text:
June 3, 2002
The Chairman, Victor Danevich called the meeting to order at 7:45 pm.
The Secretary, Bill Scanzani, called the roll:
Victor Danevich, Paddy Culbert, Bill Scanzani, Peter McNamara, Henry DeLuca, Gael Ouellette, Alternate Robin Bousa, Alternate Raymond Brunelle, Alternate Bob Yarmo, Selectmen's Representative Hal Lynde, Community Development Director Dave Brouillet, Interim Planning Director Clay Mitchell
Mr. Danevich welcomed the Planning Board's newest members, Mr. Brouillet and Mr. Yarmo.
Map 3 Lot 166-23 - Cady, Alan - Overlook Drive - Proposed 2-Lot Subdivision for Planning Director's Report on Completeness - No testimony will be taken at this time
Mr. Scanzani read the list of abutters aloud. There were no persons who did not have their name read, or who had a problem with notification. The file did not contain any written correspondence from abutters. There was one abutter notification returned from the post office, it was addressed to the State of New Hampshire Division of Forestry, Concord.
Mr. Mitchell said the Board had previously reviewed the plan and had asked if the driveway would be removed from the lot, which the applicant said they would. He said the applicant had since come back and requested that the driveway remain. He informed the applicant they would need to come before the Board because the change was significant. Mr. Mitchell said that the application was complete and he recommended that it be accepted for consideration and scheduled for hearing.
(Culbert/McNamara) To accept the plan for consideration.
(7 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.
Mr. Danevich noted that the plan was date specified for July 1, 2002.
Map 6 Lot 115 - Hammar, Alrick - Hammar & Sons, Inc. - Site Plan Review for Change of Use
Mr. Scanzani read the list of abutters aloud. There were no persons who did not have their name read, or who had a problem with notification. The file did not contain any written correspondence from abutters. There was one abutter notification returned from the post office, it was addressed to Laurie Lane Realty Trust.
Mr. Mitchell said the site and building were existing and had two distinct, separate uses. He suggested to the applicant that he present a limited site plan for the Board to review and ensure that there was enough parking. He said the Board could either accept the limited information and request a site plan for any further changes, or the Board could ask for more information to be provided. Mr. Mitchell noted that there would not be any new development. He believed that the changes were primarily all inside the building and that there was already a separate restroom and the septic was already designed to deal with expansion. Mr. Mitchell recommended that the plan be accepted for consideration
(Culbert/Scanzani) To accept the plan for consideration.
(7 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.
Mr. Alrick Hammar presented his plan to the Board. He said that the building was existing and the septic system was designed for 500-gallons per day, and the well had been tested at 40 gallons per minute. He informed that there were currently 49 parking spaces and could add spots if they hot topped other areas of the property. He said Hammar & Sons had a total of thirteen employees. Mr. Hammar noted that the building was originally built in 1974. He researched the original Board minutes to see if they reflected the intention for future subdivision/rental space, but the minutes did not elaborate. Mr. Hammar believed his father planned the building so that it could be easily subdivided. He explained the building's construction, and how it could easily be renovated to handle additional businesses. He asked permission to have the building listed with the Town as a multi-use building, for uses other than just Hammar & Sons Sign Company and Hammar & Sons Art Center.
Mr. Danevich asked what type of business was anticipated to go into the space. Mr. Hammar said they would try to get dry goods and clean businesses so the septic system would not need to be expanded. He said they would search for small 'mom & pop' type businesses with two or three employees.
Mr. Danevich asked if there were any anticipated requests for additional parking, lighting, operational hour changes, or hazardous materials on-site. Mr. Hammar said he reviewed the state's requirements and believed they had a way to go before they needed to worry about additional expansions. He said he would like the building listed as multi-use.
Mr. Scanzani had no objection to listing a building as multi-functional because each change-of-use would have to come before the Board for site review. He wanted to know how much of the building was currently available for the change-of-use. Mr. Hammar said they were only interested in a portion, and wanted to be the same as other plazas in the area. He wanted to have a quick start for rentals. He wanted to do the right thing, and was hoping that he wouldn't have to come before the Board for every tenant.
Mr. Culbert asked how much of the ten acres was usable and not wet. Mr. Hammar said a portion was wet, but believed at least half of the property could be utilized. Mr. Culbert said that other plazas in Town came before the Board with full site plans. Mr. Hammar said that the minutes from 1974 did not elaborate if his father discussed future subdivision/rental space. Mr. Culbert wanted to know how the parking space size was developed. Mr. Hammar said that since they had the building, there had been two additions. He said that each time an addition was made, plans were brought before the Board. Mr. Culbert noted that different businesses had different parking needs. Mr. Hammar said that he reviewed the regulations, but because they didn't know what businesses would come in, he couldn't answer what the parking needs would be. Mr. Culbert said that traffic flow should also be considered. Mr. Danevich discussed two buildings that had previously come before the Board due to significant changes. Mr. Scanzani said the only plan in the file was from 1986 and noted that the Board would need the plan updated and recorded. He said the Fire Chief should also review the plan. Mr. Hammar noted that Hammar & Sons was not going out of business.
Mr. Mitchell understood that the art gallery was going to be extinguished and a new business would be put in its place. He said that there were currently three uses, and if one use were replaced with the most demanding parking requirement, there would be enough parking spaces. He believed if a use was to be added, then the Board would need a full site plan. He didn't think the Board would require a full site plan at this time since Mr. Hammar was only requesting a change in use.
Mr. Danevich confirmed that the footprint would not be changed. Mr. Mitchell said that there was no construction going on outside the existing building. He said there was no indication from the previous Board minutes of what they were doing.
Mr. Culbert, as an example asked if there were currently nine uses in the building, if they would request nine different uses. Mr. Hammar said that the amount of space Hammar & Sons required was not the same as in previous years. He said they were only trying to fill the voids in the building. He said they would like the opportunity to rent a small amount of space within the building. He said if they went beyond the four uses, they would come back before the Board with a revised plan and show more details.
Mr. DeLuca asked if changes needed to be made for handicap access. Mr. Danevich said the building would need to be ADA compliant. Mr. Hammar said that he had spoken with the Fire Chief and they would be adding a fire alarm system and would address any other issues. He said that each business would need to comply with Town and state requirements.
Mr. Culbert wanted to know where the chemicals would go if a dry cleaner rented space. Mr. Hammar said he reviewed two other dry cleaners within plazas and found out that the companies were licensed and governed by the state. He said that there was only one chemical used in the dry cleaning machine that would need to be taken out and placed into a special container. He researched how it was regulated and said that they would receive copies of the paperwork to ensure that the dry cleaner was not flushing things down a drain. Mr. Culbert was concerned about the wetlands and wanted to ensure that no chemicals or spot remover would be flushed into the septic system. Mr. Hammar said that nothing would be added to the septic.
There was no public input.
Mr. Danevich said that the Board had requested updated site plans for any commercial business. He also believed the Fire Chief should review and provide written comment. Mr. Hammar had a letter from the Fire Chief that Mr. Danevich reviewed. The letter mainly addressed design guidelines inside the building. Mr. Danevich said that he would need the one-page memo from the Fire Chief that showed concurrence with the plan. Mr. Hammar said that the Fire Chief wanted to review and address everyone on an individual basis.
