DUNBARTON PLANNING BOARD

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 17, 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 Chairman James Marcou presiding.  The following members were present:

 

               James Marcou, Chairman

               Kenneth Swayze, Co-Chairman

               Alison Vallieres, Secretary

               Carter Higginbotham

               George Holt

               Brian Nordle

               Charles Graybill, Selectman

               Michael Poirier, Alternate

 

The Chairman verified with the Secretary that the meeting notice had been posted in a timely fashion at three public places throughout the Town and published in the Concord Monitor for one day. 

 

Approval of Previous Month’s Minutes – Wednesday, March 20, 2002

 

A motion was made, seconded and passed unanimously that the Dunbarton Planning Board approve the minutes of Wednesday, March 20, 2002 with the following amendments:

 

1.      Page 2 last paragraph, cross out the last line of the sentence which reads as follows:  “We are kind of out of the loop on this.” 

 

2.      Page 4, paragraph re Nancie Stone, abutter to add phrase noted in bold to paragraph regarding the salt shed as follows: “ A buffer zone is not the job of the Town, it is the job of the applicant. “

 

7:00 p.m. – STILLWATER PROPOSED 14 LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED OFF EVERETT ROAD AND MANSION ROAD IN THE MEDIUM DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH

 

At this point in the meeting, Kenneth Swayze stepped down from the Board. 

 

Because George Holt chaired the previous meeting on this subdivision, James Marcou, Chairman, asked George Holt to bring the Board up to date on progress and noted that Charles Graybill, Selectmen, would update the Board on where the proposal stands with the Selectmen’s Office. 

 

George Holt reported that at the last meeting, the Board had taken a straw vote and determined the following:

 

1.      The road should be a through road.

 

2.      The road would be at approximately a 90 degree with a stop sign and the intersection was still up in the air with the Town pending a meeting with the developer to discuss where the road would be laid out.

 

3.      Lot configuration re the wetlands, grading issue on the road itself.  No decisions have been made on these issues. 

 

4.      17 acre lot should be given to the Town as a block piece either to the Dunbarton Conservation Commission or as a permanent easement, etc. to the SPNHF or other conservation group.

 

At this point, James Marcou, Chairman, asked for the Selectmen’s update on the proposal.  Charles Graybill reported as follows:

 

1.      Selectmen had two meetings with the applicants and all negotiations have broken off.  The Selectmen felt the proposals made by the applicants were too restrictive.

 

2.      Proposal to move the road  to the up hill side with a sweeping entrance on to Everett Road.  Developer was going to swap a .2 acre parcel off Lot 19 with the Town.  The .2 parcel was sitting above the wetlands area and would not be acceptable to the Town.  Selectmen have made the decision that they will not give up any property. 

 

3.      Developer was going to give the Town 3 acres all off  #19 in return  for a five acre Lot on Mansion Road and what they proposed was to move the roadway about four lots down the hill 50 feet to the uphill side but in conjunction, they wanted to establish a 50 foot buffer that nothing could be built upon and  … the back of Lot 19 with a 75 foot buffer.  Felt it would be too binding for future Boards.  All negotiations have been broken off with the Selectmen at this point.

 

4.      Would like to see the 17 acres with a dedicated setback deed to the Town on the frontage for road improvements.

 

5.      Discussion with Selectmen resulted that would allow the developer to assume all risk as far as the wells in the future.  Will be putting in filter systems, etc.  for whatever may occur.  Everett Road must be brought up to Class V standards with no pavement.  Town will assume the responsibility of the paving.  Landing needed for snow plowing.  Developer has agreed to do some tree work and relocate two telephone poles.  Developer will not do any major improvements from the intersection to the landing. 

 

George Holt asked if the Selectmen have talked to the Town Attorney on pollution issues.  It was noted that if you “inherit” a polluted site, automatically the Town is going to be responsible and the Town will have to pay. 

 

CG noted the Selectmen were hoping the Planning Board will put in verbage re this issue. 

 

Planning Board stated that Town Counsel will be the one who should write the verbage that would appear on the plan. 

 

Jacques Belanger, Surveyor, presented a revised plan showing several changes.  Also presented a road plan.  He noted that this information was not presented within the 15 day window required so it was just for information purposes for the Board at this point.    Stated the revised plan moves the intersection west 50 feet further than previous plan.  This will be further from Zeller’s driveway.  Stated they could not move any further west because of close proximity of wetlands.  

