DUNBARTON PLANNING BOARD

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 15, 2005

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

James Marcou, Chairman

Brian Nordle, Co-Chairman

Kenneth Swayze, Admin., Planning and Zoning

Alison Vallieres, Secretary

Mert Mann, Selectman

Michael Poirier

David Breault

Terry Swain, Alternate

James Marcou, Chairman, verified with the Secretary that the Public Notice for the Meeting had been posted in three public places throughout the Town and published in the Concord Monitor for one day. In addition, it had been posted on the Dunbarton Web Site.

APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES: WEDNESDAY, MAY 18, 2005

Brian Nordle made a motion to accept the minutes of the Wednesday, May 18, 2005 minutes as written. Kenneth Swayze seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

At this point in the meeting, the Chairman announced that the two Lot Line Adjustments, Mansion Heights LLC and Mark Kilmister which were on the agenda would be not heard this evening because they were incomplete applications. Anyone who was there for these two items could leave because they most likely would not be heard this evening.

7:00 P.M. - PUBLIC HEARINGS:

NEW HAMPSHIRE TRADITIONAL HOMES (MICHAEL POIRIER) (G4-3-2) PROPOSED SIX LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON GRAPEVINE ROAD IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH (05-003)

At this point in the Public Hearing, Michael Poirier stepped down from the Board because of applicant status.

In addition, Kenneth Swayze stepped down from the Board because of abutter status.

At this point, Terry Swain, Alternate, stated that he wanted to state clearly to the members of the public that he is a part-owner in Capital Well and Capital Well has done work in the past for Mr. Poirier. He stated he has no contracts written or verbal with Mr. Poirier at this time. He stated that personally he feels he has no conflicts at all with acting on this application. The Board members agreed they had no problem with Mr. Swain’s serving on the Board for this application.

A Status Report was presented to the Board which was completed by Chairman James Marcou. (attached) It was noted that a Site Walk had been done on May 10, 2005.

Jacques Belanger, Surveyor, presented the plan. He noted that they had decided to have two common driveways for four lots off the east side of the lower end of Grapevine Road instead of trying to access at the top of the hill.

Jacques Belanger presented a Waiver for the two common driveways for the Board to act upon. (attached)

Revisions to the plan as follows:

1. Have added guard rails by the westerly side.

2. Added several signs for the two curves. (SHARP CURVE) Will add any additional signs which are required.

The Board indicated it would be up to the Police/Road Agent/Fire Chief and Selectmen’s Office with regard to what signing would be required.

Terry Swain asked if the Planning board has the authority to request signage over and above what is already there. The Board indicated the Planning Board does have this authority but they would defer this to the appropriate Town Department i.e. Police, Fire and Road Agent.

Brian Nordle stated there are certain standards that should be met with regard to signage.

3. Discussed combining the two driveways. Decided to move #2 driveway down opposite the field on Grapevine Road and leaving the other. There will be four lots being served by two driveways.

4. There will be two individual single driveways.

5. Have met with the Fire Chief regarding fire suppression needs. Have put together a design for fire pond/cistern. It will be designed under the Fire Chief’s guidelines.

6. There is a “no-cut” buffer around the Oertel lot.

7. The dedication and easements to the Town are shown on the plan.

8. Will only be four lot sales allowed until the Fire Pond/Cistern for fire suppression is put in.

9. Still waiting on Dredge and Fill approvals. Have gotten input from the Conservation Commission.

10. Jacques Belanger, Surveyor, presented a sample of reflective metal signs which will be put on trees that state “Protected Wetlands Buffer”. Will be placed 50 feet or less apart. This is more permanent than flagging. Town of Bow uses these.

11. Phasing schedule will be on the final plans. Lots 6 and 7 will be considered as Phase 2. (attached to other lots).

12. Will provide wording for common driveways. (Michael Poirier presented a copy of a Draft of Common Driveway Maintenance Agreement & Association for the Board) (attached) He stated the driveways will be split off at about 30 feet from the access point so it will not be the entire driveway to be shared.

James Marcou stated we must be sure the Town is indemnified from any liability. Will have Town Counsel review the documents.

