= Town of Pelham, NH<= span style=3D'font-size:14.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt'>=

Pelham Conservation Commission<= /o:p>

6 Villag= e Green

Pelham, NH <= st1:PostalCode w:st=3D"on">03076-3723

MEETING OF 1/10/07 = ; &n= bsp; = ; &= nbsp; APPROVED 2/21/07

Members Present: Paul Gagnon,

Paul Dadak, Jay Stearns, Lisa Loosigian,

Karen MacKay, Glennie Edwards (Alt) = &nb= sp;

Chairman Paul Gagnon brought the meeting to order at <= st1:time Hour=3D"19" Minute=3D"30" w:st=3D"on">7:30 p.m.

PUBLIC HEARING:

Map: 39, Lot 1-51 – 8 Sherburne Rd – Proposal to purchase property to be acquired for use as conservation land

Paul Dadak presented all the salient points. This trac= t of land is 37 acres and (including the Merriam parcel) would total almost a mi= le of frontage on Sherburne R= oad. This and would be almost a mile of frontage on Sherburne Road= . This parcel abuts the Frederic Cut= ter Merriam land that the Conservation Commission recently purchased. The approximate point of beginning= of this proposed purchase is where the tree line begins as you head west on Sherburne Road. Close by to this proposal are approximately 25 acres of land that the town already owns which is somewhat land-locked. Mr. Dadak commen= ted that this is a beautiful piece of land on Sherburne Road and meets all the criteria used by the Conservation Commission in why or why not to purchase a piece of land. This land prot= ects the town’s resources as a prime wetland, connectivity of three proper= ties for a total of almost 200 acres for outdoor recreation with trails, has edu= cational value with regard to wildlife habitat, plants and scenic views. The apprais= ed value is $560,000.00 – the purchase price is $390,000.00. In theory this relates to about 30= % of the land as being donated by the Nadeau family. There is also about $82,000= .00 worth of timber that could be forested if we wished to recoup further savings. This piece of land w= ould support approximately 13 single family building lots said Mr. Gagnon.

PUBLIC INPUT: None

BACK TO BOARD: Mr. Gagnon said that the Commission would be using the bond monies to make this purchase. To date w= e have spent 1.4 million of the original bond of three million dollars. The balance after this purchase wo= uld be 1.2 million dollars left in the bond. One of the stipulations of the bond was that we would only spend a maximum of one million dollars per year.

MOTION: = To move forward to purchase this property, known as the Nadeau property, map 39, lot 151 for conservation land, approximately 37.1 acres for the purchase price = of $390,000.00 (Paul Dadak/Karen MacKay)

VOTE: 5-= 0 in favor of supporting this motion. A public hearing and meeting with the selectmen will be scheduled within a fe= w weeks.

NEW BUSINESS:

Map 30, Lot 11-139 – Joseph & Debra Rufiange, 20 Westshore Drive – application for Minimum Impact Expedited Dredge & Fill Applicat= ion.

The owner, Mr. Rufiange, represented this case. He wishes to remove a stone wall a= nd grade and seed within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Protection Act. Mr. Rufiange says the existing stone wall is collapsing and falling = into the water and is a hazard. He presented pictures of the crumbling wall.&= nbsp; The distance between the wall and the water is presently 4 feet but normally is about 1 ½ to 2 feet said Mr. Rufiange. The frontage of this entire parcel = is 40 feet. The area to be disturbe= d, where the stone wall is, is approximately 10 feet of frontage. The remainder consists of 10 feet = of beach, 10 feet of grass and then the remaining 10 feet untouched to the property line.

Mr. Rufiange stated that the wall that is being remove= d will go off-site to a fill location by the contractor. The very top layer of stones will = be kept and stored at the back of the property said Mr. Rufiange. The fill behind the present wall w= ill also be hauled away by the contractor, whoever that may be. Loam will be brought in for the gr= assed area. No fertilizers will be applied to the grassed/planted area said Mr. Rufiange.

Mr. Gagnon said he would be more comfortable by doing = a site walk and asked if members would be available after the site walk at 8 a.m. with the Board of Adj= ustment. Five members indicated they were available. This case will be rescheduled at the next Conservation meeting on February 14. Mr. Rufiange stated that his neigh= bors had been informed of his intentions and were fine with it and that he had s= ent out the abutter notifications. His packet included copies of the receipts of this mailing that he presented to= us. The packets were taken back by Mr. Rufiange as he needs 5 copies to be signed for the state DES.

Map 35, Lo= ts 10-320, 321 & 322 – Advanced Spa & Pool Corp, Bridge Street/R= te 38. Pre-Design Review of Prop= osed 12,400 s.f. mixed use commercial building.= Requires dredge & fill permit. Request to fill approx. 2,300 s.f. of wetlands directly adjacent to route 38 for construction of a detention pond.

