Rochester Conservation Commission
Rochester Conservation Commission
Minutes of the May 25, 2016
Public Hearing and Regular Meeting
Approved 6-22-16
Members Present: Absent:
Michael Dionne, Chair Mark Jennings
Kevin Sullivan
Deborah Shigo
Merry Lineweber
Roger Burkhart
Michael Kirwan
Jack Hackett
Staff: Seth Creighton, Chief Planner
The chair convened the regular meeting at 6:32 p.m.
Minutes: The regular and nonpublic meeting minutes of April 27, 2016 were reviewed. Mr. Sullivan made a motion to accept the minutes as presented and Ms. Shigo seconded, all voted in favor.
1. Discussion: None.
2) Conservation Overlay District: None.
3) Dredge and Fill Application/Wetland Permit Application: 0 Dry Hill Rd, Map-Lot 248-14, Modifications to east end of municipal dam and outlet.
Mr. Creighton explained that the State of NH is requiring the City to repair an embankment area near the outlet of a municipal reservoir on Dry Hill Rd. The repair is needed because the embankment/dam wall has been seeping. The proposal involves temporary and permanent wetland impacts immediately adjacent to the embankment/dam.
The Commission viewed the NH DES application packet and said that the wetlands slated for impact likely became wetlands due to the leaking/seeping. The Commission had no concern with this application.
4) Correspondence (emailed/sent prior to meeting): None.
5) Notice of Intent to Cut Wood or Timber / Intent to Excavate:
a) Notice of Intent to Cut - Tax Map# 241-5, Salmon Falls Rd, Fowler
b) Notice of Intent to Cut - Tax Map# 247-64&64.1, Rt 202, Gilbert
c) Notice of Intent to Cut - Tax Map# 246-33, Chesley Hill Rd, Gilbert
d) Notice of Intent to Cut - Tax Map# 215-59, Milton Rd, Jarvis
e) Notice of Intent to Cut – Tax Map# 25-38, 80 Dry Hill Rd, Berube
f) Notice of Intent to Cut – Tax Map#219-1, Meaderboro Rd, Scruton
The Commission asked Staff to obtain a copy of the ‘forest management plan’ for 80 Dry Hill Rd because this property is subject to a conservation easement.
The Commission also asked Staff to contact the owners of item “f” and request that they avoid timbering in the wetland area.
There were no other concerns.
6) Reports: Ms. Shigo and Mr. Burkhart explained that they had walked the Jeremiah Lane property that is currently before the Planning Board as conceptual subdivision. The members said that there were some wetlands impacted by a skidder, but they didn’t notice any egregious logging practices.
Ms. Shigo brought attention to the CIP report and noted that most of the improvement money being requested is for roads, pavement, storm water, and groundwater. The Commission discussed this and said that less taxes and time could be spent on these items if better development standards were adopted; Mr. Creighton stated that some existing development standards need improving but most of them are good, though they need to be enforced and supported by the decision makers; the Commission agreed. Mr. Burkhart asked if the CIP requests adhere to the Master Plan goals; the Commission discussed this and decided that many do not.
7) Old Business:
a) Current Use Information – The Commission reviewed Chapter 11.21 of the City’s General Ordinance. There were many questions about how the current use penalty monies are supposed to be distributed. The Commission asked Staff to have legal counsel offer an interpretation to Chapter 11.21.
b) Status of The Ridge Phase 2’s NH DES Wetland Application – Mr. Creighton explained that NH DES had issued a letter stating that parts of the Ridge Phase 2 proposal did not conform to the
State of NH wetland rules and NH DES also had requested additional information from the applicant.
c) Status of Ten Rod Farm Grant- Mr. Creighton explained that South East Land Trust has been working with the owners of Ten Rod Farm to wrap up the last pieces needed for a grant, specifically easement language. Mr. Dionne asked Mr. Creighton to send the easement language to the members.
8) New Business: Mr. Creighton explained that Nantucket Beadboard (on Chestnuthill Rd) obtained State and Federal permits to impact wetlands in order to improve an old woods road which provides access to the back of their property. The State and Federal permits are still valid but work has not yet commenced because the proposal needs local approvals. Mr. Sullivan asked if the wetland impact could be avoided if an access from Norway Planes Rd could be made; Mr. Creighton said that would require an easement across an abutter’s private property, and said that industrial truck traffic on Norway Planes Rd is not ideal because Norway Planes Rd is residential. The Commission discussed what they would need in order to review this project and decided that a site walk would be required.
9) Other Business: None.
10) Move to Non-Public: At 7:47pm Ms. Shigo motioned to move into Non-public session, with Mr. Hackett seconding, and all voting in favor.
11) Non-Public Session pursuant to RSA 91-A:3 II(d): Discussion of acquisition of real property and/or recent site walks and LACE sheets.
12) At 8:21 pm the public session resumed.
13) Adjournment: At 8:22 a motion was made by Mr. Sullivan, and Ms. Kirwan seconded to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously.
Respectfully submitted, Seth Creighton, Chief Planner
N:\Conservation Commission\2016\2016 Minutes\ConCom20160525min.docx