Good morning! I just wanted to let you know that The Walpolean will be continuing but at a slightly lower activity level for several months. As an outgrowth of my management consulting activities, I have been engaged to act as Interim Executive Director of Apple Hill Center for Chamber Music in Nelson, NH for a 4-6 month period while the Center searches for a permanent executive director.  This fine, 30-year old institution is facing some  managerial and financial transitions, not unlike many such institutions, and I am delighted to have a role in working on them. It will be "total immersion" for a while, but we have a talented staff here and a very dedicated, committed board. Tuesday evening concerts begin June 19, and I hope to welcome Walpolean readers to them! Chuck Bingaman.

For more information on the Apple Hill Center, see www.applehill.org.

Two important events this week.  Tomorrow night the Windham World Affairs Council is presenting a program at SIT at 7:30 with Christopher Preble of the CATO Institute in Washington DC discussing "A Grand Bargain with Iran." This is especially timely in light of our beginning talks with Iran today and the very dicey relations we have with this difficult country sitting in between Iraq and Afghanistan. Should be quite interesting.

Thursday evening at 7:00, Ken Burns is previewing "The War", his new documentary.  If anyone needs tickets--they're $25 apiece--call Delores Street (756-3720) who has four tickets she cannot now use.  The event benefits equally the Fall Mountain Educational Endowment, the Walpole Historical Society and the American Legion Bridge-Wilson Post 77.

Ed.Note: Mel Schupack shared the following note and column which seem especially important for us all this weekend.  CCB

Having served during the '60's (not at the Pentagon) and having gotten to know our professional soldiers, learning to respect them and admiring their professional dedication, I find this commentary poignant.  Even when, IMHO, they get misused and abused by being given an inappropriate mission by civilian authorities seeming to be lacking in understanding, they still perform with such heroism.  How many professionals can claim that?

 Friend David Mayes reminds us that Walpole Village School will host its second annual Benefit Auction at 6:30 pm Saturday, June 2 at the school’s new location in the former Long River Gardens building on Westminster Street in Walpole.  With this, its final fundraiser of the 2006-2007 session, the school hopes to repeat the success of last year’s inaugural auction night which raised nearly $10,000 to support the school’s move into its new, dedicated space.  The goal for this year’s auction is $15,000. 

 In what promises to be a wonderful night out, guests at the event will be treated to live music, an elegant selection of hors d’oeuvers, and the chance to bid on a wonderful array of items donated by local businesses, artists, and families.  Cocktails will also be available.  For information about the items up for bid, directions to the school, or to purchase event tickets, call the Walpole Village School office at (603) 756-4246, or visit the school at 75 Westminster Street. 

 ###

ABOUT THE WALPOLE VILLAGE SCHOOL:  Incorporated in 1974, the Walpole Village School is a non-profit educational institution offering preschool, pre-kindergarten, and after-school enrichment programs.  Its child-centered program strives to achieve a balance between offering new experiences and incorporating students’ interests and abilities.  Built on a strong foundation of social skills, the goal of the school’s curriculum is to foster respect and compassion in a child’s decision-making processes. 

 Funding for the school’s programs comes from a combination of tuition payments, parent fundraising activities, and donations from local businesses and the public.  Tuition assistance is available.  The Walpole Village School does not discriminate on the basis of physical handicap, race, creed, color or sex in the administration of its educational policies, admissions, tuition assistance and other school programs.

Ed. Note: This story appeared last Sunday in the Eagle Times.  CCB

5-17-07

Walpole Veterans Reflect on Their Service and New Monument

By Chuck Bingaman, Contributing Writer

            “It’s one of the greatest honors in the world to serve under the United States’ flag,” said Ralph A. “Red” Smith of Walpole Thursday in a conversation about the new Veterans’ monument that went up on the town Common last week.

            While the monument will not be formally dedicated until Memorial Day, Monday, May 28, townspeople have been walking around it for several days already looking for names of long deceased and still living relatives and friends that entered the military service from Walpole over the years.

            “I feel bad for those that didn’t come home and for their families,” noted Smith.  “But I like the Memorial.  It’s a great addition to the town.  It lets everyone know who has served and protected our country.”  Smith, 76, served from 1951 to 1955 as a fireman on the Navy destroyer USS Warrington.  “My Navy service was one of the best things that could have happened to me.  It taught me independence…how to watch out for yourself and your comrades.”

            The monument lists the names of all those men and women that a determined committee of Bridge Wilson American Legion Post #77 volunteers could find that entered U.S. military service from Walpole from the Revolution through the present time.  Even those currently serving in Iraq, Afghanistan and other posts worldwide.  More than 1100 names are listed, 43 of which lost their lives in the service.

            Margaret Knowles, 42, originally of North Walpole, hasn’t seen the Monument yet because she’s still on active duty in the Army and posted in Washington, DC.  “But I feel very honored that my name is on it,” she said Thursday.  “I spent a lot of time on the Common when I was a girl. I love being a part of the history of Walpole.”  Knowles, who will retire from the military in November enlisted right out of Fall Mountain High School upon graduation in 1982.  She’s been a Chinese linguist throughout her Army career, and has been accepted to the George Washington University Masters program in Asian Studies beginning in the fall.

            Clancy Houghton of Old North Main in Walpole came home from college in California after one year when his dad, a Walpole dentist, had a stroke.  Seeing that he had to make his way in life, he enlisted in the Air Force in 1954 and served for four years.  During that time, he trained as a budget officer, and he and his young wife, Rit, also from Walpole, lived in England for much of the time.  “I didn’t go into it for the glory, and I didn’t expect to be honored in any way,” says Houghton.  “But I learned a lot in the Air Force.  I had an immense amount of responsibility at an age I probably didn’t deserve it and I grew up a lot!”  As to the new monument, Houghton says, “it’s a classy job!”

            Marshall Putnam of Walpole also served in the Air Force from 1943 to 1946 and was posted to aircraft engine repair facilities in Biloxi, Denver, and Amarillo.  He enlisted while in high school in Walpole.  “As I look back on it now, I had fun in the Air Force.  But it was hectic!  We worked hard, often seven days a week. And we matured rapidly.  As to the new monument, “I watched it being planned and built, and I think they’ve done a great job!”

            Currently serving with 3rd Army as an Area Support Group-Qatar (ASG-QA) Intelligence Officer out of Camp As Sayliyah near Doha, Qatar, Walpole native Demere Kasper is a 25-year-old Captain.  She helps with force protection and advises on anti-terrorism measures for the installation. “I am proud,” she says, “of my work, but only regret that I was not in the army earlier during the first push into Iraq, or had been able to serve in Afghanistan.  My service has allowed me to truly appreciate the freedoms we have in the United States.”

As to her name appearing already on the new Walpole monument, Kasper said this week in an email from Qatar, “It is a little overwhelming, and a bit humbling to think that my name is alongside people that I regard as heroes, and I definitely do not think of myself in that manner. These are men and women who sacrificed more than just a year tour, or 15 months. Many were gone years on end and never knew when they would be home again. They didn't have all the amenities we are afforded in this day and age.”

                        --30--

 

           

 

           

 

           

Get your flags ready Walpole!  Monday is the day we honor our veterans and dedicate our new memorial on the Common!  Thanks to Bruce Martin, here is the schedule of events...

10:30 a.m. Veterans form up at American Legion Bridge Wilson Post #77 and march to the Walpole Unitarian Universalist Church on Main Street.

11:00 a.m.  Upon arrival of the Fall Mountain Regional High School Band, the parade begins north on Main Street, west on Westminster Street and south on Washington Street.

When the band and spectators reach the Common, they will be joined at the south side of the new bandstand by an honor guard of Walpole Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts and an color guard.

Robert Casper, USN Ret., will give the Memorial Day Address followed by the laying of a wreath on the new Veterans Memorial, firing of a salute by a Vermont National Guard Unit, taps, dedicatory comments on the new Memorial by Project Director Bruce Martin, and a closing prayer.

11:45  Adjournment to the Town Hall for punch and cookies for the public.  CCB

Being Green

    Rev. Susan Kershaw reports that St. John’s Episcopal Church, Elm and Westminster Streets in Walpole, is hosting a community lecture on “Being Green” on Monday, June 11, at 7:00 p.m. The presenter is Tom Sintros. While the environment is a hot topic today, many of the suggested solutions seem complicated and only for scientific teams or world powers.  But there are things we can do at a personal level that will help the environment. Mr. Sintros will challenge us to identify and implement those actions.

    Sintros, a public school teacher for thirty-five years, teaches Advanced Placement Environmental Science and Chemistry at Keene High School.  He has served on numerous citizen/environmental groups in the region including the Conservation Commission (chair and member), Keene Cities for Climate Protection (founding member), Friends of Pisgah, Friends of Open Spade, Stonewall Farm, Ashuelot River Park  Advisory Board, RMOLL (Rachel Marshall Outdoor Learning Lab), TDM (Travel Demand Management), and the Advisory Committee with the Southwest Region Planning Commission.

     Tom Sintros has also been an adjunct professor at Keene State College, Suffolk University (Dakar Campus), and has worked with Antioch NE for over twenty years. Tom received the Christa McAuliffe Award Sabbatical in 2001 for the Public Land Adoption and Community Education (PLACE) project and most recently designed an alternative 11^th and 12th grade high school for interdisciplinary/civic engagement with an environmental core running through all subject areas (Monadnock Environmental Studies Academy).

     Tom’s recent work includes attending training/workshops on Climate Change at Harvard University’s Center for the Environment (HUCE), and completing the Climate Project training with Al Gore in December 2006 in Nashville, TN.

     Tom lives in Alstead with his wife Amy and their two sons. Tom brings a love of the Monadnock region to his work and says he hopes to be part of preserving the beautiful environmental ecosystems that make this region an amazing place.

     Everyone is encouraged to come to this presentation that is free and open to the public. Call 756-4533 for more information.

     Walpole Grange presents its annual awards night tonight at 7:00 p.m. at the Town Hall.  The program is free and open to the public and honors a number of significant contributors to our community. Following the award presentations, there will be entertainment by the barbershop quartet "Mixed Greens" and refreshments.  CCB

Ed. Note: Here are the May 9 Planning Board minutes prepared and passed along by Pam Aslinger, the Board secretary.  Incidentally, Pam's partner, Barkley Bull, passed away last weekend after a long illness.  So Pam needs and deserves our special support at this time.  True to her amazing level of diligence and responsibility, she actually apologized for these minutes not being as prompt as usual! CCB

Town of Walpole

PLANNING BOARD MEETING

May 8, 2007  7:30pm Town Hall

MINUTES

Presiding:  Jeff Miller, Ch.

Members Present:  Chas. Miller, Select., Henry Fletcher, Eric Merklein, Robert Miller, V-Ch., David DeCoste, Ben Daviss, Shane O’Keefe, alt., Jeff White, alt.

F. Dill present but recused and in audience.

Recording:  Pamel Aslinger, alt. and Secretary

 These minutes are unapproved and will be reviewed at the June 12, 2007 meeting for errors, omissions and corrections.  There were over 50 persons in attendance.

I.              Meeting opened at 7:30pm

                A.  No alternates were designated.  All members were present.

                B.  Minutes from April 10 and April 24, 2007 were approved as presented.

II.            Review applications submitted: 

                A.  Ch. Miller announced the Lennon 2 Lot Subdivision on High Street had been

withdrawn.

                B.  Alyson’s Apple Orchard, Inc./Robert Jasse - Lot Line Adjustment located on Wentworth Rd., Map 5, Lot 2-11 in the Rural Ag. zone.  Purpose is to remove 2.83 acres annexing it to Daniel and Jeanne McAllister, Lot 2-6 totaling 11.59 acres.  Lot 2-11 becomes 11.10 acres “not to be developed”, accessed by a 50 ft. ROW on Lot 2-9.  Joe DiBernardo, Land Surveyor provided three new maps with an address change.  The application was in order.  A motion was made and seconded to accept the application as complete, seconded, motion carried. 

III.           Ch. Miller closed the meeting and opened the Public Hearing.  Mr. Joe DiBernardo explained the purpose as stated above.  With no further questions -

IV.           closed the Public Hearing and re-opened the meeting.

V.            Action on Alyson’s Orchard Inc./Robert Jasse - Ch. Miller called for Board questions and/or action.  Mr. Fletcher moved to approve the proposal as presented, seconded by Mr. B. Miller, with no further discussion the motion carried unanimously.  Maps and mylar were signed, Mr. DiBernardo will record the plan and notify the Secretary.