Joseph Maynard of Benchmark Engineering represented th= is case. Mr. Maynard acknowledge= d that he hadn’t given us the 10 day notification/paperwork for this project= but stated this is just in the conceptual stage. The exact location is north of Acr= es Edge and south of the kindergarten facility on route 38. This proposed building/business en= compasses 3 lots and is presently owned by Neil Fineman. Advanced Spa and Pool, currently l= ocated in Pelham= Plaza, would like to move their bu= siness to this new location. Mr. May= nard said that he had been before the Planning Board the other evening and prese= nted the conceptual plans and waivers that would be required in order to accommo= date this building on this property. The largest of those waivers dealt with parking requirements. In order to accommodate the 12,400= s.f. building, the ordinance that exist today calls for approximately 170 parking spaces.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> He has met with the Planning Direc= tor Jeff Gowan where this concern was discussed. Mr. Maynard had acquired the histo= ry of the parking spaces at the current site and how many people this business services on any given day and determined that 58 parking spaces would be actually needed. The property includes a wetland and lies in the lot furthest north (10-322). A detention pond is planned direct= ly adjacent to route 38 – the wetland impact is 2,30= 0 s.f. in order to accommodate the detention pond. The pond is sized to accommodate a= ll of the parking drainage associated with the impervious areas. An outlet would be structured from= the detention pond to a treatment swale. The wetland flows in a westerly direction to a culvert located at the edge of route 38 and then flows down to the Leonard Drive area towards Beaver B= rook. The fill that was placed on this s= ite years ago came from the Pelham<= /st1:PlaceName> Plaza area when tha= t was developed. There is a large l= edge outcrop on the south-easterly side of this parcel and some blasting and cru= shing of the ledge will occur. The = ledge fragments will be reintroduced into the parking area. The remainder of the site has very well-drained soil. In some pl= aces it ranges from 12+ feet of fill. One of the waivers concerns the nee= d for a 10 ft. green strip at the rear of the property.

Waivers are also being requested for the septic system= to be allowed in the green space strip at the edge of route 38 and not constructed under the parking lot. Member= MacKay asked if the impact of the 2,300 s.f. was in the wetland, the WCD or both.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Mr. Maynard said both would be aff= ected and the total impact would be about 12,000 s.f.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> He also said they are pretty much = stuck where the septic system can go for the detention pond to function properly.= It will be at the lowest reaches o= f the site so it can drain as much of the property as possible and will then be directed to the pond so that run-off can be controlled. He said there is almost 30 feet di= fference from where the wetlands are in relation to the high side of the site.

Mr. Maynard said that he has reduced the parking by ab= out 2/3rds in order to comply with the regulations of the Planning Department a= nd doubts that he could reduce any more spaces unless he reduced the size of t= he building. He says if Advanced= Pool & Spa were to vacate this site in the future, and there was a change of use, there would have to be sufficient parking in order to attract another business. He says that Advanced Pool & Spa currently has 13,000 s.f. at Pelham Plaza and have alre= ady reduced the size of this building. This building is 12,400 s.f. in size.

Mr. Fineman and his sister owns about 80 acres behind = this front parcel and would like to reserve a portion of land on the front lot f= or future access to this 80 acres if he needed it said Mr. Maynard. Chairman Gagnon asked Mr. Maynard = if the plan called for pervious or impervious pavement. Mr. Maynard replied that he hadn&#= 8217;t seen many studies on the use of pervious pavement in the northeast and how = it functions with regard to frost, etc. The studies that have been published a= re correlated to the warmer climates than what we have here in New England he says. He’s very reluctant to venture into that kind of technology in an unproven state such New England. Mr. Gagnon offered information on = the use of pervious pavement being used near route 128 in Massachusetts, closer= to the North Shore, which is abut 20 miles from Pelham. He felt that if pervious pavement = were installed the load on the treatment swale and detention pond may be reduced= . The natural flow of this area goes westerly through an already installed culvert under route 38.

Mr. Maynard said that you might be able to reduce it s= ome, but you still have the roof area which may be co-efficient for the pavement= and it won’t function anything like grass. Member Loosigian asked about the f= low of water going to the treatment swale and then into the detention pond and what the treatment swale is comprised of such as vegetation, native vegetation or what does the treatment consists of. Mr. Maynard said the treatment swale is 100 feet long and is a grass= ed swale that’s laid at zero percent or thereabouts. He said that they install check da= ms every 25 feet or so that sit 9 inches above the berm. As the water comes out of the disc= harge pipe it pools and drains down the overflows and is extremely effective in t= he lower volume storms. Member M= acKay asked about the location of the well and noted that it is close to the treatment swale. Mr. Maynard = said that it will probably be installed next to the berm of the treatment swale.= Member Dadak asked if the detentio= n pond was a dry pond. Mr. Maynard s= aid that the outlet to it is about 6 inches higher than the bottom of the pond = to create settling.

Chairman Gagnon commented that there was 12,000 sq.ft. of disruption with nothing in retu= rn and is kind of hard to swallow. M= r. Maynard said the combined three parcels are about 3 acres in size and the u= se that Advanced Pool & Spa is asking for is a good use for this piece of land. He said that it is not = a high volume septic system use; he’s not a high volume traffic use and is v= ery well suited for what they are trying to do. Mr. Maynard said there are a lot of things in the zoning ordinances that have their hands tied for parking, etc. They are trying to make = do with what they have, there isn’t much commercial property left up on = that stretch said Mr. Maynard. Cha= irman Gagnon asked if the Planning Board mentioned pervious pavement to him. Mr. Maynard answered no. Member Dadak asked if underground detention had been considered. Mr. Maynard said that is something that can be done providing you can get the w= ater to flow from one spot to the next spot.&nb= sp; Member Dadak said that even though this is approximately 1000 ft. distance from the prime wetland, this is a piece of the puzzle of managing water that is in the watershed of the wetland and it’s still changing what was there to something new. He just wants to make sure that it’s managed well so we don’t have= any increase in intensity into the wetland.&nb= sp; Chairman Gagnon said that he liked the idea of roof run-off going in= to a dry well such as what the Sun Bridge project down= the street has plans to do.

The Conservation Commission will also do a site walk a= t this site on Saturday morning, probably around 10 a.m.

REQUEST FOR NON-PUBLIC SESSION – To discuss proposed purchase and sale in accordance with RSA 91-A-A: 3

MINUTES APPROVED:&nbs= p; 12/13/06=

MOTION to adjourn meeting – 9:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, &= nbsp; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Glennie Edwards, Recording Secretary