Something fishy going on in Winchester

The Keene Sentinel January 27, 2008
Letter to the Editor

To The sentinel:

This letter is in response to an article in the Regional section

of the Sentinel, published on Jan 10th, 2008, under the heading,

"Briefs".

The article, headlined, "Waivers Granted For Housing Plan"

stated: "A proposal to build 32 condominium units in Winchester

may be approaching it's second judgment day after the granting of

several new waivers by The Winchester Planning Board ..."

Outrageous!

Every taxpayer in Winchester should be up in arms over this

decision by the Planning Board and especially chairperson

Margaret Sharra, over her push to reopen the application of the 32

unit condo project, which had been previously denied by unanimous

vote at the Sept 19th meeting.

Mr Jack Marsh had convinced the board to deny this application

based on town law and his and the board's concerns that many

issues had been left unresolved.

Now,suddenly the board has done a complete turnaround and has

granted three of four waivers submitted to the town board by

Mr Vandyke's attorney and representatives of the engineering firm hired

to develop this project.

This includes granting a waiver to allow Mr Vandyke relief from having

to submit a completed application, as required by the town zoning laws

on any building project,under the premise this would cause him undue

hardship by having to spend the money required to submit completed

design changes.

The Planning Board also granted Mr. Van Dyke a special waiver to

intrude upon the required 100 foot buffer zone surrounding the project,

meant to protect abutters and wetlands, to construct water retention

ponds and culverts; which will channel runoff from the project onto the

adjacent neighbors' properties.

They are also allowing him to extend the entrance to the cul-de-sac

125 feet over the zoning ordinance requirement of 400' simply because

his lot layout doesn't meet the criteria,not because of any topographic

obstacles. As stated in the article, this proposed project just doesn't

fit the terrain.

No mention of the impact of leaching upwards of 20,000 gallons of

live sewage into the hillside behind existing neighborhood homes or

whose responsibility it will be to provide for these people if their water

and septic systems fail.

Nor did they have concerns what impact the approval of this project

will do to our over strained $10,000,000.00 school budget and our

property taxes.

As a member of the budget committee, I know firsthand how fragile

the school budget is. What's the impact going to be once these 32,

two- to- three bedroom units are occupied by school children?

Many of our citizens are not aware that Winchester taxpayers

currently pay the fourth-highest rate in the state.

Why have they granted all of these exemptions of the zoning

ordinance rules for this applicant?

Is Margaret Sharra, working for the townspeople; or is she

actually pandering to this applicant? Was Sharra, at the October

15th, Planning Board meeting, working in the best interest of the

town when she introduced the matter of reconsideration, passing

out documents she researched, to planning board members

indicating other towns being sued, casting out fear that the board

acted too hastily?

I feel that there is more going on here than meets the eye and that

there are other interests at stake,based on the out come of the

board's decisions.

When I questioned why certain members did not recuse themselves

when there was a special interest in the outcome of their vote, I was

verbally attacked by certain members of the board for raising these

concerns.

Have some of our board members broken their oaths; to protect the

rights, health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Winchester and to

enforce and abide by all of our current land use rules and zoning laws,

by showing their indifference to their responsibilities?

Citizens of Winchester, I implore you to stand up for our town, to be
present at the next Planning Board meeting on February 11th
( call the town hall for time )
Call or write the selectman and planning board members.