Mr. Culbert asked if the plan needed to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Danevich said that site plan change-of-use fell under the Planning Board's jurisdiction. Mr. Culbert was unclear how many uses the building was approved for. Mr. Mitchell said that the past meeting minutes did not contain the number of uses permitted. Mr. Scanzani said that per the 1986 plan, the uses were a retail store and manufacturing. He said that the plan did not show the useable land and should also be updated for review by the Fire Chief. Mr. Hammar said that the Fire Chief and his assistant reviewed the site and said that they would review each company as a separate entity. He said the Fire Chief wanted to review each as an individual basis depending on the type of business. Mr. Hammar once again asked for permission to make the building listed as multi-use. He said they could then move forward with advertising available space and would at that point be required to call into the Fire Department directly.
Mr. Danevich didn't feel that the Board objected to the intended change of use. He said that the Board would not approve the change until an updated site plan was filed with the Town. He also asked that the Fire Chief have the opportunity to review the updated site plan. There was a brief discussion regarding the requirements for site plans. Mr. Danevich suggested that Mr. Hammar discuss the requirement for a site plan. Mr. Mitchell assumed that at some point in the past, a site plan had been submitted to the Town.
Mr. Hammar asked if the Board could vote so that a couple businesses could be added without engineering the whole site. Mr. Danevich asked Mr. Lynde if he supported the request for a site plan. Mr. Lynde said that he knew the area and business and believed that the change would be approvable. He supported the request for the site plan because it was a Planning Board requirement.
Mr. Danevich said that the plan would be date specified to July 1, 2002. He said that the Board requested an updated site plan and also written comment from the Fire Chief that he had reviewed. There was a brief discussion for what the site plan should include. Mr. Lynde said that whatever business came in would fall within the guidelines and not exceed parking needs identified on the lot.
Map 5 Lot 104, 113, 115 - Sousa Realty & Development - Lawrence Corner Road - Proposed 20-Lot Subdivision for continued Consideration
Ms. Bousa informed that Mr. Sousa owned a piece of property in another town that her firm was currently working on. She said that she was not directly engaged by Mr. Sousa, but was engaged by the retailer. She said if either the Board or the applicant would like her to step down, she would. Ms. Bousa felt that she could be unbiased. There was no objection to Ms. Bousa remaining on the Board.
Mr. Danevich said that there had been a couple updates since the last meeting. He said the question came back and stemmed from whether Lawrence Corner Road was subject to gates and bars and being closed. He said the short answer was that it was no longer closed to gates and bars and was repealed in 1988. Mr. Danevich read a portion of a letter submitted by Attorney Diane Gorrow, Town Attorney which reviewed Attorney J. Bradford Westgate's research, which included the 1988 Warrant at the Town Meeting vote. Also attached was a copy of the February 1, 1988 Planning Board hearing minutes, which considered whether to consider the 1988 Warrant Article, as well as a copy of the 1972 Town Meeting Warrant. Attorney Gorrow's memo noted that the developer owned all the land upon which they proposed to build Lawrence Corner Road. Based upon the fact that Lawrence Corner Road was discontinued on parcel 5-113, the new road could be constructed through normal Planning Board process. Later acceptance of the road could be either through Town Meeting, or by the Selectmen under RSA 674:40a, if the authority had been granted to the Selectmen through Town Meeting. Mr. Danevich said Attorney Gorrow's letter had been provided to the Board members as well as the applicant. He said the Board would accept as not being closed to gates and bars.
Mr. Tony Basso, Haynor/Swanson presented the plan to the Board. He began by reviewing the plan. He said they were proposing twenty new lots with a loop road system. He said there would by two wetland impacts. He said the plans had been reviewed by CLD (Town Engineer) and that CLD had done a traffic study.
Mr. Basso reviewed the issues that the Board discussed at the previous meeting. He said the status of Lawrence Corner Road had been taken care of. He said that a right-of-way to the Lynch parcel had been added to the plan. Mr. Basso said CLD had brought up a concern of site distance at the intersection of Mammoth Road and Castle Hill Road and the Board had asked what it would take to achieve the NHDOT 400' requirement. He said that his field crew surveyed the route and laid out a profile to see where the site distance problem was, and in doing so, he found that he had the 400' site distance. He then contacted Mr. Tom Sommers, CLD, to review, who agreed with the findings and submitted a memo. He said that CLD wanted to see the 500' ISD (intersection site distance) from AASHTO, which Mr. Sousa had offered a contribution toward a project of $1000 per lot, if the Town wanted to someday pursue and 80/20 split with the state.
Mr. Basso went on to review the Board's concerns. He said if the Board desired, Mr. Sousa would provide a 100' no-cut buffer to the industrial park on lot 5-104-4. He said that the distance from the loop to Lawrence Corner Road and Castle Hill Road was approximately 1500'. He said that for a future connection/access, an easement had been provided over the Old Lawrence Corner Road.
Mr. Basso noted that there was a pile of construction debris on an abutting parcel that went onto Mr. Sousa's land. He said that a certified letter had been sent requesting that the pile be removed. The abutter responded by saying they didn't know where their property line was. Mr. Basso said that the property line had been staked several months ago, but the abutter had taken no action. Mr. Danevich asked how far up the pile the stakes went. Mr. Basso said he didn't see the stakes in the field, but believed they were approximately 10-'-15' up the pile.
Mr. Basso said that Lawrence Corner Road was approximately 16' wide and had discussed in the past to widened it to 20' with 2' wide shoulders just up to the point of the project, where it would become a Town standard road. He said that CLD supported the amount of widening, which was also AASHTO supportable widening.
Mr. Basso said that he had asked, but had not received any direction from the Board regarding the intersection of Lawrence Corner Road and Castle Hill Road, which was approximately 65 degrees. He said the Town required between 60 - 90 degrees. He said they were asked to consider altering the angle to be closer to 90 degrees. He said if the Board wanted some pavement could be removed on the easterly side of Lawrence Corner Road to create a more defined, closer to 90-degree intersection.
Mr. Tom Sommers, CLD said he had been to the site several times, reviewing the site distance, which was originally measured at 3.5' elevation (eye to object height a criteria recommended by AASHTO). He said the state criteria was 3.75', which would enable the applicant to meet the 400' site distance (with minor clearing of vegetation). Mr. Sommers recognized that the applicant met the 400' site distance, but preferred that the site distance be 500' per AASHTO. Mr. Scanzani noted that in Mr. Sommers' memo there needed to be a 6" clearance above the ground (with the 3.75' eye/object and 400' site distance) for the intersection. Mr. Sommers said that 6"-10"was for a normal car. Mr. Scanzani was concerned with safety during adverse weather. He felt that 500' made more sense. Mr. Sommers agreed with Mr. Scanzani's concern, and reiterated that the state requirement was 400'. Mr. Lynde discussed the actual speed traffic traveled in the area. Mr. Sommers said that per AASHTO, if the posted speed limit was 40mph, a speed limit of 45mph would be used to make the determination for the site distance, which was 500'. Mr. Culbert noted that the Board always followed AASHTO and would be making an exception if it weren't followed in this case.
Mr. McNamara asked for further clarification of the gap time, which he felt, would strengthen the argument that the site distance was not sufficient. Mr. Sommers said that the time gaps fit with what the distance was found to be. He said that AASHTO recommended 7.1 seconds as the critical gap to successfully take a left turn. He said that when he measured the gap was consistently 5-6 seconds.
Mr. Scanzani asked if the width at the corner of Lawrence Corner Road at the intersection of Mammoth Road was okay. Mr. Sommers felt the width was fine. He said CLD recommended cutting it down some to have a defined roadway of Lawrence Corner Road entering into Castle Hill Road.
