"Hartman Site Plan: Lorraine advised that she had found this site plan in the MCC mail slot with a note attached stating that comments were needed by December 5 1994. She had sent a note to Bill Parker advising that the Commission would not be meeting until December 8. She had left the plan in the office for member review, but found it missing when preparing for the meeting.Hub advised that this was the first staff review case for which he is the Commission's representative, and that there was some confusion as to how to identify such paperwork. He hopes to have this straightened out in the future. The "staff review" process is not a committee and it does not "meet". Each individual provides written comments on any concerns that the Department which he represents might have or on the need for further information to evaluate. These collected comments are presented to the Planning Board. The Hartman Site Plan is for Map 19 Lot 23 and shows the addition of a 5000 sq.ft. warehouse to an existing commercial/industrial building. Hub saw this plan on the evening of December 4 and submitted comments with two concerns:
At the time the UNH students presented their Management Plan for the Pond, the issue of the large amount of waterfowl present on the pond was discussed as well as the artificial feeding of these birds by the general public. The students had suggested developing an ordinance to prohibit such feeding. With this in mind, Lorraine had obtained a copy of such an ordinance from the Town of Meredith, had re-written it with Milford in mind, and had given it to the Selectmen for their consideration. With the package was the draft of a proposed sign prohibiting the feeding, and also an information sheet as to why this feeding should not take place. At their meeting on January 4 1995, the Selectmen had decided against an ordinance at this point in time, but were in favor of a notice being erected at the Hazel Burns Memorial Park at the dam. site, explaining why artificial feeding of the waterfowl should not take place. After review of the materials presented, the members were in favor of the information sign being erected, and Lorraine will work with Charles Carter on this as he had offered to prepare the sign board itself. Lorraine also offered to prepare a Letter to the Editor of the Milford Cabinet (on behalf of the Commission) further publicizing the reasons why artificial feeding should not take place. Hub expressed the view that the large numbers of snails in the pond should be added to the list of reasons, and Lorraine will look into this further. In preparation for the meeting of January 30, Lorraine was preparing a brief summary of the information in the students' report. She will provide Hub with a copy of this as he will be presenting the "case" at the meeting and will also have spare copies available for interested parties at that meeting. Lorraine updated the members on events that had taken place on this matter since the December meeting. A member of the Wetlands Board's staff had made an on site inspection of the area and had then called Lorraine to advise that the inspector's opinion was that the situation "can easily be rectified if new silt fences were installed properly and immediately". This opinion was put in writing to the Commission, together with the request that the Wetlands Board be provided with a letter and photographs within 20 days after these fences have been installed. Lorraine had talked to Bill Parker and Bob Courage about the fences, and it was felt that Public Works could indeed erect them. No time for this work to be done has yet been set. On January 1 1995, Hub had reviewed the area and had taken photographs of the situation so that a record would be available of "before and after". The members reviewed the photographs. In Hub's written report he had indicated that that the small area of land from the swinging bridge to the dam site was not owned by the Town. Lorraine provided a plan of this entire 10 acre town owned site that clarified that the town does indeed own land from the swinging bridge. In discussions, the members asked Lorraine to make arrangements with Bob Courage regarding erection of the silt fence. Further remedial Actions were also discussed which included rip rap, seeding, and generally better stabilizing of the river bank in this area. It was felt that a meeting with Bob Courage and Bill Parker should be arranged to discuss these matters and develop a plan of action. Once the silt fence has been re-erected Lorraine will pursue the plan of meeting with Bob Courage etc. Hub requested that all members unfamiliar with the details of this site, make an on site inspection of the area. Gerry Gagne of Meridian Land Services and a representative of Dunkin Donuts met with the Commission to discuss the proposed location of a third such business in Milford, this one on Elm Street on Map 12 Lot 13. The site involves wetlands, the aquifer protection district, and whether or not there is sufficient open space on the lot with the amount of wetlands on site. Gerry Gagne advised the Commission that the proposal is for a 25 seat shop and that the two existing mobile homes on the site will be removed. The soils and vegetation to the rear of the site indicate wetlands.There will be 3,630 sq.ft. of wetland disturbance and 6,288 sq.ft. ofBuffer Zone disturbance. The total area of the lot is 41,700 sq.ft.,with the wetlands covering 44% of the lot. Surface drainage from the proposed paved parking area will be directed towards the wetlands at the rear of the site. The site is out of the Flood Plain District. The case will have to go before the Board of Adjustment because of It being in the Aquifer Protection District and also because of the wetland disturbance needed to develop the site as proposed. Mr. Gagne indicated that the Dredge and Fill application will be coming in about mid February. He also indicated that the proposed disturbance falls into the Expedited Minimum Impact Application. Mr. Gagne explained that the site is on the sanitary sewer line, but that town water ends at the old McLeod farm stand site. Therefore a well will be built on the site to the rear of the building and on the edge of the wetlands, but not part of it. The well however, will disturb the 25 foot buffer zone. With the parking lot draining into the wetlands, it means that it will drain directly towards the proposed well site. The building will be on a slab foundation with no basement. It was stated that there will be one tractor trailer truck delivery per week, with other products being delivered in smaller trucks. Mr. Gagne indicated that the dredge and fill application will be an Expedited Minimum Impact application. At this point in time, the Commission had not settled on a policy of action for this new type of application which puts all responsibility onto the Commission, and Lorraine urged the members to do an on site inspection before processing any paperwork. This is scheduled for Saturday morning at 8a.m. Note: In later discussion of this project, Lorraine stated that she Did not feel, from what she knows