
The
public hearing was closed at 9:20 p.m.
Kenneth
Swayze assumed the Chair at this point.
KS
noted that the Town needs to start updating the Master Plan. It is 12 years old. Estimated cost will be $15,000 -
$20,000. It was noted that Central New
Hampshire Regional Planning Commission is able to provide services for Master
Plans. They have stated they would be
able to poll every family in Dunbarton.
KS
noted that the Board cannot require applicants to phase building permits. This is a choice made by the applicant.
KS
noted that there are a number of Seminars coming up regarding Planning and
Zoning Issues that members need to attend.
There
being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
Respectfully
submitted,
Alison
Vallieres
Secretary