Ms. Bousa felt that the Board needed to decide what speed should be reviewed (design, posted or actual) to determine the correct site distance. She wanted to know what the cost of the roadway project would be. Mr. Basso said that the project was estimated to be 500' long and would cost approximately $250 per foot (a total of $125,000). He said that they would contribute $1000 per lot and the 20% split from the 80/20 split would actually be $25,000.
Mr. Danevich noted that Mr. Sommers recognized that the 400' site distance was met, but that he recommended 500'. He also wanted to recognize the voluntary contribution for off-site exaction.
Mr. Danevich moved the discussion to the Old Lawrence Corner Road and Castle Hill Road intersection. Mr. Sommers did not have a problem with the concept for straightening the road out and concurred with the design.
Mr. Danevich went on to discuss the road width of 20' widening to 26' within the proposed subdivision. Mr. Sommers said the width had been discussed in the field. He referred to AASHTO, which says that a 20' wide road with 2' shoulders was adequate for the less than 400 vehicular trips. He said that there were wider areas proposed to enable larger vehicles to pass. Mr. Brouillet asked if the full build-out from the access point had been considered as well as the build-out access to the Lynch property. Mr. Sommers said that the Lynch property had a right-or-way along an entire road as well as Castle Hill Road, therefore providing more than one connection. He said they represented approximately 200 trips, which was within AASHTO. Mr. Sommers summarized to say that CLD did not have a problem decreasing the road width from 26' to 20'. Mr. Danevich said there was no precedent and was concerned with creating a 'bottleneck' design. Mr. Culbert believed that reducing the road would create a safety hazard. Mr. Brouillet felt that consideration to be given to bicycles and pedestrians who would have a limited ability to share the road. Mr. Scanzani said that the trip counts may be currently met, but the build-out had not been reviewed and felt that if more homes were added the standards may be exceeded. Mr. Sommers said that he reviewed the vacant land up the hill and said that 25'-30' cuts would have to be made, not taking into consideration what would need to be done on the other property to make the connection. He made the assumption that there would be a traffic limitation on the road. Mr. Scanzani asked what would happen if the Lynch property were developed. Mr. Sommers said that there was a multitude of access ways. Mr. Scanzani said that there would be access to the proposed subdivision, which may exceed the trip counts. Mr. Sommers said theoretically the trip count could be exceeded if there were more than twenty lots on the Lynch parcel. Mr. Scanzani said that he did not recall a subdivision with a similar road width without making the entire adjustments to the road mandatory for safety purposes.
Mr. DeLuca asked if the trees and walls were substantial. Mr. Basso said that there were some substantial trees. Mr. Danevich believed there was also a historic farm with a wall alongside the road. Mr. Scanzani felt that the climate should be considered. He said that snow would also further limit the road. Mr. Danevich said that within the past four years there had only been two instances that the Board reduced the paved width from 26' to 24' within the 500' category. He said the reasons for the two reductions were: 1) to reduce wetland impact and 2) reduce the amount of impervious surface.
Mr. Brouillet believed the Staff (f/k/a Safety Committee) had reviewed the plan and had a big concern over the site distance and need Mr. Sommers' memo. He said the Staff had issue with the street names and asked that the names differentiate between the circle and the main road. Mr. Danevich said the plan was accepted under the old subdivision regulations, which didn't have the street name submission requirement. Mr. Basso said he would voluntarily provide the road names for acceptance.
Mr. Scanzani said that under the current subdivision regulations, the road width, of the existing road, would not meet the requirements even though the proposed new subdivision road would. He asked if a waiver request was in order, which he would not be in favor of granting.
Mr. Lynde asked what the road length was from the point of egress, which led the Board to question what date the application was accepted. Mr. Mitchell informed that the application was accepted September 20, 2001.
Mr. Basso said that the proposed road would be approximately an additional 1000' to the furthest point. He said that the road was not a cul-de-sac, but a loop that had two access ways from the beginning of the new road.
Mr. Danevich said a remaining issue was the shared driveway. Mr. Basso said that the lots would have individual driveways.
Mr. Kim Hazavarian, Principal Engineer with TEPP LLC began by discussing the proposed width of Lawrence Corner Road. He said that they were proposing a 20' pavement with 2' shoulders plus turnouts. He had the conviction, based upon references and his engineering judgement that the road was adequate. He reviewed the AASHTO guidelines for very low volume roads, which state that 18' would work for up to 400 vehicles per day, which the proposed subdivision would have half the volume on a 20' wide road. He believed the trip count would remain under the guideline if up to twenty homes were added. He also believed if there were more than twenty houses and the traffic were split, they would still have under the 400-trip count. He noted that the AASHTO guidelines for a more general design, recommended a pavement width of 20' with 5' shoulders to carry between 400-1500 trips per day. Mr. Hazavarian said that the project was not precluding the widening of Lawrence Corner Road later on should another developer add trips to the road. Mr. Hazavarian referred to the subdivision regulations and noted that the cross section would fit the environs. He said that one of the techniques for traffic calming was to make roads not overly wide to discourage speeding. He agreed that sharing the road with bicycles and pedestrians was important, and felt that they could share the 20' road, based on volume. He said that a 'bottleneck' could be dealt with by using tapering.
Mr. Hazavarian moved on to discuss the site distance at Mammoth Road and Castle Hill Road. He said they had reviewed the accident records of the intersection at the NHDOT and found that over the past ten years (1991-2000) there had been three accidents. He said there were three ways to review site distance: 1) NHDOT 400' regardless of speed; 2) stopping site distance (SSD) (according to AASHTO); 3) intersection site distance (ISD) (according to AASHTO). Mr. Hazavarian said that the Green Book suggests that the SSD should be met for intersection safety, providing that ISD gives extra distance that is an operational enhancement. He said that the site distance was a pre-existing condition and didn't feel that the amount of traffic that the project added would not change the character of operations at the intersection. He informed that the applicant was agreeing to make a contribution far in excess of the percentage contribution of the traffic added to the intersection.
Mr. Hazavarian brought up the angle of Lawrence Corner Road and Castle Hill Road, which the applicant had agreed to improve. He noted that AASHTO states that 60 -120 degrees is okay. He said the current angle was 65 degrees.
Mr. Hazavarian concluded his remarks by saying the transportation system would be sufficient with the development. He said the growth cross-section of Lawrence Corner Road was adequate based on the research of references and engineering judgement. He said the applicant would participate in increasing the intersection site distance. He said that the intersection and study area had adequate capacity to provide adequate levels of service through the year 2012.
Mr. Scanzani reviewed Mr. Hazavarian's report that stated the paved area would be 18' of pavement with 2' of solid gravel. Mr. Hazavarian said that the paved area would be 20', with 2' of gravel, plus turnouts. He said that the design was finalized after the report was written. Ms. Bousa asked if the 2' could be paved. Mr. Basso said he would need to review, but said it was possible.
Mr. Lynde asked if snow removal had been taken into consideration. Mr. Hazavarian said that the AASHTO guidelines were based on research from the whole country and assumed that snow plowing was considered. Mr. Lynde noted that there may have been only three accidents at the Castle Hill Road intersection, but the traffic would be doubled at the intersection with the proposed subdivision.