Michael Poirier stated that similar situations as this are all over town. There is one off Route 77 which is a shared driveway. There are three lots right on Route 13 across from Mansion Road which were done to avoid wetlands. There also is Millie’s Way off Robert Rogers Road. Owners of the lots with common driveways will be required to put in $1,000 each into an escrow account for plowing and improvements. Will be managed by a delegated owner.

James Marcou stated this is the first formal use of the shared driveway regulation since the Board adopted it within the Subdivision regulations. This will have to be reviewed by Town Counsel prior to the signing of the plans.

13. Jon Wiggin, Fire Chief, has been given a proposed design for the fire suppression which, if approved. will be part of the final plan.

14. Still waiting for approved Wetlands Permits.

Terry Swain asked when you changed the driveway on Lot 2, what was the sight distance? Jacques Belanger stated they would be clearing out the brush line along the front. It was over 200 feet.

Michael Poirier stated the minimum sight distance is 200 feet. The sight line is well over 200 feet.

David Breault asked if the line of sight would be affected by snow banks.

James Marcou stated that all driveways must be suitable for a Dunbarton Driveway Permit.

VOTE ON REQUEST FOR WAIVER:

MOTION:

Brian Nordle made a motion to accept the request for a Waiver to Section V., I of the Dunbarton Subdivision regulations which require separate driveway locations for each new lot created, and to allow four lots to be serviced by two “common drives”. The purpose is to access at two safe points and eliminate two additional access points which are steep and would require substantial grading and disturbance to the frontage of the subdivision. David Breault seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

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

Kenneth Swayze – Present. No comments.

Jean/Girard Meisner – Not Present

Nicholas/Bridgett Holmes – Not Present

Robert/Joann Jergensen – Not Present

Kathleen Joan Desmarais – Present. Stated that she wanted to know how the Board was going to address

the safety issue for that number of driveways off Grapevine Road.

In addition, K. Desmarais asked what the “conflict of interest” policy is for the Planning Board. Are you (Mr. Swain) recusing himself from other discussion on other lots within this…….?

Terry Swain stated at this time, that he just wanted to say that I do drill wells but I have not drilled a well on every house that Mr. Poirier has built. I have no verbal or written contract with him at this time to drill any well.

James Marcou asked Ms. Desmarais if she had a problem with Mr. Swain. She stated she did have a problem with Mr. Swain acting on this application. James Marcou stated the Board will take this under advisement.

James Marcou stated he takes this Board at face value. This is truly an honor system. Board members recuse themselves when they feel there is a conflict.

Ms. Desmarais asked how would you all address the safety issues? How do you feel this is now safe?

James Marcou stated this was addressed while on the Site Walk. We realized that previously some of the driveways were unsafe. The driveways were a lot more hazardous before they were moved down to the lower portion on Grapevine Road.

Ms. Desmarais asked as to whether there are six or seven lots. Jacques Belanger has made references to lot 7.

Jacques Belanger explained that these are the new Tax Lot numbers and not the number of lots. This is a six lot subdivision.

Earl/Catherine Farley – Not Present

Jeffery/Katherine Deacon – Not Present

Ryan/Marlo Nedwicke – Present. No comments.

Richard/Sandra Gendron – Present. Asked why they couldn’t move driveway #4 to go with driveway #3. Driveway #4 is now goes around my house.

The Board pointed out that the whole idea was to get off the hill. Mr. Gendron asked the Board to move the driveway from in front of his house.

Brian Nordle stated that he did not see the problem in having two driveways on the flatter area to get away from Guinea Road.

Mr. Gendron stated that the driveway will go up and around behind the Manning house. If the driveway were moved, it would eliminate one more access on the road.

Sue Bye (Manning) – Present. Stated she and Rick have lived there for some time. If there is anything you can do to make it better for them with regard to the proposed driveway around their lot, it would be appreciated. We have met here with regard to this plan for four months. We don’t like the driveway wrapping around our lot. Any kind of buffer would be appreciated.

Michael Poirier stated there is a “no cut buffer of 20 feet”. This is only a 12’ – 15’ single access driveway.

James Marcou stated this has been discussed. There has been a lot of effort put into this subdivision, etc.

David Breault stated he didn’t see a problem with this.