                C.  Kimberly Bogar - Lot Line Adjustment located on 286 Old Keene Rd. Map 7, Lot 25 and 25-1 in the Rural Ag. zone.  Purpose is to reconfigure the center boundary line creating Lot 1 of 12.1 acres and Lot 2 with the existing house of 22.2 acres.  The application was in order.  Mr. Merklein motioned and Mr. DeCoste seconded to accept the application as complete, motion carried.

III.           Ch. Miller closed the meeting and opened the Public Hearing.  Mr. Bogar explained the purpose as stated above. Ch. Miller called for questions, being none -

IV.           closed the Public Hearing and re-opened the meeting.

V.            Action on Kimberly Bogar - Ch. Miller called for Board questions and/or action.

Mr. Daviss moved to approve the application as presented, seconded by Mr. Merklein, with no further discussion the motion carried unanimously.  Maps were signed, Mr. Bogar did not bring the mylar, he will coordinate with Sec. Aslinger for signatures. 

                D.                Walpole D & D, LLC/Fred Dill and Randy Daniels - Major 13 Lot Subdivision and Lot Line Adjustment located on Hooper Rd., Wentworth Rd. and Old Keene Rd. Map 8 Lots 15, 6, 16 in the Residential A (Lots 1-3) and Rural Ag. (Lots 4-13) zones.  Purpose is to create 12 new lots, 2-11 of 1.45 thru 3.34 acres and Lot 13 of 13.59 acres from a 40  acre parcel, formerly the Helff Farm.   Lot 1 and 2 involve the Lot Line Adjustment creating Lot 1 of 5 acres with the farmhouse and Lot 2 of 2.90 acres to allow for wetlands.  Lots 1-12 accessed on Hooper Rd., Lots 10, 11 and 13 by a 50 ft. ROW over Lot 9.  Mr. DiBernardo provided 2 additional sets of new maps showing the well, septic and topography on a separate page.  Sec. Aslinger reported the application was complete except for 3 items; the plans do not show typical designs of the on-lot water and sewerage systems, existing surface drainage, or preliminary locations of bridges or culverts due to access areas, she noted the items could be submitted during the

Walpole Planning Board Minutes 5/8/07 page 2

review process if the Board agreed.  Mr. DeCoste moved to accept the application as complete, seconded, motion carried unanimously. 

III.           Ch. Miller closed the meeting and opened the Public Hearing.  Ch. Miller called on Mr. Dill to explain the proposal.  Mr. Dill said he thought the prior meeting was a semi-public hearing where some were able to voice their concerns.  He took the concerns into consideration showing proposed well and septic locations but provided no answers on concerns about water.  He noted it is a concern in this area, in other areas of town and in other towns.  He offered no remedy, but has tried to present a good plan with accesses for all new lots only on Hooper Rd., but he may consider having some of the lots access on Old Keene Rd.  He configured the subdivision to allow for lots larger than the minimum to allow for houses to be more randomly placed on the lots, making it more attractive.  He stated the road measurements are now shown on the plans and in regard to the curve, he said he has walked the road several times in the last week and does not find the curve a problem, saying it is a country road and feels the curve prevents it from being a “speedway” or a “shortcut” with little traffic.  He said when designing the plans they preferred to have all the accesses from Hooper Rd.  He said the lots bordering Wentworth and Keene Rd. could be accessed onto those roads but he prefers to have them all on Hooper Rd.  He said as far as the missing information regarding bridges or culverts it is not a concern because the regulations apply to only newly created roads.  He said the right of way to the other lots does not require culverts or bridges.  He said the water and wet areas are included in the plans to answer the “existing surface drainage” requirement.  He pointed out the areas on the map, saying there are no all year round streams on the proposal. 

Ch. Miller called for questions from the public.  Mr. Gordon, abutter directed his question to the Board saying his major concern is the water issue; some of his neighbors have two or three wells because there’s not a lot of water.  He is concerned that 12 new wells will cause greater problems asking how the town will protect his water rights?

Ch. Miller thought the plans showed adequate lot space for well radius of 75’.  He said it wasn’t clearly defined in the regulations but thought the Planning Board could require a further study to address the water issue, if they agreed.  He did not have an answer about protecting Mr. Gordon’s water rights.

Mr. Dill said he knew of a project that incorporated a small public water system instead of multiple wells, however if it were not managed properly it could lead to more problems, less of a solution and possibly only a temporary plan.

Mr. Gordon asked if town water could be brought up to the area and what the cost would be?  Ms. Suzanne Steisel, abutter asked why the town would pay to bring water to the D & D proposal, when the project is inappropriately placed due to the lack of water.  She said everyone in the area has 2 or 3 wells or a dug well, saying if the subdivision is approved you can’t expect the taxpayer to bring water to it. 

Mr. Dill said there is water on the property but it’s on the other side of the property.  Ms. Steisel asked if he would tell the potential buyers they may have to drill 2 or 3 wells, again noting everyone has at least 2 wells on their property.  Mr. Dill said of the four houses he has developed in the area, all have one well.  Ms. Steisel said she was advised from a well drilling company not to drill a well but stay with the dug well she has because there is so little water in the area.  She asked if the Planning Board would approve this plan without providing adequate water.

Ch. Miller answered that part of the review criteria is to ask for a soil survey that might address the water issue.  Mr. Dill said he didn’t think it was his responsibility to guarantee water.  Ms. Steisel disagreed.  Mr. Daviss asked if the Board would also consider a hydro geological study in order to provide the information?  Ch. Miller said he is concerned about whether the 12 lots would all have water, but questioned whether the Board could require guaranteed water.  He would like to get clarification, he said Mr. Dill has indicated the 75 ft. radius; the Board could ask for soils survey but reminded that other approved subdivisions including the existing abutting lots were approved without guaranteeing water and also in other parts of town. 

Mr. Heyedenreich, abutter said his well of 700ft. ran dry, he added a second well that’s provided little water.  With the close proximity of this subdivision how would it effect his and others wells?  Ken Walsh of 206 Wentworth Rd. said he has two wells, the front one went dry in November, he knows of 2 others around him who have multiple wells and wells running dry. 

Jeff French of Ramsey Hill Rd. speaking on behalf of himself and Dr. Heyendenreich asked about the Class VI road status.  The Board corrected him.  Hooper Rd. is a Class V town Rd.  Ch. Miller said he did not think the road could handle the increased usage and the town would be forced to upgrade the road at the taxpayer’s expense, fix the drainage, curve and add gravel.  Mr. French said as a developer himself, he

Walpole Planning Board Minutes 5/8/07 page 3

is usually expected to do all road upgrades at his expense, he does not agree as a taxpayer he should foot the bill for the upgrade of the road, it is the responsibility of the developer.  Ch. Miller expressed his concern over the high density of the proposal and does not feel the town should upgrade the road at the town’s expense.  Mr. French said secondly he knows Dr. Heyendenreich has two wells, he thinks the aquifir/water resources should be addressed and he asked if there were covenants as to what type of homes could be built.  Mr. Dill said yes, there are covenants but are for the persons buying the land, he said the homes would be in keeping with the homes in the area.  Mr. French said covenants should say the homes should be in keeping and with few interpretive statements.  Ch. Miller said the Board does not regulate covenants.  He reminded the town ordinances and regulations have no set standards for design or architectural style.  He said it is up to the developer to keep the value of the homes high. 

Ch. Miller recognized town road agent Jim Terrell.  Mr. Terrell said he was asked for his opinion on the condition of the road.  He said the road definitely needs upgrading, especially during the construction phase more so than the final additional traffic.  He said the reason the road is in its present condition is to keep expenses down on a very low volume road.  He said it would require a good bit of work to bring the road up but not impossible, who pays for it is not his decision.  Ch. Miller asked him for an estimate.  He said a rough estimate for paving, grinding and removing 6” off to install a fabric, it doesn’t include the use of equipment or labor would be around 50-60 thousand dollars.

He said gravel would need to be upgraded, ditches created, widened in areas, he’s not concerned over the curve area.  He said the traffic numbers would average 120 trips per day at 10 trips per day per house, well within design standards for the roadway.  Ch. Miller asked about draining the curve area.  Mr. Terrell said an engineering study should be required to address the surface drainage and runoff onto the Old Keene Road; there is a culvert replacement.  Ch. Miller asked if Hooper Rd. should be redesigned to meet the town standards.  Mr. Terrell thought the engineering study would address the issues adequately.

                Sheldon Sawyer asked if one house is built on Wentworth Rd. or two houses or 50 houses would the town expect the road to be upgraded by the developer?  Why wouldn’t the same apply to Hooper Rd.  He said there is a bridge on Wentworth that can’t handle two cars at once; other roads in subdivisions haven’t been required to upgrade the road.  He said it is a Class V road and it is the town’s responsibility to upgrade the roads, he said there are many roads needing repairs, he doesn’t agree the developer should have to pay to upgrade a Class V town road despite its condition.

                Ch. Miller answered said the impact of this major subdivision is within the scope of the subdivision regulations.  The regulations allow for upgrading existing road at the developer’s expense, especially if the benefit is solely for the developer, which it is in this case.  He said the quality of Wentworth Rd. couldn’t be compared to Hooper Rd.  He cautioned that when a few lots are sold, the town would end up spending the money to upgrade the road because the buyers will want the road improved.  He said it is an obvious issue the developer is responsible for. He compared the Sand Hill subdivision where the developer built a new road according to the town standards and the town took over the maintenance as the lots were developed, but until it met the standards the town did not take it over.  He said common sense says the proposal creates a direct benefit to the developer.  The road has been in its present condition for many years because it has always been a dirt road that connected two roads, not intended for development potential.  He said it would be different if it were developed with one or two additional houses, but what the town is being faced with is an obvious high impact development on a poor road that shouldn’t be upgraded at the expense of the taxpayers.  He said the road should be brought up to specs by the developer and let the town take over the maintenance from there.  Mr. Sawyer reminded that Wentworth Rd. was also a dirt road at one point and the taxpayer’s paid to upgrade it; he said it is town land and the town’s responsibility to pay for it.  Ch. Miller said circumstances weren’t the same and the town has subdivision regulations that apply.  He reiterated it is not the obligation of the town to benefit the developer in this instance.  Mr. Sawyer argued it is a Class V town road, the town’s responsibility.  Ch. Miller said the road was not designed to carry a 12 lot subdivision.

                Leo Carginan abutter, expressed concerns over the rock ledges on some of the lots, specifically the need for blasting in order to locate septic or foundations.  He noticed some of the lots weren’t perk tested.  Mr. Dill said they were not able to get a perk test, so they would need to be raised systems.  Ch. Miller said it is required to have state subdivision approval applied for, Mr. Dill said they had not yet applied pending the outcome of the subdivision. 

                Suzanne Steisel asked about an old swale from Wentworth Rd. existing before the Heyendenreich house was built.  The swale was dug out during the construction of the new house causing $7000.00 in

Walpole Planning Board Minutes  5/8/07 page 4

damages to her pond.  She said the amount of water running through the dug out swale has caused her trees to fall down.  She submitted photos indeed showing clumps of fallen trees.  She asks the planning board to take into account her property lies below and in line with the area to be developed.  She wants the Board to ask that all water drained from the lots or road be directed through lot 13 or to the swale, however it must travel through by culvert to avoid further damage to her property.  She said previous construction has caused substantial damage to her property and her trees to fall.  Mr. Dill said many trees had come down around town lately.  She reiterated having the Board review the drainage situation.  She said the swale had become overgrown so the water was disbursed at a gradual rate.  Once it had been cleared it funneled a much higher volume onto her property.  She wants a guarantee they will not add to the water volume draining into the old swale.  She asked the town or developer provide adequate drainage by using culverts where needed. 

