DUNBARTON PLANNING BOARD

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2005

TOWN OFFICES – 7:00 PM

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

Brian Nordle, Co-Chairman

Alison R. Vallieres, Secretary

Mert Mann, Selectman

Kenneth Swayze, Admin., Planning and Zoning Department

Michael Poirier

David Breault

Terry Swain, Alternate

Public Meeting Notice:

The Chairman verified with the Secretary that the Public Meeting Notice had been posted in three public places throughout the Town and also published in the Concord Monitor. In addition, the Public Notice was posted on the Dunbarton Web Page.

APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES: WEDNESDAY, August 17, 2005

MOTION:

Brian Nordle made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board accept the minutes of the Wednesday, August 17, 2005 meeting as written. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.

7:00 P.M. - PUBLIC HEARINGS:

MICHAEL/LOUISE DETURK (C6-01-03) AND JANET MOZRALL (C6-01-04) PROPOSED LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT AND TWO LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON 1201 MONTALONA ROAD IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH

Kenneth Swayze presented a Status Report on the DeTurk/Mozrall proposed Lot Line Adjustment (attached).

Michael Dalberg, Surveyor, was present and stated the following with regard to the Comments:

1. They will flag the Wetlands Conservation District as required by the Conservation Commission. They (applicants) have ordered the signs.

2. Have completed the Site Walk (8/22/05). Brian Nordle went on the Site Walk representing the Planning Board. Brian reported driveway location appears adequate.

3. Final Plan is ready. Technically, the plan has not changed. Wetlands Board has asked for additional information but there is no change from the previous application.

Abutters and the Public:

There were no public comments and no abutters present.

Board Discussion and Vote:

At this point in the meeting, Ken Swayze asked the applicant how long the wetlands boundary was.

Mike Dalberg stated it was a long distance of flagging, and there will be a lot of signs. The Conservation Commission has just asked that it be flagged.

MOTION:

Brian Nordle made a motion to approve the proposed lot-line adjustment and Two-lot subdivision (#05-006) between Michael & Louise DeTurk (Tax Lot C6-01-03) and Janet Mozrall (C6-01-04) creating a nominal 6.5 acre lot (new) and a remaining 73-acre lot with an existing residence, located on Montalona Road in the Low Density Residential (5-ac.) District.

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.) 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, etc.); or a surety be posted in favor of the Town, in an amount adequate to complete such work as required.

5.) Preparation, submittal and filing of all Deeds, 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.

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

Michael Poirier seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

SITE PLAN REVIEW - US CELLULAR (RICHARD AND NICOLETTE HECKER) (C3-5-7) REQUEST SITE PLAN REVIEW TO INSTALL A 150 FOOT SELF SUPPORTING STEALTH “MONOPINE” TOWER WITHIN A 75 FOOT BY 75 FOOT FENCED COMPOUND LOCATED OFF POWELL LANE IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH. THE APPLICANT WILL LOCATE ITS APPURTENANT COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT WITHIN A 12’ X 20’ EQUIPMENT SHELTER AT THE BASE OF THE TOWER, FROM WHICH CABLING WILL CONNECT THROUGH THE INSIDE BODY OF THE TOWER TO ITS ANTENNAS, LOCATED JUST BELOW THE TOP OF THE TOWER.

Kenneth Swayze presented a Status Report for the U. S. Cellular Site Plan Review (attached). It was noted the applicants were looking for an approval this evening. The Board noted that all outstanding fees have been paid.

The following comments were addressed as follows:

1. Planning Board conducted a Site Walk on 9/15/05. Following members were on the Site Walk: Brian Nordle, Jim Marcou, Kenneth Swayze,

2. Selectmen’s Representative Comments re road requirements:

Mert Mann, Selectman, reported that the only thing the Selectmen will require is that the existing damaged culvert be replaced on Powell Lane. U. S. Cellular will replace the culvert after the construction work is completed.

3. Waivers to the Dunbarton Site Plan Regulations as follows:

Pursuant to VII of the Town of Dunbarton Site Plan Review Regulations, the Applicant requests waivers to the following items:

IV. Required Exhibits and Data

A6. The Applicant has not shown any water or sewage facilities or detail as the proposed facility is unmanned and none are proposed or necessary.

B2. The Applicant has not shown any water or sewage facilities or detail as the proposed facility is unmanned and none are proposed or necessary.

B3. There are no existing catch basins or drainage features and the Applicant is not proposing any.

B5. The Applicant proposes to maintain as much of the existing on-site vegetation as possible and is not proposing any additional landscaping.

