DUNBARTON PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OFFICES –
The Dunbarton Planning Board held its regular monthly meeting at the above time, date and place with Chairman James Marcou presiding. The following members were present:
James Marcou, Chairman
Brian Nordle, Co-Chairman
Kenneth Swayze, Admin., Planning
and Zoning Department
Mert Mann, Selectman
Alison Vallieres, Secretary
George Holt
Michael Poirier
David Breault, Alternate
The
Chairman verified with the Secretary that the meeting notice had been published
in three public places throughout the Town in a timely fashion according to
State Law and published in the Concord Monitor for one day.
Approval
of Previous Meeting Minutes:
MOTION:
Kenneth Swayze made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board approve the minutes of the May 19, 2004 meeting as written. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
At this point in the meeting, the Chairman announced that two items had been withdrawn from the agenda as follows and that if there were any parties present for these two items on the agenda, they could leave because they would not be taken up at this meeting.
Paul and Barbara Simoneau
Gerald Dugrenier
David Nault stated that he had purchased land across the street from the Dugrenier property, and he would be closing before the next meeting, therefore he would be considered an abutter. The Board advised him to contact the Surveyor regarding this information.
PUBLIC HEARING - TED JOHNSON (H4-2-10) PROPOSED FOUR LOT
SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON GRAPEVINE ROAD IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN
David Breault stepped down from
the Board for the Johnson proposed subdivision.
Kenneth Swayze presented a
Status Report on the Johnson proposed subdivision. (attached)
At this point, Jennifer
McCourt of McCourt Engineering Associates, appeared before the Board to
represent J. E. Belanger Surveying. A
letter of authorization was presented to the Board. (attached)
Jennifer McCourt addressed the
following items:
1.
Presented an updated plan showing the entrance road extending to the
lower property line with a hammer- head.
In addition, she presented a revised detail of the hammer- head which
changed the configuration slightly which will be included on the final plan.
(attached)
2.
With regard to the sight distance, a detail was presented showing there
was additional land available than previously thought to allow for improvements
(10’ wide). Jennifer McCourt stated
there was sufficient sight distance for the right of way. She stated the right of way was presently 25
feet of the centerline and this would give sufficient room.
At this point, the Board indicated they still would
like to see thirty (30) feet from the centerline set aside for future road
improvements. They indicated the Road
Agent would like as much room as possible for cutting back brush, etc.
J. McCourt stated they would take it under
advisement with their client.
3.
Stated they would prefer to use plastic pipe instead of concrete
culverts. The Board stated they would
like concrete culverts. Jennifer
McCourt agreed to use concrete culverts in accordance with the Planning Board
and Don Mayo’s recommendations.
4.
Will provide guard rail and retaining wall details as requested by Don
Mayo. Are presently checking out
different manufacturer’s of retaining walls, etc. prior to making a decision
for what type of retaining wall. Will
provide details to Planning Board in accordance with Don Mayo’s
recommendations.
5.
Meadow Road was most likely given one half to each landowner, to the
centerline. This will be shown on the
final
plan. The easement will remain
on Meadow Road. This is just an easement
for the existing property
owners.
Kenneth
Swayze noted the following:
1.
Has suggested that the Wetlands Conservation line @ 125 feet be clearly
marked on the plan. Should be noted this
is a Conservation buffer so the owners of the property know what it is.
2. Driveway on one lot goes
through the 4K septic area. Should be
rearranged. J. McCourt agreed to
changing the configuration of the driveway or the location of the 4K area.
3.
Signage should be shown at the intersection and also “Dead End Road”
sign indicating No Outlet, etc.
Standard list for signs: speed
limit, etc..
4. New Name of road “Natalie
Drive” should be approved by the Fire Department. J. McCourt indicated they were in the
process of getting this approval.
5.
Site Walk was done on Monday, June 14, 2004 with the following
representatives of the Planning Board:
James Marcou
Kenneth Swayze
Michael Poirier
Brian Nordle
George Holt
6.
Slope easement is necessary for the entire roadway. Any construction that extends beyond the 50
foot ROW would require a slope easement.
7.
Talked with Larry Cook, Conservation Commission, and Larry feels the
Conservation Commission has been duly notified.
