Planning Board Meeting ~ October 7, 2026

2026-10-07 · Planning Board · 2:18:01 · watch on YouTube →

The Durham Planning Board met on October 7, 2026 with a quorum, with Darren appointed as a voting member for the night. The main item was the Bowie Hill subdivision phase 2 preliminary application (Maddie Lane, map 10, lot 38), where the board found the application complete subject to corrected mapping of cleared areas, held a public hearing, began substantive review, and then tabled the application to the November meeting pending an accurate existing conditions plan, DEP verification, and information on clearing limits in phase one. The board also granted an extension for the Durham Heights preliminary plan and agreed to continue reviewing it under the previous land use ordinance; moved on preliminary approval conditions for the Basset subdivision amendment with a waiver of the financial performance guarantee; and found the Harmony Towers telecommunications tower application at 662 Milbrook Road incomplete. The board discussed ordinance amendments for the June 2027 town meeting (affordable housing, gravel pits, telecommunication towers, noise) and scheduled a workshop for October 21 at 6:30 to prepare comments on the agriculture committee's agritourism proposal before that committee's October 28 meeting. The board also moved to ask the select board to appoint Darren as a permanent member.

No written minutes could be matched to this meeting. The transcript records that the speaker changed but never who was speaking, so any name attached to a statement below is inferred from context and is marked (?).

What was discussed

1. 5:14
   Call to order, quorum, voting member appointment

   The chair opened the October 7, 2026 regularly scheduled meeting, noted a quorum, and appointed Darren as a voting member for the evening. Pledge of Allegiance followed; no amendments to the agenda were raised.

2. 5:14
   Minutes of September 2 meeting

   No comments were offered on the minutes. A motion was made to accept them as presented.

3. 5:14
   Site walk report, September 17, 2026

   The report covered the September 17 site walk of the Bowie Hill phase 2 proposal. Brian was thanked for preparing it and a motion was made to accept it as presented.

4. 5:14
   Staff report / informational exchange

   George Thurlow (?) summarized his written report: a recap of the September meeting, the site walk scheduling, a summary of the September 15 meeting of the interim economic development committee serving as the citizen group for the study project and its four tasks, his work developing artificial intelligence to help process applications, and updating the website forms for the new land use ordinance. No public comment was offered on non-agenda items.

5. 5:14
   Bowie Hill phase 2 — completeness review

   Charles Burman of Graange Engineering and a member of the development team presented. Because the earlier approval lapsed, the board is reviewing the application as new and under the 2026 land use ordinance, which the applicants agreed to. Phase one was described as originally 13 lots reduced to 11 by lot combinations, fully sold, with 10 homes occupied and the last to finish in four to six weeks.

6. 10:24
   Abutter notices, record owner correction, solid waste capacity

   Abutter notices were sent August 23 referencing the September 2 meeting, but certification was only received the day before this meeting, so the town had not checked the list against its own records. The record owner ID correction and a corrected fire code reference were submitted the previous day. A conflict was identified between the statement that no containers would be located on Bowie Hill and the one isolated lot (lot 26) that would be served directly from Bowie Hill.

7. 15:29
   Traffic study threshold

   Staff explained the board may require a traffic study where trips exceed 140 per day, which phase two would. Staff and board members indicated a study was likely unnecessary here given low volumes and adequate sight distances already recorded in phase one.

8. 15:29
   Clearing done before application; wetlands

   The applicant said that in April he decided to clear the road and partially clear lots while no application was pending, notifying the state forester and the town. The board noted clearing appears to exceed what the site plan shows, that there is communication from Calvin (the road commissioner) and the CEO but nothing from DEP, and that the work is close to wetlands. The applicant said fill was brought in at the saddle between two wetlands to allow logging equipment access and that there is no wetland connection or impact.

9. 20:49
   Existing conditions plan and cluster subdivision implications

   The board said it needs an updated existing conditions plan that measures cleared areas, because the clearing table does not match conditions on the ground and cluster subdivision rules affect where building envelopes may lie. Staff noted some phase one lots may have been cleared more than allowed, a possible violation, and recommended discussing it during substantive review.

10. 26:25
    Application form and driveway permit documents

    Board members found blank pages in the packet PDF; this was traced to the town website's packet generator rather than the applicant, as the individually linked PDF was filled out. A driveway permit in the packet was undated, unsigned, and showed a 50-foot entrance width; the applicant said he had no objection to reducing it to 30 feet.

11. 37:04
    Completeness motion

    A motion was made to determine the preliminary plan application complete with corrected mapping of cleared areas. Items noted as resolved that evening were the ownership information correction and the abutter notices; other outstanding items (undated and unsigned documents, DEP letter, UDSF 3 and 4 encroachments) were deferred to substantive review.

12. 37:04
    Bowie Hill phase 2 public hearing

    The chair read the hearing script setting out the board's limited authority, the rule that questions go through the chair, and the definition of an aggrieved party. The project was identified as located on Maddie Lane off Bowie Hill with Graange Engineering as applicant representative.