                Bob Anderson asked if the road could be kept dirt.  He said as the lots are sold it could be disclosed the road would forever remain unpaved.  He and others agreed the drainage should be addressed but preferred it to remain a dirt road.  Mr. Bogar said he thought paving the road was a disservice to persons presently using the road.  Mr. Terrell said they had basically put 4 inches of regrind on the road because it is easier to maintain.  A dirt road costs less but is harder to maintain.  If left dirt he would still like to see it improved because of the amount of traffic.  He suggested a base of 4 inches of gravel, fabric and proper ditching.  He said asphalt would be easier to maintain.  Krystyna Marcom asked if the property lines would change due to widening the road.  Mr. Terrell said only a foot or two where needed.  Ch. Miller said it would need to meet the Class V road standards.  Mr. Terrell said 20 foot width would require a substantial amount of tree removal, he thought with the amount of proposed traffic 18 ft. would be adequate.  Ms. Marcom asked about the traffic standard.  Mr. Terrell said for the type of development it is figured at 10 trips per day per lot, so 120 trips per day still considered minor.  No paving is required until 400 trips per day.

                Mr. Bob Miller said having driven Hooper Rd. as of yesterday he could not see any spot where two cars could pass at the same time.  He said as he drove onto the road from Old Keene Rd. the map looks a lot cleaner than the actual curve of the road or the grade.  An audience member agreed saying the road as shown looks wider than Wentworth Rd.

                Mr. Gordon asked if the road could be taken over as a private road run by an association, make it a dead end.  Mr. Dill said he hadn’t thought about that.  Ch. Miller said it wasn’t allowed to have a dead end or private road greater than 600 ft.

                Ms. Steisel asked again if the Board would consider carefully her concerns on the drainage and the swale funneling water in and onto her property.  Ch. Miller said the final plans would if the Board agrees, show water run-off and erosion and a water study to make certain the impact would be minimal.  He said he was surprised she had not spoken to the town before about her problems.  She said she has but with no results.  Mr. Dill said she had talked to everyone several times; it hasn’t been for lack of talking. 

Mr. Dill asked if he could rehash from the prior meeting where a person who used to work for the road crew spoke about the road, how he had been the one to build it and was quite critical of the process.  He said there was further discussion on the regrind etc.  He points out it is a town maintained road with some potholes as some other town roads have.  He said with the present amount of traffic on it, it certainly hasn’t been a priority.  But in the past when it has needed attention it’s gotten it.  He said the comment about cars not being able to pass is not true, it isn’t a wide road but it is passable without having to pull in a driveway to let someone by, it’s a country road, he agrees with Bob Miller a person must use caution coming in from Old Keene Rd.  He said as far as the expense to maintain a dirt road vs. macadam, some towns feel it’s less for a dirt road.

Ms. Steisel asked about school children waiting for the bus on the road.  Mr. Dill thought the bus wouldn’t likely travel Hooper Rd.  Ms. Steisel raised more concern for children walking to a school bus on a narrow barely passable road.  Ch. Miller called for other questions.

Mrs. Jill Dance abutter thought the proposal was inappropriate for the area, sighting the restrictions placed on their Farm resulting from the neighborhood opposition regarding an occasional 23 cars on the road, she thought it was unfair.  In addition the proposal has septic, well, road, drainage, safety and traffic issues.  She thought homework should have been done prior to the purchase of the property rather than forcing a square peg into a round hole.  She doesn’t understand how a project can be approved with so many serious issues.  She said she isn’t against development, but maybe this isn’t the spot for a project of this density.

Walpole Planning Board Minutes 5/8/07 page 5

Ken Walsh asked about the road and snow removal issues, he thought Hooper Road served to offer an important cut through during plowing, he wondered if it would still be allowed once homes are built?

Sue Bingaman asked about the lots showing the wetlands, asking if it were infact buildable?  Mr. Dill said they are, the engineer said there is room to build.  He said there are a couple of ponds and just recently two mallard ducks flew in.  He said they dry up in the summer but they could be reclaimed if someone wanted to.          

Leo Carignan asked about the perk tests, he said two lots were still un-perked.  Mr. Dill said they wouldn’t perk, but the State permitting process would address it.  Ch. Miller agreed noting any subdivision lots less than 5 acres would require State subdivision approval prior to the approval of the subdivision.  He said it would be a very expensive system.  Mr. Dill said when they designed the subdivision they tried to abide by every rule of the town regarding lot sizes, frontages etc.  He said the plan conforms to all the rules of the town and just because some don’t want any others to move into town it is not a reason to deny the plan, it meets all the criteria.  He stressed that there are some water issues but overall it is conforming.  He said its not as if the plan has driveways coming from every road with just four on Hooper Rd.  He said as Sheldon brought up would the town rather see that or rather see the development contained within the access of Hooper Rd. only?  He said it’s a town road and dismissed the complaint about its construction noting other roads in town and particularly the Old Drewsville Road similarities.  He said he thinks the proposal meets the criteria better in a lot of ways and is a good situation.

Ms. Steisel asked if he or the town would be paying for any environmental impacts occurring from the construction phase such as damages from blasting and water issues.  Mr. Dill asked if she was implying he should have an impact study done on the project when someone else not bordering on her property wouldn’t be required to?  She answered no but she is expressly concerned by her personal experience relating to one simple change in the swale and its impact.  She said the proposal has the potential of creating a much larger impact and it is not fair for the surrounding property owner’s to suffer damages from this high impact proposal.  She suggested some type of study to insure against potential damages.  Mr. Dill said the problem with studies often times is people’s minds are already made up their minds; it just costs the developer to spend more money.

Mr. Gordon asked about lot 13 not showing a well or septic and what is its access.  Mr. Dill said lots over 5 acres are not required to be perked, it is accessed across a 50 ft. ROW across lots 10, 11, 12.  He said it does have frontage on Wentworth Rd. but because it is more buildable near the other lots, it make sense to have access over the ROW off Hooper Rd.  Mrs. Krystyna Marcom confirmed the State subdivision approval had not yet been obtained

Ch. Miller called for more questions.  Mr. Daviss asked if the plan were approved as is, wells dry up or there is no water, would the town or Board be liable?  Ch. Miller said he didn’t think so.  Mr. Dill said the town wouldn’t have the liability but a court of law would determine whether he would be liable. 

Mr. Bob Miller asked to get a legal opinion regarding the water issue.  Mr. Merklein said it is the absolute obligation of the Board to look at perceived events such as drainage or well water going dry, these questions are serious, he suggests a geological study.  An audience member asked who is responsible for upgrading the road?   It shouldn’t be the taxpayers.  Mr. Miller said he couldn’t say definitively at this time.

Ms. Aslinger pointed out that while the well locations are shown, they are not necessarily the exact sites, some lots look as if they have few or no alternative sites, leading to future problems if more than one well is required.  Mr. Dill said once the house is located then they readjust the layout to take into account the required setbacks from the well and septic system and abutting properties. 

Ch. Miller suggested continuing the public hearing to take into account new information or changes resulting from this meeting.  He said it is important to address the issues raised on the water and road.  Hearing no objections he announced continuance of the public hearing until the June 12, 2006 meeting and reopened the meeting.  (A large number of attendees left the meeting although the Chairman announced the Board would discuss the proposal later in the meeting.)

VI.           New Business

                A.  Cindy Westover presented a tax map showing a proposed 2 lot subdivision on Walpole Valley Rd.  Purpose is to divide about 2 acres from the lot for her son to build a home.  Her surveyor has not yet completed the plan and does not have the application prepared.  She’s talked to Jim Terrell about the driveway.  Sec. Aslinger noted the usual procedure is to have the complete application submitted at the

Walpole Planning Board Minutes 5/8/07 page 6

meeting, but if the Board agrees, she can accept the application materials by the actual deadline of May 28, 2007 and process it for a public hearing for the June 12, 2007 meeting.  Ch. Miller called for a motion to process the application and schedule the public hearing providing the deadlines are met for the June 12, 2007 meeting, seconded, motion carried.

                B.  Joe DiBernardo presented a plan and application materials for Robert Hubbard on Reservoir Rd.  The Board requested Mr. DiBernardo to submit clarified plans noting the way the lots were shown was confusing.  He will submit the corrected plans by the May 28, 2007 deadline.  He stated the lot is being kept in the family.  A motion to process the application and schedule the public hearing for the June 12, 2007 meeting was made and seconded.   Motion carried.

                C.  Mary McMahon, Mr. DiBernardo presented a plan and application materials for a minor 2 lot subdivision on Whipple Hill Rd.  He showed where the Class V and VI designation was clarified allowing for adequate frontage on Class V for both lots.  A motion to process the application and schedule the public hearing for the June 12, 2007 meeting was made and seconded.  Motion carried.

                D.  Red Smith/Walpole Foundation - Sec. Aslinger presented a site plan review application given to her by Mr. Smith for the brick house formerly Westburg property next to Murray’s Restaurant.  They are planning 5 apartments and office space.  The architectural plans show the apartments, townhouses and office space, parking lot layout etc.  She asked Mr. Smith if they had acquired the former manufacturing building in back of the property, they have not but are in the negotiating process.  The plan is to remove the buildings and create extra parking space.  She asked if the townhouses would be sold, Mr. Smith all space would be rented only.  It is in the commercial district.  A motion to process the application and schedule the public hearing for the June 12, 2007 meeting was made and seconded.  Motion carried.

VII.         Old Business

                A.  North Walpole Village Commissioners - 2004 Site Plan Compliance.  Barbra O’Brien Commissioner acknowledged the concerns of the Board regarding the April 27, 2007 letter (attached) In regards to the Board’s conditional approval of June 8, 2004 for a 130,000 gallon water reservoir and 14 x 14 foot filtration building located on Mountain View Rd., Map 29, Lot 22.  Abutter Mrs. Anne Hill asked to have the Planning Board address two issues that remain unresolved for drainage and noise.  Ms. O’Brien listed the dates and results of various visits to the site to resolve the issues.  She stated the Commissioners would not have signed off on the original plans if they had known the drainage was not addressed and stated Mrs. Hill’s comments to the contractor were never taken into account, there is no way to go back to have it repaired by the contractor.  She and other agree the pipe was not low enough to stop the seasonal back up and flow.  She said they would fix the problem as soon as there is money in the budget to do it.  As far as the noise, Bob McCormick and others have determined the noise is no greater than the sound of a furnace going on, but have attempted to find a muffler attachment to help eliminate most of the noise and again will need to wait until there is money in the budget to address it.  She noted the trains are more of a distraction.  She added they have discussed this issue at several of their meetings.  Mrs. Hill appreciated the effort of the Planning Board and the commissioners but she is very concerned with the delay and with the diversion of the water during runoff creates standing water in her back yard and it would be taken care of, but it hasn’t.  She said she and the Durling’s wanted to support the filtration project to remove radon but thought the noise condition would be addressed.  She agrees it isn’t much louder than a car idling but it is a constant noise she finds very disturbing, especially during the months when window can be opened.  Again she stressed that the issue was to be addressed and hasn’t been.  She agreed the trains create noise but not continuously.  She asked if the filtration could be put on a timer to run during the late night hours.  She said it is hard to enjoy her back yard with the constant noise from the plant.  She said she wants the drainage resolved so it doesn’t leave standing water.  She said because the drainage wasn’t done properly is not her fault. 

Ch. Miller asked if the drainage system ever worked properly, Mrs. Hill said it did not but having only owned the property for 8 years she was not certain if the existing culvert now diverting excess water into the ditch had ever worked.  Ch. Miller said he remembered the site visit to address screening and the standing water.  She wants the improvement and has offered to allow some of her own property to used to have it corrected.  Ms. O’Brien thought she should have come to them sooner so they could have had the contractor make the repair instead of now when they haven’t been able to include it in their work schedule or budget.  Mrs. Hill said she had not approached the issue due to having a baby and family commitments.

Walpole Planning Board Minutes 5/8/07 page 7

She thought it would have been taken care of by now.  Ch. Miller said the Board physically looked at the project, discussed it with the Commissioners and made it clear the conditions would be met, but they haven’t been.  He thought it was reasonable to set a timeframe regardless of the design and expenditure.  He asked if it could be resolved or bring more information back the Board by the July meeting.  He thought the Commissioners should abide by the conditions of the original approval and as soon as possible.  He said it was to be addressed, if the Commissioners prefer to hold another site plan review to get it resolved this would be an option.  He said he is flabbergasted that it has not been addressed because at the time of approval everyone was in agreement with the steps to be taken.  Ms. O’Brien asked what would happen if the costs become so great they have to put it off until next year?  Ch. Miller said it should be fixed and a course of action determined so the water doesn’t collect as agreed.  Mrs. Hill noted that a week prior electrical poles had been delivered were placed within the standing water, she notified National Grid when she saw oils leaking into the water, they removed them and cleaned up the leaking oils.  Ms. O’Brien said they will have an estimate and idea of how to make the repair in time for the next Board meeting and will either attend or forward the information after being directed to do so by Ch. Miller.

