Planning Board

Minutes

July 23, 2009

Official as of August 27, 2009

Chairman Pete Jones calls the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. 

PRESENT: Chairman Pete Jones, Vice Chairman Bob Strobel, Deborah Couch, Alternate Pat Bell, Town Planner Elaine Planchet, and Board Administrator Linda Smith. Selectmen Representative Bob Holden arrives at 7:55 p.m.

VOTING DESIGNATION: Chairman Pete Jones, Vice Chairman Bob Strobel, Deborah Couch, and Pat Bell; Bob Holden at 7:55.

ABSENT: Roger LeClerc, Herb Johnson, Victoria Parmele, and Alternates Scott Campbell and Rick Wolf.

MINUTES:
April 8, 2009
Page 4: Amend: …from the site.
Page 3: Amend: …drove past the site and observed blasting mats.
Page 5: Add: …if he…
Page 5: Delete: Ms. Couch states there should not be an occupancy permit because the site plan has been completed.
Page 8: Change: amount to number

Pete Jones makes a motion to accept the minutes of April 8, 2009, as amended. Pat Bell seconds and the motion passes unanimously; 4/0.

April 29, 2009
Page 1: Delete: Alternate…
Pete Jones makes a motion to accept the minutes of April 29, 2009, as amended. Bob Strobel seconds and the motion passes; 3/0/1. Mr. Bell abstains.

June 25, 2009
The minutes of June 25 are postponed.

Voluntary Merger:
VM: 09-02: Bruce R. Marshall, 1029 First NH Turnpike, Map 217; Lots 23 & 24.
Ms. Planchet distributes correspondence received from town counsel and a proposed addendum. She explains that the board must vote to make this material public information before it is discussed. Ms. Planchet states that the merger is a condition of the planning board’s site plan approval. One lot is a road lot, which provides access to Mr. Marshall and to two abutters. She further states that one abutter and his attorney requested permission to speak with town counsel, which the board authorized; the email provided is a synopsis of what has occurred between the two attorneys.

Pete Jones makes a motion to make the two legal documents; e-mail and draft addendum, public information. Second by Bob Strobel. Motion passes; 4/0. Ms. Smith provides an overview of the process of recording a voluntary merger. 

A discussion is held regarding the wording of a “private road”. Ms. Planchet states that Mr. Marshall owns the access road lot with a right of way to the other lots. Mr. Jones asks if Mr. Marshall is aware of the proposed addendum.  Ms. Planchet states that the applicant is aware that an abutter contacted an attorney and the planning board authorized town counsel to speak with the abutter’s counsel. She adds that she has spoken to Mr. Marshall and assured him that he would remain as the owner of the property and that a note is proposed to be added to the merger form. She adds that there is nothing in the addendum that is not already in the property file and the abutter’s attorney feels that this would make her client more comfortable with the activity.

Ms. Couch states that she is not comfortable with the fact that Mr. Marshall has not seen the addendum and that there is a private road listed when it is actually a driveway. Ms. Planchet states that she has explained to Mr. Marshall what is going on and he is not opposed to the merger. Mr. Jones asks if the use of the wording of a private road creates a use that does not exist even though the board feels that this information is not necessary since it does not cause any change in the actual status of the abutter’s rights. He asks whether this is a right of way or a private road. Ms. Planchet replies that it is a right of way per wording noted in the deed.  
 
Linda Smith states that at the time when the subdivision was put in place, they appeared before the zoning board of adjustment (ZBA) and requested a variance for lack of road frontage. A variance was granted for a cul-de-sac. She states that at that point this could be referred to as a private road due to the fact that it was for the purpose of meeting the standard for the road. She adds that even in 1984 there was a requirement for road frontage. Ms. Smith states that there is no problem with calling this a private road. Ms. Couch asks if language can be added stating that the voluntary merger shall not affect the existing access pursuant to the 1984 subdivision approval. Ms. Smith agrees that this statement would be sufficient. She adds that the problem with not calling this a private road is that this is the frontage to the lot via the variance. Ms. Couch states that she does not feel that this is a private road.