Alma Kingsbury – Not Present

Christopher Long/Ann Hargrove – Not Present

Joe/Pam Milioto – Not Present

SPNHF – Not Present

Carlos DelCarpio – Not Present

Bertha Oertel – Present, represented by Attorney Stephen Buckley. Attorney Buckley stated he wanted to thank Mr. Poirier and the Board for the 50 foot buffer around the Oertel property. Stated he was still not clear as to the access and the question of the easement. Still would suggest to the Board that they require that the back part of the parcel be put in a Conservation Easement. This is very common. This would give protection to the Bela Brook Wetlands. We want you to put this under a Conservation Easement. I would again suggest it. It is not clear what the construction easement does from the road to the back parcel.

Brian Nordle stated this was addressed by the board and the Board felt that the 125 feet for the Bela Brook Wetlands Conservation District was sufficient protection. Mr. Poirier has the voluntary right to transfer if he choses.

Attorney Buckley stated he would encourage the Board to take a more broad role and when you see an opportunity like this, you make it happen. Planning Boards do that all the time. I would urge you to do this now.

James Marcou stated the Board will take the suggestion under advisement.

Melissa Rouillard/Gary Auclair – Not Present

Schauer Environmental Consultant – Not Present (Representing the applicant)

J. E. Belanger Surveying – Present. (Representing the applicant)

Other Members of the Public:

Steve Brennan – Asked who is responsible for plowing out to the cistern?

The Board stated the Town is responsible for access to the fire protection pond/cistern. It is not a road, it is an emergency service pull off.

S. Brenan stated he was not against anything. I think the Board should be talking to the State/Prison about getting signs that say “ Rounding these corners in a snow storm may cause death”. There is no way that two cars can meet and not hit. I myself hit a school bus in a snow storm, etc. If you are lucky enough to turn out, you are going to wind up in a 3’ – 5’ culvert. I took my laser, etc. out there at 3:00 a.m. in the morning. There is no place where I was able to find a real clean line of sight on any of these driveways.

George Holt – Stated he was speaking for the Conservation Commission. When Jacques Belanger, Surveyor, mentioned wet areas, etc. as you were talking about the lower driveways (near Gendrons’ house). Are you saying these have not been delineated by the Wetlands Scientist? Why weren’t they delineated?

Jacques Belanger stated these were not flagged by the Wetlands Scientist as wetland areas.

James Marcou stated that the Board discussed this in the field at the Site Walk. Peter Schauer did not flag this area as Wetlands.

George Holt asked about the location of the cistern. It is within a Wetlands Conservation District. This would require a Variance to consider a cistern here. This is a structure. You need to have a discussion on this. This should also be included in the Wetlands Permit.

Brian Nordle stated he would seek a legal opinion on this. Do you believe this would be a harm to the Town of Dunbarton?

At this point in the discussion, Jon Wiggin, Fire Chief, stated this is not a typical cistern. This is a dry hydrant which uses a pumping device to get water. In addition, fire ponds are exempt from requiring Variances, etc. This is not a “normal” structure.

The Board indicated there will be no plans signed until all permits are in hand.

George Holt stated his concerns were about public safety for driveways on the westerly portion of the road. This is a poor access point. Should put a new road across from Guinea Road. That is the cost of doing business on that lot. You are asking for trouble up there. You should wait and see about wetlands permits before approval.

George Holt also asked about a “no cut buffer” on the driveway. Is this on the plan and included in the deed? The next person that owns the land needs to have it in their deed and a note on the plan. It seems very vague. The easement should be granted to the owner of the property.

Michael Poirier stated he will meet with his abutters to discuss easements, etc.

At this point in the Public Hearing, Terry Swain stated he was stepping down from the Board on this application.

The Public Hearing was closed at 8:15 p.m.

MOTION:

Brian Nordle made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board approve the proposed subdivision of N. H. Traditional Homes, Inc. of Tax Lot G4-03-02 consisting of a 6 lot subdivision on approximately 75 acres, located in the Low Density (5 acre) Residential District on Grapevine Road, subject to the following conditions:

1.) Submittal of a final, technically accurate and graphically correct plan-set in full compliance with all current subdivision regulations and incorporating any and all additional requirements established during deliberations with the Board (per minutes, per status reports, etc.).

