TOWN OF WILTON

PLANNING BOARD MEETING

Approved 4/16/08

 

DATE:            April 3, 2008

TIME:            7:30 P.M.

PLACE:          Citizen’s Hall Lyndeborough, NH

PRESENT:     Wilton Planning Board Members: Chairman Jeff Kandt (arrived late), Alec MacMartin, Neil Faiman, Selectman Representative Bill Condra, Alternate Dawn Tuomala, Alternate Walter Zuber,  NRPC Representative Kerrie Diers, and Clerk Heather Loewy Nichols.

Lyndeborough Planning Board: Chair Tracey Turner, Mike Decubellis, Bill Ball, Tom Chrisenton, Bob Rogers, Selectman Representative Steve Brown, Alternates Julie Zebuhr, Larry Larouche, and Ron Bosquet, and Clerk Pauline Ball.

 

The Wilton Planning Board joined the Lyndeborough Planning Board to hear:

 

1.       Subdivision Application - Provost 1993 Trust –for Lot B-014 Cram Hill Road in the Residential/Agricultural and Wetlands Districts.  Applicant is proposing a 14-lot subdivision

 

Chairman Tracey Turner called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. She explained that the last time the Boards met they were each going to get opinions from their respective counsels and she noted that the Lyndeborough Board received an opinion from their counsel just this evening. Lyndeborough’s Town Counsel believes that Lyndeborough has jurisdiction over the lots that have frontage on Cram Hill Road. Tom Chrisenton stated that the subdivision is restricted to two accesses on Cram Hill Road unless a conveyance is placed on the plan that states that no building will occur in Lyndeborough. Chairman Tracey Turner stated that she is not convinced that a conveyance would completely protect Lyndeborough. Tom Chrisenton also noted that the driveways have to be on the Wilton side or they will be under the jurisdiction of Lyndeborough. Attorney Robert McKenney stated that directions can be placed on the plan to insure that no building will be allowed in Lyndeborough. Tom Chrisenton stated that once the driveways are removed from the Lyndeborough side of the plan the only issue he has is with the grade of Cram Hill Road. He also noted that there will be no soil issues so long as building activity, including driveways, septic systems and buildings, is restricted to Wilton. Attorney Robert McKenney stated that it is their intention to put such a note on the plan. Bill Ball stated that he needed more time to go over Town Counsel’s recommendations.

Attorney Robert McKenney stated that on March 19th they met with the Wilton Conservation Commission and they have provided a recommendation, which he gave to the Board. He also noted that there was a mistake on the plan he presented to the Conservation Commission in that the grade is not 6.5’ but half that at 3.5’. He also submitted pictures of the proposed culvert and explained that originally they had proposed a bottomless culvert but they are now proposing the baffled culvert as it will retain water better and will better simulate a river bottom.  

Attorney Robert McKenney stated that he had spoken with the Wilton Police Chief in November and did so again in March to confirm that Wilton will be the first responders. He explained that the Police Chief confirmed that he is prepared to be the first responder but he noted concern that about the street names, enhanced 911, fire cisterns, town demarcation, and house numbering. Attorney Robert McKenney explained that he has confirmed the naming of the roads meets the Police Chiefs needs. In response to a question from Chairman Tracey Turner, Attorney Robert McKenney stated that the Wilton Police Chief wanted the granite posts to be placed at the town line for liability reasons and to assist with reporting an emergency. Attorney Robert McKenney stated that he spoke with Susan Metter at the 911 mapping department and confirmed that the lots will all have Wilton numbers. He also confirmed that the road names were dissimilar to other roads in each town but would remain the same throughout the length of the road, not switch names at the town line. Also, he confirmed that Wilton would be assigning the numbers. He stated that the Police Chief will write a letter to the Board if they have specific concerns. In response to question from Bill Ball, Jeff Merritt stated that the Fire Chief is requesting that two 30,000 gallon cisterns be placed in Wilton so he can maintain them. Jeff Merritt also noted that he has not been able to contact the Lyndeborough Fire Chief. In response to a question from the Lyndeborough Planning Board, Steve Keach stated that he assumes the cisterns will be on the left as you come in to the intersection as this is where they would commonly be placed.

