All towns · sandwich

Minutes

Document

September 3, 2026 
Sandwich Planning Board 
Page 1 of 2 
Approved 9/17/26 
 
 
Planning Board 
Town of Sandwich 
PO Box 194 
Center Sandwich, NH 03227 
Minutes September 3, 2026 
 
Members Present: Mike Babcock, Ray Cameron, Alix Coolidge, Julie Dolan, Brewster Lee, Maureen 
Westrick, ex officio Joanne Haight, Alternate Ben Fullerton  
 
Also Present: Susan Bryant Kimball, Chip Kimball, Scott Kraus, Rebecca Upham, Nancy Walser  
 
Call to Order: Chair Mr. Babcock called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 
 
Minutes of August 20, 2026: Ms. Dolan Motioned to approve as written. Mr. Fullerton seconded. 
7 in favor, 1 abstained. Nonpublic Minutes of August 20, 2026: Ms. Dolan Motioned to approve 
as written. Ms. Coolidge seconded. All in favor. Sealed for 90 days (Nov. 19, 2026). 
 
Master Plan Next step: Mr. Babcock proposed that the Planning Board now formulate a 
“Mission Statement”, Rules of Procedure, and guidance on process for the next subcommittee. 
Ms. Dolan has drafted a mission statement to distribute for review next meeting. The actual 
process the Implementation Committee would follow to be determined by that committee along 
with spreadsheet or other tools to use. The Board will recruit members by advertising and 
outreach after guidelines are established. Ms. Dolan has offered to be on this committee for 
continuity. 
 
Proposed lot size and setback ZO amendments: It was agreed to start by reviewing Mr. Lee’s 
Guidance Memo as the summary of proposed amendments for lot size and setbacks. Comments 
had been received from Tom Carr, a SSSNNE board member and Conservation Commission on 
Monday and from LRPC this afternoon. Based on feedback from surveyor Jim Hambrook and 
soil scientist Greg Howard it was proposed to: 1. exclude Soil Groups 5 and 6 as they are already 
unbuildable jurisdictional wetlands; 2. To simplify by keeping the minimum lot size as 100,000 
square feet and establish minimum buildable area as contiguous unrestricted 50,000 square feet.  
Question on whether to set maximum lot coverage based a percentage ratio of the total 
parcel taking restricted areas into consideration: This is applied in the shoreland overlay under 
state requirements to address amount of impervious surface and runoff issues. Beyond aesthetics, 
coverage in any lot not in the shoreland overlay may create runoff issues. This could be managed 
with Stormwater Management requirements which can be done in Site Plan Reviews for 
commercial, but residential building is managed through the Building Permit process, so some 
standards would have to be in the zoning. 
In draft memo B, in proposed amendment for § 150-31 A (2) the scaling of multi-unit lot 
sizes was miscalculated, so disregard those numbers. NHDES septic approvals do address 
adjusting setbacks when scaling up systems. The current ZO setbacks for multi-unit should 
remain. Existing § 150-31(D) says a Multiple-Unit Structure’s “minimum area per unit” shall be 
specified in § 150-10 — but no such per-unit figure currently exists anywhere in § 150-10. 
Consensus was this amendment should simply delete § 150-31(D) as an orphaned, never-
completed cross-reference. 
In C, Road Frontage, question was to define a “flag-lot” (not defined in ZO): A flag lot is a 
parcel of land where the main buildable area sits behind another property and connects to the 

September 3, 2026 
Sandwich Planning Board 
Page 2 of 2 
Approved 9/17/26 
 
 
street through a long, narrow strip of land—resembling a flag on a pole. This narrow “pole” 
provides the only street access, while the larger “flag” portion contains the usable lot area.  
It was decided to defer on working on an amended frontage requirement. 
D. Squam Lakes watershed premium (open item): It was decided not to pursue this for an 
amendment in 2027 warrant. 
IV. Setbacks: Discussion on the distinction between principal and accessory structures 
(waste-producing and nonwasted-producing) to have different setbacks. “Waste-producing” is 
not defined in the ZO and generally understood as septic systems. First setbacks discussed were 
from wetlands and waterbodies recognized as “protected” (public waters) or “unprotected”. 
Conservation Commission letter proposed unprotected should be regarded with the same setback 
of a minimum of 100 feet as all wetlands are important regardless of size. 
Discussion on difference in protection with 75-foot setback for septic fields, 100 feet for a 
dwelling, and 50 feet for an accessory structure and whether to make all the same:  
Points: 1. Properly working leach fields are safe; 2. Problem with dwellings may be initial 
construction, then use on the property such as fertilizer and pesticide use runoff; 3. Accessory 
structures don’t have septic systems but may house petroleum products, pesticides, animal 
manure, etc. 4. Some debate on NHDES classifying all wetlands the same versus differently 
based on size and type to require different permitting and allowable actions (crossings, dredging, 
etc.); 5. Would add more confusion to change to increased setbacks and make some existing 
structures nonconforming; 6. Would need to be delineated by a soil scientist even for simple 
accessory structures; 7. Point that no action is taken on complaints of noncompliance, the 
Wetlands Bureau was defended as being responsive; 8. Septic setbacks should follow NHDES – 
side and back is 10 feet for leach fields and 5 feet for tanks – wording should refer to follow the 
current NHDES Administrative Rules. 
The idea endorsed by soil scientists consulted to set no-disturbance buffers was proposed to 
apply to all wetlands and waterbodies with 15,000 sq ft and under also considered. Vernal pools 
were mentioned with Mr. Fullerton stating that NHDES permitting does take them into account 
with Ms. Walser not agreeing and stating she would look into it. 
The Board has seven more meetings to finalize what amendments to put forth, so what to 
focus on for 2027 ballot? Define what the amendments are to achieve and focus on priorities. 
Consensus on memo B., updating septic and well to conform with NHDES and delete well radius 
in the ZO and add references to appropriate NHDES Administrative Rules; work on adding 
buffer requirements; amend buildable (restricted) requirements on a 100,000 sq ft minimum lot. 
Mr. Lee will revise memos with bracketing unresolved issues for next meeting. 
 
Other: Revised Scenic Tree Cut deferred. 
Mr. Babcock extended invitation to September 10 Housing Conference in Ossipee (LUS forwarded 
information) 
Adjournment: 8:03 pm  
 
Scheduled Meetings: September 17, 2026 work session: Regular meeting October 1, 2026     
 
Respectfully submitted, 
Susan MacLeod, Land Use Secretary