2.) Approval and receipt of all other required local, State, or Federal permits, including, but not limited to, N.H. Wetlands. There shall be no change(s) to the base plan(s) without re-consultation with the board, as a result of such other permit approvals.

3.) Payment of all fees and costs associated with the Dunbarton Planning Board application process.

4.) Installation of a water-source fire suppression pond/cistern system designed and constructed in accordance with requirements of the Dunbarton Fire Department, including construction inspection and performance testing thereof; all costs, including design, permits, inspection, and construction shall be paid by the applicant.

Required completion of fire suppression construction may be deferred subject to an approved lot phasing plan, whereby the first filed plan thereof, shows no more than a total of 4 lots available for sale or transfer. At such time that a plan (or plans) showing more than an aggregate of 4 lots is requested to be signed and filed, the applicant shall present certification from the Dunbarton Fire Dept. that all work has been satisfactorily completed.

5.) That all specified work and improvements at the site, as specified by the Land Subdivision Regulations, be completed prior to the signing and filing of the mylar (i.e.: survey monumentation, road signage in its entirety, etc.); or a surety be posted in favor of the Town, in an amount adequate to complete such work as required.

6.) Preparation, submittal and filing of all Deeds, easements, driveway easements, legal instruments, and/or other documents required or intended to be filed at the Merrimack County Registry of Deeds; in such content and form acceptable to the Town.

7.) Wetlands Conservation District boundary verification by the Conservation Commission.

8.) Review of driveway easements by Town Counsel.

Mert Mann seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

ANNA CHAN (H5-2-1) PROPOSED FIVE LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED OFF GILE ROAD IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH

At this point in the meeting, Kenneth Swayze, Michael Poirier and Terry Swain stepped back to the Board.

Kenneth Swayze presented a Status Report (attached) on the Chan proposed subdivision and stated that this had been before the Board for well over a year. He noted they were looking for an approval this evening.

Jacques Belanger, Surveyor, presented an update and noted they had met with the Selectmen regarding suggested road improvements. The proposed road from the Brennan’s up to the proposed subdivision will be 22 feet total wide including 2 foot shoulders on each side. The traveled way will be 18’. Jacques Belanger noted they have already given the Conservation Commission an inventory of trees which will be cut on the Chan’s side of the road. The Brennan property is the only one with any large trees. Some utility poles will have to be relocated. Will lose a substantial part of the stone wall. The turn around will be as proposed by the Road Agent. Jacques Belanger stated they have not talked to the Town of Bow about the gate.

The Planning Board noted that if the Town of Bow wants to gate the road, they should do it on their own.

Jacques Belanger stated this subdivision will consist of three new residential lots with one lot being given to the Town of Dunbarton (Conservation Commission) with the stipulation that it not be subdivided in the future. The Chan’s want to make sure the lot is never developed in the future.

Kenneth Swayze noted this has been discussed at the Board level. It was always discussed that the lot would go to the Town of Dunbarton. The Planning Board never agreed or talked about the lot going to the Conservation Commission.

Jacques Belanger noted they will be filing for a Dredge and Fill Permit. There are no other Wetlands Permits needed.

It was noted that improvements will start at the termination of the existing Class V Gile Road section.

Kenneth Swayze asked if the plan shows the details of the road construction. Can an uninformed contractor build to this plan?

James Marcou stated the Board was not going to get hung up on the technical dialog, but would request an “as built” plan at the end of construction.

Kenneth Swayze asked if the Chan’s are aware that there may be some unknown expenses on their part for the road construction due to road conditions, etc.

Exaction Fee Discussion:

K. Swayze noted that an impact fee is the same as an exaction fee. Jeff Crosby has based his road improvement estimate on a number reflecting the number of houses expected to be built out on the road. The fee would be based on the Chan’s getting three lots. Any other owner along the road would have to pay a similar fee for development of a lot along the road. The Planning Board must assess the value now. It has to be done within six years or the money is given back. The Town has a responsibility once we “go down this road”. If they do not expend the money, the money goes to the landowners. This is a marginal road. There will be an increase in traffic and we should do reasonable improvements. It is up to the Planning Board to assess a fee.