Attorney Robert McKenney introduced Bob Prokop from Wetland Consulting Services to discuss the wetland issues. He explained that Bob Prokop has a full report to leave with the Board but that he will address any specific concerns the Board has at this meeting. Bob Prokop stated that he has a master of wildlife ecology, is New Hampshire certified, teaches wetland classes at the University of New Hampshire, is the chair of his Conservation Commission, and has been doing this work for 25 years. He stated that he did the original wetland delineations and at that time he had concerns about the originally proposed wetland crossings. He explained that he went back to the site this spring and found substantial vernal pools with hundreds of frog eggs and salamander egg masses.  He further explained that there are two vernal pools with less egg masses and another with no amphibians present. He stated that the currently proposed crossing is a very narrow conduit for water flow, basically an intermittent stream, and the proposed culvert will clearly have enough room to allow water to flow. He stated that the wetland downstream will be unaffected as there are high spots in the landscape which means that the water will always be trapped upstream no matter how much water flow the culvert allows. Bob Prokop explained that because of the natural blockage the road crossing will not affect the wetland and even if something dramatic were to occur there is very little significant activity in the down stream wetland which could be damaged. In response to a question from the Board, Bob Prokop stated that the road crossing would not affect the functionality of the wetlands. In response to a question from the Board, he explained that the proposed 3.5’ grade would increase the rate of water flow because the current grade is 1’ but there is not a lot of habitat in the downstream wetland to be affected. He explained that primarily frogs and salamanders come from surrounding uplands to the vernal pool to mate and drop their eggs. They then hang out for a few weeks before the leave the pool and move back to the upland. He further explained that the pools need to remain wet for two months so the eggs have time to mature and hatch. He noted that people have a tendency to develop around the pools and then the wildlife has no where to live as most of them live within 300-600’. He emphasized the importance of maintaining as much surrounding upland as possible near the pools. Bob Prokop explained that salamanders and wood frogs will cross roads and since most of the proposed driveways are on existing car paths the wildlife is already passing over them so the driveways will not impede their migration.  He noted that he would want to make sure there are no impediments on the sides of the driveway like curbing. He explained that a vast amount of upland habitat is being maintained in this proposal. He further explained that the north pool will experience a temporary reduction in the number of species present but that they will come back over time. He also noted that if the detention basin is dug deep enough it may turn into another vernal pool. Bob Prokop explained that the detention basins will be spreading any pollutant load around once the soils are stabilized. He stated that it will be crucial to keep tabs on the development. He explained that most of the houses are built on the upland and while the site will lose some of the species of wildlife that hate to be around people it will acquire more people friendly wildlife and will create more habitat for other species, such as raptors looking for road kill.  He stated that the proposal will create a change in wildlife but not an impact on the wetlands and that three out of the four vernal pools will be unharmed. He noted that he is much more comfortable with this plan than the previous plan. He also noted that this plan leaves large tracts of undisturbed land.

Neil Faiman stated that he is concerned about the animal corridor being disrupted. Bob Prokop explained that he does not consider the crossing a crossing because you can step over it. He explained that upland animals can go around the crossing. However the amphibians will have to go through the culvert. He stated that sometimes people suggest putting a grate over the culvert so the animals can still use the stars to navigate. In this case Bob Prokop does not see this crossing as an amphibian corridor as it is primarily an intermittent stream, not a perennial stream, and it will dry out by mid summer.

In response to a question from Jeff Kandt, Bob Prokop stated that he feels that whether salt is used on the driveway is a function of whether the drive is paved or not. He also explained that the vegetation which would be affected by the salt is dormant during the winter so it will be less affected and the spring rain will dilute the salt before the vegetation grows.

Alec MacMartin stated that the University of NH Coop suggests that setbacks of 300’ are appropriate for significant wetlands, which the Board has been told this site borders. Bob Prokop stated that the increase in buffer zones is appropriate if there is a reason for the buffer. He stated that one needs to know what they are protecting and noted that monitoring construction for erosion control is important.  He questioned what the Board would be buffering against and Alec MacMartin responded that they would be buffering against human activity. Steve Keach pointed out the proposed no cut/no disturbance areas.  

Jeff Merritt explained that there was concern expressed at the last meeting that the reduced frontage lots were simply a way to get more lots on the property and he presented a plan with three cul-de-sacs, one running through the hay field, but no reduced frontage lots. He explained that the reduced frontage lots scenario was a much better plan.