VIII.                Communications and Miscellaneous

                A.  Handouts - Sec. Aslinger gave members copies of the SPR revision, Contact List and Legal Memo of 4/26/07.  She asked if the Board would like to go through the revocation process on a 1991 Site Plan Review located within the North Meadow Plaza Shopping Center as mentioned in the Legal Memo.  She said as indicated the Municipal Attorney strongly suggested revoking the obviously invalid expired approval (beyond the statutory time limits) not to let it be assumed.  She said abutters would be notified at the expense of the Board, she would determine the procedure and stressed the importance of formally revoking the approval to avoid future misunderstandings.  She mentioned when reviewing the commercial area to determine ownership issues she ran across the plans.  Mr. DeCoste, Mr. Dill and others thought it was an unnecessary expense and effort on something so outdated and were afraid it would stir up problems.  Ch. Miller thought it would not be challenged at such a late date.  Ms. Aslinger said she was concerned and found it surprising to see an approval for over 16 additional connected and separate stores on one lot.  She provided the map showing the plans, the lot in question being between the old Ames building and Fall Mountain, the lot houses the Reel to Reel video store.  She said it was a substantial proposal but certainly beyond the time limit outlined in the RSA’s and site plan review regs, noting there had been several zoning changes granted since the approval was granted so it no longer conforms to the zoning.  She said the provision allowed in the RSA’s to revoke an approval could apply if the Board agrees.   Mr. Daviss asked if the State law already provides for revocation.  Ms. Aslinger said yes but there is an actual process to be followed or take a chance it would not be pursued.  Mr. Daviss asked about the costs, Ms. Aslinger said all abutters and property owners would be notified by certified mail and a notice published in the paper, she didn’t think it was a substantial amount.  Ch. Miller said he didn’t think it was necessary; Ms. Aslinger disagreed.   Shane O’Keefe asked couldn’t the Board just refer to the RSA’s showing it was out of date, if they didn’t like the Board’s decision they could go through the appeal process?  Ms. Aslinger said if the Board takes a formal action the abutters and owners must be notified ahead.  She said it couldn’t just be done at a meeting without proper notice.  There is no pubic hearing.  Mr. Fletcher said everyone on the Planning Board knows it isn’t valid.  Ms. Aslinger said she thought the current property owner (Berkshire) must be aware of the approval.  Mr. DeCoste asked if on a subdivision if it is never acted on isn’t it moot?  Ms. Aslinger said a subdivision is valid only when it has been recorded, but on a site plan review since the plans are not recorded they fall under the time line restrictions.  Mrs. Judy Daniels present in the audience had express knowledge that the property was sold to Berkshire with the approved plans.  Ms. Aslinger said without asking Berkshire directly, do they realize it is an expired plan?  She said it is only fair to the present property owner to go through the revocation process and not wait for them to come in with a proposal based on an expired approval.  Mr. Bob Miller agreed with the municipal lawyer’s recommendation to go through the revocation.  Mr. DeCoste asked how to proceed, would the Board take an action, make a statement?  Answer was yes, but not without notifying property owners and abutters.  Ch. Miller thought common sense would prove the plan had expired.  Ms. Aslinger said if she were a property owner and had bought it thinking it was an approved plan, she’d start working on it as such.  Ch. Miller suggested going through the process.  Mr. Bob Miller moved to go through the revocation process on the site plan review approved in 1991 in question.  Motion was seconded and carried unanimously.  Ch. Miller instructed Sec. Aslinger to review the procedure and process the revocation for the June 12,

Walpole Planning Board Minutes 5/8/07 page 8

2007 meeting.  Mr. Fletcher commented that the 1991 plan might not fit in with their intended plans anyway.

Continued review of D & D LLC - 12 lot subdivision.  Ch. Miller reminded the public hearing was continued and asked for the Board to comment.  He suggested in order to address the issues from the public hearing, he would like to involve the SW Regional Planning Commission by having them review the plans and make comments and suggestions.  Mr. Charles Miller asked for exact clarification of how much land the town owns along Hooper Rd., specifically the width, he questioned if the actual road could have been privately owned and deeded to the town; there may be some question as to how much and if the road is owned by the town.  Ch. Miller asked Charles Miller to look into the clarification and noted it was a good point, members agreed.  Mr. Dill did not think he bought the Hooper Rd.  Charles Miller thought it might be similar to the railroad beds.  Shane O’Keefe asked if there was a precedent set whereby a developer upgrades a Class V road.  Charles Miller said the sub regs have set standards for Class V road, the problem being Hooper Rd. is adequate for the amount of existing houses, with the newly proposed 12 lots, the road becomes inadequate for the amount of traffic and homes planned.  He said as far as who pays for it is up to the Board through its review process.  Mr. Dill said a precedent had been set by the amount of traffic generated by the Apple Orchard development and its impact on Wentworth Rd., they have not had to pay to upgrade the road or fix the narrow bridge.  He asks why the Apple Orchard is not paying to upgrade the “red star” bridge?  Selectman Miller said a red star bridge is being taken over and upgraded by the State, the Selectmen approve and the town is reimbursed.  He said there are two bridges red starred at this time although it takes a long time to be completed.  Mr. Dill asks if they pay for the road, can they put more lots in there.  Ch. Miller said not without meeting the frontage requirements.  Ms. Aslinger asked why they don’t put in half the lots.  She said by reducing the lots, they would be reducing the amount of traffic on the road to a reasonable level, double the size lots would be “as desirable” as a purchaser, it wouldn’t effect the surrounding area as much, the septics and wells would be less of an impact.  She said she thought the plans show excessive density on a relatively small 40 acre parcel, on a marginal road.  If it were only 6 lots it would be in keeping with the surrounding homes with a large buffer between them.  She thought the density was excessive.  Mr. Dill said much of the opposition to the project involves the surrounding property owners not wanting to loose their own private preserve for recreation and even deer hunting.  He thought the well and road issues were not the real issues.  Mr. DeCoste asked if the Board decides the subdivision puts pressure on the road could we require the developer to do something about it?  Ch. Miller said his feeling this was a situation that the town hasn’t faced but under the general requirements for subdivision L.  it asks for specific criteria related to the road.  Mr. Dill said it was for new roads only.  Ch. Miller disagreed pointing out while it is a Class V road it is not up to standard for 12 house lots and the impact they will have on the road, therefore the developer must pay to bring it up to town standard since the project solely benefits the developer.  He said the road safety is questionable.  Mr. Dill and Mrs. Daniels compared Hooper Rd. to Old Drewsville Road, but Ch. Miller disagreed, the development has been very gradual and the road maintained as needed.  Shane O’Keefe asked about procedures and was concerned the public hearing had been opened up again; he cautioned the discussion should be amongst the Board members only.  Ch. Miller agreed.  Mr. Fletcher said the Old Drewsville Rd. would be upgraded when the town decides to upgrade it, not when it is under pressure from a developer.  Ch. Miller noted the town does have a Capital Improvements plan so may require impact fees.  Selectmen Miller noted the Road Agent is somewhat responsible for added development, because he has the most say in how the roads are maintained and improved.  He said he is not as concerned about the water or whether the purchaser has water, it’s their gamble.  He feels the Board has a responsibility to protect the water of the abutting property owner first.  He said the courts might require the town to provide water to any abutting property owner who looses their water because of the subdivisions pressure on the water supply.  He hopes if the plan is approved and water is obtained, he does not want to see the abutter’s water taken away because of it.  Mr. O’Keefe asked if it was an obligation on the town, he thought it would be more likely the developer would be liable.  Selectmen Miller thought it was worth clarifying.  Mr. Merklein asked if the problems of water and drainage might be addressed through an engineered hydro-geological study paid for by the developer?  Ch. Miller said one of the reasons to continue the Public Hearing is to gather further information; raised at the public hearing, he thought the Board would need to look into the issues by way of certain specific studies.  Mr. Dill said there is no drainage problem within the subdivision, only Ms. Steisel’s concerns about her own property. Mr. O’Keefe said the plans do not show drainage so how can the Board tell?   Ch. Miller

Walpole Planning Board Minutes 5/8/07 page 9

said he wants to avoid the problem Ms. Steisel had when the new house was built next to her and has impacted her property.  The subdivision has the same potential to effect surrounding properties and abutters in the same way.  

Mr. Daviss asked how the Board could gather the information and how to proceed.  Sec. Aslinger said the plans would go to SWRPC, they do a full review and make suggestions to the Board, they charge an hourly rate that can be billed to the developer.  Mr. O’Keefe asked if they would do a site visit.  Mr. Daviss asked if a copy of the minutes and previous minutes be included.  Bob Miller asked if the issue of water rights could be addressed in their review. 

Mr. O’Keefe expressed his concern over the prior meeting where a former road crew person discussed the known inadequacies of the road maintenance.  Ch. Miller said there weren’t doing substandard work to the road but in fact improving it from what it has been, basically because it has so little use.  Mr. Dill questioned the spokesman’s authority when he was a grader operator 20 years ago; he’s not the road agent for the town.  Ch. Miller said the quality of the road needs major improvement, from tree cutting and ditching to surfacing and to address the safety.  He said it should not be upgraded at the expense of the town; it cannot be compared to Old Drewsville Rd. or Wentworth Rd.  He said it is a one shot development only benefiting the developer.  Mr. Bob Miller said Hooper Rd. must not be compared to Wentworth Rd.; they are two different qualities of roads.  Ch. Miller said it was more of a gradual succession of development not a major impact all at once like the D&D proposal.  Mr. Dill said the 12 new lots would generate a minimum of $500,000 value in taxes so it would be returned in taxes for the Town to upgrade the road, he said they are entitled to something.  Ch. Miller said yes they are entitled to something, a road that Mr. Dill will pay to upgrade. 

Ch. Miller will call SWRPC and submit the plans for review along with the minutes.  Mr. Dill said the Board should be careful not to try and guarantee people water, that it isn’t the responsibility of the Board.  Ch. Miller said it is not a matter of guaranteeing water but the impact the subdivision has on the abutters and water availability for the area that counts.  Mr. Daviss said to ask for the study to determine water available, more of an impact than a guarantee.  Mr. Dill still thinks it is buyer beware on the water.  Ch. Miller cautioned and referred to the plan Mrs. Westover submitted noting the small spaghetti lots that were created, at the time the issue was over long small lots what was the impact on septic, wells and runoff because of their size and configuration on a relatively small original parcel, it has been a concern in the past. 

Ms. Aslinger asked members to review the general standards portion of the sub regs noting under G. Characteristics of land for subdivision, it points out many of the areas discussed and requires the Board to take into account danger to the public, health or safety or to the environment.  She read on showing land with inadequate drainage, sewer or water should not be subdivided.  She noted Mr. Dill had not submitted the plans for State subdivision approval, saying normally a developer would at least have applied prior to submitting the application to try to have the state approval to coincide with the Boards final action.  She said otherwise the Board would have to grant a conditional approval.  Mr. Dill thought the Board would just do a conditional approval because they aren’t certain the plans will remain exactly as shown possibly due to some driveway and access re-locations.  She asked if they are uncertain about the plans did he wish to withdraw the plans and resubmit at a later time?  He said no, it is the best plan; they would start over if the Board disapproves the plan or if they needed to make substantial changes.  Ms. Aslinger asked the Board to act quickly in fairness to Mr. Dill on the plan, get it to SWRPC, get there review and be mindful of the time limitation of 60 days from acceptance, not to drag it out with costly studies and information gathering, to be certain the review can continue at the next meeting along with continued public input and to get on with the process.  She said one of the SW Reg. planners will compare the plans to our own regulations; make suggestions for various studies and recommendations to the Board.  The Board will decide how to proceed.  They will not indicate how whether the Board should approve or disapprove a plan.  She said it is somewhat hard for the Planning Board to review a project of this size and handle all of the other monthly obligations; they will be better focused on it.  Mr. Dill asked if the plan was accepted at the prior meeting, answer was no, abutters must be notified before the plan is accepted and the hearing held, continuing the public hearing saves having to re-notifying abutters.  The plans will be submitted early next week once the minutes are completed.  Mr. Merklein asked if the report could be circulated to the Board prior to the June meeting. 

