Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sig Sauer Stormwater Wetlands topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board approves conditional use permit for Sig Sauer Academy stormwater work near wetlands
Summary
After a public hearing, the planning board invoked jurisdiction and approved conditional-use findings for stormwater treatment measures at the Sig Sauer Academy site, tied to a recent NH DES Alteration of Terrain requirement; approvals include conditions and references to conservation commission input.
The Brentwood Planning Board approved a conditional-use permit July 17 for stormwater treatment work at the Sig Sauer Academy indoor shooting-range complex on Exeter Road after a public hearing and technical review.
Nicholas, representing the applicant and engineering team, explained the application was submitted because the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) now treats the whole Sig Sauer property as exceeding alteration-of-terrain thresholds. He said the work proposes two stormwater treatment practices — a bioretention pond and a filtration trench — and the removal of some existing gravel, with no increase in impervious area. “We’re not proposing any more impervious area,” the presenter said.
Why it matters: the DES administrative rule change (AOT) brought the project within state permitting requirements even though the 50-yard range was built earlier. The board’s approval addresses wetland-buffer criteria and design and requires markers and construction measures to minimize impacts.
Board action and findings: the board first invoked jurisdiction and then voted, paragraph by paragraph, that project design and construction methods would minimize wetland impacts; that no feasible alternative would avoid the wetland area; that no wetland crossings are proposed; and that wetland boundary markers will be set and approved by the planning board. The conservation commission submitted a letter with no exceptions, and staff engineer Glenn Greenwood’s comments were incorporated into the files.
Conditions and oversight: the board’s approvals were recorded in a set of motions that referenced the June 11 submission letter and included provisions that best management practices be used during construction, that final restoration match the plan, and that wetland boundary markers be supplied for planning-board approval. The board also noted DES permitting and TEC (town engineer consultant) review as related oversight steps.
Public involvement and next steps: there were no substantive public objections at the hearing; the conservation commission’s letter was included in the record. The applicant was directed to provide the wetland-boundary-marker details for the board’s sign-off. The board approved the conditional-use permit and closed the hearing.
