Pillsbury Memorial Hall

93 Main Street

Sutton Mills, NH 03221


Meeting Tuesday August 11, 2020 at 7:00 p.m.


CALL TO ORDER: Chair Wells called the meeting to order at 7:00pm and took attendance. It was determined that there was a quorum.


ROLL: Roger Wells (Chair), Glenn Pogust, David Angeli, Deborah Lang, David Hill, Dane Headley (Selectman’s Representative), Katie Nelson and Craig Tufts (Central New Hampshire Regional Planning Commission), Stephanie Perkins (resident of Sutton)


Absent: Peter Blakeman, Jim Lowe




Public Hearing to review proposed Minor Subdivision of Map/Lot # 05-678-405 by the Headley Family Trust.


Mr. Headley recused himself from deliberations and voting during the Public Hearing.


Mr. Stanley said the parcel is 14.7 acres in size on which there is currently a residence and an easement for a cell tower. He would like to subdivide the property and merge a sliver of another property he owns with it. After taking out the wetlands and wetland buffers and adding in the small sliver, the subdivided lot will be 2.5 acres in size. It is larger than 2.5 acres, although the wetlands and the buffer have to be taken from the buildable acreage. Dane Headley, said he and his wife have talked about eventually wanting to downsize to a smaller house. Their thought was to subdivide the property and build a smaller home on the vacant parcel. Recently, their daughter and son in law have been interested in building a house on the property to get into the Kearsarge School District. They tentatively plan to build a home about 2,200 square feet in size on the property. The approximate location is shown on the map which was provided to the board. This may or may not happen, but either way, they would like to subdivide to have another buildable lot available for either himself or for his daughter.


Mr. Stanley said that the lots will comply with the minimum lot line setbacks. Mr. Headley said that Adam Hurst is OK with the location of the driveway as planned. Chair Wells asked what the frontage was on the large lot that was left with his current home on it. Mr. Stanley estimated that there were several hundred feet of frontage. Mr. Hill asked how long the tower had been on the property. Mr. Headley said about 10 years. It is camouflaged as a pine tree.



IT WS MOVED (Debbie Lang) AND SECONDED (Glenn Pogust) to open the public hearing. THE MOTION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.


Stephanie Perkins, 87 Shadow Hill Road, said her house is directly across from the house they are proposing to build. Her question has to do with water runoff. There is a lot of water that comes off the hill already and they have had to redo their driveway and put a sump pump in their basement to deal with it. She wondered if there was a way to move the proposed house over a bit as it is right in front of their house. Mr. Stanley was asked to show the topographical map for the property. The map was shown. Mr. Stanley said that the slope on the property the new home would be placed was gentle. He added that the house location met all the requirements the property owners were asked adhere to. Where they build on the property is ultimately up to them.


There were no further comments from the public.


IT WAS MOVED (Glenn Pogust) AND SECONDED (Debbie Lang) to acknowledge that the Headley application was complete.



IT WAS MOVED (Glenn Pogust)AND SECONDED (Debbie Lang) to approve the application as presented.


Chair Wells opened with discussion. He said since the application has been deemed complete, the Planning Board has no right to deny the application. However, to get the actual building permit, the applicants will need to go to the Selectmen. He suggested that Ms. Perkins go to the Selectman’s meeting and give her input at that point. Mr. Pogust said that the water runoff could be diverted from any new structure so that it does not go into the neighbor’s property. Chair Wells said that while this is true, there is no requirement that the applicants have to do anything in this manner unless they decide to do so.


Mr. Hill noted that the slope on the proposed subdivision isn’t that steep. He thought that any water issues would go into the street before going into Ms. Perkins’ property. Perhaps the road agent should be notified of this possible issue.


Mr. Headley said that the original driveway was going to be closer to the Perkins’ property. Adam Hurst said that there was too much granite in that area and they’d have to blast. That is why they moved the driveway to where it currently is proposed. Ms. Perkins said that she was happy to speak with the Selectmen and was comfortable discussing it further with her neighbor, Mr. Headley.


Chair Wells called for a vote on the motion.




Mr. Stanley said the surveyor needs to provide a mylar with a signature block to Mr. Headley so it could be signed by Chair Wells and recorded at the Registry of Deeds.


IT WAS MOVED (Glenn Pogust) AND SECONDED (David Hill) to approve the merger of lot __ into the newly created subdivided lot. THE MOTION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.


ADMINISTRATIVE:                                                                                                         Approval of July 14, 2020 Meeting Minutes

It was noted that Peter Blakeman should be listed as absent from the meeting.

IT WAS MOVED (Glenn Pogust) AND SECONDED (Debbie Lang) to approve the minutes of July 14, 2020, as amended. THE MOTION WAS APPROVED UNANIOUSLY.


