NOTES OF JULY 30,
2014 RYE CONSERVATION COMMISSION SITE WALK
Rye Farm, 561 South
Rd.
Final Revision C – Provided by
the Rye Civic League
Present
from the Conservation Commission:
Chairman Sally King, Jeff Gardner, Mike Garvan.
Present
from the Planning Board: Ray Tweedie.
Present
from the applicant: Developer Don Cook and his wife Kathy Cook, John Chagnon,
Ambit Engineering, and Jim Gove, Gove Environmental Services, Inc.
Abutters
and homeowners living within the Aquifer and Wellhead Protection District
present: Pat and Tim Losik, Lois Taylor,
Kathleen Casey, Bob Svihovec, Oren Sheetreet, Angelo and Amanda Puglisi and
family, Deb Dallero, Mary Dallero, and Matt Burke.
Also
present: Peter Crawford
Editor’s
note: For ease in finding particular
sections using the archived video and audio on Vimeo, the elapsed time is
indicated. Use the slider and the
elapsed time indicated at the bottom of the video window to fast forward to the
desired section. The video is available
at https://vimeo.com/102424111/
Summary
3. Abutters expressed concerns about drainage and flooding and referred to FEMA flood zone maps.
4. The proposed wetlands crossing was viewed.
The
developer describes his plan and raises the possibility of an RCD (1:50
elapsed)
Don
Cook, the applicant/developer, welcomes everybody present and introduces
himself, his wife, Kathy Cook, John Chagnon from Ambit Engineering, and Jim
Gove as our “environmental guy.” He provides a brief description of the
property referring to it as sort of a big square and then comes in at the
trees. It is one parcel of roughly 35
acres and he offers a look at the tax map.
(3:00 elapsed)
Abutter
Mary Dallero asks where is the road going to be located to access the
lots. Don Cook replies where the tractor
is located. Mary Dallero, the abutter,
responds by stating “just where we don’t need it ” because there is already a
lot of traffic. Another abutter notes,
“We have terrible traffic here.” Ms.
Dallero then asks how close is the road going to be. Don Cook replies that a 50 feet right-of-way
is required, however, in talking to abutters, he is going to try to go for 70
feet in order to create a buffer for planting.
(4:50 elapsed)
Don
Cook shows the site on the tax map and how it relates to all the abutting
properties noting the series of homes on West Road and where the land “chokes
in” and states that it is mostly surrounded by stone walls. He refers to the “logging road” or a “woods
road” crossing the wetlands and is questioned by an abutter as to the source of
his description.
(5:40 elapsed)
Conservation
Commission member Mike Garvan, asks what the goal is and what is proposed to be
built. Mr. Cook replies “five lots, the
fifth lot we might or might not try (RCD)…”
Mr. Garvan requests clarification.
Kathy Cook notes that the farmhouse represents one lot and Mr. Cook
explains the location of the cul-de-sac going just into the woods. He states that the farmhouse stays and Lot 2
begins with the mowed grass line to the short trees, Lot 3 is the area of tall
trees to the right. Mr. Garvan queries,
“and the plan is that these are all single home lots and then you have a
cluster of homes in the back lot?” Mr.
Cook responds, “We might try to attempt that, we haven’t gotten that far along
but that would be my ultimate goal is to do the….there are 10 RCD’s left in the
town because you can only have 52 and the place up at the airfield had 22, the
Rand project had 20 and that leaves 10 left, so we have a concept of it but we
haven’t got that far, we are more concerned with drainage and the road and the
water and just trying to get to that point.”
(7:25 elapsed)
Jeff
Gardner from the Conservation Commission asks whether, if the applicant chose
not to develop the land in the back for an RCD, would they still have to
cross the wetland. Don Cook replies, “Yes, either way, because
that’s where the developable land is there.”
Mr. Cook noted that they would not need to test all of the back
property. Jeff Gardner asks whether that would also be the
case with a single residence house before the Lot 5 wetland? Mr. Cook states that one of his goals is not
to disturb any of the property lines to give everybody their privacy. Matt Burke asks whether the map shows 75 by
100 or 150 of developable land (Lot 5) and, if so, whether Mr. Cook would not
need to go behind the wetlands crossing.