B6. The Applicant proposes to run new electric and telephone service from PSNH Pole #1 as shown on the plans. Applicant has not shown any connections to Gas, Fire Alarm or CATV as none are proposed.

V. General Standards

B 1 & 2. The Applicant proposes to maintain as much of the existing on-site vegetation as possible and is not proposing any additional landscaping.

E. The Applicant is proposing a total of 320 square feet of impervious surface and as such will not substantially alter the current runoff on the site.

F. The Applicant proposes no lighting other than one 100 watt motion sensitive fixture at the equipment building entrance. This fixture is downcast and will not project any illumination onto neighboring parcels.

H. The Applicant has not shown any water or sewage facilities or detail as the proposed facility is unmanned and non are proposed or necessary.

J. The Applicant has not shown any water or sewage facilities or detail as the proposed facility is unmanned and none are proposed or necessary.

K. The Applicant is proposing a total of 320 square feet of impervious surface and as such will not substantially alter the current runoff on the site. Therefore, no Storm Water Drainage plan is included or required.

4. Board needs to review and select “artificial tree” option.

Ken Kozyra, U. S. Cellular, presented a copy of the specs for the tree which were within the Artificial Tree Study. There are three styles of artificial trees as follows:

1. Low Density which are usually used for shorter lower towers.

2. Medium Density which are used for towers up to 150 feet.

3. High Density which are used for higher towers and have more branches. This could limit the coverage of the tower.

K. Kozrya stated that the higher density branches limits the number of carriers that can be put on the tower. He presented pictures showing the types of trees, etc. He stated they could build an artificial tree with staggered length branches between 4 feet and 12 feet.

Board Discussion:

Terry Swain asked what the tree canopy was. Ken Kozrya noted it was about 75 feet. They would not start putting the “artificial branches” onto the tree until after 75 feet.

David Breault stated he would like to see the higher density if possible.

K. Kozrya stated you won’t be able to tell the difference between a medium density tree and high density. The medium density will allow us to put up the carriers. The high density may limit it to four carriers instead of five. In addition, we may have to put in another tower for coverage.

James Marcou stated he doesn’t feel it is going to make a lot of difference, and we don’t want to impede the tower.

The Board took a poll as to what type of artificial tree should be put in as follows:

Medium Density Artificial Tower – Yes – Vallieres, Marcou, Nordle, Swayze, Mann, Poirier, Swain

High Density – David Breault

Result of the poll - The Artificial Tree be Medium Density

5. Don Mayo’s Engineering Report (attached). The on-site inspection and plan review indicate that the proposed Powell Lane Tower Site and Access Drive is satisfactory from an engineering and construction perspective.

6. All fees have been paid.

Applicants Request for Waivers – Board Discussion:

Terry Swain asked about the need for a 100 watt motion sensitive light.

K. Kozrya stated that when they do technical work, etc. it will be between 12 midnight and 3:00 a.m. The technician needs to be able to see his way into the facility. The light will only be on when the technician is there. The sensor is aimed directly at the stoop.

D. Breault asked if they are going to be locating the Dunbarton Fire Department and Police onto the Tower as required within the zoning approval?

Jim Marcou asked if there is any time constraint on this?

K. Kozrya stated that at this time, no one has approached us from Dunbarton requesting to be put on the Tower. If the Town waits, there is the chance there will be no room left on the tower.

At this point Attorney Grill stated that we were being asked to do more that usual with the location of the Town facilities but we have agreed to it. We are in agreement with whatever the Zoning Board ruled. The Town can be put on the Tower if there is available space. Safety Services uses whips which is not a problem. The sooner the Town acts, the more likely there will be available space.

Jim Marcou asked if they appeared to be running out of space, would they notify the Town?

K. Kozrya stated he could not guarantee this. He stated he did communicate with the Police and Fire Departments, and they indicated there was no need at this time.

David Breault stated there was no mention of fire suppression. Is there enough room in Hecker’s driveway for parking?

K. Kozrya stated there is nothing combustible. This is an aluminum prefabricated building. The Hecker’s have agreed to allowing parking in their driveway.

K. Kozrya stated they have agreed not to touch the co-owned stone wall. The rock wall denotes part of the property line to the east.

Abutters and Public Comment:

None

MOTION:

Kenneth Swayze made a motion to approve the Waivers as requested as follows:

IV. Required Exhibits and Data

A6. The Applicant has not shown any water or sewage facilities or detail as the proposed facility is unmanned and none are proposed or necessary.

B2. The Applicant has not shown any water or sewage facilities or detail as the proposed facility is unmanned and none are proposed or necessary.