 

J. Belanger also noted they had realigned the road which reduces lot sizes on Lots 19, 6 and 5.   Uphill sites are smaller and down hill sites are larger.   It was noted the road grade will still be 8%. 

 

J. Belanger stated the applicants have opted for in-house fire suppression with no fire pond. 

 

At this point in the meeting, Don Mayo’s letter with comments on the road was presented.  (attached)   Jacques Belanger stated he had gone over the comments in Mayo’s letter, but not prior to redoing of the plan.  He will include Mayo’s recommendations, etc. on a new plan after talking with Mayo. 

 

Board asked that driveway locations be placed on plan. 

 

Board noted that Mayo’s letter made mention of HDPE Pipe under Drainage paragraph.  Does applicant has a problem with special supplemental specifications for this and use an alternative.  Applicants indicated they did not feel they had a problem with adhering to NHDOT specs on this issue and will use the HDPE Pipe as noted on plan. 

 

Board noted flowage of water off steep driveways on Lot 19, 6 and the next one down. Water has got to be brought down and encompassed in the flowage of the road. 

 

It was noted that most all lots on the west side of the road have treatment swales. 

 

Discussion re stone retaining wall as noted on Mayo’s letter.  Jacques Belanger stated he will provide detail, etc.

 

GH noted the box culvert needed to be cleaned out. 

 

JB noted they would look at it.  He stated the entire center of Town drains through this culvert.

 

GH noted we are going to have to address this issue.  Road Agent and Don Mayo should look at this.  Possibility of putting a new culvert under the new piece of street.  Existing culvert is 36”.  This issue will have to be dealt with no matter what. 

 

Applicant stated they don’t have a detailed plan and want to know what we are getting into and now we have to go down another 50-60 feet down Everett Road. 

 

JM stated this is the road location and if that culvert is going to be impacted by this development, it needs to be addressed. 

 

JM noted the Board will need the following:

 

1.      Detail on intersection

2.      Drainage for driveways

 

Lot Issues:

 

CG indicated he would like to hear the Zeller’s comments re this proposal.

 

CH questioned how we address the water aquifer issues. 

 

Board indicated that water from road will be used for recharging water aquifers and wetlands. Treatment swales and  septic systems are good filters for contaminated water.  As long as septic systems are 75 feet from wells and are working well, they are good filters.

 

CH noted the applicants would be putting in deep water wells. 

 

Building Inspector noted that with the issue of wells, when putting in salt shed, the Town should put in a membrane or something to keep the salt contained that will present any seepage and have a roof over the salt shed to prevent any seepage into the wetlands. 

 

Board asked about the progress of the Town in building a Salt Shed, etc.

 

CG indicated a Committee was being established for a self contained system for the prevention of any future deterioration.

 

Wetlands issues:

 

GH indicated he had issues with several lots, particularly Lot 47 and 46.  They center around this large wetland area that comes down the hill.  Have issue with this configuration as drawn.  You are placing wetlands at risk to incidental cutting but are important to the ecology.  Very tight.  You are trying to maximize this development.  Central NH Regional Planning Commission mentioned possibly taking out one lot would be better. 

 

GH presented a draft of the proposed subdivision with a new configuration of lots and the road which resulted in the losing of one lot.  It also provided an area for a fire pond.  Stated this would be the most protection for the wetlands. The grade would also be easier on the road.  There would be no cut buffer along the Town lot.  Would be room to provide for a walking trail to the wetlands area.  There is also a potential that the Stone Lot will be developed in the future.  Could provide for a right of way to this lot at this time. 

 

JM indicated the configuration on the applicant’s proposal looked tight to him also.  Asked the applicants what they would do if the State denied them a permit. 

 

JB indicated there would be 1.5 acres of high and dry land on Lot 47 and State approval should not be a problem. 

 

The applicants stated they would reconfigure the subdivision and lose a lot if they did not get State approval.  The applicants stated that they had conformed to all the Town’s regulations regarding frontage and lot size.  They said the Town should revise their regulations if they felt this way.  The proposal in its present form conforms to all Town regulations, etc. 

 

GH stated the current configuration does  not address the wetlands and we need to be more conscious of the wetlands.  Have you applied for any wetlands permits yet?