Mr. Culbert asked for clarification of the term operational enhancement. Mr. Hazavarian said that the term operational enhancement in the Green Book meant that if SSD was the only thing provided, then cars travelling along a main street would have to adjust their speed for when cars pulled out from a side street. He said that SSD applied to intersections and that ISD provided additional site distance at intersections. Mr. Culbert asked if the applicant had 500' site distance. Mr. Hazavarian said that the 500' was ISD, not SSD. He said that the plan did not have the 500' ISD per AASHTO, but did have the AASHTO SSD.
Mr. DeLuca wanted to know if the road were 24' if it would go up against the stone wall and trees. Mr. Basso said there would be some tight spots that would require some cutting and would not provide much room for a shoulder beyond it.
Ms. Bousa felt more comfortable if the 24' cross-section were paved for emergency vehicles and pedestrian safety. Mr. Brouillet's concern with paving the shoulder was that shoulders often serve as a function to get water out of a road and felt that the integrity of the construction of the road may by compromised. Mr. Sommers said that the only way around it would be to add catch basins, which would then require curbing. Mr. Brouillet asked if profiling cross-sections were provided for the section of road. Mr. Basso said that a profile and an enlightenment were provided to CLD. Mr. Brouillet asked if there was a cut, fill or balanced. Mr. Basso said it was close, they were trying to stay with what was out there. Mr. Sommers said there was no major change in grade.
Mr. DeLuca asked if the paving for the project was 24' so that there would not be a need for tapering. Mr. Lynde suggested 20' for the entire length of the loop.
Mr. Hazavarian wanted to clarify any confusion regarding SSD and ISD. He said that SSD was normally used for their standard intersection analysis. He said that the ISD went one step beyond.
Attorney J. Bradford Westgate of Winer & Bennett, LLP, representing Sousa Realty & Development said he had written a letter to the Board dated May 9, 2002 and went on to review some of the points stated. He said the first item was the concept of proportionality test, which was connecting what off-site improvements may be required for subdivision approval with what a developer was obligated to do. He said the basic concept was that a developer was only obligated to bear his proportional share of off-site improvements or bear those, which are rationally connected by way of the proportional share. He said the proportionality test had relevance in two issues, the first being the pavement width and design of the existing Lawrence Corner Road. He said that the traffic volume generated from the project (approximately 200 cars per day) would be adequately handled under the AASHTO standards of an 18' pavement width, and therefore would be handled with the proposed 20' pavement width. He believed that the 20' pavement width was more than an adequate fix for what traffic the project would generate. He ended by saying that was the proportionality or rational connection to what they were imposing versus the impact on the road.
Attorney Westgate said a similar thought pertained to the Mammoth Road intersection that the 400' site distance was adequate, even though Mr. Sommers preferred the ISD calculation of 500'. He believed the intersection met typical design standards, however they were willing to offer up to $20,000 ($1000 per lot) for a Town project which improves the intersection site distance of the north to the 500' distance under the preferred ISD standard. He believed, from a legal point of view, that no improvements should be imposed on the project, since what they were doing didn't rationally connect to the need for improvement since the site distance was already there. Attorney Westgate noted that the traffic trips into the intersection were a bit under the 20% contribution that would be made. In general, he felt that the improvement suggested and the contribution proposed more than met the proportionality test that they were required to undertake.
Attorney Jim Tamposi, representing members of the Lynch family discussed the proposed subdivision with the Board. He said the Lynch farm (a/k/a Mary farm) was at the corner of Lawrence Corner Road and Castle Hill Road. He said there were no problems widening the road and wished the Board would make it a requirement. He said at the last meeting, and currently still, his clients felt the project to be a scattered and premature. He said the applicant offered to put $1000 per lot in a fund toward road improvements on Mammoth Road, which didn't mean it would be done today, but would be done when the state came through with the remaining 80% of the money. Attorney Tamposi discussed the traffic flow and said that the intersection was dangerous. He didn't feel the Board should set a precedent on Mammoth Road. He believed that three accidents were a lot for the intersection since there wasn't much traffic coming out of the intersection. Attorney Tamposi discussed the 400' site distance, which was a standard set and was not specific to the actual intersection. He said the site should be reviewed as it stood, taking into consideration inclement weather and the actual speed that traffic flowed. Attorney Tamposi discussed the widening of Lawrence Corner Road and said that the drainage for the road had not been addressed. He said under the law, a subdivision was scattered and premature if the health, safety and general welfare of the Town could not be met. He said there were approximately thirty catch basins within the subdivision, which indicated there was a lot of water on the parcel. He questioned where the water would eventually go.
Mr. Jay Lynch, 20 Roosevelt Avenue of Hudson, discussed the proposed right-of-way. He asked if the right-of-way could be moved over to go through the old bar way, due to the topography of the land.
Mr. David Lynch said that the site line on Lawrence Corner Road, near the existing home, had not been discussed. He didn't feel the current width was adequate, since it was tight for two cars to pass.
Attorney Bill Mason, representing members of the Lynch family, reviewed the plans. He said that Lawrence Corner Road, on the tax maps went into two parcels (lots 5-113 and 5-104). He said that for purposes of the subdivision lots 5-113 and 5-104 were being combined and made 5-104. He said it seemed like the centerline of the road appeared to be bisected by the tax map line of 5-113 and 5-104. He discussed the subdivision plan with regard to lot 5-114, and said it appeared that Lawrence Corner Road traveled through a portion of lot 5-104. He said he reviewed the Warrant Article, and it did not reference lot 5-104 and believed the Board may need clarification of where Lawrence Corner Road traveled through. He didn't feel that the action of the Town in 1988 served to discontinue the portion of Lawrence Corner Road that traveled through lot 5-104. Attorney Mason felt the Board should take a proactive approach with regard to road width and drainage since there would be further development in the area. He discussed the road width issue and believed that due to weather and pedestrian safety a 24' paved area may be a more appropriate width. He also noted that the Board may need to review the drainage and curbing.
Mr. Danevich noted that the letter from Town Counsel addressed lot 5-104, and suggested that if the plan were approved and Lawrence Corner Road was developed and accepted by the Town, the Town may want to consider discontinuing the old corner of the road as it exists on lot 5-114. The letter went on to suggested that the only other discontinuance issue that might require a Town meeting vote would be if Lawrence Corner Road existed on any part of lot 5-104, which would create a cloud on the title for the lots carved out from lot 5-104. Attorney Westgate said the question of lot 5-104 had been researched, and didn't feel that the entirety of a road would be discontinued leaving a small gap in the center. He said leaving the gap would not be the intention of the discontinuity act. He said when the history of the deeds was investigated, the road did bisect the lots along where Attorney Mason pointed out. He said that he had Mr. Basso's firm, Haynor/Swanson investigate the question and the Chief Surveyor, Mr. Gary Collins prepared a memo that outlined the history and showed that the road did bisect lots 5-101 and 5-113. He said the road traveled fully along lot 5-113 and was therefore was fully discontinued because the Warrant Article discontinued the entirety of Lawrence Corner Road along 5-113. Attorney Westgate maintained his belief that there was not an issue, but said if there was, it would be a title issue for the developer and not a regulatory issue.
Mr. Culbert asked what the status would be if the portion of the road was not discontinued. Attorney Westgate said the road would arguably be still subject to the public servitude. He went on to reference his memo of May 9, 2002 which addressed the 'scattered and premature' issue raised by Attorney Tamposi. He said that the notion of a scattered and premature subdivision is one that sufficient town services aren't in the area to accommodate the subdivision, which was not the case in this instance. He said the proposed subdivision was close to a major thoroughfare and would be serviced by on site septic systems and wells. He said with the proposed improvements, there was adequate road system into the project. Attorney Westgate said that they would take care of their proportionate share, and more so, of the necessary impacts that the project imposed. He said the proposed plan deserved conditions of approval that adequately addressed the Lawrence Corner Road issue as well as the preferred site distance issue on Mammoth Road through and overall Town project.