Mr. Cook notes that the test pits are not good right there: the better soil is behind there and a
wetlands buffer is needed. Abutter Pat
Losik asks Mr. Cook whether he has a possible developable lot (5) without
impinging upon the wetlands which are in the Wellhead Protection Area.
Nearby
Wellhead and Aquifer Protection land, and conservation land (8:29 elapsed)
In response to Abutter Pat Losik’s
remark about the Wellhead Protection District, Don Cook states that hundreds of
homes are in this zone, and is he is not sure if it is the wellhead
district. Ms. Losik confirms that the
zone in question is in the Aquifer and Wellhead Protection District. Mr. Cook confirms the location of the
District on the map and notes that essentially every home “within a mile of
here is in that”. Ms. Losik makes reference
to the homes on the inside of the “polygon” and notes that Mr. Cook is proposing
to increase, if he gets 10 RCD units, what’s on the inside of the Wellhead
Protection District by 20%.
Don
Cook replies that he is not sure about what is being referred as a 20%
increase. Abutter Tim Losik replies that it represents a 20% increase of homes
in the area. Ms. Losik concludes that a
20% increase is a material increase “to our water.”
(9:20 elapsed)
In response to the Losik’s comments,
Don Cook shows on the tax map all land owned by the Town of Rye (referring to
it as TOR) in the area. Abutter Pat
Losik replies that the Town of Rye owns and preserves this land for a good
reason. Editor’s Note: See page 49 of
the SMP Final Concept Report for Town Hall a portion of which inventoried all
town owned lands and conservation easements. http://www.town.rye.nh.us/Pages/RyeNH_BComm/TownHallComm/smpfinal.pdf
An excerpt of the map is below,
illustrating Rye Farm and the contiguous conserved lands related to adjacent
well heads and aquifer: Green indicates town-owned land managed by the
Conservation Commission. Pink indicates
other town-owned land. Orange indicates
land subject to a conservation easement for the benefit of the Town of Rye.
(9:40 elapsed)
Abutter Tim Losik asks a question
regarding Bailey’s Brook, addressing the many entities responsible for
protecting it, specifically mentioning the Water District, the Conservation
Commission, and the Planning Board. He
states that it is not too far from this property. He also mentions “Brown’s Brook,” as he
believes it is commonly called, which ends up flowing into “Brown’s Pond.” His question is if any of that (i.e. the
geography of the brooks in relation to this property) has been taken into
consideration within the context of this proposed development.
Jeff Gardner of the Conservation
Commission replies that that this is their first meeting and that it was
premature to provide an answer to that question.
Abutters
express concerns about drainage (12:00 elapsed)
Abutter Pat Losik talks about the
new FEMA maps and regulations in relation to this proposed development. Referencing the location of “Bonnie’s Pond”
on the FEMA map, she points out what is now designated as a special flood
hazard area. She states that this
development is proximate to (FEMA designated SFHA) and is land that does not
drain.
Mr. Cook replies that the parcel for
the RCD is significantly above the level of that pond.
(13:00 elapsed)
In response to the concerns of
abutters Pat and Tim Losik, Don Cook replies that they have been concerned
about the wellhead district, or whatever they call it, the Aquifer, and John
Chagnon of Ambit Engineering noted they were going to do a hydro-geological
study to determine the impact.
Abutter Pat Losik replies that they
know how the land drains, what happens in significant storms, and how many sump
pumps are brought in. When there is high
tide, it impacts how the water drains.
She mentions the Storm of 2006, concluding that 13 more units is a big
impact.
The
group views the proposed wetlands crossing (14:00 elapsed)
All present proceeded to walk across
the field into the woods. Shortly
thereafter, Jim Gove answered questions about the test pits and noted his work
with Dennis Plante, consultant to the Town.
He noted that Lots 1, 2 and 4 were fine.
Lot 3 had to be worked a bit and all were outside the area of the
wetlands (referring to wetlands on Lot 3).