Land Use Mapping

Katie from Central New Hampshire Regional Planning Commission (CNHRPC) introduced Craig Tufts who was their resident GIS “expert.” He was there to show the Land Use Mapping that they were to review.


Mr. Stanley brought up the map. Mr. Tufts said that the map isn’t parcel based but what can be seen from the sky. It is a standardized national method that they use. They did have some assessing data to help clarify things. Everything in town is included in the categories in the key, represented by a myriad of colored blocks. He asked the Board to look at the map to find anything that needed changes. Also if there are any unique categories in town, please let him know and he will create them on the map. Mr. Tufts noted that an intern created the map and he had reviewed it.


Mr. Stanley suggested a category for conservation and/or protected land be added. He opined that there are too many colors in the legend. He thought some of the categories could be removed and/or lumped together. Mr. Tufts said this could be done. He offered that some things could be labeled instead of color-coded as it is a large map. Chair Wells thought they should remove the categories that they don’t have in Sutton. Mr. Hill suggested using primary colors instead of pastel.


Mr. Pogust wondered what “other residential” meant. Mr. Tufts said it represented a camp, not a year-round home . Ms. Lang said there are a lot of seasonal camps not showing up around Blaisdell Lake. Chair Wells asked Mr. Tufts to reduce the categories and use bolder colors.


Mr. Stanley said there are areas labeled as recreation which are actually conserved land. There are some other conserved properties that are not shown as such on the map but they should be noted as there are development restrictions on them. The details of these properties are all available at Ausbon Sargent Land Preservation Trust in New London. Mr. Tufts said they don’t delineate conservation lands through aerials. The recreation areas were explained. There was some discussion as to which categories should be assigned to the recreation areas.


Mr. Tufts said the colors on the maps can be changed as they wish. Chair Wells said he feels the colors could be improved. Mr. Tufts said he will make a map with labels so when it is zoomed in on, the label comes up.


Mr. Headley said he didn’t think the tower was visible on his property (on the map). Mr. Tufts said if it is less than a quarter acre they don’t delineate it as it blends in. He offered to make this attribute more visible on the map.


Mr. Hill said a previous map from the Conservation Commission showed very vibrant colors, which made it easy to read. Chair Wells said he would get those maps to Mr. Tufts to review.


Chair Wells said they need to determine what the map is for and how they will use it. Mr. Tufts said the master plan generally has a standardized map. This particular map is more of a data input for them to help the craft the plan. It is a tool for them to use. Chair Wells thought things that are deemed important (constraints) should be present in the master plan. Mr. Tufts asked if the board would like an update map with the suggested changes. Ms. Lang asked if the segregation between seasonal and year round properties would be removed. It was determined that they should be combined. Every structure built in a residential zone can be upgraded to be a year-round home, so they should all appear as residences. Chair Wells said they shouldn’t be thinking of the buildings, but more the land use. It is called “current residential use.” Mr. Tufts said he could give updated maps to the town the following day. He said he would send them to Mr. Stanley. Chair Wells offered to have copies made for each board member to assist with driving around the town to make sure they are accurate.


Master Plan Survey Summary

Ms. Nelson said that a she sent a summary of the results to Mr. Stanley.

A few type-os were identified.


Chair Wells said he would like to see the results more visually condensed. It seems to be too long. Mr. Stanley said he prefers the graphs the way they have been laid out. He said they provide a lot of information in a small area.


Ms. Nelson asked what the intention was for the summary document. Chair Wells said he intended for this to be in the appendix and in the introductory chapter that explains what the town’s survey results were. The master plan is then crafted from these responses. It was thought by Mr. Hill that the answers to the open-ended questions didn’t need to be in the master plan.


Chair Wells stressed the use of less words and meaningful information. He would like the Planning Board to review the drafts; do they want it more flowery or to the point? Mr. Pogust said they want to generate some interest in people taking action in town.


Ms. Nelson asked if she should try to take Chair Wells’ comments to change the wording, or did she want the board to attempt to change the text first. Chair Wells said he would like to be conscientious about keeping the text short. But he wanted the rest of the board to give their opinion as well. The Board said they would review the text and come up with some suggestions.


Ms. Nelson left the meeting at 8:18pm.


Chair Wells stressed that feedback from the board needs to be given to the consultants in order to get the results they would like.




The next meeting of the Planning Board would be Wednesday, September 9, 2020 at 7pm.



With no other business, Chair Wells called for a motion to adjourn.


IT WAS MOVED (Glenn Pogust) AND SECONDED (Debbie Lang) to adjourn the meeting. THE MOTION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.


The meeting adjourned at 8:21pm.


Respectfully submitted,


Kristy Heath, Recording Secretary

Town of Sutton