 

JB stated they have not made any application for wetlands permit because of road alignment changes. 

 

JM asked if Jacques Belanger/applicants if they felt they could provide for a 50 foot ROW to the Stone property.  This land is subject to development and the Board would be remiss in not providing access. 

 

JB indicated they could consider the ROW. 

 

Applicant – Stated they were following the Town and State  Regulations.  We have moved both intersections of the road to accommodate abutters.  I agree we have to look at these issues.  You should change your regulations.  You have seen our style and it is very accommodating.  We can’t keep changing.  These changes have nothing to do with Zoning Board or issues with road holding back the pond or other Variances, etc. 

 

JM indicated they were getting over a number of hurdles.  You have a right to go and seek subdivision approval.  If it failed at the State level, we want to know what your next move would be. 

 

Applicants indicated they would have to give up a lot and either turn it over to the Town or expand the lots on either side. 

 

JM stated that sounded reasonable.  We need to look at access to abutting property.  See if it is possible to put a 50 ROW to Stone property.  This would certainly help the Planning Board.

 

Brian Nordle – Stated he would be very uncomfortable creating any new plan.  There has been a lot of ground work done.  The only comment I have is re the 17 acres.  If there was a way to get a footpath to this, would be good. 

 

JB – Stated this probably could be done. 

 

JM – Stated it was always speculative that the lot in question might fail at the State level.  Stated he had spoken to his brother in Fire Department.  The Fire Department is agreeable with internal fire suppression.  Will ask them to address this for the record. 

 

GH – stated he didn’t trust the State to make that determination as to whether lots will be adequate.  We should not rely on other agencies to make our decisions for us. 

 

BN – Stated that the Conservation Commission has the opportunity to make comments.  They have said there will be 1.5 acres of high and dry land on Lot 47. 

 

CH noted that with a subdivision/house on Black Brook Road, etc., we did not get involved.  Have to be very careful what we get into. 

 

GH – Stated the developers are going to make a lot of money on this project and it is up to us to make sure it is right.   

 

JM that within reason, we have to make sure that 99% makes sense.  George does not make absolute nonsense in what he is saying. 

 

Abutters were read as follows and noted that all had been notified by certified mail:

 

Janet Zeller Revocable Trust, Janet Zeller   (attached letter)  Diane Jenkins, daughter present. Said she knew that you can’t change the laws.   Stated she was please to see any movement of the road away from their driveway.  Asked about where the exact location of the new proposed entrance would be in relation to their driveway. 

 

Jacques Belanger explained that it had been moved 50 feet west so it was further away from their driveway.  He indicated they would be making a plan of the intersection so she could see it in more detail.  The Planning Board has asked for this. 

 

Diane Jenkins indicated that certainly anything further down the road, the better for us.  Road improvements for Everett Road and traffic coming out of Town garage an issue also. 

 

Charles Graybill indicated that once the improvements are made from the intersection, the Town is going to pave the road.  Town will take over the cost of paving the road. 

 

Diane Jenkins stated they had problems of drainage now.  Will you be putting in a pipe underneath the driveway. 

 

It was indicated the developer will be taking care of that piece. 

 

Jacques Belanger indicating that the water washes down from all of the center. 

 

Question arose as to whose responsibility the culvert would be.  Everything from the center drains through this culvert and max out that culvert.  There is some shifting of water.  Don’t know if this is part of this or not.  This continues to be a problem. 

 

David and Deborah Foster – Not Present

 

Martha Hammond  - Not Present

 

Randolph/Lisa Bauer – Present, asked about the individual fire systems.  What about if the power fails. (It was noted that it is powered during a power failure) Only comment is that a fire pond would benefit all the other houses in the community.  I don’t know who makes the decisions.  The Board noted the Fire Chief is the ultimate decision maker on this issue.

 

Board noted there is a large fire pond at the Flintlock Farm Development and at Gorham Pond. 

 

Albert Statuto – Present, stated that at the last meeting, you voted to have a through road.  Wouldn’t be just a fire lane. It is going to be a regular road.   The road will have to be upgraded.

 

Jeff and Bronda Crosby – Present.  Stated this was more of the same.  Now we have something new a 50 foot ROW to a piece of land.  What piece of land are we talking about?  What property adjacent that might be developed in the future.  Are you trying to say it is Nancie Stone’s property?  It is the Stone Property.  This has been split up twice and you didn’t get a through road, etc.  Is this going to be the norm in the future.