At this point in the meeting, Les Hammond, Selectman, stated that he and the Road Agent and with Ken Swayze’s assistance had worked out an estimated cost for the road improvements. They estimated there could be 30 new lots on Gile Hill Road before maximized. He stated he felt the road should be paved all the way because of snowplowing issues. The paving cost is included in the road construction estimate. The road improvements will for the entire length of Gile Hill Road from Brennan’s to the corner of Grapevine Road. The Chan’s will be responsible for road improvements from Brennan’s to their property at time. The Road Agent/Selectmen, etc. have estimated road improvements at between $90,000 and $150,000. Les Hammond stated it was difficult to estimate exactly. They decided to settle on a figure in the middle of $120,000. It will depend on what we find. In addition, the Board should take into consideration that this is not a through road. The question is how much do we really need to fix this road.

Ken Swayze noted the $120,000 will be divided by 30 proposed new lots and come to an exaction fee of $4,000 per new lot. This will be assessed when the building permit is issued. At that time, the town could go ahead and do some of the work. The respective lot owners will pay $12,000 when they “pull” all building permits. The $12,000 will be used exclusively on that road. The money has to be put in an interest bearing account. Possibility of three separate accounts. Will work on the details.

James Marcou asked if the Chan’s have been made aware of the exaction fees. We want to make sure they are okay with them.

Mert Mann noted that the Chan’s were aware of the requirement for exaction fees. They have been in attendance at Selectmen’s meetings, etc. when this was discussed.

Ken Swayze stated the Chan’s may have some questions regarding the repairs to the road.

The Chan’s noted the Town would be widening the road which would be more expensive.

Ken Swayze stated that if the Town does not spend all the money on the road, it has to be returned. Exaction fees are exact for everyone and fair. It is very similar to a Town requiring a landowner to hook into a sewer line.

MOTION:

Brian Nordle made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board estimate the costs for upgrading of Gile Hill Road from Brennan’s to the corner of Grapevine Road to be $120,000. (Based on the estimated potential of 30 new house lots, each lot will be assessed at $4,000 each) Alison Vallieres seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

It was noted for the record that in the future any other lots to be developed on Gile Hill Road will be subject to the $4,000 per lot exaction fee.

It was noted for the record that the Chan’s will be assessed $4,000 each lot for a total assessment of $12,000. They will not be assessed for the lot which their home is on nor the lot they are giving to the Town of Dunbarton.

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

Linda Baines – Not Present

Thomas/Linda Sexton – Not Present

William/Elizabeth Jacob – Not Present

Mark/Patricia Johnson – Not Present

Gregory/Marie Marquis – Not Present

Robert/Carol VanHam – Not Present

Dale/Susan Murphy – Not Present

Andrea Procita/Paul Iopresti – Not Present

Richard/Nancy Robertson – Not Present

Brian Laframboise – Not Present

William/Janet Dare – Not Present

Michelle/Roderick McQuarrie – Not Present

Leo O’Neil Matos – Not Present

Theodore Gamlin – Not Present

Dennis/Patricia Pinski – Not Present

Dan Dion Construction – Not Present

Stephen Brennan – Present. Stated that “Pita” doesn’t have a problem with this. We do have a problem with an ice dam on the top of the second hill. Water flows over the road and even J. R. Swindlehurst can’t get over it with his fire truck, etc. Should address this problem. What are we doing to do between the end of the Chan’s and my driveway?

James Marcou stated that road improvements will start at the end of the Class V road.

Steve Brennan stated he is considering bringing all his elderly relatives in and build a multi-family complex. Stated he would like to buy the lot adjacent to his from the Chan’s. Wanted to know when the Town of Dunbarton is going to straighten out the situation with the Town of Bow line. He stated he is getting a tax bill from the Town of Bow.

Earl/CatherineFarley – Not Present

Town of Bow – Not Present

Town of Dunbarton – Present. Selectmen present

A. C. Engineering – Not Present. (Represents the applicants)

Schauer Environmental Engineering – Not Present (Represents the applicants)

J. E. Belanger Surveying – Present (Represents the applicants)

Other Members of the Public:

George Holt said he wanted to talk about this build out figure. He has been working on this project for a year. Had a meeting with the Planning Board, Zoning Board and Selectmen. It was not feasible to allow this subdivision with this road. Now we are talking about building this road out and tarring it, when all along we have assumed the road is impassable. If someone was going to build this road out they were going to be on someone’s else’s property.