George Holt also stated he had spoken with the Conservation Commission.
8.
Surety bonding will be coming from the owners.
Brian
Nordle asked if this project qualifies for Regional Impact. The Board determined that this project did
not cause undue Regional Impact.
At this point, George Holt stated that this proposed road opens up a much larger project by the connection at the end of the road. We voted on a Waiver for the 10% grade instead of 8% without looking at the property. I was opposed to that. There is discussion of opening up the back lots. If the back lots are accessed by this road, this becomes a high traffic road. That causes me concern about the 10% grade. Feel we should rescind the waiver. If we are talking about 20 or 40 lots, this is considerable.
MOTION:
George
Holt made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board reconsider the Vote to
grant the Waiver for a 10% Grade.
Discussion:
James Marcou stated we
are talking about a four lot subdivision.
We can’t go too far to assume anything much beyond that.
Kenneth Swayze stated we
are talking about 450 feet at 10% grade.
Not talking about problematic engineering. There is a 400 foot sight distance at the
main road, and this is a well-designed roadway.
.
George Holt stated we
have had a number of subdivisions that stayed with the 8% grade.
The motion was not seconded therefore the motion failed.
Abutters were read as follows and noted all had been notified by certified mail:
Richard and Mary West –
Not Present
Charles/Sandra Morin –
Not Present
Juneau Development –
Present. David Hiltz, Uchida Law Firm,
appeared before the Board on behalf of Juneau Development. Stated his client was in support of this
subdivision and very pleased this is going in and there have been design
discussions about changes to the end of the roadway. Have no problem with this project.
Douglas/Tammy Garcia –
Not Present
Pamela Sullivan/Lee
Richards – Present. Stated that George
Holt is talking about opening up the back lots from the hammer- head. They certainly can’t go across Bela
Brook. I would like an update on the
drainage. Am concerned about drainage,
etc.
J. McCourt explained the
drainage report and stated it goes into a level spreader before it goes
anywhere. Will also provide silt fence according to BMP standards. Riprap will be put in as necessary. Will be silt fences which will have to be
maintained during construction. This
would apply to the road building.
Construction sites would be a separate issue and would be monitored by
the Building Department.
James Marcou stated he
assumed the Conservation Commission would be monitoring the project also.
George Holt asked about
the Drainage Report. The Board noted
that the Town Engineer had a copy, and another was available for review from
the Planning Department.
Richard Burchell – Not
Present.
Cherie/Karl Boisvert –
Not Present
Lahajji Development –
Present. represented by Uchida Law Firm.
Same comments as Juneau Development.
Country Woods –
Present. No comments.
Peter Nieries – Not
Present.
AC Engineering and
Consulting – Not Present
Schauer Environmental
Consultants – Not Present
J. E. Belanger Surveying
– Present. Representing applicant.
Other Members of the Public:
John Trottier asked how
high the retaining wall would be. J.
McCourt stated about eight to ten feet because of the driveway. This will hold the enbankment for the roadway
from the wetlands.
J. Trottier indicated
the Board should consider for now or in the future, the Town doesn’t have the
funds to maintain these walls. It is a
2:1 slope. Should ask for an additional
ten feet slope easement off the toe of the slope so they can rebuild if
necessary. Will need more than the slope
easement.
The Board noted there is
a design approval pending on this issue.
J. Trottier asked about
how much developable land there is in back of the proposed hammer head?
The Board noted that
Bela Brook is at the bottom of the area.
There are considerable wetlands.
There also is a 125 foot Wetlands Conservation District along both sides
of Bela Brook. There is a lot of
wetlands that in itself restricts development but development is possible.
The Board noted the applicants needed to provide the following prior to the next meeting:
1. Design detail of the retaining wall.
2. Bonding
3. Should have a complete set of plans showing all issues of the road and Meadow Road.
4. Easements
5. 10’ Shaded area. (Board indicated they would need more than the 25 feet from the centerline. McCourt agreed to provide 30 feet from the centerline. )
MOTION:
Kenneth Swayze made a motion to continue the Public Hearing for the Johnson Proposed Four Lot Subdivision until the meeting in July. Brian Nordle seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
The Public Hearing was
closed.