Mr. Lynde didn't feel that the right-of -way onto the Lynch property should head toward an area that would need wetland crossings. He also noted that there was no open space provisions or recreation space. It was his understanding that the words cul-de-sac and dead-end were used interchangeably. He said that the cul-de-sac issue should be addressed. He said the furthest point should be calculated.
Mr. Culbert referenced the Mammoth Road and Castle Hill Road intersection and said he didn't feel comfortable with the site distance being less than 500'. His said another concern was the narrowing of the road and even though tapering was mentioned, it was not indicated on the plan. He questioned the right-of-way because the plan didn't show where it went. He said that the Board normally required that right-of-ways lead to developable land. Mr. Culbert ended by saying he shared Mr. Lynde's concern regarding the length of the road.
Mr. McNamara felt that both attorneys had made a good case for and against the premature development issue. He referenced the Zukis v. Town of Fitzwilliam case, which said in part, 'at the point where such a hazard is created, further development becomes premature'. Mr. McNamara said if the Board accepted the premise that there was a hazardous situation with the site distance on Mammoth Road, which CLD's memo and testimony suggested that was the case, and the Board considered that the be the hazard within Zukis, the development would be premature. He said he appreciated the applicant's offer to donate some money per parcel to mitigate the problem, but didn't feel that concern applied to premature development. He said the current condition seemed to be hazardous, and by approving the proposed, more traffic would be added, and a further potential for accidents would be created. He said that everyone knew how fast people drove in the area, therefore making the area not particularly safe. Mr. McNamara felt it was a little self-serving of Mr. Tamposi's client for discussing the improvements and requesting the right-of-way. He said when the project and improvements were complete, Mr. Tamposi's client's parcel would then become developable without them having input to the development. Mr. McNamara said he would have a hard time approving the plan without having some kind of plan in place that would mitigate the site distance problem. He said if the Board went with the premise that the project was premature and there was a hazardous condition, the development would remain premature unless the hazardous conditions were alleviated. He felt that the funneling of the road from 26' to 20', in conjunction with the site distance created a bit of a hazard.
Mr. Scanzani said that historically the Board reviewed roads for their safety as well as how they would be for the Town, long term. He said the Board had actual history of the speeds on Mammoth Road, and to require a safe site distance would be in the purview of the Board. He said that he would not vote for a road that had 20' of pavement that continued and created a funnel. He felt that snow removal, pedestrian safety and drainage should be taken into consideration. He could not recall a waiver precedent for a road narrowing to the degree proposed. Mr. Scanzani didn't feel that the applicant adequately addressed the road drainage. He said that part of the reason the road had been closed to gates and bars was due to the road condition. He said that the Town now had a good set of plans for why the length of road was being reviewed for cul-de-sacs. Mr. Scanzani said that the Board had to review long-term public safety. He understood the premature development situation and believed that it had to do with the actual conditions, not the location. He felt the premature condition could be eliminated if the road were brought up to the proper specs. He said he would not be able to approve the plan as it currently was.
(Culbert/McNamara) To deny the plan for the following specific reasons: 1) safety issue at the Mammoth Road intersection on the belief that the 400' was not adequate and would cause a hazardous situation to put more traffic into that intersection; 2) going from a 26' to a 20' wide road created an additional hazard; 3) a problem with the right-of-way going to the Lynch property because it is unclear if it goes anywhere that could be extended; 4) there was no waiver for the length of the road; 5) reviewing from a safety standpoint, the knowledge of the site; 6) road drainage for Old Lawrence Corner Road has not been adequately addressed, when the road has been widened to the 20' the road drainage issues have not been properly addressed; 7) premature development based on a road hazard existing in the area (not the fact that the Town could not provide services to the area).
(7 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.
Mr. Danevich said a memo would be drafted informing of the denial.
Administrative Break.......
Mr. Danevich reviewed the agenda and date specified the following plans to the July 1, 2002 meeting:
Map 12 Lot 44 - Hart, Jordan & White - Shephard Road/Mulberry Lane - Proposed 28 Lot Subdivision
Map 9 Lot 9-2 - East View Corporation - Off Simpson Mill Road - Proposed 9-Lot Subdivision
Map 3 Lot 88-2 & 89 - M&P Realty Trust - Priscilla Way and Nashua Road - Proposed 6-Lot Subdivision for continued Consideration
Mr. Peter Zohdi, Herbert Associates presented the plan to the Board. He said that the Board had previously reviewed the subdivision and they were now seeking final approval. He reviewed the changes made to the plan and said that there was an existing lot of record now shown, the road configuration was changed to add some land to one of the lots, and that the sixth lot would be deeded to theTown if the Town wanted it. He said that all the lots were checked by Mr. Brouillet and Mr. Tom Sommers of CLD, and believed that all the lots were satisfactory.
Mr. Danevich said that the Staff (f/k/a Safety Committee) had submitted a memo requesting the feasibility of connecting the road through to Nashua Road. He said that he met with both the Fire Chief and the Police Chief and was able to explain the reasons why the connection would not be possible and at that point received verbal concurrence acknowledgement why the connection could not be done. He said the reasons the road could not be connected were as follows: 1) site distance reduced to 300'; 2) grade consideration coming down to Nashua Road; 3) wetland impact and the amount of displacement of the WCD. He said that the Fire Chief came in at the last meeting and was amiable, from a fire perspective to the extension of the cul-de-sac.
Ms. Ouellette and Mr. Lynde asked if there was a frontage issue. Mr. Zohdi said the frontage issue was resolved at the last meeting by Mr. Mitchell, who informed that the new regulations said the narrowest portion of the lot would have to be 75'. He said that the new plan showed 75' of frontage onto Priscilla Road. He said at the last meeting there had been a question of driveway placement, and the logical placement for the driveway on lot 23 would come from Priscilla Way. He said if the Board felt the driveway should be located on the portion of the lot with 200' frontage, his client would like to reserve the right to go before the Board of Adjustment and request a Variance. Mr. Zohdi pointed out that the Board had never interpreted the zoning in such a way. He said that placing the driveway on the 200' portion of the parcel would require a wetland crossing, but placing the driveway from Priscilla Way would not.
Mr. Lynde said that he understood what Mr. Zohdi was saying, but believed the Zoning Ordinance was clear when it defined frontage as the length of the lot bordering on the public right-of-way and served as the access to the lot and the requirement was 200'. Mr. Danevich said he had discussed the issue with past Board members who believed the spirit and intent frontage was that the lot had 200' frontage someplace on a class five road. He said that the Board should be consistent. Mr. Scanzani said that historically the Board had interpreted the ordinance as stated by Mr. Danevich and had always addressed and determined the placement of driveways. Mr. Zohdi didn't feel that zoning stated that access had to be from 200'.
Mr. McNamara read a portion of Zoning Ordinance 307:14, which addressed the issue of frontage. Mr. Lynde asked that Zoning Ordinance 307:6, 8 that defined frontage. Mr. McNamara felt that past practice contradicted the wording in the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Brouillet understood that if the Board recommend that the driveway continue the driveway from Priscilla Way, the developer would need to go before the Board of Adjustment and seek a Variance. Mr. Zohdi said that if he could not get approval to place the driveway from Priscilla Way, he would place the driveway from Nashua Road, but would reserve the right to seek a Variance from the Board of Adjustment.