Brian Nordle stated it is feasible. How can you assess a road value and not be challenged down the line. You have already prohibited the Chan’s from doing a larger subdivision.

Ken Swayze stated that any other person who develops on this road will have to pay a comparable exaction fee per lot. Other people have the right to develop their land. You are assessing value based on a conceptual build-out.

George Holt said this is to get money to contribute to the repairs on the road. It has been previously agreed upon that this was undevelopable.

George Holt stated that the statement that the Planning Board objected to re the land going to the Conservation Commission he resented. Would like to caution the owners that if it is the Town of Dunbarton, there is no guarantee that it will never be subdivided.

The Planning Board noted they had an honest discussion as to whether or not the Town could benefit from minerals from the area. The Board did not agree with giving the lot to the Conservation Commission.

George Holt stated he was upset with the attitude of the Planning Board with regard to the lot being given to the Conservation Commission.

Ken Swayze asked George Holt if he ever heard that the lot was going to the Conservation Commission? (George Holt did not respond.)

James Marcou stated the Planning Board had the discussion of having the entire Town benefit from this land. There was never any thought of it going to the Conservation Commission. That was never mentioned.

Steve Brennan asked why he was denied a lot. I was told traffic was going to be too heavy.

The public hearing was closed at this point.

MOTION:

Kenneth Swayze made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board approve the proposed subdivision of ANNA CHAN of Tax Lot H5-02-01 consisting of a 5-lot subdivision on approximately 80 acres, located in the Low Density (5-ac.) Residential District on Gile Road, subject to the following conditions:

3.) Payment of all fees and costs associated with the Dunbarton Planning Board application process.

4.) That all specified work and improvements at the site, as specified by the Land Subdivision Regulations, and as required for improvements to Gile Road be completed prior to the signing and filing of the mylar; or a surety be posted in favor of the Town, in an amount adequate to complete such work as required.

5.) The signing of an agreement with the Dunbarton Board of Selectmen providing for the formal review and acceptance of the roadway system prior to the sale of any lots, issuance of any building permits, or issuance of any certificates-of-occupancy within the described subdivision; and to otherwise determine the administrative requirements for said construction. (“At-risk” provision.)

6.) That an impact/exaction fee be assessed in the amount of $4,000 per new residential lot to account for the recognized need for incremental construction improvements on the Class V (lower) section of Gile Road necessitated by the increased use to be generated by this proposal. (To be assessed at the issuance of building permit(s).

7.) That in-house fire suppression (sprinklers) be required for any new residence located on the subdivided lots.

8.) Preparation submittal and filing of all Deeds, legal instruments, and/or other documents required or intended to be filed at the Merrimack County Registry of Deeds; in such content and form acceptable to the Town.

James Marcou seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

David Breault stated he would like to make sure the Chan’s can put any remarks they want on the lot that would be given to the Town reflecting that it not be developed in the future.

NEW BUSINESS:

RECEIPT AND ACCEPTANCE OF NEW APPLICATIONS BY THE DUNBARTON PLANNING BOARD; FOR COMPLETION.

MANSION HEIGHTS LLC (G3-1-5) (G2-5-7) (G2-5-15) (G2-5-12) AND JAMES AND SANDRA WHITE PROPOSED LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LOCATED ON MANSION ROAD IN THE MEDIUM DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH

MARK KILMISTER, ADMINISTRATOR OF BARBARA KILMISTER ESTATE, (F3-2-4 & 20) PROPOSED LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT LOCATED ON BARNARD HILL ROAD IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH

Kenneth Swayze reported that the two Lot Line Adjustments of Mansion Heights/James and Sandra White and Mark Kilmister were incomplete as submitted and he would recommend denying them at this time.