B3. There are no existing catch basins or drainage features and the Applicant is not proposing any.

B5. The Applicant proposes to maintain as much of the existing on-site vegetation as possible and is not proposing any additional landscaping.

B6. The Applicant proposes to run new electric and telephone service from PSNH Pole #1 as shown on the plans. Applicant has not shown any connections to Gas, Fire Alarm or CATV as none are proposed.

V. General Standards

B 1 & 2. The Applicant proposes to maintain as much of the existing on-site vegetation as possible and is not proposing any additional landscaping.

E. The Applicant is proposing a total of 320 square feet of impervious surface and as such will not substantially alter the current runoff on the site.

H. The Applicant has not shown any water or sewage facilities or detail as the proposed facility is unmanned and non are proposed or necessary.

J. The Applicant has not shown any water or sewage facilities or detail as the proposed facility is unmanned and none are proposed or necessary.

Brian Nordle seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

MOTION:

Kenneth Swayze made a motion to approve the Commercial Site Plan of U.S. Cellular, Agent/Lessee for Richard & Nicolette Hecker for a 150 ft. freestanding telecommunications tower, including related equipment and facilities. Located on Powell Lane (off Rt. 13) in the Low Density (5-ac) Residential District, subject to the following conditions:

1.) Compliance with all conditions as established by the Dunbarton Zoning Board of Adjustment and/or the U.S. Federal District Court pursuant to a civil action in this matter.

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

3.) Approval and receipt of all other required local, State, or Federal permits. 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.

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

5.) Compliance with all terms and conditions of any roadway improvement work on Powell Lane as required by the Dunbarton Board of Selectmen (scope of work to be entered on the final plan set).

6.) That artificial tree design, known as a medium density, variable branch be incorporated to camouflage the “Monopine” antenna system.

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

8.) 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.

The motion was seconded by Brian Nordle. The motion passed unanimously.

ARTHUR AND KATHLEEN BOISVERT (B3-2-12) REQUEST FOR AN AMENDED DECISION FROM THE DUNBARTON PLANNING BOARD TO ALLOW THEM TO APPLY FOR A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 1078 GORHAM POND ROAD IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH. (DUNBARTON PLANNING BOARD PREVIOUSLY MADE A MOTION THAT THE LOT NOT BE FURTHER SUBDIVIDED BECAUSE OF SOIL CONDITIONS, ETC.)

Kenneth Swayze reported that it was important for the Board to understand that this is a revocation of a previous Planning Board decision. If the Planning Board approves the request, then the applicant still must wait approximately 60 days before applying to the Dunbarton Planning Board for a subdivision.

Jacques Belanger, Surveyor, reported that he had obtained a second professional opinion from a Soils Scientist as requested by the Board (attached).

The Board noted that the previous Planning Board had put the restriction of no further subdivision because of Soil Conditions. Both of the other lots have already been subdivided. The standards have changed with regard to soil conditions for septic systems.

The Board noted they had scheduled a Site Walk on 8/22/05; it appeared no members of the Board, or applicants surveyor, attended.

Abutters and General Public:

None

MOTION:

Brian Nordle made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board revoke the previous Planning Board approval which included a restriction that there be no further subdivision of the lot.

David Breault seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

Ken Swayze noted there is a 30 day appeal time frame for anyone or abutters to appeal. The Planning Board has to send a note to all abutters and anybody interested, etc. We have to give them 30 days from the receipt of the notice. It was noted they could be coming back to the Planning Board in about 60 days with a subdivision application.

SITE PLAN REVIEW/SUBDIVISION - SUMMERHILL CONDOMINIUMS (DUNBARTON 88) CONSISTING OF 83 UNITS LOCATED OFF ROUTE 13 SOUTH AT THE COUNTRYSIDE GOLF COURSE IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH

Maria Dolder, Hebert & Uchida’s Office, appeared before the Board along with Bob Pike, Owner, and Jen McCourt, Engineer.

Maria Dolder stated she has been in contact with Dunbarton’s Town Counsel several times today. Dunbarton’s Town Counsel requirement is for a 50 foot right of way with 25 foot setbacks for protection to the Town of Dunbarton in case the Town ever has to take over the road, etc.

Maria Dolder stated that the biggest obstacle the applicant has at this time is the requirement for a 50 foot right of way with 25 feet setbacks. She stated this is impossible to achieve, and if this is required, they will have to drop the proposal and come in with a standard sub-division.