Walpole Planning Board Minutes page 10

B.  Work Session - Mr. Daviss asked if the work session for May was being held.  Sec. Aslinger said she had discussed with Ch. Miller the possibility of canceling the work sessions for the summer months and to take up the Master Plan Update at the regular meetings to allow for people to enjoy the summer.  Mr. Daviss asked to hold the May work session. 

He asked if the Conservation Commission attendees would speak about their meeting earlier in the week regarding the Monadnock Conservancy.  Mary Lou Montgomery said they discussed the possibility of improving the mapping through a new pilot project.  They are not certain Walpole is eligible yet but offers it as a possibility.  Mr.Schupack said the intent is to do a survey of the town and rank all the different conservation areas and types by value in the town and put that information on a GIS map they would like to see it coordinated with the Planning Boards land use mapping, it could be used as a tool by all Boards and used with overlays.  Mary Lou said this is an expansion and result of the newly created conservation plan.

Work session to be held May 22, 2007 at 7:00 PM in the basement office.    

Meeting was adjourned at 10:30pm

Cc:  file, PB, ZBA, MPU, BOS, Road Agent

Posted:  Town Hall, Lobby, Burdick’s Market, www.walpolenh.us, www.the walpolean.com   

 

 

Cruise Night At The Real Twist

The Real Twist Ice Cream stand in Walpole, NH will hold its first Classic Car Cruise Night of the season on Sunday, May 20 from 6-9 p.m. It’s a chance for the whole family to enjoy a Sunday evening looking at old and antique cars, while enjoying pizza, hot dogs and ice cream. There will be live music by Vinnie Dibernardo. Anyone who brings his classic car to show will get a free regular sized sundae. Everyone visiting can get free jimmies, diptop or flavorburst with any cup or cone. And you can enter the drawing for free Pizza, ice cream or DVD’s!

     The Real Twist is located next to Real to Reel Video at the North Meadow Plaza in Walpole. It is open noon – 9PM, seven days a week. Enjoy your ice cream outside, in the lovely garden, or under the porch.

      Future  2007 Season Cruise Nights are scheduled for  June 17^th, July 15^th, August 12th and September 2nd. See you there!

Ed. Note: Here are minutes of the May 3 hearing on Berkshire Development's rehearing appeal of the March 13 town meeting vote changing the language of the zoning ordinance in two places from "establishment" to "building" AND minutes of the May 3 Selectmen's meeting that followed.  Important stuff! BTW, Berkshire, which the Selectmen turned down on its petition to have the March vote thrown out, has until June 3 to file an appeal of the ruling to the Superior Court.  CCB

TOWN OF WALPOLE

BOARD OF SELECTMEN

PUBLIC HEARING

MAY 3, 2007

Selectmen Present:            Charles Miller, Sheldon Sawyer, Whitney Aldrich

RE-HEARING ON MOTION: 

Ernie Vose, Moderator, called the Public Hearing to order at 7:15 P.M. in the Town Hall.

Mr. Vose advised that the Selectmen called this Public Hearing for a Rehearing on Article 3 of the March 13, 2007, Town Meeting, on May 03, 2007, at 7:00 PM at the Town Hall.

ARTICLE 3:  Are You in favor of the adoption of Amendment #2, as proposed by the Planning Board for the Walpole Zoning Ordinance as follows:  “To amend Article VI Commercial District, Section B.  Uses Permitted 3.  “Shops, restaurants, and other retail establishments not exceeding 40,000 square feet in gross floor area.”  And Article VIII Rural Agricultural District, Section C.  Special Exceptions: (g) “No retail commercial establishments shall be permitted which exceeds 40,000 square feet in gross floor area.”  By replacing the words “establishments” with “buildings”. 

The motion for rehearing references RSA 677:2, and Attorney Hanna has correctly requested that the Board of Selectmen consider the motion.  Mr. Vose explained that this is not a Public Hearing but rather a Rehearing.  Mr. Aldrich said that the public is allowed to be here but the Local Government Center advised that:  “This is not an opportunity for affected persons to renew debate about the underlying issue, nor is it a public hearing where members of the public could provide input and opinion on the issue.  There is no requirement that the selectmen allow anyone to speak, or that they take any additional information before making a decision.”

Mr. Sawyer noted that the Board of Selectmen sought legal counsel from the Local Government Center and they are prepared for this Hearing.  Mr. Aldrich advised that they have two choices “yes” or “no”.

Attorney Thomas Hanna represents Berkshire who owns property on both sides of the existing shopping center.  He is at this meeting to convince the Board of Selectmen to call a special Town Meeting to segment Article 3 into two parts.  It is not a question of clarity but of not being allowed to vote on a disparate issue.  There should be a vote for the Rural Agricultural District and a different vote for the Commercial District.  He expects this hearing to be one of fairness and process and not the merits. 

Attorney Thomas Hanna distributed copies of a memorandum “In Support of Motion for Rehearing”, dated May 3, 2007, to the Board of Selectmen and read portions of that document.

“There is a huge difference between Walpole’s Commercial District – which covers a relatively limited area – and the Rural Agricultural District which covers most of the Town.  It goes without saying that a discriminating voter would likely choose to have more intense commercial activities in the Commercial District than in the Rural Agricultural District. 

Article 3 on the 2007 Town Warrant deprived voters of the opportunity to discriminate between activities in disparate zoning districts.

Board of Selectmen Meeting – May 3, 2007 – Page 2

We ask the Selectmen to remedy this unfairness by calling a special Town Meeting so that there can be a separate vote on the two distinct policy issues which were commingled in Article 3.

Walpole voters were disadvantaged when they cast their votes on Article 3, because they were denied the opportunity to vote separately on the amendment for each of the affected zoning districts.  Votes may have considered a 40,000 square foot limitation on retail buildings in the Rural Agricultural District to be in the best interest of the Town, while simultaneously not wanting to limit retail buildings to 40,000 square feet in the Commercial District.  Voters at the 2007 Town Meeting had no such choice.  Those in favor of limiting retail “buildings” in the Rural Agricultural District to 40,000 square feet could only do so by also limiting retail buildings in the Commercial District.

The primary purpose of establishing different zoning districts is to allow municipalities the opportunity to create different regulations for different areas of the municipality.  RSA 674:20 governs zoning districts.  It states:

‘RSA 674:20 Districts. – In order to accomplish any or all of the purposes of a zoning ordinance enumerated under RSA 674:17, the local legislative body may regulate and restrict the erection, construction, reconstruction, alternation, repair, or use of buildings, structures, or land within each district which it creates.  All regulations shall be uniform for each class or kind of buildings throughout each district, but the regulations in one district may differ from those in other districts.’

The local legislative body that voted on Article 3 at the 2007 Town Meeting was deprived of the right to adopt a regulation in one district that was different from the regulation in another district, because Article 3 unreasonably and unfairly presented two separate zoning amendments in one warrant article.

At its meeting on June 13, 2006, the Planning Board recognized that the 40,000 square foot limitation could apply in one district and not another.  When discussing the adoption of a resolution “that it is the understanding of this Planning Board that no single retail building shall encompass more than 40,000 square feet.”  Mr. Sawyer “asked if it was just in the commercial zone, answer was yes.”  (See June 13, 2006 Planning Board minutes.)

The vast difference between the purposes of the Commercial District and the purposes of the Rural Agricultural District is demonstrated by the preambles at the beginning of Article VI and Article VIII, respectively, of the zoning ordinance:

Article VI, “Commercial District”

1. Preamble

The purpose for establishing a Commercial District is to provide within the Town ample area in which business and the sale of merchandise can be conducted with its inherent traffic, loading, parking, and activity normally unpleasant in close proximity to restful and comfortable residences.

Article VIII “Rural / Agricultural District”

1. Preamble

The purpose for establishing a Rural/Agricultural District is to provide ample area for pursuit of agriculture including, but not limited to: dairy farming, poultry raising and timber harvest. 

Board of Selectmen Meeting – May 3, 2007 – Page 3

Within this district in Walpole, it is expected that residential living will be enjoyed on what were once farms of large acreage, with or without leasage of some of the land for tillage and the usual agricultural pursuits.  The Planning Board recognizes that there may be fewer active farm units in the Town in the future, but probably these will use more land by lease or other arrangement.  It may be that in the future, amendment to this Ordinance may be needed to increase the Residential District along certain highways, yet retaining the arable land set back from those highways for this Rural/Agricultural District.

The Protest Petition Statute Further Demonstrates Why Amendments in Article 3 Should Be Voted on Separately:  New Hampshire law providing for protest petitions – which, if properly filed, requires a two-thirds majority vote – further demonstrates why Article 3 unreasonably combined amendments affecting two zoning districts.  One amendment in Article 3, the portion affecting the Commercial District, could legally be protested under NHRSA 675:5.  On the other hand, the amendment in Article 3 relating to the Rural Agricultural District could not be legally protested, because the Rural Agricultural District encompasses more than one-third of the land area within the municipality.  RSA 675:5, I-b.

Article 3 Was Not Merely A Housekeeping Change:  Amendment #2, which became Article 3 on the 2007 Town Warrant, was presented by the Planning Board as being a clarification of the meaning of the word “establishments” as used in the existing language of the zoning ordinance.  In fact, the changing of the word “establishments” to the word “buildings” was a substantive amendment, not mere clarification.

When a citizen’s group and the Planning Board originally proposed a 40,000 square foot limitation (adopted at the 2000 Town Meeting), they discussed whether to use the word “establishments” or the word “buildings.”  The draftsmen of the original limitation decided to use the word “establishments” rather than “buildings” because this accomplished their objective (stopping a “big box” retail store) and because they did not want to cause the existing shopping center on Route 12 to become non-conforming under the zoning ordinance.  See Affidavit of David M. Edkins attached hereto as Exhibit A.

The contention that the word “establishments” in the 2000 ordinance was not intended to mean “buildings” is further supported by basic rules of statutory construction.  The Planning Board in 2000 demonstrated that it knew how to use the word “buildings” if that was what was intended, because the same Board in 2000 reviewed and recommended an amendment to the zoning ordinance to add a definition of “building”.  See 2000 Town Warrant, Article 3.  Clearly then, the Board would not have used the word “establishment” in the 40,000 square foot limitation zoning amendment if it intended that “establishment” should actually mean “building”.

Article 3 Fails to Satisfy the “Single Subject” Rule: The “single-subject” rule prohibits a municipality from combining disparate changes to a zoning ordinance in a single warrant article.  Handley v. Town of Hooksett, 147 N.H. 184, 190 (2001); see also Albert v. City of Laconia, 134 N.H. 355 (1991).  (Attorney Hanna had a copy of the findings on Handley v. Town of Hooksett.  He will provide a copy of the findings on Albert v. City of Laconia to the Board of Selectmen.) 

Conclusion:  For the foregoing reasons, Warrant Article 3 and the resulting March 12, 2007 vote in favor of said article were unreasonable and illegal.

Board of Selectmen Meeting – May 3, 2007 – Page 4

Accordingly, I respectfully request that the Selectmen call a special town meeting to allow voters to vote separately on the zoning amendment affecting the Commercial District and the zoning amendment affecting the Rural Agricultural District.  At a special town meeting, the voters may vote to adopt the amendments pertaining to both zoning districts, but at least they will have the right not to.”    

There were approximately 39 people in attendance.

There being no other public comment, Mr. Vose closed the Public Rehearing at 7:46 P.M.

Mr. Aldrich moved that the Board of Selectmen stand by the Town vote of March 13th, 2007, for Article No. 3, Amendment No. 2, by a legal interpretation.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.

Mr. Sawyer noted that one thing that bothers him is that this is the only time he heard about a voter not having a choice.  He doesn’t believe that the voters meant to separate Article VI and Article VIII under Article 3. 

Romey Biron advised that right now there a lot of people here that are confused on what has been said and on the day of the vote there were some people that might have voted differently.

Attorney Robert Kasper felt that the Board of Selectmen has to talk to the Town Attorney and then make a decision.  There are two sides to this issue.  You can argue that it was logical and fair but the wording was changed and so several sections of the ordinance had to be amended.  It seems that we should do it all at once rather than piecemeal.

Vote on Motion:  Mr. Aldrich, Mr. Miller and Mr. Sawyer were in favor, the motion was approved. 

   PUBLIC BUSINESS:

RED SMITH – 1824 Washington Street Property:  Red Smith displayed sketches of the proposed restorations to the 1824 Washington Street property.  There will be some commercial space and apartments.  Mr. Smith plans to attend the next Planning Board meeting.