Mr. Danevich believed that the prevailing issues were the Board's history, common sense piece, the dramatic fire and safety concern, the wetlands impact and overall accessibility. There was a brief discussion regarding the past practice of the Board for pieces that had been approved with similar instances. Mr. McNamara felt there had been a misinterpretation of zoning. Mr. Zohdi believed that the Board could approve the plan with the driveway coming from Nashua Road, but also support his case to the Board of Adjustment to have the driveway from Priscilla Way. The Board went on to discuss the spirit and intent of the Zoning.
Mr. Philip Currier, said there had been a twenty-year history and explained that the term Administrative Gloss, used in the law, that a Board may put as it interprets its ordinance, and if it goes on long enough, that would in effect become the way the ordinance was interpreted by the Board. He wanted to be clear that the Board was changing the Administrative Gloss of at least twenty years that applied to the ordinance. He wanted felt the change was unwise and wanted to make clear that the change would apply to everyone in the future.
Mr. Lynde said that after review of the ordinance, he had to interpret what he read. Mr. Currier said the interpretation had been consistent for twenty years. He urged the Board to stay with the interpretation and approve the plan. Mr. McNamara discussed the wording of the Zoning Ordinance, which stated 'and', not 'or'. He said the Board was interpreting it contrary to that. Mr. Currier said the prior argument made for years by the Board was that the word 'access' was used, and the ordinance did not say that the driveway had to be on the 200' portion of a lot. He said the ordinance could have been changes, but wasn't because the Board was satisfied with the Administrative Gloss, which no one had ever appealed. Mr. Scanzani said if the Fire Department had to put out a fire, it would have access from two roads, not driveway access, but just access. He then made a motion to approve the plan, as is, as the Board had done in the past with other plans, with 200' frontage onto a Town owned road and place driveways wherever they make sense. Mr. Culbert seconded the motion based on the Board's past interpretation. Mr. Danevich noted that the cul-de-sac waiver needed to be voted on first.
(Scanzani/Culbert) To approve the waiver of the cul-de-sac length as it is, under the new regulations.
(6 - 0 - 1) The motion carries. Mr. Lynde abstained because he disagreed with the 2400'.
(Scanzani/Culbert) To approve the plan as is.
(4 - 3 - 0) The motion carries. Mr. McNamara, Mr. Lynde and Ms. Ouellette voted no.
Mr. Danevich said he voted yes for the following reasons: 1) last segment and finishing four separate subdivision; 2) interpretation always has been the 200', which had been consistently applied as long as he had been on the Board and before and could site at least 20-30 parcels where the exact situation had occurred. He felt the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance was to have any portion of the lot with a contiguous 200' frontage on any Town road.
Administrative Break....
Mr. Danevich asked if the Board would reconsider holding a meeting June 17, 2002 to hear the Stonepost Village LLC case. There was a discussion and the Board was amiable holding a meeting on June 17, 2002.
The following case was date specified to June 17, 2002:
Map 12 Lot 41-43 - Stonepost Village LLC - Spring Street - Proposed 12-Lot Subdivision for continued Consideration
Map 4 Lot 139 - Normandy R.E. Holding Co. LLC - Valley Hill Road - Proposed 25-Lot Subdivision for continued Consideration
Mr. Peter Zohdi, Herbert Associates presented the plan to the Board. He said that they were proposing a 25-lot subdivision and an extension of Longview Road. He said the plan had been before the Board a few times and it had been decided to not connect through to Valley Hill Road. Mr. Zohdi said he met with Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Brouillet and Mr. Tom Sommers of CLD, and done everything he had been asked to. He believed that the plan was now ready for final approval. He said they were pushing the approval because the abutting apple orchard development needed the water line extension, which had to go through the proposed subdivision since the apple orchard lots had been waived from having individual wells. Mr. Zohdi believed that all issues were resolved on the plan. He said that he did not have a dredge and fill permit and needed the Board to make a decision before Conservation would act on the permit.
Mr. Danevich reviewed his list of concerns. He noted the need to change the 10' walking path to a 50' easement for access to state land and that the plan should clearly articulate the public access - Mr. Zohdi said he would change the plan to note a 50' right-of-way easement (without using the words walking) - The Board was in concurrence that the plan should be changed to have the 50' easement;
Mr. Tom Sommers, CLD said that almost everything had been done. He noted the following remaining issues: 1) bicycle safety/pedestrian access should be added per the regulations; 2) requirement for a 15,000SF buildable area be shown - Mr. Zohdi had agreed, at his meeting with Mr. Sommers to add the information to the topo plan; 3) also during his meeting with Mr. Sommers, Mr. Zohdi had agreed to change the intersection of Collins Way to a 3% grade - Mr. Sommers felt the grade change should be an approval stipulation; 4) a stipulation of signing the plan that the water line system be shown on the plan. Mr. Brouillet asked if there were slope issues that would require some additional engineering. Mr. Sommers said at his meeting with Mr. Zohdi, it had been agreed that there were two headwalls that should have the structural designs complete before the plan was signed. He said he was not opposed to the two K-factor waivers for vertical curves requested. He felt the waivers fit within AASHTO guidelines. Mr. Sommers was in basic support of the plan. Mr. Danevich said there should also be a stipulation that the Fire Chief has the opportunity to permanently locate fire hydrant placement. Mr. Zohdi said he had added a note (#11) to the front page of the plan.
Mr. McNamara asked how Rome Avenue connected within the plan. Mr. Zohdi discussed the connection with him. Mr. McNamara wanted to know how the construction vehicles would access the parcel. Mr. Zohdi said Conservation had approved the dredge and fill permit from Meadowview and believed a majority would be from that point.
Mr. Lynde wanted to now if the environmental impacts had been addressed. Mr. Danevich said that it had been addressed three separate times throughout the process of all three phases.
Ms. Bousa noted that there was not frontage noted on sheet 4 lot 31. Mr. Zohdi said he would add it.
Mr. Danevich reviewed the outstanding issues as follows: 1) lot frontage to be added to lot 31; 2) water plan design. Mr. Mitchell believed the Board should review lot 4-139-8 based on the recent interpretation of frontage and if the applicant could use Valley Hill Road. Mr. Zohdi said he was not proposing to use Valley Hill Road, but would instead be using Longview for the frontage. He also asked the Board to examine the shape of lot 4-139-23. Mr. Zohdi showed on the plan how the lot line could be change, if the Board wanted. He said he would work with Mr. Brouillet to adjust the lot line. Mr. Danevich reviewed the remaining issues. Mr. Mitchell noted that Valley Hill was fairly steep and believed that there should possibly be a no disturbance area. Mr. Zohdi said he could add a 75' no-cut or disturbance zone. He said the 75' could join the lots being deeded to the Town. Mr. Lynde asked if the land could be deeded to the Town. Mr. Zohdi said that instead of having the 75' no-cut area, he would instead deed 50' along the property line up to the lots already being deeded to the Town.
Mr. Danevich noted that the remaining issues were: 1) lot-line adjustment for lots 4-139-22 & 23; 2) adding a frontage note for lot 31; 3) adding the water plan design or Pennichuck; 4) Fire Chief comment with regard to placement of hydrants; 5) K-factor waivers; 6) two structure headwall plans; 7) 50' deed to the Town.