Maria Dolder stated we have been working very hard today on developing restrictive covenants within the Condo Documents to satisfy Dunbarton’s Town Counsel requirements that the Town will never be petitioned to take over the road. Everyone that comes into the development will understand that this is a private road. It could not be amended except if the Town or the Planning Board approves it. They can’t petition the Town until the Town says they can do it. The Town will have the final say.

Regarding the second stage of the petition to take over the road, you can’t even get to Stage #2. There is no way we want this to become a public road. That is our position this evening. We are working diligently to satisfy Dunbarton’s Town Counsel. If we can’t get past this issue, this project will not be completed. This project was not designed to have lot lines and setbacks.

James Marcou stated that at a meeting with Town Counsel recently, we indicated at the meeting to make sure we were all up to date. They mentioned the 50 foot setback, and it has been talked about throughout this project in the off chance in the future, you want to make this is Town road. Town Counsel has concerns about the future and the Town being responsible. We do not want to leave ourselves unprotected on this matter. You are saying there will be something in the condo documents such as a restrictive covenants?

Maria Dolder stated that in trying to work this out, this is our suggested solution. We got the impression from your Town Counsel that they would review our suggestion.

James Marcou stated that if the Town is forced to take over the road in the future, we have no setbacks. We have got no place to go but to demand the 50 foot right of way. We want to do what we need to do to protect the Town. If we can be taken out of the road issue and you and Town Counsel agree, but it has got to be right.

Maria Dolder stated she was feeling confident that this can work. The restrictive covenants takes the liability away from the Town. If Town Counsel comes back and says this will work, we will put it in the condo documents.

James Marcou stated the Planning Board could not move if there was no alternative for the Town of Dunbarton. The next step is to go through all the engineering standards. Would like to get a final plan to the Board in October. They have been put on notice to do everything they need to do and be diligent to the Town of Dunbarton. Town Counsel has been very good. Have reviewed the condo documents and have all their comments, and should have that wrapped up by October.

The Board noted that Town Counsel will be present at the October Planning Board Meeting.

Brian Nordle stated that he has seen a lot of projects very similar to this one. Some of them are with only 15 feet of pavement. I am not sure if they are right of ways. Some of these buildings are within 8 feet of pavement. I don’t have a problem with this even if the Town had to accept the road.

James Marcou asked if the applicants think they can make this work.

Stated they didn’t see any reason why not.

James Marcou stated the Board will communicate with Town Counsel.

Bob Pike, Owner, stated we don’t want to scrap this project. We have a strong commitment to these abutters.

James Marcou stated the Board ‘s responsibility is to protect the Town of Dunbarton.

Engineering Issues – Jen McCourt:

1. Jen McCourt, Engineer, asked if the Fire Department has reviewed the phasing plan. Phase I will be building the main drive in, the first loop and build the infrastructure. Phase I also includes the cistern. Phase II is just the second loop. Fire Chief Wiggin noted this is the first he heard of it.

Brian Nordle asked if the pumps will be able to handle the second phase. J. McCourt stated the pump house will be built for the entire project.

Fire Chief Wiggin stated it seemed reasonable to him, but he will look at it.

Bob Pike stated that because of Fannie Mae and HUD standards, we may have to put some phasing lines for the units but not the infrastructure.

2. Planning Board will have copies of the yearly age report for the 55 year old and older community.

3. J. McCourt explained the lines on the plan around each unit are for a limited condo area for each individual unit. Owners only own from the “paint in”. The lines show the owners of the units where their limited condo area is, etc. These are also described within the condo documents. They are shown by metes and bounds.

There is the large open space within the golf course and also another larger open space expressly for the purpose of Conservation Commission with public parking.

4. Ken Swayze stated he has heard from Mike Tardiff, New Hampshire Central Regional Planning Commission. Lucy St. John will be in touch with Town Counsel as their representative .

Brian Nordle stated it was also brought up about the septic in an open space not in accordance with the PRD ordinance.

Maria Dolder stated she is working with Town Counsel regarding the interpretation of this.

5. Fire Chief Wiggin asked if they would be allowing outside burning.

Robert Pike stated there will be no open fires allowed. Even gas barbecue grills have to be in a certain location.

6. Don Mayo’s Comments – Town Engineer (attached):

Don Mayo explained that he felt the project should be one way traffic on both Summerhill Drive and Fairway Lane due to a combination of factors, including steep grades, sharp curves and limited sight distance. Don Mayo stated there was not 200 feet of sight distance at both curves in the road. The second curve was reduced by a waiver to 110 feet wide from the required 150 feet. This in itself, reduces the sight distance. There is no way to get the 200 foot sight distance. This is a 55 year and older community. Vision and hearing is not as good as younger people. These are the reasons I recommend one way traffic.