ANNUAL TOWN MEETING – MAY 5, 2007:  Ernie Vose reviewed the items to be voted upon during the continued Annual Town Meeting on Saturday, May 5th:  Article 6 - the Ballam Farm property and Article 22 – Cochran Road

ACCOUNTS PAYABLE:  Mr. Aldrich moved to approve the Accounts Payable check register and manifest in the amount of $539,625.33.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

The above amount includes a monthly payment of $434,569.83 to the Fall Mountain Region School District. 

Mr. Aldrich moved to approve a voided check register for check No. 050220.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

PAYROLL:  Mr. Sawyer moved to approve the payroll voucher for the week ending April 28, 2007, for gross wages in the amount of $17,459.35 or net wages in the amount of $9,788.20.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

Board of Selectmen Meeting – May 3, 2007 – Page 5

Mr. Aldrich moved to approve the electronic fund transfer for the Withholding, MEDI and FICA taxes in the amount of $4,134.78.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

Mr. Aldrich moved to approve the supplemental payroll voucher for gross wages in the amount of $115.01 or net wages in the amount of $63.06.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

Mr. Aldrich moved to approve the supplemental electronic fund transfer for the Withholding, MEDI and FICA taxes in the amount of $24.00.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

TRANSFER:  Mr. Sawyer moved to authorize Myra Mansouri, Treasurer, to transfer $500,000.00 from the MBIA to the Savings Bank of Walpole.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

Mr. Sawyer moved to authorize the Chairman to sign the withdrawal form for the above transfer.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

MINUTES –SELECTMEN’S MEETING- APRIL 26, 2007:  Mr. Sawyer moved to approve the Minutes of the public Board of Selectmen’s meeting of April 26, 2007, as printed.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

DEPARTMENT / COMMITTEE REPORTS:

The Board of Selectmen received and reviewed the minutes of the North Walpole Village Board of Commissioners meeting of May 01, 2007.

WARRANTS:

WATER AND SEWER WARRANTS – WALPOLE ONLY:  Mr. Aldrich moved to increase the Walpole Water and Sewer rates by 8% and to increase the North Walpole Sewer rate by 8%.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  Mr. Miller was opposed.  Mr. Aldrich and Mr. Sawyer were in favor, the motion was approved.

Mr. Sawyer moved to sign the Warrants for Water and Sewer as soon as they are prepared.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

BUILDING PERMITS:

FRANK PALMIERI – MAP 012-055-007:  Mr. Aldrich moved to approve Building Permit No. 2007-012 for Frank Palmieri to construct a 14’ x 16’ finished porch on Dearborn Circle.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

GEORGE AND SUSAN KERSHAW – MAP 019-046-000:  Mr. Aldrich moved to approve Building Permit No. 2007-011 for George and Susan Kershaw to construct a 12’ x 16’ deck at the rear of the house.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

OLD BUSINESS:

TKG – CONTRACT NORTH SIDE:  Mr. Sawyer moved to authorize the Chairman to sign the contract with TKG Contracting for work to be done to the north end of the Town Hall.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

MELANSON’S ROOFING – TOWN HALL ROOF:  Elaine Moore reported that Melanson’s Roofing came today to look at the Town Hall roof in the cupola area.  Some pictures were taken. 

Board of Selectmen Meeting – May 3, 2007 – Page 6

A crane will be needed to get to the cupola area to do a quick fix and to provide an estimate for work to be done in the future; the cost will be $2,500.

Mr. Sawyer moved to go ahead with this project and to have the Chairman sign the acceptance agreement.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE – COLD RIVER ROAD BRIDGE:  A letter was received from L. Robert Landry, PE and Project Manager for the Cold River Road Bridge, advising that there will be a Department of Transportation Hearing on May 15, 2007, at 11:00 am in room 112 in Concord.  The intent of this meeting is not to continue taking testimony as was done in the January 24, 2007 Public Hearing but instead the meeting serves as a decision making forum for the Hearing Commissioners.  The public may observe the proceedings, however no public testimony will be taken.

NEW BUSINESS:  

SET WORK SESSION TO REVIEW PROPERTY CARDS:  The Board of Selectmen set a Workshop Meeting for Monday, May 7th at 5:00 pm to review the property cards.

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT GRANT:  Richard Hurlburt, Emergency Management Director, requested that the Board of Selectmen sign the agreement for an Emergency Management Grant that will require matching funds.

Mr. Sawyer moved that the Chairman be authorized to sign the Emergency Management Grant document.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT FOR PUBLIC SERVICE – BELLOWS FALLS:  Mr. Sawyer moved that the Board of Selectmen sign the Mutual Aid Agreement for Public Service between the Village of Bellows Falls and Town of Walpole.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

ROYAL GLASS & SECURITY – COUNTRYSIDE LOCK AND ALARM:  Mr. Sawyer moved to change the Town Hall security from Royal Glass & Security to Countryside Lock and Alarm.  Seconded by Mr. Miller.  All in favor, so voted.

TOWN HALL CHAIRS AND TABLES:  Mr. Aldrich said it was brought to his attention that the Town Hall is in need of some new chairs and tables.  There was discussion relative to having 6-foot tables so they will fit in the elevator.  There was a consensus to explore costs.

HEALTH INSURANCE:  The Board of Selectmen discussed an issue involving a duplication of health insurance for an employee and his spouse.  Before making a decision the Board of Selectmen will request a copy of the spouse’s Personnel Policy.

TRANSFER STATION:  A memo from Rick Cooper pertaining to employees was received and reviewed.        

PUBLIC BUSINESS (Continued):

DAVID BEAUDREAU:  Mr. Beaudreau purchased the property at 24 North River Road.  It is in the process of being cleaned-up.  He is working with the Fire Chief so some fire training can be done on the property until June 3rd.  He discussed his plans to re-build.     

Board of Selectmen Meeting – May 3, 2007 – Page 7

LETTERS TO SIGN:

BARKLEY BULL:  Mr. Sawyer moved to sign the letter to Barkley Bull regarding the Town Common.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.      

 Mr. Sawyer moved to adjourn the Board of Selectmen’s meeting and to enter into a Trustees of Hooper Trust meeting. Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.  The time was 10:24 pm. 

TRUSTEES OF HOOPER TRUST

Dead Trees:  A request was received from the Hooper Trust to take down some dead trees.  There was a consensus of the Board of Selectmen to do a site visit after the leaves come out before making a decision.

Approve Bills: 

Mr. Aldrich moved to approve payment of the bill from Brendan Honey in the amount of $5,854.18 for work done on the Hooper Mansion.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

Mr. Aldrich moved to approve payment of the bill from E.E. Houghton Company in the amount of $410.24 for work done at the Hooper Institute.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

Mr. Aldrich moved to approve payment of the bill from E.E. Houghton Company in the amount of $103.00 for work done at the Hooper Mansion.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

Mr. Aldrich moved to approve having the security for the three Town facilities – Town Hall, Hooper Mansion and Hooper Institute - changed over to Countryside Lock and Alarm as soon as contracts are received.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

Mr. Sawyer moved to adjourn the Trustees of Hooper Trust meeting.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.  The time was 10:36 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Regina Borden, Recording Secretary

Ed. Note: Judy Shumway has asked me to tell Walpolean readers that the Walpole Historical Society needs hosts or hostesses for its June 23 Historical Society Homes Tour? If you could do it, you would be assigned a three-hour shift from 10-1 or 1-4 greeting visitors in one of the ten homes on Saturday, June 23.  Hosts get a five dollar discount on their tour ticket. Judy says, "the only requirements are a friendly smile and one meeting prior to the tour to meet the owner of the home you will be working in and to familiarize yourself with your house. If you are interested, please phone me at 756-3664." 

4th Annual Perennial Plant and Bake Sale to Benefit Walpole Village School

 
Walpole, NH — May 15, 2007 — The Walpole Village School’s 4th Annual Plant and Bake Sale will be held this Saturday, May 19th from 9:00 am to Noon, rain or shine.  The sale will take place at the school's new location in the former Long River Gardens Building at  75 Westminster Street in  Walpole.  Directional signs will be posted in the village center. 

     The sale will feature a large selection of locally grown perennials with many unusual varieties.  Bagged composted manure, garden-related items hand-crafted by WVS students, parents, and volunteers will also be available for purchase.  Visitors will also have an opportunity to participate in a plant raffle, and pick up a variety of delectable homemade baked goods made by some of Walpole’s finest cooks including pies, quiche, baked beans, fudge, and coffee cakes. 

     Now in its fourth year, the annual plant & bake sale has become one of the school’s largest fundraisers.  Proceeds from the plant & bake sale will benefit the School’s scholarship fund.  “As our enrollment has grown in our new building, so has the need for more scholarship assistance to help families meet their childcare and early education needs,” says Justin Parrot, the school’s Director.  “Our scholarship budget has doubled for the upcoming school year, so the plant sale is a very important event for us,” he continues.  For additional information and directions, please call (603) 756-2865.

    ABOUT THE WALPOLE VILLAGE SCHOOL:  Incorporated in 1974, the Walpole Village School is a non-profit educational institution offering preschool, pre-kindergarten, and after-school enrichment programs.  Its child-centered program strives to achieve a balance between offering new experiences and incorporating students’ interests and abilities.  Built on a strong foundation of social skills, the goal of the school’s curriculum is to foster respect and compassion in a child’s decision-making processes. 

     Funding for the school’s programs comes from a combination of tuition payments, parent fundraising activities, and donations from local businesses and the public.  Tuition assistance is available.  The Walpole Village School does not discriminate on the basis of physical handicap, race, creed, color or sex in the administration of its educational policies, admissions, tuition assistance and other school programs.

Long-term readers of The Walpolean know that I have vacilated on whether to require Comments to be signed before I'll let them remain on the site.  In theory I think all Commenters should sign their names and be personally accountable for what they put into cyberspace. At the same time I favor full, responsible public discussion of all important issues, and I have generally allowed non-signed postings to stand. I still argue that a signed posting has more credibility than an unsigned posting, and I reserve the right to delete any posting that I see as a personal attack, scurrilous or defaming.  Chuck Bingaman  (And, I welcome your thoughts/suggestions on these approaches!)  Chuck Bingaman

Ed. Note: Here is the story on last week's Planning Board meeting that appeared in the Eagle Times yesterday.  CCB

5-10-07

Walpole Subdivision Plan Draws Questions

By Chuck Bingaman, Contributing Writer

          Walpole developer Fred Dill spoke to his 12-lot subdivision proposal at Tuesday’s Planning Board meeting.  And he got an earful of questions and skeptical comments from Board members, abutters and neighbors.

          Walpole D&D LLC, Dill’s development company jointly created with Walpole resident and developer Randy Daniels, proposes to carve out 12 residential lots between Old Keene Road and Wentworth Road about a mile south of the village.

 The wooded acreage is cut in two by Hooper Road, a dirt way varying from 12 to about 19 feet wide with limited ditches on either side.  The portion of the land north of Hooper Road contains several small ponds and wet areas, and much of the property on either side of Hooper appears, according to Dill, to have ledge just below the surface.  Some of the land on the south of Hooper slopes to the southeast; other portions slope toward Old Keene Road.

While Tuesday’s hearing was to focus on whether D&D’s subdivision application was compete, neighbors and abutters raised questions about sufficiency of well water in the area, possible rainwater run off issues, traffic on Hooper Rd., blasting problems, and who should pay for possible improving of Hooper Road for as many as 120 trips per day from projected new residents.

Wentworth Road resident Ken Walsh said that he had had a well run dry in the recent past, and that other nearby residents had had well water shortages. Walsh's concern was echoed by Dr. David Heydenreich, an abutter to the D&D land, who bought a new house approximately a year ago.  He said that he had had a well run dry and had to drill a second one.  Finally Old Keene Road resident Gordon Hunt said, “There’s not a lot of water in the area.  With 12 more holes in the ground there’s likely to be a problem.  What recourse,” he asked, “will abutters have if their wells run dry because of these new wells?” Mr. Dill’s response was that “I don’t have an answer to concerns about the water issues…When you drill a well, you don’t know whether you hit somebody else’s vein or close it up.  It’s not my responsibility to see that your wells keep running. This is going down the road of guaranteeing everybody everything!”