13. 42:31
    Conservation commission testimony

    A conservation commission member of 35 Brianna Drive reported on the September 17 site walk: tree clearing for the phase 2 road and house lots was already done before approval, fill may be impacting wetlands, it is unclear whether trees were cut in wetland buffers, silt fences did not appear to extend far enough, and invasive weeds have spread across cleared lots. The commission suggested a site visit with the CEO and DEP and an invasive plant minimization and mitigation plan approved by DEP and the town.

14. 47:52
    Substantive review discussion

    The board asked for DEP verification and possibly an updated wetland delineation. The engineer said he had already flown a drone survey overlaying cleared areas on the proposed plan and wetlands and found no disturbance, and would provide it; the board asked why it had not been submitted earlier. The board also asked the applicant to report whether any phase one lots exceeded the clearing limits in the HOA and deeds, saying an unresolved violation would hinder final approval.

15. 53:17
    Clearing figures and storm water calculations

    A board member compared the plan's proposed clearing (cited as 9,150 square feet on lot 14) with roughly 25,000 square feet per lot estimated from aerial imagery, and said storm water and phosphorus calculations based on the plan figures would not hold. Staff noted the board must consider the whole subdivision's impacts and that inaccurate plans are what is delaying the process.

16. 58:25
    Road width waiver

    Two waivers were discussed; the road width one arises because the new ordinance classifies roads by lot count and this would be a subcollector. Staff said a waiver down to the local road standard makes sense since phase one is 20 feet wide, and the chair said he was willing to support 20 feet rather than 22. A question was raised about whether the fire chief needs to sign off.

17. 58:25
    Principal issues review: fire protection, access, solid waste, existing conditions

    The board agreed no fire protection waiver is needed because sprinklers are allowed and in place in phase one, and that a traffic study is likely unnecessary. The engineer explained he would show existing conditions overlaid with what was cleared for enforcement purposes but model the site as undisturbed woodland for storm water, taking a conservative approach to pond sizing; the board agreed. Staff noted the board has independent jurisdiction in that it cannot approve a final plan where a pre-existing violation exists on a previously approved plan.

18. 1:03:41
    Peer review and wetland mapping accuracy

    The board stressed that a peer review will occur and that inaccurate clearing figures would give the peer reviewer bad information for phosphorus and engineering checks. The engineer clarified the question is not whether the wetlands were mapped correctly but whether clearing impacted them.

19. 1:08:59
    Motion to table Bowie Hill phase 2

    A motion was made to table the application to the next meeting (first Wednesday in November) pending additional information. Staff said the 60-day clock fits since completeness was determined that night, and that the applicant may request a waiver to combine preliminary and final approval at the next meeting.

20. 1:11:29
    Durham Heights extension request

    The board considered a request to extend preliminary subdivision plan approval for Durham Heights, 439 Quaker Meeting House Road, map 2 lot 60, attributed to state processing delays. A motion to approve the extension was made and seconded, and a further motion was made to continue the review under the previous land use ordinance rather than the current one.

21. 1:14:49
    Basset subdivision amendment — substantive review

    Staff outlined the key issues: the grade of existing Winter's Way, the road maintenance arrangement, documentation, and the use of a sprinklered home instead of a fire pond. Evan Jones, who prepared the application for the owner, described a T-shaped hammerhead turnaround at the end of Winter's Way discussed with the fire chief and road commissioner, deferred maintenance items (culvert inlets, ditching, road shoulder pitch, adding crown), and an erosion and sediment control plan for construction.

22. 1:20:28
    Basset road maintenance and easements

    Jones (?) explained the 1980s subdivision and the 2005 subdivision that showed this lot as remaining land, and the deed easement giving an abutting lot (lot 1141C) access 10 feet either side of the road center line with equal cost sharing. A new maintenance agreement between the two lots would reference the existing agreement and reduce that lot's share to a third. The new lots would benefit from a 60-foot easement; lot two would own the right of way in fee.

23. 1:31:06
    Basset cost estimate and waivers

    The difference between the applicant's and the contractor's cost estimates was discussed, with diesel cost cited. The applicant requested a waiver of the financial performance guarantee because of the small amount, substituting a financial capacity statement. A motion was made on the draft preliminary approval conditions on page 26 with the exception of number seven, and to waive the performance guarantee.

24. 1:36:45
    Basset public hearing question

    The board clarified that no public hearing had been scheduled or discussed for this amendment and that one is not required. The applicant was advised to put together the final plan with all documentation for the next meeting, when final approval could be considered.

25. 1:36:45
    Harmony Towers site plan — completeness review

    Mark Roberts, representative for Harmony Towers Gateway LLC, described a 290-foot self-supporting telecommunications tower at 662 Milbrook Road for Verizon Wireless, in a 50 by 50 fenced compound with a 12-foot gravel drive in a 30-foot easement from Route 9, power and fiber only. The compound will be shifted roughly 80 feet center to center toward Route 9 to meet the 100-foot non-residential setback in the rural agricultural zone.