PUBLIC HEARING – SIMON AUDET (C7-1-9) PROPOSED FOUR LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON TWIST HILL ROAD IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH
At this point in the meeting, David Breault came back to the Board.
Kenneth Swayze submitted a Status Report on the
proposed Audet subdivison.
(attached) He noted the applicant
is seeking an approval this evening.
J.
McCourt, representing J. E. Belanger Surveying, presented the updated
plan. She noted there is 25 feet from
the centerline for road improvements. The
Board indicated they would like 30 feet for future road improvements. J. McCourt agreed to the 30 feet.
J. McCourt stated the ROW to the
Wheeler Property gives the “right to pass with a team and to allow a
fence”. How much do you need for a
“team”, 16 – 18 feet possibly.
Abutters were read as follows and noted all had been notified by certified mail:
Wheeler
Family Trust – Present. Paul
Bruzga. Stated he had been discussing
the ROW with Simon Audet and he has told me several times where the ROW is
located. It is in the northern part and
he proposed trading it for a ROW at the extreme north end. The line of sight is very poor and probably
the Town would not allow it because it would be on a blind corner. Haven’t drawn up where the ROW is. This is between myself and the owner of the
land.
Kenneth Swayze stated there is a note on the plan regarding the easement. Asked if the two parties could work out the easement between them. They acknowledged they would work this out.
Simon Audet stated that
all it is is an easement to go there and do forestry and agriculture work. I have made him some offers. This is only an agricultural easement.
James Marcou stated the
Board did not need to address this at this time. We are going to deal with that at another
time. If the width of the ROW were 50
feet, we are going to look at it as a potential subdivision ROW requiring an
increased sight distance..
Brian Nordle stated
there should be a note on the plan that it is an easement that runs per a deed
and not a vehicle ROW.
J. McCourt stated again
that this is only a “right to pass and repass with a team”.
JWF Real Estate and
Development – Not Present
Roger/Marjolane Bergeron
– Not Present
Jamie/Sharyn Goddard –
Not Present
Lewis/Penny Fortin – Not
Present
Jeffrey Rousseau/Kathy
Heon – Not Present
Mark/Siobhan Dougherty –
Not Present
J. E. Belanger Surveying
– Present. (Representing the applicant)
Other Members of the Public:
John Trottier – Stated
the Planning Board did a good job at getting 30 feet for future road
improvements.
MOTION:
Kenneth Swayze made a motion to approve the proposed subdivision of SIMON
AUDET of Tax Lot C7-01-09 consisting of a 4 (four) lot subdivision on 27.6
acres, located on Twist Hill Road in the Low Density (5 ac.) District subject
to the following conditions:
Brian
Nordle seconded the motion. The motion
passed unanimously.
The
public hearing was closed.
PUBLIC
HEARING – PAGES COUNTRY STORE AND DELI (THOMAS THORNE) (I3-4-2) REQUEST
PERMISSION TO PAVE THE REAR SECTION OF THE STORE INCLUDING THE ENTRANCE AND
EXIT ONTO OLD FORT LAND AND TO INSTALL A DIRECTIONAL SIGN ONTO OLD FORT LANE AT
THE PROPERTY ON ROUTE #77 (CONCORD STAGE ROAD) IN THE MANUFACTURING HOUSING
DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH
Attorney Gregg Michael appeared before the Board on behalf of his clients, the Thornes.
1.
Stated they would like permission to pave the back parking lot and to
pave up to Old Fort Estate Road.
2.
Also would request to allow two signs to state “for Delivery and
Emergency Vehicles only”. (attached)
Also would like to restrict this access to emergency vehicles only and would
like the Board to give this some consideration. There will be 9,400 square feet that would
be paved. This will not effect the
drainage patterns. Also will prevent
vehicles from taking gravel out onto the roadway. We feel it would make sense.
At this point, Attorney Michael submitted a drainage
report from Keach-Nordstrom Associates regarding the pavement of the parking
lot. (attached)
James Marcou asked if they were increasing the
square footage of the parking area.
Attorney Michaels stated “No, they were not”. They are paving the existing parking
area.