Mr. Yarmo discussed the proximity of the subdivision to the state park. He wanted to ensure the open space area was being utilized. Mr. Mitchell said that the plan provided for the connectivity.
(Culbert/Scanzani) To approve the plan with the following stipulations: 1) lot-line adjustment for lots 4-139-22 & 23; 2) adding a frontage note for lot 31; 3) adding the water plan design for Pennichuck; 4) Fire Chief comment with regard to placement of hydrants; 5) completing designs for K-factor waivers; 6) two structure headwall plans; 7) 50' deed to the Town for the back parcels.
(6 - 0 - 1) The motion carries. Mr. McNamara abstained
Discussion of engaging NRPC to assist the Town of Pelham with a Hazard Migration Plan
Mr. Danevich said a formal vote was needed to engage NRPC to assist the Town with the Hazard Migration Plan. He said there was no cost to the Town and if they required a subcommittee they would meet with the Board to request further discussion.
(Lynde/Culbert) To engage NRPC to assist the Town of Pelham with a Hazard Migration Plan.
(7 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.
MAHLEP Housing Limited Partnership discussion regarding request for Impact Fee waiver for Pelham Terrace
Mr. Danevich said that there were two impact fee waiver requests received from Pelham Terrace for the expansion of the building. He said one request was for the school and one request was for fire. Based on the amount of calls that go to Pelham Terrace he would not support the waiver request for fire. Mr. Danevich noted with regard to Elderly Housing there was a deed restriction on the property which made the school request different than if a resident were requesting the waiver.
(Culbert/McNamara) To waive the impact fee for the school based on the deed restrictions for Elderly Housing
(6 - 0 - 1) The motion carries. Mr. DeLuca voted no.
(Culbert/McNamara) To deny the request to waive the fire impact fee for Pelham Terrace.
(7 - 0 - 0) The motion carries.
Mr. Danevich reiterated that the waiver request for the fire impact fee was denied.
May 20, 2002
(Culbert/DeLuca) To accept the minutes of the May 20, 2002 Board meeting as amended.
(6 - 0 - 1) The motion carries. Mr. Scanzani abstained.
The following case was date specified to the June 17, 2002 meeting:
Map 12 Lot 41-43 - Stonepost Village LLC - Spring Street - Proposed 12-Lot Subdivision for continued Consideration
The following cases were date specified to the July 1, 2002 meeting:
Map 3 Lot 166-23 - Cady, Alan - Overlook Drive - Proposed 2-Lot Subdivision
Map 12 Lot 44 - Hart, Jordan & White - Shephard Road/Mulberry Lane - Proposed 28 Lot Subdivision
Map 9 Lot 9-2 - East View Corporation - Off Simpson Mill Road - Proposed 9-Lot Subdivision
A motion was made and seconded to adjourn the meeting.
The motion was adjourned at approximately 11:15 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Charity A. L. Willis
Recording Secretary


text:
'PlayStation Store Holiday Sale' Week 3: Far Cry 3, God of War Ascension, and more
Continuing the PlayStation Store Holiday Sale, Sony has posted the new list of PS3 and Vita games that will be discounted... Read More
Continuing the PlayStation Store Holiday Sale, Sony has posted the new list of PS3 and Vita games that will be discounted... Read More
The Black Ops 2 trailer was an explosion-y version of The Postman Read More
Captain America, Iron Man and others have definitely left their mark in the digital realm. Read More
PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale looks to be a Sony-themed Smash Bros. Should Nintendo fear the competition? Read More
Tweeting in the front seat. Tweeting in the back seat. Gotta make my mind up. What's the tweet of the da-ay? Read More
Gametrailers TV confirms this worst kept secret of 2012, complete with stupid name Read More
Here's five game series that would benefit from a change of location Read More
God of War: Ascension confirmed as a series prequel Read More
Box art and a trailer reveal that the recent God of War IV rumors were true Read More
French website claims a 'mysterious' PS3 title will be revealed during a live show Read More
Xenoblade has finally made it to North American Wii consoles. Does it deliver? Read More
Is it related to God of War IV? Read More
Gaming trilogies are awesome, and we highlight the best of the best Read More
Compatible with PlayStation Move Read More
Ever wondered what PS3 games have been completed 100% the most? Read More
GameZone looks at golden rule of three, and three games that failed to deliver their promised sequels Read More
Developing a 3rd person, action adventure for future home consoles Read More
Reverb Publishing wants to turn the tables of the game industry and put developers in charge. CEO Doug Kennedy explains his company's dedication to devs Read More
Have trouble finding all the relics in the Darkness II, let us walk you through all the locations Read More
A South African retailer is allowing gamers to pre-order the next adventure in the God of War series Read More

subset: commoncrawl


text:
U.S. Cautiously Optimistic Swine Flu is Mild
05.05.09 |
New Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius says they are taking a positive outlook.
05.05.09 |
New Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius says they are taking a positive outlook.
04.27.09 |
The governor has activated New York State's health emergency preparedness plan.
04.23.09 |
Women as young as 17 can buy the so-called "Plan B."
04.20.09 |
The mission: Making you more comfortable when you are in the hospital.
04.10.09 |
Vice President Joe Biden made the announcement yesterday.
04.08.09 |
President Obama is expected to direct the Health and Human Services Department to overturn the policy.
04.06.09 |
It really is healthy to eat your broccoli.
03.31.09 |
A California company is recalling pistachio products over salmonella concerns.
03.30.09 |
Researchers say ventricular reconstruction offers no real benefit.
03.29.09 |
Researchers have invented a way to give vaccines through a yogurt culture.


text:
Homemade proton pack pillows ain't afraid of no ghosts
Well, this is significantly cooler than any pillows you've currently got cluttering up your bed: proton pack pillows. Awesome.
These pillows, which are available for a steep $150 on Etsy, are lovingly detailed and appear to be wearable. Perfect for when you want to travel with your pillow and also look like the coolest dude at the airport! Unfortunately, the ghost trap doesn't come with the pack — it really should, right? — but despite that fact, I'm going to go ahead and call this the most awesome Ghostbusters-themed pillow ever made. Yeah, I said it.
Etsy via Geekologie


text:
- Bikes
- Building Your Bike
- How to Order
- About Seven
- Seven in the World
- Blog
- Store
Throughout my life I keep rediscovering a new and ever-growing lust for bikes. My dad taught me how to ride in the suburbs of Tampa where I grew up. To keep me from crying every time I fell he would fall with me and start laughing. The thrill of riding around the neighborhood turned into a form of transportation and onto a love of going real fast when I started racing and being more involved with bike culture in college. The track and the road were something I became dedicated to. Riding and learning how to work on my bike was a form of complete liberation for me. I wanted others to have access to such an incredible machine and started the Tampa Bay Bike Co-Op which is still standing today. Despite the learning curve of dealing with my first winters ever, my move to New England has only inspired me to ride in even more ways. I am now in love with mountain biking, my cross bike, and touring. I love working at a place where passion and inspiration come together to create something as beautiful as a Seven.
I manage and sass Rob Vandermark 9 hours a day, 5 days a week and then some.
Check out Lilys band.


text:
Hurricane Isaac could produce tornadoes in Arkansas
Updated On: Aug 28 2012 02:45:50 PM CDT
Forecasters are warning that tornadoes that develop from a tropical depression can spring up so quickly that there often isn't time to warn the public.
Hurricane Isaac is expected to reach Arkansas as a tropical depression, with wind and rain Thursday night into Friday. Wind speeds are forecast at 20 mph to 30 mph with higher gusts.