about the new applications, that this case would fall into the expedited category. If it does not then there is no imperative need for an on site inspection. If it does, then the application should be in hand for the on site as various measurements, statements etc. made on the application have to be verified by the Commission. It was decided she would call Gerry tomorrow and then advise those members who plan to do the on site on Saturday, accordingly. This case will be discussed further at the January 26 meeting of the Commission. A recommendation will be needed to the Board of Adjustment and perhaps the Wetlands Board, depending on the type of application involved. With time being short, Lorraine gave each member a copy of the above two items without them being reviewed, and asked members to call her with any questions they may have. It was noted that the unexpended balance for 1994 was in the amount of $1,121.14, and this has been deposited into the Accumulative Fund. Lorraine advised the members that the EPA would be holding a public hearing on this matter in the Town Hall on Tuesday, January 17 1995 at 7p.m. Members were urged to attend. It was noted that potential impacts of cleaning up this site which also includes a former storage shed on Mill Street and the drainage ditch which runs from a small pond south of Mill Street north towards the Souhegan River and under the paint works building, include temporary closure or rerouting of traffic on Elm Street and Mill Street, the closure of Keyes Field for several years to provide space to manage and store the contaminated and clean soils, to construct and operate a treatment system and to provide space for necessary facilities, the temporary relocation of residents on the south side of Mill Street during excavation of residential soils ' and the temporary shut down of the railroad system which may be required during excavation activities on Mill Street. Selectman Marilyn Kenison and Planning Director Bill Parker met with the Commission to discuss the desire to purchase this 20 acre site for recreation and conservation purposes. Bill explained that it was hoped the Commission would be willing to Put forward funding for the purchase of the land, from the Conservation Land Fund. He explained that this site is mainly flat and very suitable for Recreation field space. The owners are asking $150,000 for the land which has considerable frontage on the Souhegan River. This means that part of the land is included in the 50 foot buffer zone in from the River, and part of it is also in the Flood Plain. The current owners are interested in developing this land in low-income housing project, should the Town not purchase it as proposed. Bill stated that the State Land and Water Conservation Committee had awarded $25,000 matching funds for the project. However, when Hub read the letter from DRED to this effect, he was of the opinion that this amount of funding was by no means secured. It was added that the Milford Rotary Club would be donating $3,000 and the Club had also indicated a willingness to provide manpower. Ms. Kenison stated that both the Arthur Keyes Memorial Trust and the Kaley Foundation would be approached for funds as well. Bill stated that Roger Chappell who owns property of about 6 acres abutting the site on the right and which includes an island in the River, had verbally indicated a desire to donate his land should the Town raise sufficient funds to purchase the property from Stellos & Whalen. The site also abuts Riverside Cemetery and it was stated that part of the Stellos/Whalen site could be used as expansion of the cemetery. Bob Walsh expressed the opinion that to use funds from the Conservation Land Fund for this property would not be in order because this property was mainly for recreation and the funds in the Land Fund had been appropriated by the towns people for "conservation purposes". He felt there should be a warrant article requesting an affirmative vote of the people to transfer funds from the Land Fund to the purchase of this property. In answer to questions regarding the use of funds in the Land Fund, Lorraine advised the members she had checked into the RSA's and found that there is no distinction made between funding in the Land Fund and funds appropriated to the Commission in general. Funds appropriated to a commission may be expended at the discretion of that commission. However, she pointed out that when the Conservation Land Fund was originally set up, the towns people voted to appropriate funds "for conservation land". Charles Carter expressed the concern that if land funds were used for this property which he felt was more recreation than conservation, there was little chance of the funds being replaced in the foreseeable future. He noted that no appropriation has been made to this fund in several years, the Commission's requests having been turned down. Bob Walsh reiterated his opinion that the Town gave money for Conservation land and not recreation land, he being of the opinion that ball fields did not fall into an acceptable use of conservation land. Chris Costantino, a member of the Recreation Committee, expressed disagreement stating that she saw no difference and felt money in the land fund could be used for this purpose. Hub pointed out that with no support from the Town for the Land Fund For several years, should the Commission now decide to help out, there should be assurances that it will have the support of the Town when it requests funding for the Land Fund in the future. Charles Carter put forward the suggestion that something in writing be obtained from Mr. Chappell regarding his interest in donating his land to be part of this project. His land is mainly wooded and well populated with wildlife; it also would increase the river frontage and has the added attraction of the island, which is reachable on foot during the dry season. Lorraine put forward the suggestion to the members that should they be in favor of supporting the purchase of this property for recreation/conservation. that they do so but with a very specifically defined area as being that for which they are using the funds in the Land Fund. She added that the dimensions of the area in question should be spelled out in a deed that would give the Commission jurisdiction over that area. In discussions of this idea, Charles put forward the suggestion that this conservation area should also include the land hopefully to be donated by the Chappells. Possible uses of this conservation land included a boat ramp for canoes. It was felt this would be an acceptable use of part of the conservation land. It was decided to give the members time to think about this entire idea and to discuss it further at the January 26 1995 meeting. In the meantime Hub asked that all members not familiar with the property take time to review it before the January 26 meeting. Arrangements were tentatively made to review this property following the Saturday 8a.m. on site at the Dunkin Donut property. The meeting schedule is as follows:
Reminders of Meetings: Tuesday, January 17 1995 7p.m.:
|