MOTION:

Kenneth Swayze made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board deny the receipt of application for the two Lot Line Adjustments of Mansion Heights/James and Sandra White and Mark Kilmister because they were incomplete as submitted to the Board. Brian Nordle seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

SITE PLAN REVIEW - DUNBARTON 88, LLC (B3-02-01, B4-01-11, A4-01-05, AND A3-01-04) PROPOSED WATCH HILL DEVELOPMENT-MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT LOCATED OFF ROUTE 13 IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH. FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW. (05-001)

Kenneth Swayze reported on the Site Plan Review Process for Summerhill Development (formerly Watch Hill Development). He stated the following:

1. The Town of Goffstown has sent a letter stating they feel there is a Regional Impact to the Town of Goffstown by this Development. (attached)

The applicant was advised to send a complete set of plans to the Town of Goffstown.

Ken Swayze stated he had called them and they were not aware that this was an over 55 development.

2. Planning Board has received the Life Safety Review of Plans of Summerhill Development. (attached)

3. Planning Board has received a Request for a Waiver for one access road serving over 25 residences. (attached)

Ken Swayze stated there was a meeting on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 regarding the SFC Review during which time the applicant and his consultants presented a new plan for the access road that will make the request for the Waiver a moot issue. They are proposing two 12 foot wide lanes with two foot shoulders separated by a 8 – 12’ wide stone/rock barrier in the middle of the two lanes. The proposed access road will be wider at the entrance and at the section where the curve occurs.

Ken Swayze noted the Planning Board must still consider the Temporary Waiver for the 100 foot radius which expires shortly. According to the Life Safety Consultant, the 100 foot radius corresponds to the minimum required by the Fire Codes.

Jon Wiggin stated that we are able to make the turn with the largest truck we have, and we can get around the corner.

James Marcou asked if he was satisfied with the improvements to the radius. Jon Wiggin stated he was.

MOTION:

A motion was made, seconded and passed unanimously that the Dunbarton Planning Board grant the Waiver permanently for the radius to be 100 feet.

Ken Swayze noted there was discussion at the meeting regarding additional parking spaces. The applicant contends there are two in the garage and two outside each unit for a total of four parking spaces per unit. Some members of the Board do not agree with this basis of calculation. He stated he feels there needs to be more available spaces to prevent cars from parking along the road, etc.

At this point in the discussion, Michael Poirier stated that the applicant has paid to have a Life Safety Consultant review the plan. He meets the Site Plan Review regulations criteria for numbers of parking spaces per unit.

Jennifer McCourt, Engineer, explained the revised access road plan as follows:

1. Stated the access road will start at Route 13 It will be a double lane road with a 12’ island at the beginning and then carrying it down through an 8 foot wide island along the fairway until the first tee and then it will widen out again. The stone islands would have irrigation to provide for vegetation/flowers to be planted. Would actually have the dual access off Route 13 this way. We would still provide the chain and bollards on Town Farm Road as previously discussed. If the chain needs to be removed, it can be. There will be a 12 foot wide lane with a 4 foot shoulder on each side. Will start at about 30’ – 40’ in from Route 13. This is necessary in order to get a driveway permit from Route 13.

She stated this will be a vegetative island down through the access road. It will start at 12 feet wide, go down to 8 feet, and then back up to 14 feet. There will be a gap in the island for golfers to go from the tee to the green. SFC requested that we move the sidewalks/cross walks which we have done.

2. SFC Consultant has recommended that all of the roads be posted no parking except in areas designed to have parking.

J. McCourt stated they have provided a few extra spaces because of this. We also have Open Space parking plus the Open Space Parking on Route 13.

3. SFC Consultant has required that the road be widened where the fire cistern is to be located.

J. McCourt stated they will include the widening on the plan.

4. SFC Consultant has recommended a fence be put along the top of the 18 foot retaining wall on Fairway Lane.

J. McCourt stated they will include fencing as required on the plan also.

5. SFC Consultant regarding the road grade waiver from 8% to 10%. The waiver is consistent with the Fire Codes and is acceptable.

J. McCourt stated the waiver has already been granted.

6. SFC Consultant has asked that all turns and corners be checked for turning using a 40 foot bus with a seven foot overhang. This corresponds to a fire department ladder truck.

J. McCourt stated that all turns and corners will be checked for the turning radius for a 40 foot bus or fire truck, etc.

7. SFC Consultant’s concerns about access road (Items 11 and 12) have been addressed.

J. McCourt stated that Bob Pike has spoken with a group of golf pros as to how to widen the road entrance. They have done good work. This was very much a team effort getting to this point for the access road.