    As to Hooper Road, Planning Board chair Jeff Miller said, “it’s my opinion that the road couldn’t handle increased traffic and it would have to be upgraded.  I do not feel it’s up to the town to upgrade the road.” 

     Road Agent Jim Terrell agreed that the road would need upgrading to handle the traffic, especially for house construction traffic. “It would require a good bit of work to repair it.  It would require grinding and paving.  I’d want to lay down fabric at a minimum, widen it and put in drainage ditches.  As a rough estimate, I’d say the cost would be around $60,000.”  No decision was made about whether the road would be upgraded or who would pay for such an upgrade.

As to blasting to create septic systems, Dill said “We couldn’t dig the area, so septics would be ‘built-up’ systems.” 

Susanna Steisel, an abutter whose land was flooded in 2005 in unrelated construction on Wentworth Road, expressed concern about new rainwater runoff should additional houses be constructed abutting her land and along Wentworth Road as shown on Dill’s drawings.

 Jill Dance, a resident from across Wentworth Road from the proposed subdivision, asked about the safety of children from the new houses using school buses on Hooper Road where there are no sidewalks and its narrow width makes it difficult for two cars to pass.  Mr. Dill’s response was “School buses wouldn’t use Hooper road.”  And, he said, “Just because you don’t want anyone else to move into town is no reason to start waving flags.  We followed all the town rules [in our plan] and asked for no exceptions.  In fact, this plan meets the criteria better than many other situations in town.”

Mrs. Dance observed, “I think the homework should have been done before the land was bought.  We have water problems, drainage problems, traffic problems, and road problems.  Maybe this isn’t the spot!”

While several nearby residents suggested that D&D supply engineering studies on the road and hydrology studies on the availability of water for additional wells, Mr. Dill responded, “One problem is that we do these studies and nobody believes them.  You’re just spending someone’s money.”

Board chairman Miller ruled that the Board would not reach a conclusion at the meeting on the completeness of the application as “we have a couple of issues about the road and the wells.  So we should not close the public hearing and, rather, set a continuation of it at the June 11 meeting.”

                              --30--

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

           

Ed. Note: Thanks to Board Secretary Pam Aslinger, here is the agenda for the Planning Board meeting tonight. CCB

PLANNING BOARD MEETING - Tuesday, May 8, 2007 - 7:30pm Town Hall

AGENDA

I.          Open Meeting
            A.  Roll call - Designate alternates        

            B.  Approve Minutes of 4/10/07 and 4/24/07

II.            Review Applications Submitted:  Accept - Reject - Delay

A.     Charles & Sheila Lennon - Minor 2 Lot Subdivision - High St. WITHDRAWN

B.     Alyson’s Apple Orchard, Inc./Robert Jasse - Lot Line Adjustment located on Wentworth Rd., Map 5, Lot (3) 2-11 in the Rural Ag. zone. Purpose is to remove 2.83 acres annexing it to Daniel & Jeanne McAllister Lot 2-6 totaling 11.59 acres.  Lot (3) 2-11 becomes 11.10 acres “not to be developed” accessed by a 50 ft. ROW on Lot 2-9.

C.     Kimberly Bogar - Lot Line Adjustment located on 286 Old Keene Rd. Map 7, Lot 25 and 25-1 in the Rural Ag. zone.  Purpose is to reconfigure the center boundary line  creating Lot 1 of 12.1 acres and Lot 2 with the existing house of 22.2 acres.

D.     Walpole D & D, LLC/Fred Dill and Randy Daniels - Major 13 Lot Subdivision and Lot Line Adjustment located on Hooper Rd., Wentworth Rd. and Old Keene Rd. Map 8 Lots 15, 6, 16 in the Residential A (Lots 1-3) and Rural Ag. (Lots 4-13) zones.  Purpose is to create 12 new lots, 2-11 of 1.45 thru 3.34 acres and Lot 13 of 13.59 acres from a 40 acre parcel, formerly the Helff Farm.  Lot 1 and 2 involve the Lot Line Adjust-ment creating Lot 1 of 5 acres with the farmhouse and Lot 2 of 2.90 acres to allow for wetlands.  Lots 1-12 accessed on Hooper Rd., Lots 10 & 11 by a 50 ft. ROW over Lot 9.

III.       Close Meeting/Open Public Hearing on accepted applications:

            B.     Alyson’s Apple Orchard

            C.     Kimberly Bogar

            D.     Walpole D & D

IV.       Close Public Hearing/Reopen Meeting

V.         Board Action on Applications/ Approve - Disapprove - Delay

            B.     Alyson’s Apple Orchard

            C.     Kimberly Bogar

            D.     Walpole D & D

VI.       New Business        

   A.     Cindy Westover - Minor 2 Lot Subdivision on Walpole Valley Rd.

            B.     Joe DiBernardo - Minor 2 Lot Subdivision on Reservoir Rd., Robert Hubbard

            C.     Mary McMahon - Minor 2 Lot Subdivision on Whipple Hill Rd.

            D.     Other

VII.      Old Business

            A.     North Walpole Village Commissioners - 2004 Site Plan Compliance

VIII.            Communications and Miscellaneous

            A.     Handouts - SPR revision, Contact list, Legal memo 4/26/07

            B.     Work Session scheduling for Summer - Master Plan Update

            C.     Discuss items for June 12, 2007 meeting

IX.            Adjourn Meeting

Posted:  Town Hall, Lobby, Burdick’s Market, www.thewalpolean.com

cc:  All PB, MPU, ZBA, BOS, Town Offices, WCC, NWVC, Jim Terrell   

 

 

 

 

Ed. Note: Thanks to Regina Borden, here are the minutes of the April 26 Selectmen's meeting. CCB

MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SELECTMEN

APRIL 26, 2007

Selectmen Present:            Charles Miller, Sheldon Sawyer, Whitney Aldrich

Mr. Miller called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. with two people present in the audience.

PUBLIC BUSINESS:

KELLY GOODRICH:  The Board of Selectmen and Kelly Goodrich, T.G.K. Contracting, outlined the repairs that will be made to the north end of the Town Hall. 

Mr. Sawyer moved to accept the T.G.K. contracting proposal for work on the front of the Town Hall.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

SOUTHWEST REGION PLANNING COMMISSION:  Matt Suchodolski, SWRPC, requested that the Board of Selectmen approve signing the Mortgage Discharge between the Monadnock Economic Development Corporation and the Town of Walpole.  The Community Development Block Grant associated with the original purchase of the property has been successfully closed out so there is no longer a requirement for the Town to have the mortgage.  MEDC would like to re-finance the Dunning Building in North Walpole with TD BankNorth and the New Hampshire Business Finance Authority.    

Mr. Sawyer moved to approve and sign the Mortgage Discharge between the Monadnock Economic Development Corporation and the Town of Walpole.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

ACCOUNTS PAYABLE:  Mr. Sawyer moved to approve the Accounts Payable check register and manifest in the amount of $16,029.81.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

PAYROLL:  Mr. Aldrich moved to approve the payroll voucher for the week ending April 21, 2007, for gross wages in the amount of $17,319.29 or net wages in the amount of $8,895.85.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

Mr. Aldrich moved to approve the electronic fund transfer for the Withholding, MEDI and FICA taxes in the amount of $4,399.76.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

MINUTES –SELECTMEN’S MEETING- APRIL 19, 2007:  Mr. Sawyer moved to approve the Minutes of the public Board of Selectmen’s meeting of April 19, 2007.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

Mr. Aldrich moved to approve the Minutes of the Non-Public Session and that the Minutes remain sealed as they contain information on personnel.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

DEPARTMENT / COMMITTEE MEETINGS:

The Board of Selectmen received and reviewed the minutes of the following meetings:  1) Zoning Board of Adjustment – April 18, 2007; and 2) North Walpole Village Board of Commissioners – April 17, 2007 and April 24, 2007.

BUILDING PERMITS:

JUSTIN & SARAH STERNER – MAP 014-003-000:  Mr. Sawyer moved to approve Building Permit No. 2007-009 for Justin & Sarah Sterner to extend the existing breezeway by 12-feet.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

JOHN & LINDA BURROWS – MAP 021-042-000:  Mr. Aldrich moved to approve Building Permit No. 2007-010 for John & Linda Burrows to add to a deck and porch roof on Colonial Drive.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

DOROTHY FLETCHER – MAP 004-037-000:  There was a consensus of the Board of Selectmen to put Building Permit No. 2007-011 “on-hold” pending receipt of additional information for Dorothy Fletcher. 

OLD BUSINESS:

DSR #49 – GRAVES ROAD AND MILL ROAD:  Mr. Sawyer moved to authorize Elaine Moore to sign the notice from the NRCS for DSR #49, Graves Road and Mill Road, as the Town will not be doing these two projects.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

Elaine Moore advised that the bidders for the Ford Avenue and Black Jack Crossing projects will be here on May 3^rd, 2007, at 9:00 am.  The Board of Selectmen authorized having Elaine Moore contact the contractors on the list that was provided.

WHITCOMB ROAD BRIDGE:  A letter was received from L. Robert Landry, PE and Project Manager for the Whitcomb Road Bridge, advising that there will be a Department of Transportation Hearing on May 15, 2007, at 11:00 am in room 112 in Concord.  The meeting serves as a decision making forum for the Hearing Commissioners.  

E-911:  Elaine Moore received the paperwork for the Board of Selectmen to appoint a replacement E-911 Coordinator.

Mr. Aldrich moved that Elaine Moore, the Office Manager, be appointed as the E-911 Coordinator and be authorized to sign the Verizon data base appointment document.  Seconded by Mr. Sawyer.  All in favor, so voted.

TOWN HALL ROOF – CUPOLA:  Melanson Roofing will be at the Town Hall tomorrow to do an inspection of the Town Hall roof cupola.

TREE ON COMMON:  The Board of Selectmen acknowledged a letter from Barkley Bull regarding the replacement tree on the Common.  There was a consensus to send a letter to Mr. Bull thanking him for his observations and hope that he will have the patience to allow the project to proceed.  It will also include the fact that Carol Christian, Women of Walpole member, picked out the replacement tree.

RECYCLING STUDY COMMITTEE:  The Board of Selectmen will ask Duncan Watson, Chairman of the Recycling Study Committee, to submit his report in writing.

NEW BUSINESS:

NORTH WALPOLE VILLAGE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING – REQUEST BOARD OF SELECTMEN – MAY 1^ST – 7:15 PM:  The Board of Selectmen would like to have a copy of the contract for review prior to attending their meeting on May 1^st. 

OTIS ELEVATOR:  There was discussion relative to problems with the Town Hall elevator and the recent bill in the amount of $872.29 from Otis Elevator.  To discontinue their service requires a 90 day notice of cancellation.  Elaine Moore advised that Stanley Elevator has a service representative in Keene who is willing to service the elevator.  The State requires that the elevator has to be inspected once a year.

Mr. Sawyer moved to send Otis Elevator a 90 notice of cancellation and that the Office Manager be authorized to sign the letter.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU MEETING – MAY 03, 2007:  A notice was received that there will be a meeting by the U.S. Census Bureau on May 3^rd, 20007 at 10:00 am in the Keene Public Library to discuss early participation in the 2010 census.

CURRENT USE CHANGE – DISCUSS WITH BOS:  There was a consensus of the Board of Selectmen to put this Current Use Change agenda item “on-hold” until the next meeting as more figures are needed before a decision can be made.    

REGULATIONS GOVERNING EARTH EXCAVATIONS:  Pam Aslinger advised the office staff that the “Regulations Governing Earth Excavations” are available for sale.  The Board of Selectmen will contact Myra Mansouri, Chair of the ZBA, to discuss this before they are sold.  

CONSERVATION COMMISSION:  Mr. Sawyer advised that Larry Britton did not seek re-election to the Conservation Commission.  Both Bradley Fletcher and Peter Graves talked to him about being appointed to the commission. 

Mr. Sawyer moved to appoint Peter Graves to the Conservation Commission for a three-year term.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

ARTICLE 24:  Mr. Miller noted that under Article 24, the issue of climate change, the Town voted to appoint a voluntary energy committee to recommend local steps to save energy and reduce emissions.  The Board of Selectmen agreed to form a committee and come up with some names as possible volunteers. 

Mr. Sawyer moved to adjourn the Board of Selectmen’s meeting and to enter into a Trustees of Hooper Trust meeting.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.  The time was 9:00 PM.