Abutters were read as follows and noted all had been
notified by certified mail:
Karen Gincott/Thomas Cusano – Present. Thomas Cusano stated that he lived on 10 Old Fort Lane. Stated the original design did not have an access. The Planning Board requested that the driveway be put in. This driveway is not needed. A lot of people have found it easier to use the driveway off Old Fort Estate as an entrance to the store. They don’t know that it is not okay. School children have to walk to the end of the road. Large trucks use that and use that as an exit. There are tracks on the road. You don’t just see one or two sets of tracks, you see many. A truck with bark mulch dumped some mulch in the middle of the road and it took a week or so or rain, etc. for it to go away. In addition, having this open there detracts from them using that as a driveway. Once you pave it, it will be used more. Was to be only a graveled driveway. We have even discussed having it gated. Gates have drawbacks and could a problem for emergency vehicles. We don’t want the road to be more accessible. Easy to come around this way. It is simply more convenient. As far as trucks, I am in a quandary as to how to stop them. I don’t feel that was originally intended for this to become the turn around for large trucks.
Sjacqueline/Richard Brough – Present. As far as paving the driveway, that is
okay. I agree with Tom. I have seen large trucks and this is the
only way out. The end of Old Fort
Estates Road is already crumbling and starting to become damaged. We have already lost a couple of feet on the
end of that road. I don’t have a problem
with the paving. We need to keep people
from going there and the only way they can go is the back of the building.
Laraine Allen – Not Present. Represented by Thomas Cusano. Mr. Cusano read a letter from the Allen’s
stating their opposition to the paving.
(attached)
Antonio/Julie Rabbia – Not Present.
Other Members of the Public:
Brian Naro – Stated that he was opposed to the
paving of the parking lot. Read a
statement. (attached)
Also presented copies of pictures. (attached)
Lee Richards – Stated he was not sure large trucks
could turn around in the parking area.
Can go ahead and allow the upgrade to the back parking lot and put in
“Do Not Enter” signs.
Diane Richter – Stated she fell in love with Old
Fort Estates and has only lived there a short time. I like the Store there. However, as a mother and vet, I have concerns
about changing things. Delivery trucks
have a routine that it is hard to change.
I would like us not to pave. It
should have “Do Not Enter” signs. Only
emergency vehicles should be allowed.
Stig Harding, 22 Old Fort Estates – We ought to let
them pave and have a gate. Should be
only one way. It shouldn’t have been
allowed to go in there in the first place.
Richard Brough – Should be no paving around the
store. Should be a “Do Not Enter”
sign. I agree with the doctor. At times,
there are trucks parked along Old Fort Estates Road. There should be no parking allowed along Old
Fort Estates Road.
David Nault – I use the back entry going around the building regularly. I believe that paving is a good thing. That entrance was for delivery at that time. They are good property owners and have done everything the Town has asked them to do.
Kenneth Swayze – Stated he has personally observed
the traffic flow. They are mostly
delivery trucks. The front parking lot
is not conducive to truck turn around.
The paving and use of the rear driveway is consistent with the Police
and Fire Department’s recommendation. In
1992-93, JR Swindlehurst, Fire Chief at the time, recommended the driveway for
overall traffice flow and safety
reasons. It was an “arm twisting”
venture with the previous owner, Sal Rabbia to get him to agree to the side
entrance. The police are concerned that
it will be more difficult to turn around large vehicles in the front area. If there is a sign, the people who live there
are going to have to go out onto Route 77 to get to the store, and then come
back onto Route 77 to leave. The Police
are concerned that enforcement is going to be tough. The breakup of the road was started before
the store was even started. The problem
is the construction of the road. Today
the State would probably require only the side entrances from Old Fort
Road. They would probably not even allow the entrance onto Route
77.
James Marcou – Stated he was certainly in favor of
paving the rear parking lot. With regard
to Old Fort Estates, the rear entrance was designed to be a usable
entrance. It was never intended to be
gated or be used only by emergency vehicles only. It does certainly need a Stop Sign. A Stop Sign would give the police department
a much better enforcement basis. It is
more credible. If it is for emergency
vehicles only, they could run into a car.