BOB DAVIS
893 Old Westmport Road
Winchester

Waivers granted for housing plan

The Keene Sentinel Thursday, January 10, 2008
by Sarah Palermo
Sentinel Staff

Winchester - A proposal to build 32 condominiums in Winchester may be approaching it's second judgment day before the town planning board.
On Monday night, the board granted two out of three waivers requested by the Franklin Mountain project's developer, Robert Van Dyke of Rindge.
In September, the board rejected the proposal; but re-opened the hearing process in November under fear that it acted too hastily, said board member Kenneth Cole in his motion to reopen the hearing in October.
Of the two waivers granted, one allows two detention basins within part of the protected buffer zone between the development and neighboring properties and one allows a cul-de-sac in the development to be 125 feet longer than the town maximum of 400 feet.
The board decided to waive the road length restriction based on the topography of the land in question, Sharra said.
Part of the plans detailed a road with a slope of 11.5 percent, steeper than the town maximum of 8 percent, said Planning Board Chairman Margaret A. Sharra. The board chose not to grant this waiver.
"Part of the waiver request is that they need to justify it and we felt the justification was not there." Sharra said, adding "that safety was also a concern".
Though most issues in the town's reconsideration of the project have been completed, "the board decided to postpone closing the hearing for at least one more month", Sharra said.
"We didn't want to close it just in case we missed something", she said.
Van Dykes proposal, which is also awaiting approvals and permits from state agencies will be before the board again at it's Feb 4 meetings.
During the first round of hearings, neighbors and other resident enthusiastically opposed to the plan, hiring a lawyer to speak on their behalf before the board.
The residents were concerned that the project would draw too heavily on an already limited water supply.

Rindge developer Van Dyke is behind both

The Keene Sentinel Wednesday, October 31,2007
by Sarah Palermo

Rindge developer Van Dyke is behind both

Robert Van Dyke is now fighting battles over land-use regulations in two Monadnock Region communities.
In 2004, the Rindge developer proposed a condominium complex in jaffrey near Mount Monadnock and in March, he applied to build another complex on Franklin Mountain in Winchester.
Members of the Winchester Planning Board unanimously rejected that proposal in September; but put the issue back on the agenda for Nov 5 because they are concerned they may have acted too hastily, according to board member Kenneth A. Cole
They will examine the process they used to reach the denial and reopen the public hearing for more information from the developer.
The jaffrey proposal has been tied up in legal battles for three years, with a recent petition from local residents added to the piles of paperwork.
Twenty-two citizens from Jaffrey, the town governments of Dublin and Marlborough and the Society for the Protection of N. H. Forests filed a petition last week in Superior Court, asking a judge to overrule the decisions made by the Jaffrey planning and zoning boards.
Both boards ruled in September that the complex would not need variances from a town ordinance establishing buffers around wetlands.
Because the plan shows 28 units on one lot shared by all residents of the complex, instead of separate lots, Van Dyke did not need a variance from the town's wetlands buffer requirements, according to the zoning board minutes.
The wetlands-protection law requires lots to have a minimum of 200 feet of shore frontage, so the single lot would be in compliance. If the complex were divided into separate lots, it would not meet the requirements and the project would need a variance according to the minutes.
The petition claims the decisions are illegal because they allow the developer to bypass the intent of the law.
James P. Bassett of Concord, the petitioner's lawyer, said the complaint may hold for all towns in the state.
"If it's as simple as doing a condominium development instead of a conventional subdivision", Bassett said, "a lot of developers will go that route to avoid satisfying environmental ordinances".
"I don't think it would be solid policy for Jaffrey or any community to follow".
Van Dyke is confident his opposition was a minority of the town and the decisions of the boards will stand.
"It's a sign of the times," he said Tuesday, when reached by phone at his Rindge office. "It seems like a lot of people who have moved here to Jaffrey are not pro-growth."
Bassett did not know when the court will decide on the matter; but according to Lee A. Sawyer, chairman of the zoning board, the matter is on the agenda for the board's Nov 6 meeting at the town hall.
At that time, the board will discuss whether to grant the petitioners another chance to argue for the necessity of the wetlands variance.
"This hasn't been as curt and dry as everyone hopes it would be," Sawyer said.

Winchester plans

In Winchester, Van Dyke's proposal for 32 condominiums was shut down by unanimous vote by the planning board in September.
At the time, board Chairman Margaret A. Sharra requested twice that the board wait until it's next meeting to hear more information and vote on the matter.
During the discussion several board members expressed concern that the town would become tangled in a legal snag similar to the situation in Jaffrey.
At that meeting, Sharra suggested they reconsider how the decision was reached.
Kenneth A. Cole made the motion in October to open the issue again and she said the board did so under advice from it's lawyer.
"We might have been a little hasty with the denial," Cole said. "Sometimes we make decisions under a little stress and in this case, we were able to reconsider it".
The plan the members see at their next meeting will be slightly different, according to Van Dyke, who would not say what changes had been made; but called them minor.
At this time, the proposal is still for a 32 -unit condominium complex with a community center.
The hearing on the development will be reopened at the meeting of the planning board on Nov 5 at 7 p.m. at town hall.