TRUSTEES OF HOOPER TRUST

Appointment of Jackie Bujnevicie:  Mr. Sawyer moved to appoint Jackie Bujnevicie to the Hooper Institute Committee.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.

Water Supply:  Mr. Sawyer noted that the Water Department hooked up water to the Institute but not the Mansion.  Since it would be extremely expensive to get the water system over to the other side of the road for the Mansion, Mark Houghton feels it would be better to take out the two old tanks and put in two more modern pressure tanks plus some new piping and that would solve the problem.   There was a consensus of the Board of Selectmen to look into this option.

Mr. Sawyer moved to adjourn the Trustees of Hooper Trust meeting.  Seconded by Mr. Aldrich.  All in favor, so voted.  The time was 9:09 PM.

 

Ed. Note: Mark your calendars for next Saturday's Horticultural Hot Ticket!  Note that this is one of the Friends of the Library's two annual fund-raisers, and it enable us to make significant contributions for books and other materials each year for BOTH the Walpole library and the North Walpole branch library.  As told to me by Chairperson Lucy Weber...

"The Friends of the Library Plant Sale is Saturday, May 12, on the lawn at the library.  We start at 9 and go til noon or sellout, whichever comes first.  Before 9, you can look, but not buy--unless it is cold and teeming with rain like it was last year when I was afraid that people wouldn’t wait.  This year, we will have plants, library tote bags and also tickets for the Historical Society House Tour on sale.  Despite the slow season, plants are beginning to come in, so I am way less desperate than I was last week.  Currently we have Siberian iris, bee balm, pachysandra, hostas, day lilies, phlox, two kinds of raspberries, yellow and red, and lots of smaller things promised." Lucy

Ed. Note: I actually misquoted Jackie Caserta in the previous posting.  The tax cost of the Ballam Farm proposal was 9 cents per thousand or about $9 per hundred thousand of valuation, not $18. So her argument was even stronger than I said.  CCB

Ed. Note: Early look at tomorrow's news!  CCB

5-5-07

Walpole Voters Reject Conservation Easement

_______________________________________

Ballam Farm Preservation in Doubt

By Chuck Bingaman, Contributing Writer

            Walpole voters Saturday rejected a proposal put forward by its Conservation Commission and Selectmen to finance a conservation easement on 52 acres of land off Rt. 12 and to purchase outright 8 acres of wellhead protection land in an adjourned session of the March town meeting.

            While the proposal attracted 205 votes in favor against 166 opposed, it failed to get the two-thirds affirmative vote needed under state law when towns are seeking to borrow money.  “It’s a shame,” said Selectman Sheldon Sawyer, “because so many people have worked so long and hard in putting together the proposal over the last year.”

            One hundred and six North Walpole voters registered for ballots at Saturday’s meeting (as compared to about 30 at its Village Meeting in March), and it appeared that the great majority of them opposed to the proposal.  But clearly some voters from other areas of Walpole opposed the proposal as well as showed by the final tally.

            Conservation Commission chairman Gary Speed had explained the purposes of the proposed purchase as twofold: to buy for the town a little more protective land around one of the town’s main drinking water wells and to protect in perpetuity a piece of high quality farm land from any possible use other than farming.  He quoted the Commission’s 2006 Walpole resident survey that found that 86% of respondents favored taking steps to protect the town’s drinking water aquifers and 88% favored protecting existing farmland from development. 

Speed said that Commission members and Selectmen had, in fact, changed the proposal in recent weeks to respond to concerns raised in the public bond hearing in April.   First, in response to objections from North Walpole voters that it would tax them for protecting a well that they do not use, the Selectmen had withdrawn from the proposal the purchase of the wellhead land by arranging, instead, for the Walpole Water Department to buy it out of existing surplus. Second, Speed said that Marques Lovell-Smith, who had a right of first refusal on any future sale of the land to a farmer, had relinquished that right so that the future auction of the land would be guaranteed to go to the highest qualified public bidder.  This responded to an objection voiced by some in the agricultural community that they really would have no realistic opportunity to acquire the land with the easement limiting it to farming.

            Despite those concessions, a heatedly vocal minority spoke against the proposal and, at times, tried to shout down the moderator, Ernie Vose.  Proponents of the plan urged passage to provide long-term protection of valuable food-growing area and to protect the water supply.  Passionate opponents objected to raising the necessary taxes, even the estimated “worse case” of $18 per year per hundred thousand of assessed valuation over ten years.  Other objectors argued that the town should save the money and rely on its Zoning and Planning Boards to prevent unwelcome development in the area.

            Jackie Caserta, proprietor of  The Inn at Valley Farms in Walpole, argued “we’re being hit more and more often with development proposals that are harder and harder to avoid.  This is beautiful and important farmland.  For only $18 per year per thousand dollars of valuation for ten years at the most, we can protect this land forever.  Come on, people,” she urged, “don’t be short-sighted!”

            In other town business, voters rejected by voice vote a proposal to “throw up” a section of Cochran Rd., a Class 6 road currently owned by the town.  Landowners had complained that four-wheel driver vehicles had damaged the road and that it should be given back to abutting owners so they could control it more effectively.

                                                --30--

Ed. Note: Our IT department--me--seems to have bollixed up the first posting of Men Who Cook. Sorry Ben Daviss!  Here's another try at getting it ALL on your plate.  CCB

MEN WHO COOK

 -- and you know who you are --

come and show your stuff on May 18 with the region’s best chefs of the non-female gender.  Prepare and bring your signature dish (or try something new and adventurous) to the Zorn Dining Commons at Keene State College at 5:30 on Friday, May 18 for the annual “Men Who Cook” celebration on behalf of Monadnock Family Services.  Contributing a dish to the community-wide dinner earns you one ticket to the event (valued at $20), the opportunity to sample some of the Monadnock region’s finest cuisine, and the chance to see if your two-alarm chili is tastier than Pete’s stuffed pot roast.  Just as important, you’ll be supporting Monadnock Family Services, the community mental health agency that serves Walpole with an office next to Ruggles & Hunt.  Beyond our town's borders, Monadnock Family Services operates more than 25 programs that help the mentally ill and teens and families at risk.  For more information and a registration form, please contact Ben Daviss in Keene at 283-1631 or bdaviss@mfs.org.  And if you don’t cook, come anyway.  We need people to help us eat all that great food!

Ed. Note: Ben Daviss sends the following...

MEN WHO COOK

 -- and you know who you are --

come and show your stuff on May 18 with the region’s best chefs of the non-female gender.  Prepare and bring your signature dish (or try something new and adventurous) to the Zorn Dining Commons at Keene State College at 5:30 on Friday, May 18 for the annual “Men Who Cook” celebration on behalf of Monadnock Family Services.  Contributing a dish to the community-wide dinner earns you one ticket to the event (valued at $20), the opportunity to sample some of the Monadnock region’s finest cuisine, and the chance to see if your two-alarm chili is tastier than Pete’s stuffed pot roast.  Just as important, you’ll be supporting Monadnock Family Services, the community mental health agency that serves WalpoleKeene at 283-1631 or bdaviss@mfs.org.  And if you don’t cook, come anyway.  We need people to help us eat all that great food!

Ed. Note: A crowd of over forty sat in on the Selectmen's meeting last night in Town Hall to hear about Berkshire Development's petition for a rehearing on March's town meeting vote changing the language of the zoning ordinance from "establishment" to "building".  Here is my story that ran this morning in the Eagle Times.  CCB

5-3-07

 
Challenge to Walpole Town Vote Rejected

 _____________________________
Possible Appeal to Superior Court Looms

 
By Chuck Bingaman, Contributing Writer

 
            WALPOLE – Walpole Selectmen Thursday evening unanimously rejected a petition by Berkshire Development LLC to throw out results of a March warrant article vote clarifying town zoning ordinances in commercial and agricultural zones.

 
            Berkshire now has 30 days to file in Superior Court should it wish to appeal the Selectmen’s decision.

 
            The March vote asked whether voters wanted to make it clear that the town’s zoning prohibited new buildings of more than 40,000 square feet rather than, as some argued, that it merely barred “establishments” of over 40,000 square feet in new buildings that could be any size.  Berkshire, which owns parts of North Meadow Plaza and land south of it, and possibly other developers, would like to be able to build one or more buildings larger than 40,000.  Many in the town feel that such “big boxes” are inappropriate to the size of Walpole and contrary to its Master Plan.

 
    The problem with the March vote, as last night’s petitioners argued, was that the warrant article asked whether voters wanted to change the “establishment” term to “building” in different two sections of the zoning ordinance, commercial zones and rural/agricultural zones.  That, according to Keene attorney Thomas Hanna, was “unreasonable, illegal and unfair to voters” because it prevented them from choosing to change the ordinance in one zone and not the other.

 
    In support of his claim Hanna pointed to the very different characters of commercial zones and agricultural zones and their needs for different treatments in zoning codes.  Hanna also argued that New Hampshire case law suggests that lumping of more than one zoning change in one warrant article is only permitted where “the defeat of one would defeat the usefulness of the others”.  And he argued that was not the case here.

 
    Previous to the March vote, owners of commercial property in the town used a statutory provision to require at least a 2/3 vote to change the language to prevent buildings over 40,000 feet.  But, despite that added hurdle, they failed to stop the article which drew more than a two-thirds majority of those voting.  Neither they nor Berkshire Development LLC raised their argument about two changes in one article at that time.

 
    While a hearing on such petitions does not allow public discussion, the selectmen allowed some public discussion during the regular selectmen’s meeting that followed Hanna’s presentation.

 
    Selectman Sheldon Sawyer noted that “no voter complained to me about the language of the warrant article. Berkshire ’s petition was the first that I heard of a problem. The town itself didn’t seem to mean to separate the two provisions.”  Sawyer also added that the selectmen had consulted town counsel on the issue.

 
    Selectman Whitney Aldrich moved that the Select Board “stand with the town vote approving the ordinance language changes” and Mr. Sawyer seconded.  The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion.

 
    One speaker from the audience claimed that he did not understand the warrant article at the time he voted in March. But local attorney Rob Kasper, saying he was speaking for himself only, pointed out that the warrant article was not necessarily unfair as it changed two sections in a single ordinance, and not two totally different, unrelated provisions.

 
    In 2006 Berkshire-Walpole LLC proposed erecting a 70,000 square foot structure near North Meadow Plaza that would have housed 3-5 businesses or, as they called them, “establishments”, none of which by themselves required more than 40,000 square feet.  Last June, Berkshire withdrew its proposal, the Planning Board stated that it was interpreting the statutory language to mean the limit was on the size of future buildings, not businesses within them, and later the Planning Board put the matter on the 2007 town warrant.

 
    Until the March 13 town meeting, Article VI Commercial District, Sec. B. Uses Permitted said “A building may be erected, altered or used and a lot may be used or occupied only for the following purposes and in accordance with the following provisions:… 3. Shops, restaurants, and other retails establishments not exceeding 40,000 square feet in gross floor area.”  Also, until the March 13 town meeting, Article VII Rural/Agricultural District, setting parameters of development in that district, permitted special exceptions in Sec. C. including “1) Industrial, manufacturing, and commercial operations by Special Exception from the Board of Adjustment when fulfilling the following requirements:…g) No retail commercial establishment shall be permitted which exceeds 40,000 square feet in gross floor area.”

                                    --30--

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TWO key civic meetings are taking place in Walpole this week. You may well wish to attend and participate.

1. Tomorrow night--Thursday, May 3 at 7:00 p.m.--two landowner entities in the North Meadows Plaza area will make their pitch to the Selectmen to overturn the March 13 vote of the town to change the zoning ordinance clarifying its intent to limit future commercial buildings to a maximum of 40,000 square feet. You may wish to hear their arguments and to observe the selectmen's response.  The meeting is at Town Hall. The regular weekly selectmen's meeting follows and, if you have not recently attended one of those meetings, you might consider staying for it too.

2.  Saturday morning at 10:00 a.m. in the Town Hall the selectmen reconvene the town meeting for the purpose of voting on the proposed Ballam Farm bond issue to fund the placement of a conservation easement on 52 acres and to purchase for the town 8 acres around the wellhead on the property north of Rite Aid and between Rt. 12 and the river.  Because it involves town borrowing, approval requires at least a two-thirds vote. (While there are rational arguments on both sides of this one, in my opinion  they have been clouded a bit this week by some inaccurate and specious nonsense being circulated by opponents.)