Ms. Planchet further explains additional conversations with town counsel relative to obtaining building permits. She explains that town counsel has asked what the procedure is for building permits once a lot is created. She adds that she informed counsel, after speaking with the building department, that once a lot is created a building permit can be obtained without the need to go before the ZBA. 

Discussion ensues relative to rights of ways and private roads. Ms. Smith states that when the subdivision occurred the road was created as a private road. Ms. Smith adds that not all rights of ways are private roads. 

Ms. Couch motions to amend the addendum as follows:
to eliminate “private road” and replace with “access”;
to delete wording “private road which provides legal”;
to attach revised addendum to the voluntary merger form; and,
to accept the voluntary merger with the condition that all necessary fees are paid prior to recording. Mr. Jones seconds. Motion passes unanimously; 4/0.

OLD CASE:
CASE 09-07: Davlynn Development, LLC, Masten Drive at Rte. 4, Map 234. Applicants seek amendment to approved subdivision plan to remove sidewalk. Application accepted as complete on 4/23/09; 65-day 6/27/09. Continuance granted to 7/23/09.

Ms. Planchet states that a request for continuance has been received. She provides a brief overview, references the status report provided from the consultant and explains that they are currently working with NHDOT on how to provide the sidewalks with adequate drainage. Bob Strobel makes a motion, second by Pete Jones, to accept the request to continue to August 27, 2009. Motion passes unanimously; 4/0.

Bob Holden arrives at 7:55 p.m.

NEW BUSINESS:
CASE 09-08: Coe Brown Northwood Academy, 907 First NH Turnpike, Map 217; Lots 65 and 66; Dana and Cindy Davidson, 35 Bow Lake Road, Map 218; Lot 1. Applicants are seeking site plan approval to add an educational facility with proposed 1,500 +/- sq. ft.; to expand athletic fields; and to create access onto Bow Lake Road.   

Ms. Planchet provides an overview of the information included in the board packets for this case. She states that new plans and additional information were received yesterday afternoon, which she has not had a chance to review. She notes that the RSA requires information to be provided 15 days prior to the meeting for review; however, the work session was just 14 days ago. 

Ms. Planchet provides an explanation of the site plan review public hearing process. Board members review additional information received.

Bob Holden makes a makes, second by Deborah Couch, to accept the application as complete. Motion passes unanimously; 5/0.

Mr. Jones opens the public hearing and reads the abutters list. Abutters present are Marcia Severance and Bob Holden, representing the Town of Northwood, Allan and Diane Wall, and Scott Vaughn. Coe Brown Northwood Academy (CBNA) Board of Trustees members present are Jim Colburn, president, Stuart Mitchell, Bunny Behm, Roberta Stearns, and Bob Bailey. Also present is Geoffrey Aleva of Civil Consultants, project engineer representing CBNA.

There are about 25 members of the public present.

Geoff Aleva provides a presentation of the project referring to sheet C4. He states that Civil Consultants was hired by CBNA to look into master planning for the overall campus, to address internal traffic around the campus, pedestrian traffic and safety, and any long range goals for the next 10-20 years. They have been working on this for the past year and recently the abutting Davidson property became available and a purchase and sales agreement has been done.

Mr. Aleva states that they have presented plans to DOT for the access road out of the campus along Bow Lake. DOT agrees that this proposal will improve the traffic situation and they will not require a traffic study.  He states that the main concern is with the traffic entering the main Rte. 4 access, the impact to the morning traffic, and pedestrian access near the tunnel. He explains that they have looked at staff and student traffic of the campus and they believe that 85-90% of the students and staff that drive to school come from the east or south, up Rte 4, or down Bow Lake Rd. into the campus. The idea is that this driveway will pull in students and staff that come along Bow Lake Rd. and bring them into the northern parking lot. They do not plan to expand the pavement of this parking lot but may change the traffic pattern. He adds that this access keeps traffic to the north and away from the campus as the students walk towards their classes.