Back from the dead

At the October 15, 2007 Planning Board meeting, Margaret A. Sharra and Kenneth A. Cole decided to reconsider the decision to deny Robert Vandykes application ..

" Fifth order of business: Old and new business. M. Sharra passes out copies of the second draft of proposed zoning changes, an important superior court decision and other information.
M. Sharra and the board discuss the superior court decision on Land Use boards reconsidering decisions. The board interprets reconsideration as reconsidering not just the decision but how the decision was determined. M. Sharra asks the board if they would like to reconsider Mr. Vandyke’s PRD. She explains that what reconsideration does is open the hearing process to continue discussion on the application. Reconsideration does not necessarily mean the decision will be changed but rather to obtain more evidence to make a more informed decision.
K. Cole moves to reconsider the decision of the board, of 9-17-07, on the application of RVD’s PRD located on Rt.10. J. Amman seconds. The board discusses again the understanding of reconsideration and allowing for the board to hear more evidence to be able to make a clear, informed decision. D. Beaman yes, J. Amman yes, K. Cole yes, M. Sharra yes, K. Berthiaume yes, J. Marsh no. Motion passes. "

Winchester condo proposal voted down, drawing applause

The Keene Sentinel Tuesday, September 18, 2007
by Sarah Palermo
Sentinel Staff

A plan to put an 80 bedroom condominium community on Franklin Mountain was unanimously rejected by the Winchester Planning Board Monday night.
Proposed in March by Robert Vandyke of Rindge, the development would have sat off of Route 10 just south of Westport Village Road.
The motion to dismiss Vandykes application for 32 condo units and a community center came after more than two hours of discussion between the board, the public and Vandykes engineer - and a brief intermission caused by a fire alarm at town hall.
When the vote was announced, the nearly 20 residents in attendance erupted in applause.\
Board member Jack D. Marsh Jr., who moved to deny the application, cited excessive slope of the property, the inadequacies of community resources, such as transportation and emergency services to handle such an increase in population and the failure of the developer to preserve the existing features of the property -- the plans called for cutting trees and filling streams.
Vandyke did not attend the meeting and could not be reached for comment today.
Several Winchester residents and Silas B Little 3rd, a lawyer retained by two abutters, questioned the layout of the wells and septic systems, the storm-drainage plans and the possible increase in schools aged children and demand on the town's municipal resources.
Ultimately; however the issue that brought the most comments was not included in the motion to deny.
Five residents with homes near the proposed site said they were concerned the projects high demand for water in an area of town where there have already been problomatic wells could cause their own water supply to run dry.
After making the motion to deny, Marsh explained he had purposely omitted that complaint, anticipating Vandyke will appeal the decision.
'I didn't include the problems with the wells in the motion in case of a suit and appeal. The state of New Hampshire does not recognize any studies showing that a new well might make an old one down the road run dry," marsh said.
Planning Board Chairman Magaret A Sharra twice recommended the board wait until next meeting to decide and board member Kenneth A Cole also anticipates a court battle over the denial.
Marsh acknowledged Cole's fears had merit saying, ": the objections I made come right out of our regulations. No matter when it happens, if we deny this, we're probably going to have to go to court."

Sarah Palermo can be reached at 352-1234. extension 1436, or spalermo@keenesentinel.com

Concerns Raised About Condo Plans

The Keene Sentinel Sunday September 16, 2007
by Sarah Palermo
Sentinel Staff

Winchester - Though the Boston and Maine Railroad tracks by Franklin Mountain have been silent for some time, the property next door has been generating noise in recent months.