Attorney Robert McKenney explained that there is an RSA which states that Planning Boards are empowered to release regulations when the regulations conflict with the bordering town on a site which is crossing town boundaries. He explained that if it is the position of the Lyndeborough Planning Board that the applicant use two entrances or nothing, with no flexibility, then the applicant has to decide what to do at that point, and the Lyndeborough Planning Board is holding her feet to the fire despite the fact that the Wilton Planning Board, where all the construction would occur, would allow the plan. Chairman Tracey Turner stated that there are other choices the applicant can make which would allow them to get closer to adhering to the requirements of both Boards.

A MOTION was made by Tom Chrisenton and SECONDED by Mike Decubellis that the Lyndeborough Planning Board  adhere to their driveway and road entrances ordinances with respect to the Provost joint town application.

Mike Decubellis stated that the there are not a lot of subdivisions in Lyndeborough and that the Lyndeborough Planning Board has to take care of the Lyndeborough side of the application and trust that the Wilton Planning Board will take care of their side. He stated that it isn’t clear that this project could not be done with only two cuts and while it may not be as desirable and economical for the applicant, it will be better for Lyndeborough as a town.

Voting: 9 ayes; motion passed.

After discussion the Lyndeborough Planning Board agreed to a site walk with the applicant for the purpose of discussing offsite improvements on April 19, 2008 at 9:00 am.

The Wilton Planning Board discussed their position on flexibility for the proposal. They stated that if the applicant presents a plan they reserve the right to get the opinion of Town Counsel but they are not going to not consider the application outright. .

Mike Decebullis stated that he did not want to slight the applicant and recognized that they have been flexible and have worked on a number of plans.

Alec MacMartin stated that he is sensitive to 19 meetings the applicant has attended so far but he would like the biologist to look at the setback from the perspective of the wildlife. Spencer Brookes, of the Wilton Conservation Commission, stated that the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services has denied the culvert twice and this, and because of a lack of understanding, is why the Conservation Commission objects to the culvert. Alec MacMartin suggested that the Board needs to determine who the biologist will be.

In response to a question from Chairman Tracey Turner, Jeff Merritt stated that the detention basins have always been on the plan to mitigate storm water run off.

Matt Fish stated that he is a member of the Wilton Planning Board but he is off this case and therefore speaking as a private citizen. He stated that there is more to lose than to gain with this application and he does not want to see the towns lose the opportunity to work with someone who is willing to come up with the best case scenario. He explained that his family has owned the property for over 100 years and everything that happens on this site will flow through his property. He also noted the importance of preserving the 20 acres of hay field currently present and pointed out some different configurations which he thinks are possible. He asked that the Boards not let the opportunity pass to have an applicant who is willing to work with the Boards, noting that he was not here to support a plan but rather to champion the applicant.

Chairman Tracey Turner stated that the Lyndeborough Planning Board works with any applicant on a plan that allows the applicant to take the opportunity to use their property but also conforms to the character of Lyndeborough. She explained that Cram Hill Road is steep in the areas in questioned and that adding more cuts would be a bad thing. She explained that they are not trying to be difficult but she thinks the Lyndeborough Planning Board’s concerns are real. She stated that she appreciates Matt Fish’s comments. Attorney Robert McKenney stated that other applications would have gotten as far as this one has in two thirds of the number of meetings. Chairman Tracey Turner stated that Lyndeborough Planning Board does not get a lot of these types of applications and they will not be taking any short cuts. She stated that they will do things thoroughly to make the best subdivision for the town.

A MOTION was made by Alec MacMartin and SECONDED by Neil Faiman that the Board refer the culvert and setback issues to a biologist chosen by the Board.

 Voting: 6 ayes; motion carried.

 

A MOTION was made by Alec MacMartin and SECONDED by Bill Condra to continue the application to May 7, 2008 at 7:30 in the Wilton Town Hall.

Voting: 6 ayes; motion carried.

 

The Lyndeborough Planning Board continued their meeting. The Wilton Planning Board left the meeting.

 

Respectfully Submitted,

Heather Loewy Nichols

Wilton Planning Board Clerk

<Return to Planning Board Home Page>