 

JM indicated the Board tried to tie properties to roads, etc.  and if we have an opportunity to tie another subdivision into this road system, we will try to accommodate it.  

 

Jeff Crosby – How come you did not make your mother’s subdivision with a through road with a right of way to the land in back.  If the shoe, fits, wear it.  These people have been here seven months.  You would have thought the 50 foot ROW would have come up before now. 

 

JM – Indicated it would be helpful to the Board if the applicant could do this at the right location.

 

Jacqueline Kennedy – Present.  Stated she had been here previously and she was going to reaffirm what Jeff Crosby has said.  I have sat here before and now in the middle of the game, I hear these different things.  I feel really bad for the developer. 

 

Kathleen McDonald – Not Present

 

Mark/Gretchen Andrews – Not Present

 

Nancie Stone – (represented by Kenneth Swayze)  Stated he was surprised about the ROW issue.  If this does happen, I would like to be part of the discussion.  Stated he did think there was too many lots on this proposal.  I think this point has been brought up by other abutters from the beginning.  There are substantial wetlands on the property.  I don’t agree with the Selectmen’s trade for the improvement of Everett Road.  The law says that he who pollutes is involved in the fix.  Could be a big legal issue down the road.  I think they owe us a buffer zone around the Town Garage Area. 

 

Mark Tarsa – Not Present

 

Applicant – With regard to the idea that there are too many lots, why do we have regulations but I honestly don’t feel this is our problem.  This is too the existing code.  The Selectmen’s second proposal stated that we have agreed that when and if there is a problem with wells, we will fix the problem.  Will cost $10,000 - $20,000 each system.  Once the problem is fixed, it is the end of our responsibility.  There should be a membrane under the salt.  Trade for no improvement to Everett Road.  We have agreed to moving poles, and we know we have to do a good job with the intersection.  Agreement reached at the Selectmen’s Meeting.  We have worked hard and diligently and the Selectmen were great to work with but we couldn’t come to any agreement.  Regarding a buffer zone around the Town Garage, both lots were there at the same time.  Therefore, you shouldn’t be getting something.  A person buying the lot will not want to cut any trees down.  Just felt that needed to be said.

 

Bruce Vaal – Re well issue.  If there is more of an issue, might be more than salt to deal with.  Might be other issues.

 

Zeller – Concerned about the understanding about what is going to be done to the road.  The road will be improved as part of this discussion before it goes any further. 

 

JM summarized what the applicants will do for the next meeting as follows:

 

1.      Address items in Don Mayo’s letter

2.      Prepare intersection plan showing all details, etc.

3.      Address the bonding of the road or whether the applicant will go “at risk”

 

At this point in the discussion, JM stated that Ken Swayze had been part of the setting up of the bonding session and he would like him to participate in the discussion when the Board addresses the layout of the structure for the bonding of the road if this is okay with the applicants.  The applicants indicated they had no problem with this. 

 

RECEIPT AND ACCEPTANCE OF NEW APPLICATIONS BY THE DUNBARTON PLANNING BOARD – ROBERT AND JANE LEWELLEN PROPOSED TWO LOT SUBDIVISION OF LOT 2, BLOCK 2, MAP D3 LOCATED ON ROUTE 13 IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH

 

At this point, Kenneth Swayze stepped back on the Board. 

 

Michael Poirier stepped down from the Board on the Lewellen Proposal. 

 

Ken Swayze stated that he had reviewed the application and plan and felt that it is generally complete and would recommend that the Board go forward with the application.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MOTION:

 

Ken Swayze made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board accept the Robert and Jane Lewellen Proposed Two Lot Subdivision located on Route 13 in the Low Density District in Dunbarton, NH and begin deliberations this evening.  Charles Graybill seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 

 

Charles Graybill noted the driveways would be very steep.  The State might have comments about them. 

 

Jacques Belanger, Surveyor, stated they haven’t made application to the State yet for driveways.  The total size of the lot is 12.7 acres and they are creating two lots, one 7.5 acres and the other 5 acres.  There will be two building sites.  He noted they will be delineating the wetlands.  Stated they have done test pits already.  Possibly would be a shared driveway between the two lots. 

 

KS suggested the applicant talk with the State prior to the site visit.  He noted the driveway would be steep. 