8. J. McCourt stated there have been changes as to sidewalks. It was requested by the Planning Board that we have sidewalks. Would not suggest putting sidewalks where all the driveways are because people don’t like to go up and down. In Hudson, at a single access development, it is very narrow, They agreed that sidewalks should not be in a congested area. One development had it and snow goes there and they turn into a nightmare. The ones we looked at had trees. You slow down because it is narrow and “treed”. They police themselves for the parking.

David Breault stated there will be guard rails along with the sidewalk on the other side of the road, right.

9. Ken Swayze asked how many extra parking spaces do you have now.

J. McCourt stated there will be 19 spaces additional for street-side parking. Could possibly fit four more in. Each unit also has four parking spaces.

10. James Marcou stated that he wanted to make sure the Town is indemnified from any liability for any reason. Who is responsible for keeping the cars off the road.

Attorney Marie Dolder stated that the Association will be in charge of it. The people in the Association will enforce the parking. It is a self-policing association. People that live there. It is an internal thing and the condo documents will address this.

James Marcou asked if the Police Department drives through, the Police can go up to the door and can go to the association and complain, etc.

Attorney Dolder stated the Association doesn’t want this. There are different avenues. They could be towed away or ticketed. We will allow the Town to enforce. At the least, the Police/Fire Departments could be allowed to enforce the rules.

James Marcou asked about a “go to number to call”. The Town has to have a number to call if there are problems.

Attorney Dolder stated it would be one of the members of the Association.

The Board asked what about if there was a family having a large party, etc. and the driveway and garage are full, where are the guests supposed to park? If they park along the road, they are impeding a fire truck. Where are you going to put the cars?

J. McCourt stated she realizes it is hard to believe that people would try to help out by neighbors allowing others to park in their driveways. We will be putting it in the condo documents that it is a real fire hazard to have parking along the roadway. If people see this in the documents before they buy, maybe they should consider they are not buying in the right development, etc.

J. McCourt stated that within this type of development, there is a sense of community. The houses are 50 feet apart. There will be no teenagers or 30 year old here. These people are more considerate of others.

At this point in the discussion, Bob Pike, Owner, stated that SFC had no problems with the parking as long as there were no parking signs along the roadways. The police have the responsibility. It really won’t happen. They are not going to do it. As long as someone can tow the car. I talked with the Police Chief about this. The Board of Directors will have penalties for parking along the street.

Kenneth Swayze stated he remains unconvinced about the parking. I am looking at it from the convenience of people who are living there.

David Breault stated to say that it will not happen and is not true reality about plenty of parking.

Michael Poirier stated all these roads are the same as roads in the Towns and cities. I don’t think you can stop people from parking along the road.

Attorney Dolder stated they have met the parking regulation without the extra parking. If you are looking for something more, tell us and we will do it. People coming into this project will know what they are buying into.

James Marcou stated they are building a good project. People will come and enjoy it. We know you meet the minimum requirement but if there is an opportunity to get more parking, we would like it. Stated he was trying to understand how the Town (Police Chief and Fire Chief) can interface with this community. I don’t want the Town to be burdened with this development.

Attorney Dolder stated it was not the Town’s responsibility to respond to enforce the parking issues. The Board of Directors would be willing to work with the town. With Life Safety issues, usually people “step up to the plate”.

James Marcou stated that any improvements that you can make would affect the value of the property.

At this point in the discussion, James Marcou, Chairman, asked individual members of the Board how they felt about the project. Responses as follows:

Michael Poirier stated that he thought SFC Consultant had done an excellent job and the applicants had taken their recommendations and worked them into the plan. He commended the applicant on a good job.

Alison Vallieres stated she commended the applicants for being able to work out the problem with the single access. She stated this had been a problem for her since the beginning of the project. It was good to see they were able to expand onto the fairway to widen the road for safety reasons. The applicants have done a good job working with the Board and Life Safety Consultant.

Terry Swain stated it was very encouraging to see an applicant that is so willing to work with the Board. Stated he doesn’t have a problem with the parking. They have met the requirement for the parking. The Consultant required them to put up the No Parking signs.

Mert Mann stated he was pleased with the new access road. Has no concern about the parking spaces.