Should be a sign that it is a “Dead End” Street. We need the access for overall public
safety reasons.
Michael Poirier – Stated he concurred with what Jim
Marcou has just said.
Alison Vallieres stated that back in 1992-93 when
the Planning Board reviewed the first subdivision and Site Plan, the Planning
Board Chairman, Barry Lussier, knew that
the front parking lot was inadequate for delivery trucks to turn around so the Planning Board fought long and hard
for the side entrance specifically for deliveries. Mr. Rabbia did not want to do it because of
cost and inconvenience, etc. I would
hate to think we would be losing it now.
There was a huge discussion about what the width of the right of way
should be. And in addition, the end of
Old Fort Lane was purposely widened for the added truck traffic.
George Holt – Stated that the Planning Board should
hire a traffic consultant to study the parking lot situation and make
recommendations as to how to handle the situation before making any
decisions.
The Board felt the application before the Board was
merely to pave the rear parking lot and put signs at the side driveway. We cannot expect the applicant to make a lot
of changes from the original plan, etc.
Brian Nordle stated he agreed with the Stop Sign
going in and would agree with one of the comments that there shouldn’t be any
parking on Old Fort Estates Road. We
need signs in to say “No Parking” along the side of the Old Fort Estates
Road.
Kenneth Swayze stated he agreed with Brian
Nordle. The Town has the right to put up
signs regardless of the Planning Board’s position this evening, since it is a
Town Road (and not here for Site Plan Review).
.
MOTION:
Kenneth Swayze made a motion that the Dunbarton
Planning Board allow the Pages Country Store and Deli (Thomas Thorne) (I3-4-2)
to pave the rear section of the store including the entrance and exit onto Old
Fort Lane, that a Stop Sign be put up, and a sign stating “Right Turn allowed
for local traffic only”. The motion was
seconded by Brian Nordle. The motion
passed by a majority vote as follows:
Marcou
– Yes
Nordle
– Yes
Swayze
– Yes
Vallieres
– Yes
Mann
– Yes
Poirier
- Yes
Holt
– Abstained
RECEIPT AND ACCEPTANCE OF NEW APPLICATIONS BY THE DUNBARTON PLANNING BOARD AND START OF PROCEEDINGS:
GEORGE NICHOLAOU (D3-3-1) PROPOSED TWO LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON ROUTE 13 AND MANSION ROAD IN THE VILLAGE AND MEDIUM DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH
Kenneth Swayze submitted a Status Report. (attached)
The Secretary reported that there was a problem with
abutter notification. The list of
abutters shows New Hampshire Traditional Homes as an abutter and the property
has been sold two months ago.
MOTION:
Kenneth Swayze made a motion that the George
Nicholaou proposed subdivision be moved to the next meeting because of a
defective list of abutters. The motion
was seconded and passed unanimously.
GPS PROPERTIES, INC. (C4-1-3) PROPOSED THREE LOT
SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON POWELL LANE OFF ROUTE 13 IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN
DUNBARTON, NH
Kenneth Swayze submitted a Status Report. (attached)
George Holt stated that he reviewed the plan this afternoon. He is concerned because it is not a complete survey of the entire property and there is no test pit on the 89-acre tract. . I would say that the application is incomplete and the intent of what the large lot is all about is not on the plan.
Kenneth Swayze stated even the State does not look for test pits over five acres under subdivision approvals. We have to act on what is presented to us. This is only a three lot subdivision at this point and the large lot is one of those lots.
MOTION:
Kenneth Swayze made a motion that the Dunbarton
Planning Board accept the application for the GPS Properties, Inc. (C4-1-3)
Proposed Three Lot Subdivision located on Powell Lane off Route 13 in the Low
Density District in Dunbarton, NH and start deliberations this evening. Brian Nordle seconded the motion. The motion passed by a majority vote as
follows:
Marcou
– Yes
Nordle - Yes
Swayze
– Yes
Vallieres
– Yes
Poirier
– Yes
Holt
– No
At this point in the meeting, Gregg Scarlet, Owner of the property, stated that his surveyor Mike Dalberg was not able to be present at this meeting. He stated he could explain the plan to the Board, but did not appear ready for any presentation.