 

CH asked about the stability of the existing beaver dam and its relation to the driveway.  If the beaver dam ruptures, what happens to the driveway.  Should the landowner be addressing these concerns. 

 

J Belanger noted this is currently handled by the 24” culvert.

 

C Graybill indicated they would like to have two driveways locations instead of a shared driveway. 

 

Abutters were read as follows and noted all had been notified by certified mail:

 

Diane Ouelette-Falkensten – Not Present

 

Peter/Jane Lunsford – Present, basically they are concerned about the driveway. Concerned because of cars going up and down Route 13.  Why can’t they have one driveway and share it.  Would prefer that.  There is a culvert that runs under Route 13.

 

J Marcou stated that the Planning Board encourage separate driveways for legal reasons.  Each lot should have its own driveway. 

 

Thomas Englund Revocable Trust – Not Present

 

John/Doraine Mooar – Present.  Stated there wasn’t much room for two driveways.  There is my driveway and Pete’s driveway and Mansion Road. 

 

J Marcou stated that the State of New Hampshire makes the driveway decisions. 

 

Richard/Denise Morin – Present, no comments.

 

Peter/Monica Ann Ness – Present, stated he didn’t feel the beaver dam will be moving. 

 

Lisa/Mark E. Tierney – Present,  No comments.

 

OTHER PUBLIC:

 

Jeff Crosby asked how they were going to allow for the 50 foot right of way for developing the land out back.

 

 

 

 

 

OTHER BUSINESS:  Rick Martin

 

At this point, Michael Poirier stepped back on the Board. 

 

The Board stated that this discussion was for information purposes only and was a non-binding discussion.

 

Rick Martin appeared before the Board with a draft of a proposed four lot subdivision on Tenney Hill Road.  The draft was done by Surveyor Robert Todd.  This lot is the former Lorden Lot which has recently been cut. 

 

The Board advised Mr. Martin that the road was a Class V Scenic Road and any efforts to clean up the road would have to be on one side only.  The Board advised the applicant to see the Selectmen re any road issues.

 

R Martin indicated he would be providing a ROW to the back lot.  Board questioned as to what width this ROW would be. 

 

R Martin stated he would not be building in the powerlines. 

 

  The size of the proposed four lots is as follows:

 

               Lot 1 – 15 acres

               Lot 2 – 20 acres

               Lot 3 – 40 acres

               Lot 4 – 5 acres

 

Board noted they would need the following on the plan:

 

1.      Plan showing all frontage of all lots

2.      Wetlands delineated

3.      ROW width, whether it be 50’ or 30’

 

Board indicated there was a main snowmobile trail going through the property. 

 

At this point, James Marcou stepped down from the Board. 

 

CORRRECTION TO PLAN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FOR BEVERLY MARCOU AT MANSION ROAD IN DUNBARTON, NH

 

James Marcou appeared before the Board on behalf of his mother, Beverly Marcou.  He stated they were presenting a new sub-division plan because of a change in the road.  The plan had previously been approved with a culdasac.  The subdivision was done with a hammerhead instead of the culdasac and the revised plan shows the hammerhead. 

 

He stated there is no other changes to the plan other than the change from the culdasac to the hammerhead.  Stated he would like the Board to allow him to bring in a mylar with a correction to the plan. 

 

Kenneth Swayze noted that this was a Minor Modification with only a slight change.  It does not change the original complexion of the plan.  The Board will have to agree as to whether we should proceed as presented.  He needs to file a corrected plan and it should have the signatures of the Planning Board on it.  Stated he did talk with Jan VanDeBogart, Road Agent, and he would like to review it.  Would like also to see contours on the plan. 

 

MOTION: 

 

Kenneth Swayze made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board accept the Beverly Marcou Plan as a Minor Modification with no notice to abutters.  George Holt seconded the motion.  The motion passed by a majority with George Holt and Charles Graybill abstaining. 

 

It was noted the revised plan will comply with the original plan with the exception of the hammerhead in place of the culdasac.  Arrangements are made for the final cost of pavement. 

 

Board requirements:

 

1.      Once the road is accepted by the Town, plan to be submitted to the Board for signature.

2.      Bring in final plan for Planning Board to review and sign at that point.

 

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.

 

                                                                                                                        Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

                                                                                                                        Alison R. Vallieres

                                                                                                                        Secretary