26. 1:36:45
    Tower review standards

    Staff reported the town attorney determined that transmission towers fall under the essential services definition, so unlike the board's past practice they are not a conditional use outside the shoreland zone. The town has no standards for transmission towers, so only article 8 site plan review applies. A motion was made that the application is incomplete based on the staff list of procedural and mandatory submissions and because the actual application form was not completed.

27. 1:47:19
    Code amendments for the 2027 town meeting

    Staff presented white papers on affordable housing, gravel pits, telecommunications towers and noise, proposing to fix broken ordinances for the June 2027 town meeting and defer larger locational and policy questions. The board confirmed the affordable housing work rests largely with the town attorney and that the state minimum is the intent. Members agreed they had capacity for gravel pits, telecommunications and noise amendments.

28. 1:57:58
    Workshop scheduling

    The board agreed to hold workshops outside the regular meeting and bookmarked Wednesday October 21 at 6:30, subject to confirming the venue and Juliet's availability. The aim is to provide comments to the agriculture committee before its October 28 meeting.

29. 1:57:58
    Agritourism proposal from the agriculture committee

    Jonah Fertig-Burd of 125 Oak Hill Road, co-chair of the agriculture committee, said the goal is clarity for farmers and the town and less subjectivity, citing the USDA threshold of $1,000 in annual sales to define an agricultural enterprise. Staff described a framework of tiers: no review, code officer review, staff committee review for multi-department matters, and full planning board conditional use review for high-impact or composite activity. Eric Day of the committee said many of the nine categories' questions are subjective; board members raised parking on Route 136 at a recent event, expansion over time, liquor licenses, and whether yurts and tiny homes count as accessory dwelling units or campsites. The committee's public meeting and potluck is October 28 at the Eureka Center.

30. 2:14:27
    Board vacancy and appointment

    Following a resignation leaving a vacancy, a motion was made to ask the select board to appoint Darren as a permanent member. The chair said he would notify Joe Roy and Jerry of the board's recommendation. The board also discussed recruiting an alternate and noted the town has been soliciting applications.

31. 2:14:27
    Adjournment

    A motion to adjourn was made and seconded, followed by a vote.

What was decided

• 5:14
  Accept the September 2 meeting minutes as presentedpassed
• 5:14
  Accept the September 17, 2026 site walk report for Bowie Hill phase 2 as presentedoutcome unclear
• 37:04
  Determine the Bowie Hill subdivision phase 2 preliminary plan application complete with corrected mapping of cleared areasoutcome unclear
• 1:08:59
  Table the Bowie Hill phase 2 application to the next meeting (first Wednesday in November) pending additional informationoutcome unclear
• 1:14:49
  Approve the request to extend preliminary subdivision plan approval for Durham Heights, 439 Quaker Meeting House Roadoutcome unclear
• 1:14:49
  Continue review of the Durham Heights subdivision under the previous land use ordinance rather than the current oneoutcome unclear
• 1:31:06
  Approve the draft preliminary approval conditions for the Basset subdivision amendment on page 26, except number seven, and waive the financial performance guaranteeoutcome unclear
• 1:42:07
  Find the Harmony Towers Gateway LLC site plan application incomplete based on the staff list of procedural and mandatory submissions and the missing application formoutcome unclear
• 2:14:27
  Ask the select board to appoint Darren as a permanent member of the planning boardoutcome unclear
• 2:14:27
  Adjournoutcome unclear

An outcome reads "unclear" where the recording does not state it plainly. The recogniser drops short words, and "the motion does not carry" is one missing word from its opposite.

Worth knowing

• 15:29
  The applicant cleared the phase 2 road corridor and partially cleared lots in April while no application was pending; the state forester, road commissioner and CEO were notified, but the board has nothing from DEP and the clearing appears to exceed what the site plan shows.
• 53:17
  A board member compared the plan's stated clearing (cited as 9,150 square feet on lot 14) with roughly 25,000 square feet per lot estimated from aerial imagery, and said storm water and phosphorus calculations based on the plan figures cannot be relied on.
• 1:36:45
  Durham has no ordinance standards for transmission towers, and the town attorney has determined towers are an essential service rather than a conditional use, so the 290-foot tower is reviewed only under the site plan review article written for commercial development.
• 1:57:58
  The agriculture committee holds a public meeting and potluck on October 28 at the Eureka Center; the planning board set a workshop for October 21 at 6:30 to get comments to the committee beforehand.

Motion language found in the transcript

Located by pattern matching, with no model involved: "I move that", "I'll second", "all those in favour". This is an independent check on the summary above: 1 passage of motion language, against 10 decisions summarised.

Elsewhere

← 2026-09-02 Planning BoardAll meetings