Fire Chief Wiggin stated this might alleviate the parking problem. He stated that no matter what the applicant is saying, he believes there will be a parking problem. He stated that just yesterday, he went out on an emergency call to a development, and there was a party washing a boat which was blocking the roadway. The emergency vehicle could not get through.

Jen McCourt stated that if they did this, many of the residents of the units would have to travel further, etc. In order to get out, the units on the one way drive will have to pass by other units. Felt that this was unnecessary. She stated that 24 feet of pavement would make it appear to be a two way road.

There was considerable discussion regarding the one way traffic as recommended by Don Mayo.

Alison Vallieres stated she felt this was a “small price for the developer to pay” for the good of the project. The Board relies on the Town Engineer for his input. We should listen to him.

Brian Nordle stated that the developments he has looked at were one way roads. It seemed to work.

At this point in the discussion, James Marcou, Chairman, stated he would poll the Board to find out whether they wanted one way traffic or two way.

The Board poll was unanimous for one way traffic as suggested by Don Mayo.

7. Bonding of Road

Bob Pike mentioned giving the Town a letter of credit for road work. The Board noted the bonding would be addressed the same as any other proposed subdivision.

Public and Abutter Comments:

None

MOTION:

Kenneth Swayze made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board continue the Public Hearing for the Site Plan Review of the Summerhill Condominium Project until next regularly scheduled meeting. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.

OLD BUSINESS: NONE

NEW BUSINESS:

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

NONE

OTHER BUSINESS:

MANSION HEIGHTS LLC AND DIPETRO HOMES LLC (ROCO DIPETRO) REQUEST FOR REDUCTION IN SURETY (LETTER OF CREDIT)

Kenneth Swayze reported that Dipietro Homes was requesting a reduction in their letter of credit with the Town. Based on the information they presented, the Dunbarton Planning Board agreed they needed more information before making any decision. The Board also noted that before they give any money back, the Board should review the entire project as to appropriate valuation.

CIP PROGRAM – PLANNING BOARD ASSIGNMENT OF PLANNING BOARD REPRESENTATIVES TO CIP COMMITTEE

David Breault, CIP Chairman, presented the following list of individuals to be put on the CIP Committee:

Jeff Nelson, Police Chief

Patrick “Woody” Bowne, Transfer Station

Jon Wiggin, Fire Chief

Charles Graybill, Selectmen’s Office

Les Hammond, Selectmen’s Office

Michael Poirier, Planning Board

Alison Vallieres, Planning Board

David Breault, Planning Board

MOTION:

James Marcou made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board accept the list as recommended by David Breault. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.

David Breault noted that the next CIP Meeting would be held on Tuesday, October 4, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. at the Police Station.

ROAD STANDARDS COMMITTEE:

Kenneth Swayze noted that there needs to be a Work Sub-Committee for Road Standards. The following members volunteered to be on the Work Committee:

Brian Nordle, Planning Board

Larry Cook, Conservation Commission

Alison Vallieres, Planning Board

Kenneth Swayze, Planning Board

Mert Mann, Selectmen’s Representative

INFORMAL DISCUSSION:

Burchell Property, Grapevine Road:

Jacques Belanger, Surveyor, appeared before the Board with a Conceptual Plan showing a proposed ten lot subdivision of the Burchell Property off Grapevine Road.

Charles (Chuck) Williamson:

Chuck Williamson asked the Planning Board about the correct procedure for doing a “Voluntary Merger”. The Planning Board advised him the best way is to get a certified Plot Plan showing the proposed merger. The plan would then be filed at the Merrimack Registry of Deeds Office after the Planning Board reviews it, etc.

MOTION:

James Marcou made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board go into non-public session in accordance with RSA 91-A:3 at 9:35 p.m. to discuss legal issues. The motion was seconded by Brian Nordle. The motion passed with a roll call vote as follows:

Marcou – Yes

Nordle – Yes

Swayze - Yes

Mann – Yes

Vallieres– Yes

Poirier – Yes

Breault – Yes

Swain – Yes

No motions or decisions were made during the non-public session.

MOTION:

James Marcou made a motion that the Dunbarton Planning Board adjourn the non-public session in accordance with RSA 91-A:3 at 9:45 p.m. to discuss legal issues. The motion was seconded by Alison Vallieres. The motion passed with a roll call vote as follows:

Marcou – Yes

Nordle – Yes

Swayze - Yes

Mann – Yes

Vallieres– Yes

Poirier – Yes

Breault - Yes

Swain – Yes

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Alison Vallieres

Secretary