Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wetlands Buffer Impacts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rye Conservation Commission says proposed 110 Brackett Road house would have excessive wetland‑buffer impacts
Summary
The commission voted 7‑0 July 9 that the proposed single‑family house, septic and associated grading at 110 Brackett Road would have excessive impacts to the 100‑ft wetland buffer; the motion calls for a smaller, lower‑impact design if the lot is to be developed.
The Rye Conservation Commission voted unanimously July 9 to conclude that the construction plan for a single‑family house at 110 Brackett Road would have excessive impacts to the town’s 100‑foot wetland buffer.
Engineer Alex Ross and developer Mike Garrepy presented plans for a house with an advanced onsite septic (AOS) system, driveway work and fill near Berry’s Brook. Chair Shawn Joyce said the house, septic and proposed grade changes would lie within the buffer and ‘‘will be a major impact on the wetlands and the buffer,’’ raising concerns about runoff, fertilizer and irrigation entering nearby wetlands and Parsons Creek.
Secretary/Clerk Hugh Lee moved that the Commission conclude the proposed buffer impacts are excessive, citing the volume of fill/excavation to raise the main floor and garage, relocation of a woods‑road right‑of‑way nearer sensitive wetlands, and the proposal for a paved driveway adjacent to wetlands. The motion, seconded by Chair Joyce, passed 7‑0 (Michael Bean – Aye; Glenn Suchocki – Aye; Shawn Joyce – Aye; Joe Marttila – Aye; Hugh Lee – Aye; Jenn Madden – Aye; Vic Odryna – Aye).
A neighbor, Mike Thiel of 34 Brackett Road, raised similar concerns about runoff into Parsons Creek and Berry’s Brook and noted the site lies within high‑quality habitat identified in the New Hampshire Wildlife Action Plan; he also mentioned an existing right‑of‑way across the property.
The motion asks the applicant to consider a smaller or slab‑on‑grade house sited at existing grades with reduced fill and driveway impact. The Commission’s action was a conclusion of the buffer impacts as presented and does not itself approve or deny any land‑use permits; further review or revised plans would be required for the project to proceed.
Next steps: the applicant may revise plans and return to the Conservation Commission (and, where applicable, seek ZBA or Planning Board relief).