In addition, Mr. Aleva explains that there is a new softball and soccer field proposed to the north of the access road, which will allow for future expansion along Rte. 4.

Mr. Aleva explains that they have submitted waiver requests for a completed drainage study, parking for compact cars, a landscaping plan, as well as a lighting plan. He notes that the project does not increase the traffic demand to the campus but they are trying to address internal deficiencies with traffic circulation and access to and from the site.

Mr. Aleva states that the plan set delivered yesterday has not changed drastically since the July workshop. The revised plans address the comments and concerns noted by the board.

In addition, Mr. Aleva explains that a 1,600 sq. ft. maintenance building is proposed, which will house lawn mowers, snow plows, and on the second floor there will be storage for athletic equipment. The total disturbance of the project requires a NHDES alteration of terrain permit and they have applied for this. He states that a new delineation of wetlands has been completed with a value assessment. He adds that they have met with the conservation commission for the fill on the access road and soccer field.

Mr. Jones asks if there are any comments from the conservation commission and Ms. Planchet replies that the standard comments are requested from the building department, fire and police departments. Mr. Aleva states that the concerns from the conservation commission were that the certified abutter’s notices receipts were missing from the application. Ms. Planchet states that three copies of the storm water management submission have been provided as well as a copy of the wetlands report. Mr. Aleva states that he has met with Dori Wiggin at NHDES regarding re-delineating the wetlands.

Ms. Couch asks about the two proposed speed bumps and asks if this is a standard distance. Mr. Aleva explains that they have used curves to avoid the wetlands and keep the speed slow. He states that the roadway is lower than the athletic field and the design lessens the disturbance on the adjacent wetlands and provides a safety break.

Ms. Couch asks if there is a traffic study or count that shows what is being brought to Bow Lake Rd. Mr. Aleva explains a traffic assessment provided by the campus.  He states that 350 permits are issued each year for students and staff. Of those, 150-200 are probably coming down Bow Lake Rd. from a traffic study done by NHDOT for Rte. 4. These cars will now not make the right onto Rte 4 as they will be turning into the new access road off of Bow Lake Rd. He adds that nothing is being increased; they are trying to accommodate the deficiencies on Rte. 4 and alleviate some traffic problems.

Ms. Couch expresses concern with the Rte. 4/Bow Lake Rd. intersection. Mr. Colburn explains that the current traffic waits for a break to turn west. He adds that this will help others coming onto Rte. 4 from Bow Lake Rd. so they can more easily turn west or east and the delay and congestion will be less. He notes that the academy has received many complaints over time relative to the traffic impact from Coe Brown on Rte. 4 traffic. He feels that this will be a significant improvement on Rte. 4

Patti Blackburn, resident at the corner of Rte 4 and Bow Lake Rd., explains that she has lived here for 21 years and has concerns with the traffic. She asks where the 300+ automobiles count was compiled from and notes that the traffic seems to come east from Rte. 4. She states she witnesses 20-30 cars backed up on Bow Lake Rd. Mr. Colburn states that there are times when the traffic is backed up past town hall at peak times and the delay is caused from the traffic turning into the main entrance. He feels that the majority of the traffic will use the new access road and help alleviate the congestion. Ms. Blackburn states that there are two bus stops on Bow Lake Rd. before the proposed access road location so traffic will still be backed up. She adds that this traffic occurs all within 15 minutes. Ms. Blackburn feels that there will be some confusion to the people that live on Bow Lake Rd. and there will be the same problems only in a different area.

Mr. Jones states that the point of the discussion of the traffic is based on parking permits, not with actual car trips being made on Bow Lake Rd. Additional discussion is held regarding the parents dropping off students. Mr. Aleva explains that the drop offs will still be at the main entrance off of Rte. 4.