The Lot 5 test pit did not pass
the Town standards so they had to go beyond the wetlands on the other side to
find a pit that met the requirements. A
Conservation Commission member asked if it was due to ledge or some other
reason. Jim Gove responded that it was
loose glacial till. He was surprised as
he was expecting to find sand and gravel and instead found a little bit of sand
over clay, stating that typically when you have all sand over clay, you don’t
have an aquifer situation at all.
Once they got beyond this, and then
noted the drainage that comes from the horse field (West Road resident) and
comes across toward the pond, Jim noted this was not a significant drainage but
could be seen on the plan. They found two pits, outside the wetland boundaries,
which met the standard. Conservation
Commission Chairman Sally King confirmed they had to go through the wetland to
get the pit test. John Chagnon noted
that if the house was placed up near the road you would pump effluent
(indicated upward motion) to the suitable receiving area so there would be a
temporary crossing impact. The other
option, according to John Chagnon, would be to put a driveway through the
wetlands and a house in the back.
Mr. Cook noted that if they did not
do an RCD they would want to construct a driveway crossing because it’s a nice
beautiful building lot. Ms. Losik
confirmed that it would then be one lot and Don responded, yes, it would still
be a lot. The RCD is technically
required to have 10 acres, even though you have up to 10 units, it is still
considered one building lot.
(21.09 elapsed)
Showing the group passing through
the narrow section of the lot.
(24:00 elapsed)
Don Cook is showing where the
wetlands are located, marked by red flags and asks Jim Gove for concurrence
that wetlands start on this property.
Mr. Gove notes the origins of the wetlands at the stone wall draining
toward the pond.
(25:00 elapsed)
Abutter Pat Losik asks for the
distance from the proposed access road on Lot 5 to her property. John Chagnon
noted that it would be a driveway and the public road would end (pointing to
the beginning of Lot 5) and so it would be a driveway and would be where it is
now. Don Cook states that he has no
intention of making the proposed private road into a Town road for privacy even
though it will have to be built according to Town standards.
Editor’s
Note: the front four lots through which the RCD will be accessed are proposed
to be on a new town road. Access to the RCD will be on a “private road”. An RCD must have, in accordance with section
401.4 C of the Zoning Ordinance, entitled “Frontage”
“… a minimum contiguous frontage
on a Class V Road or better of 150 feet. Each dwelling within an RCD shall face
upon either an existing Class V Road or better or on a private way constructed
within the RCD. (Amended 2008)
(28:00 elapsed)
Jim Gove shows where the road
actually crosses the wetland boundary.
His recommendation is that if you are going to cross the wetlands, do it
where it has already been disturbed.
(28:52 elapsed)
Don Cook stated the intent is to put
a driveway not a road crossing the wetlands in response to abutter Pat Losik’s
concerns.
(29:20 elapsed)
Don Cook shows where they have done
two test pits and where they will be doing more in the next couple of
weeks.
Discussion
of the possible RCD (30:00 elapsed)
Abutter Matt Burke asked where the
septic system for the RCD would be. Mr.
Cook noted the location but said that he didn’t want to go for the RCD right
away. John Chagnon of Ambit Engineering
states that the RCD is a concept, not a plan yet. Abutter Angelo Puglisi replies that most
concepts become reality. Mr. Cook notes
there are plenty of other suitable places for the septic but needed a start to
make sure the soils were suitable. John
Chagnon replies that it will have to go through the Planning Board process. Mr. Puglisi states his concerns regarding the
RCD “proposed concept,” namely because of the increased traffic and that it
will impact his property. It will put
his house on a peninsula, as there will be a road on three sides of his
property. He is not a big fan of the
RCD.
(33:40 elapsed)
Don Cook stopped walking and put the
plans on the ground to show what he calls is a little peninsula where the stone
walls are located. He states that there
is a significant amount of upland, which in his view would justify crossing the
wetlands to access the huge amount of land in the back. He also shows all the different parcels owned
by the Town of Rye on the map.