Rindge developer Robert Vandyke has plans for what could be Winchester's first planned residential development, on the property and will appear before the planning board Monday night for a continuation of a public hearing.
The project, off of Route 10 just south of Westport Village Road, could create 32 new condominium units and a community center run by a homeowners association.
Plans show the units clustered together on roughly 17 acres of the property. The remaining land, about 27 acres, would be protected in a conservation easment.
Vandykes proposal has met with opposition at previous public hearings and some concerned residents have been trying to gather more support for Monday.
Cope T Homan and Michael Towne own properties adjacent to the proposed development and have been involved with circulating petitions and fliers around town, hoping to limit the size of the development.
I'm really not the type of guy that says, "Don't develope any of your land; but I do not believe with the buffers and wells and all, that there is enough buildable land for all this," Homan said.
Vandyke could not be reached for comment.
THe developer recently faced lawsuits from a group including residents of Jaffrey, the towns of Dublin and Marlborough and the Society for the Protection of N.H. Forests, for a development proposed near Mount Monadnock.
Magaret A. Sharra, Winchester planning board chairperson, said the board was "not pleased" with delays in a five lot subdivision project Vandyke started on Route 119. The lots have been vacant, after most trees and brush were removed, for several months.
"We didn't know at that time the things we could require in terms of vegetation to be left in place, or time limits on when it would have to be done," she said.
More accustomed to working with smaller subdivisions, the planning board has hired a consultant from Stevens and Associates Engineering in Brattleboro, at Vandykes expense, according to Sharra, to help members understand various surveys and studies of the property.
Shara said the planning board has given the proposal serious consideration.
"This isn't a two-lot subdivision and the board has been very careful, taking it slowly, " she said.
"We're going to put in every reasonable protection for the town known to man."
> The Winchester Planning Board meets Monday at 7 p.m. at the Winchester Town Hall on Richmond Road.

Sarah Palermo can be reached at 352-1234. extension 1436, or spalermo@keenesentinel.com

Links to Planning and Zoning Board minutes

We've removed the links to the town's site because they keep changing the url. We have provided a link to the town's web site on our homepage ( see link at bottom of page ) and from there you can find the links to the meeting minutes of each board. Be aware though, some dept's haven't updated meeting minutes in months. )
If you click on the dated minutes links, which you will notice are not in sequence and which have been edited recently, you will get a new page with a written transcript of what took place at each meeting with regards to this project. The transcripts are not verbatim, only what chairperson Margaret Sharra deemed important and therefore, not all information is included in the minutes; thus the records are really incomplete.

Of particular interest is the Zoning Board minutes of 5/31/07, to wit, no abutters were notified as per law and only one family attended because someone attached a note to their front door informing them of the meeting.

Condo Project on Franklin Mountain

Are you aware that contractor Robert Van Dyke of Rindge, has purchased a parcel of land on Franklin Mountain and has submitted a plan to build 32 condominiums and a community center on it to the Winchester Planning Board? If he is successful in getting approval, this will open the door to more and more development of our forests and wetlands. Mr. Van Dyke already has a project ongoing in Winchester on Route 119E on the Winchester/Richmond town line in which he has clear cut the forests and left the land open to the elements and erosion and it’s an eyesore to everyone.

There is no need for this planned development in Winchester. There is no housing shortage here; in fact many of our neighbors are in trouble and are trying to sell their homes before they lose them. Why do we need to destroy more of our natural resources ?

Mr. Van Dyke’s property is situated on Route 10, adjacent to and directly behind Shamrock Realty. His planned development will not only affect those homeowners that directly abut his property; but adversely affect us all .

His plans call for drainage into existing streams and wetlands, wells that will pump thousands of gallons of water to this community, which could leave those living nearby waterless and a very dangerous driveway entrance just on the rise above Westport Village Road. His plan is to build this community, sell the units and then pull out; leaving an association, run by the owners to maintain the wells, septic, roadways and storm drain cisterns on their own.

Please give us your support and help us stop this unnecessary project before it’s begun.

Please come and voice your concerns and help us protect our natural surroundings.

Special points of interest:

· More new taxes?

· Adverse effects on current residents in the area?

· The real possibility of wells going dry?

· Pollution of existing wetlands and streams?

· The natural beauty of another forest and habitat to hundreds of songbirds and other animals destroyed, purely for economic gain!