Mr. Jones requests the total number of cars that come into Coe Brown during the day. Mr. Aleva replies that their main concern is the morning rush time. Mr. Colburn replies that there are approximately 680-700 students enrolled and he is unsure as to the specific amount of car trips for these students. Ms. Planchet refers to a letter received by the highway advisory committee in support of the project; however, they have requested a traffic count be completed. Ms. Couch asks if the traffic count would change anything. Ms. Planchet states that other folks use Bow Lake Rd. and would be impacted as well. She notes that staff’s opinion is that this is shifting the traffic from a major state road to a substandard 20’ wide town road and a traffic study and count would be useful for the board to have. Ms. Couch asks if the board should investigate a traffic light for the intersection. Mr. Aleva states that the traffic light is the responsibility of NHDOT whose review has indicated that it is not necessary for a Rte 4 traffic light and it includes Bow Lake Rd. Further discussion is held as to the process of a traffic study and the possible requirements for adding a light. Additional discussion ensues regarding the possibility of a traffic cop at this location.  

Mark Shea, 180 Bow Lake Rd., states that the discussions have only been relative to the morning commute. He asks about the afternoon and evening and notes that it still takes time to get onto Rte. 4 in the afternoon as well.

Tim Colby, Bryant Rd., states that the way the drop off of students has been explained will be the same way that has been occurring. In the afternoon, parents will be leaving coming down Rte. 4 so there is going to be a bottleneck on Rte. 4 around 2:30 in the afternoon and now there will be traffic off from Bow Lake Road entering onto Rte. 4 from the access road. Mr. Jones states that the proposal will not make all bottlenecks go away. Mr. Aleva states that disciplinary actions are taken by Coe Brown if the drop off pattern is not followed. He adds that reducing traffic and the safety of the students is a major concern too.

Mr. Jones asks about the long term maintenance impact for Rte. 4. Mr. Aleva states that from the intersection to the proposed access is about 700 feet. He adds that this is not bus traffic proposed as the bus route will not be changing; therefore, the impact will be local cars and pick up trucks, which is a lower impact on rural maintenance of the roads. Mr. Colburn adds that structural damage to the roads is caused primarily by heavy trucks. 

Bob Bailey states that the state built Bow Lake Rd. up and there are pipes and wiring under the road for a light that were installed when the intersection was reconstructed. He adds that he does not believe that there will be any additional impact of traffic to Bow Lake Rd. than what exists now. Mr. Aleva notes that there will be an increase that turns onto Rte. 4. Ms. Couch asks for that count and Mr. Aleva states his estimate is that there are about 50 of the 150 cars they believe would continue to enter from Bow Lake Rd.  Stuart Mitchell said that not all students leave at the same time of day.

Mr. Jones asks for more details regarding the bus stops. Ms. Blackburn explains that the first bus stop is at the corner of Bow Lake Rd., which is her house, the next one is at the house right past the pond, and then she notes that there are little kids that get on at the next few stops in the morning when all this traffic is going to be turning onto Bow Lake Rd. She adds that she supports the whole plan; however, is very concerned about the safety of the amount of traffic on this small stretch of road.

Rick Blackburn states that he has issues with cars getting into his driveway now. He states that in the winter there are additional issues with how the road is plowed and the drainage of the snow. He notes that there are additional issues when it rains along that corner as there is a drain there that freezes a large area in front of his house and makes it slippery when you hit the brakes. Additional discussion is held with drainage near the driveway where the Davidson property is as it floods and freezes. He adds that they sand but it is still slick. He adds that there is a hill near the Severance’s house that many times cars have issues getting up. He states that any increased traffic may just be enough to increase accidents.

Mr. Blackburn states that currently they have about 10 cars that enter their place to drop off children on a daily basis. He states that this is a potential hazard with the additional traffic. He explains that with their day care facility they do not allow the children to be in a certain area anymore in the afternoon due to the students speeding as they go up Bow Lake Rd. as they feel that this is a potential hazard. He notes that he feels that this is wonderful that there is some effort to come up with an alternative plan to the traffic issues. Mr. Blackburn adds that he is not sure where the police are at this time of day. Mr. Aleva notes that the speed limit is 25 MPH. He explains that the minimum site distance is 250’ and the proposed access road has over 600’ of sight distance.