(34:40 elapsed)
Abutter Tim Losik states that this
roadway passes all the way through to the wellhead. Don Cook does not know where it goes and asks
for the name of the area. The Puglisi’s
mentioned possible names of the area.
Conservation Commission Chairman Sally King asks if they are going to
see the Wellhead Protection Area. Don
Cook asks if it is an active well.
Abutter Tim Losik replies that the town wellheads are there. As they proceed to walk, Don Cook stops and
says that he is not comfortable leading a group because this is no longer his
property.
(37:25 elapsed)
Conservation Commission Chairman
Sally King asks John Chagnon if he has any idea about the amount of upland, in
terms of acreage of the fifth lot. John
Chagnon replies that he has no idea.
(37:40 elapsed)
A member of the public asks what
they would be doing with the remnant of the land not being built upon. Don Cook figures that it amounts to 15 acres,
which he intends to leave alone.
Planning Board member Ray Tweedie interjects that it is approximately 20
acres. Ray Tweedie goes on to state that
the Planning Board would not approve Lot 5 for the RCD unless 50% of the land
would be put into conservation. He shows
on the map the piece of land that would go into conservation, which would be
well over 50%. He makes a parallel with
the recently approved RCD for 20 units at Rand’s in terms of the percentage of
land going into conservation.
Peter Crawford corrects Ray Tweedie
by stating that this would not apply to this RCD because there is a maximum of
10 units that can be built and as a result no bonus can be granted by putting
50% of the land into conservation. Ray
Tweedie agrees and states that this would be up to Mr. Cook to do the right
thing.
(39.00 elapsed)
Abutter Amanda Puglisi asks if the
RCD would be similar to the Airfield. Editor’s note: This appears to be a reference to the RCD
built off of Lafayette Rd. near the Rye Airfield. Don Cook states that his intent is to put
10 individual capes in the 2000 square feet range if that means anything,
something comparable to the RCD at Rand’s.
(39.35 elapsed)
Conservation Commission Chairman
Sally King states that they would like to come back if Don Cook were to proceed
with his concept for an RCD. They would
like to walk the whole site. Jim Gove
notes that the remaining land is a nice mix of upland and wetland.
(41:00 elapsed)
In talking to the Conservation
Commission members present, Don Cook states that he wants to do his homework
with the RCD by hiring a hydrologist. He
does not want to come to the Planning Board without being prepared. He states: “…but the five lot we’re probably
going to present… trying to go to the Planning Board with the five lot and
potentially go with the RCD. But this
all just a thought, I am working with Tim Phoenix because he is the attorney
who did the Rand property and he knows all about the RCD’s even though I have
never worked with him before.”
(42.00 elapsed)
In response to abutter Pat Losik’s
concerns about prior statements made regarding a Town road, Don Cook states
that the RCD can be on a private driveway that would be built to town
standard. Ray Tweedie says “your first
part would be a town road which is how you would be able to access this by way
of RCD.” Mr. Cook agrees and states that in order to have an RCD you have to
have a building lot with 150 feet on a Class V road. Mr. Puglisi noted that an Association would
be needed to maintain the private road if it’s private and Messrs. Cook and
Tweedie agreed.
(46:00 elapsed)
Abutter Tim Losik asks for
clarification regarding the RCD. He
makes the point that Don Cook has been stating that the RCD is not on table,
however, the letters sent to the abutters and the plans only show the RCD as
the potential proposal not a single family home as described during the
walk. Don Cook replies that he is going
to ask for a five-lot subdivision.
Ultimately he would like to do the RCD.
He is going to talk to his attorney on how to approach the Planning
Board regarding the RCD. Tim Losik
summarized the discussion as follows: the outcome of Lot 5 is unknown at this point; Don Cook has
two thoughts in mind: a single family
single dwelling as a potential, with a need to cross wetlands or a 10 unit RCD
still having a need to cross wetlands.
Don Cook agreed. Abutter Pat Losik stated that the RCD (for Lot 5) was
not posted on the July 8th Planning Board agenda and it was
confusing to people. Planning Board
member, Ray Tweedie stated that the rules were followed.