MOTION:
Michael Poirier made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board continue the proposed subdivision until the next meeting when the Surveyor was present.
The Board decided to give Mr. Scarlet the
opportunity to get the plan out of his car and explain it to the Board.
The motion was withdrawn by Michael Poirier.
At this point, Gregg Scarlet, applicant, presented a plan showing the proposed three lot subdivision. He stated he had purchased the Ken Alton property. He plans on selling the Ken Alton Home on one of the five acre lots and selling the other five acre lot as a building lot. He possibly plans on building a home for himself on the large 89 acre lot depending on whether the Cell Tower goes in or not, etc.
The Board noted the applicant should address the following :
1. Line of Sight for driveways
2. Schedule a Site Walk
3. Need the driveways shown on the plan and on the ground
4. Set granite bounds
5. Re septic design, need to show the test pit numbers on the plan
Abutters were read as follows and noted all had
been notified by certified mail:
Dennis/Tammy Little – Not Present
Schauer Environmental Consultants – Not Present
Alain/Phyllis Biron – Present. Stated they had no problem with this. We are concerned about the large 89 acre lot and what will be done with it.
Henry/Joan Burnham – Not Present
Wayne/Mary Bracy – Present. Stated he was very concerned about the next step. We assume the 89 acre lot will be chopped up. It is 15 feet from the Old Mill Brook Road. Very much concerned.
Ronald/Edith Soucy – Present. What about the 89 acre lot?
Mary Story Heirs, R. & W. Doucet – Not Present
Michael/Christine Soucy – Present. No comment at this time.
Jason T. Gail Georgantas – Not Present
Keith Jordan – Present. Stated he was improperly notified because the public notice said the subdivision was located on Powell Lane. The subdivision is on three roads, Route 13, Powell Lane and Black Brook Road. Said he thought at the time he received a notice, that it didn’t affect him. Stated he was unprepared for the public hearing. Stated he owns the swamp. Drainage to the back and to the side of his property from this land. Want to make sure the test pits are going to meet the approval of the Town before there is any permits given. Concerned if any Variances are needed because it is a large parcel of land. Water from Ken Alton’s comes across the road and water into a drainage area. Lot of drainage and water comes down my piece of property. Where are the well, septic and house going to be?
William Schlottman – Not Present
Eleanor Swindlehurst Revocable Trust – Present. No comments
John Swindlehurst Revocable Trust – Not Present.
Peter and Linda Hecker – Present. Stated his concerns are the same as everyone else. My concerns are for the 89 acres and my brother’s land also. There is a pond in the back yard. Access becomes a major issue.
Richard/Nicolette Hecker – Not Present.
MOTION:
Kenneth Swayze made a motion that the Dunbarton
Planning Board waive the requirements for a test pit on the proposed 89 acre
lot on the GPS PROPERTIES, INC. proposed subdivision. The motion was seconded and passed
unanimously.
At this point, the public hearing was closed.
MOTION:
Kenneth Swayze made a motion that the Dunbarton
Planning Board continue the public hearing for GPS Properties, Inc. (C4-1-3)
proposed three lot subdivision until the July meeting. The motion was seconded and passed
unanimously.
MASTER PLAN UPDATE:
Brian Nordle reported as follows:
1. Community Facilities Chapter is completed
2. Land Use Chapter has two more meetings and then will be completed.
3. Housing Sub-committee will be starting on July 12. (Committee members – Nick Holmes, Arline Little, and Stig Harding)
4. Transportation Chapter is almost completed.
5. First updates of Chapters will be presented at the August meeting of the Planning Board.
George Holt presented Board members with a copy of the first draft of the Build Out Study. (attached)
OTHER BUSINESS:
Chan Property
Jacques Belanger, Surveyor, presented a preliminary plan showing a subdivision of the Chan property off Gile Hill Road. They would like to break of two lots, leaving a five acre lot with the existing home, and give the Town a 43.65 acre lot. This large lot would be a non-buildable lot.
David Nault
Stated he had just purchased the property around his and wanted advice on how to annex land to his parcel.
He will consider several options.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Alison R. Vallieres, Secretary