Marcia Severance, 44 Bow Lake Rd., states this is a good plan to come down Bow Lake Rd. and agrees that this will alleviate some traffic problems; however, she is very concerned with the amount of traffic that would now be on Bow Lake Rd. coming from Rte. 4. She personally requests to see a traffic officer at that access road intersection.

Allen Wall, 67 Bow Lake Rd., re-affirms what Ms. Severance states and adds that there are others traveling on Bow Lake Rd. other than students. He explains that there will be traffic competing to turn and there will be some congestion. He states that there may be a requirement for a traffic officer.

Mr. Jones asks how the school resource officer (SRO) position works. Mr. Colburn explains that the SRO is an official employee of the police department and is paid by the academy. He explains that the plan is for the SRO to stay at Coe Brown and once the access road is in place, the traffic would be re-evaluated and there may be a need to have an additional officer.

Mr. Aleva states that as cars come to the intersection in the winter there is 700 ft. of clear sight distance up Bow Lake Rd. A member of the public states that there is only 7 ft. to the Blackburn’s driveway with little kids in the morning getting onto the bus. Additional discussion is held regarding the location of the bus stops.

Scott Severance, resident on Bow Lake Rd., states that he is also an EMT, and  that there have been numerous times that he has tried to get out and it’s very congested. He has seen some students driving extremely fast around the corner, taking a right to go up the road that they have almost hit the school bus. He adds that in the winter time there is less stopping distance. He mentions that he witnessed one car that almost hydroplaned across the road into the telephone pole across the street. He states that there is also a law enforcement issue here as the speed needs to be adjusted and addressed. He feels that the police need to be involved with this and there needs to be better enforcement on the road.

Mr. Strobel states that the curve on the west side encourages speed. He suggests that they could consider active control vs. passive control; perhaps a solution could be either in striping or that the curve of the corner with Bow Lake Rd and Rte 4 could be more defined. Mr. Aleva states that he can meet with District 6 regarding the striping that exists. He suggests restriping the section. Ms. Couch states that there is not striping now as it is worn away. Mr. Aleva states that there needs to be some cooperation between the town, state, and CBNA for striping. Mr. Jones notes that there is definitely a concern.

Ronald Thomas, Sherburne Hill Rd., states that he has been involved with the  CBNA traffic since 1991 as he has dropped off his children with the last child graduating in 2008 so he has seen the traffic develop and change. He states that he likes some of the ideas presented; however, the majority of the development in town is up Bow Lake Rd. so he suggests that the access road be used by parents and students coming down Bow Lake Rd. This would relieve Rte. 4 and some parents from Rte. 4. He adds that students who are headed west should stay on Rte. 4. He explains that there is no deceleration  lane on this road so when going onto Bow Lake Rd., he is usually at 40 MPH to avoid being rear ended. He states that the speed that people are traveling on Bow Lake Rd. in the afternoon is scary. He adds that unless you ride the brakes, when you get to the bottom of the road you’re doing 45 MPH. He realizes the speed limit and notes that people drive too fast going down the hill and people are in a hurry to get off of Rte. 4 and out of the intersection.

Mark Shea mentions the situation of students that live on Bow Lake Rd. are required to walk to school as they are not eligible for the bus.

Bruce Hodgdon expresses concern with the safety of the students on the campus with the traffic going in there now. He states that this is one of the reasons why the school is doing this proposal. Mr. Aleva states that he agrees and explains that is one of the goals. He adds that he is unsure as to pedestrian traffic and would have to consult with the academy.

Steve Ireland, Allen Farm Rd., states that he is a licensed PE and has worked in transportation. He explains that from an engineering aspect there are more vehicles on Rte. 4, there are more bus stops with some now on Rte. 4. He adds that children need to be safe and perhaps someone should talk with the highway department and advisory committee. He echoes the sentiments regarding the need for additional police enforcement. He is all for it and is willing to pay for it in his taxes. He adds that as far as the traffic flow, there will be an improvement over all as it will reduce the vehicles stacking up on Bow Lake Rd. This will put more of the traffic in CBNA and less on Rte. 4. It will not solve everything; however, it will be an improvement with some adjustments needed that can be made.

Tim Colby asks about signage. Mr. Aleva states that there will be caution signs. Mr. Jones asks if this section of Bow Lake Rd. will become a school zone. Mr. Aleva said he was not sure.  Additional discussion is held regarding entering school property, a flashing light, spotlights, and the speed limit for a school zone. This information will be checked into.

The board discusses staff recommendations to have the town engineers review the plan. Pete Jones makes a motion, Deborah Couch seconds, to have the town engineers review the application and to give direction during the rest of the meeting. Motion passes unanimously; 5/0.

Waiver Requests
Mr. Aleva reviews the waiver requests.
Compact Car Parking requirement: Mr. Aleva explains the waiver request.
Deborah Couch makes a motion to grant the waiver request for compact car parking. Pat Bell seconds, and the motion passes unanimously; 5/0.

Landscaping Plan:
Mr. Aleva explains that Coe Brown is not proposing any new landscaping as a result of this project and therefore are seeking this waiver. The board decides to address this request at the next meeting. Discussion is also held regarding the setbacks which are not shown on the plan.
Lighting Plan: Mr. Aleva states that they are not proposing any new lighting. Discussion ensues regarding whether lighting would be recommended for safety issues associated with the access road.  Ms. Couch requests that this item be identified for the town engineer for comment with emphasis on safety for lighting.

Traffic Study: The board requests that the engineer review the minutes from this meeting and the work session and the TRC notes.  The board also asks the engineer to consider traffic calming measures at Rte. 4 and Bow Lake Rd., the proposed intersection of Bow Lake Rd., access road turning counts,  sight distances, queuing distances, and possible deceleration lanes coming down on Bow Lake Rd. Also mentioned is to have the engineers review the traffic flow of turning lane, left turn lane on Bow Lake Rd., if the road should be widened, increasing the radius of the lane, school zone potential issues, and pedestrian traffic.

Ms. Smith asks if a voluntary merger is planned. Mr. Aleva replies that they do not believe that it is necessary.

Discussion is held regarding the engineering process and applicable fees. Mr. Aleva states that he thought all engineering fees were included with the application processing fee. Ms. Smith explained the engineering estimate/escrow account procedure. She suggests that an itemized estimate be received and the board can discuss the issue further at the work session. Ms. Smith states that the funding must be provided before the engineer can begin the review. Additional discussion is held regarding setting up an escrow account and the possibility of a waiver request. Mr. Holden asks if the town could pick up the first $2,000 of the engineering costs. Linda Smith states that the board can vote to waive part of their fees. Bob Holden makes a motion, second by Deborah Couch, to continue the public hearing to August 13, for the purpose of addressing the waiver requests. Motion passes unanimously; 5/0.

OTHER BUSINESS:
Planner’s Items:
Consideration of Appointment to Economic Development Committee
Bob Holden makes a motion, second by Deborah Couch, to recommend that the selectmen appoint Pete Jones as the planning board representative to the Economic Development Committee. Motion passes unanimously; 5/0.

Benson Sign Permit Request
Ms. Planchet explains that Mr. Benson has filled out a sign permit and it was noted on the approved site plan that a sign was not going to be added. She explains that the code enforcement officer requested the planning board comment on this and at the last meeting, it was agreed that the file would be obtained and available for the planning board discussion this evening.  Since then, the sign has been added with no permit. Discussion ensues relative to whether the owner needs to apply for an amendment to the site plan and show the sign on the plan. Mr. Bell notes that it appears that the note in the file appeared to be a request for a waiver from showing a sign on the site plan since no sign was proposed at that time, it is not a waiver from having a sign.  Ms. Couch motions that the applicant does not have to come before the board for an amendment to the site plan and should just follow the sign permit process. Bob Strobel seconds the motion. The motion passes unanimously; 5/0.

ADJOURNMENT
Pete Jones makes a motion, second by Bob Strobel, to adjourn at 11:06 p.m. Motion passes unanimously; 5/0.

Respectfully submitted,
Lisa Fellows-Weaver
Board Secretary