Between 2 inches and 5 inches of rain are forecast in the state's east, with around an inch in the west, if the forecast track for the storm holds.
National Weather Service meteorologist Chris Buonanno says small supercell thunderstorms can develop in tropical storm bands and produce tornadoes so quickly that in some cases it won't be possible to issue tornado warnings.
Those tornadoes tend to be relatively weak and dissipate quickly.
Copyright 2012 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


text:
A handful of critics of Redding Electric Utility like to point out that, for the power-thriftiest households, REU -- notwithstanding the city's claims of low rates -- is in fact more expensive than PG&E, thanks to REU's flat rates and monthly "access charge," which the city's lately increased. PG&E, meanwhile, has very low rates at the bottom "tier," and costs then climb steeply for heavy users.
Well, as the San Francisco Chronicle reports, the California Energy Commission has drawn up a plan for "sweeping changes" to PG&E's electric rate structure. One of the big changes? Making them look more like REU's.
The plan would phase out the current four-tier system and shift to just two tiers, raising charges on the lower tiers and cutting them at the top. (The lowest tiers, it's said, don't cover the cost of their power.) Meanwhile, the utilities would add either a fixed monthly charge or a monthly minimum to cover the costs of grid maintenance. So many Californians are throwing solar panels on their roofs -- a good thing -- that the utilities fear not having the money to maintain their grid. And most households, even if they're "net zero" on kilowatts, still use that grid as backup power.
All this is in addition to perhaps the most dramatic change: a proposal to shift to "time of use" rates for residences. Businesses already pay more for power during times of peak demand -- summer afternoon especially -- but most homes don't.
As far as I'm concerned, this is one of those ideas that's ingenious and economically efficient on paper, but really burdensome to the typical household. When it's 110 in Bella Vista, you're going to charge homes more to run their AC in the afternoon? Yes, that's when the utility's costs are highest as they fire up peaker plants, but keeping cool can be more than a matter of convenience. It's life and death for some.
In any case, especially if you're a PG&E customer, read the whole thing. Change is coming.


text:
Fix Your Own Appliances Orlando
Home appliances can be a wonderful addition to your home to make certain tasks easier and more enjoyable. They can even improve the look of your home with their modern, slick stylings and space age functionality. However, at one point in time, all of those perks come with the headaches of eventual breakdowns leading to costly repairs. Usually, you'd call some random appliance repair company and have them come to your home to assess the problem with your machine and give you an estimate that more often than not, is something you simply can't afford. Wouldn't it be great if you just knew how to fix your appliance repair problems on your own? Unfortunately, for most of us, that simply just isn't a viable solution. The time it would take to learn the skills needed to do this alone is something most us can't make time for in our busy schedules, but fear not… there is a solution. HomeTradie.com is your local directory to reliable and affordable home appliance repair services. We hand pick all of our directory members to ensure that we're offering potential consumers the highest quality home services companies at the most affordable prices. So, if you need that washing machine or dishwasher fixed, visit HomeTradie.com to find local service companies waiting and willing to do quality work at reasonable prices.


text:
Morrisville College Yearling Sale
Sunday, September 21, 2014
Hip 76 Royal Encore - RC Royalty - Spin The Planet
consigned by Morrisville College Equine
Purchased by Wanda Polisseni
Erin Shantal and crew with Royal Encore
Thank You to ALL who attended our 2014 Sale.
Special thanks to all those who inspected and bid on all the yearlings! All the best of racing luck with your new purchases!
And to the students, staff and consignors
who make this event so successful.
View the 2012 Morrisville Sale photo gallery
Privacy Policy


text:
Pacific Gas & Electric
Utility Customers Outraged Over Possible Fee To Cope With Revenue Loss From Popular Solar Panels
Some Southern California residents are outraged by a state bill that would allow three utility companies to charge customers up to $10 a month to cope with the loss of revenue due to the popularity of solar panels.
Calif. Sends Aircraft, Personnel To Aid East Coast During Sandy
The California National Guard and the state Emergency Management Agency have dispatched aircraft and rescue personnel to aid the East Coast during the superstorm.
Survey Finds Unremarkable Cancer Rate In Hinkley
A California state study has not revealed elevated cancer levels in the town of Hinkley, a small desert community whose struggles with contaminated groundwater inspired the award-winning "Erin Brockovich."


text:
The Vancouver Giants got their first two points of the season Sunday, a 3-2 victory over the visiting Spokane Chiefs, thanks in large part to rookie netminder Tyler Fuhr.He allowed two goals on 15 shots — both inside-out dekes on the PK that he can hardly be faulted for — but stopped every puck he should have. Tonight, Fuhr even made a save or two he probably shouldn't have, including a dramatic pad stop with seconds left to preserve the win. That's something the Giants haven't seen early this season, as Liam Liston has posted a disappointing .774 save percentage in his three starts thus far.
Monthly Archives: September 2012
Belfast Giants yet to lose a regulation league game
As many of you know, I vowed to follow the Belfast Giants this season as my personal snub of Gary Bettman and his
travelling shit show insistence upon another NHL lockout. Instead of writing substandard game recaps from afar, I've enlisted Giants seasons ticket holder Jim Doran to give us first hand reports from the capital of Northern Ireland. This is his second report for the 2012-13 season — the first can be read here.
by Jim Doran
I should probably set the scene somewhat for anyone unfamiliar with the UK Elite Ice Hockey League. The EIHL is made up of ten teams; four from England (Coventry Blaze, Hull Stingrays, Nottingham Panthers and Sheffield Steelers); four from Scotland (Braehead Clan, Dundee Stars, Edinburgh Capitals and Fife Flyers); the Cardiff Devils from Wales; and the Belfast Giants from Northern Ireland.
This season has seen the league spilt into two conferences for the first time. The four Scottish teams along with Hull comprise the Gardiner Conference, with the Giants joining the Steelers, Blaze, Panthers and Devils in the Erhardt Conference. The new format sees each club play teams in their own conference eight times during the season (four home / four away) and play the teams in the opposing conference four times (twice home / twice away). Continue reading
Victoria Royals 2012-13 home opener
Well, I was wrong. After letting in 5 goals on 17 shots in Friday's opening night loss at the Pacific Coliseum, Giants goaltender Liam Liston did not ride the bench in the next day's rematch. He performed better, but got the same result: a loss to the Victoria Royals. Pucked in the Head's new friend Adrian Charlie (@Adrian_Charlie on the Twitter) was in the building, and offers this game recap:
Victoria Royals 3, Vancouver Giants 2 – September 22, 2012
by Adrian Charlie
The Victoria Royals played host to the Vancouver Giants on Saturday in the team's home opener. The Royals carried momentum going into their second game of the season after defeating those same Giants 6-4 the night before.
Vancouver Giants 2012-13 home opener
Some things never change. Even with the NHL locked out, hockey fans in Vancouver are wondering just who will be the #1 goaltender for the home team.
No, not the Canucks — pretty much everyone agrees, for better or for worse, that Roberto Luongo's days are numbered around here — I'm talking about the Giants. Newly-acquired third-year netminder Liam Liston didn't inspire much confidence during the 2012-13 home opener Friday night, giving up five goals on 17 shots in a 6-4 loss to the Victoria Royals. Rookie Tyler Fuhr will almost certainly get the start in the second half of the back-to-back in the capital Saturday.
Of Movie Stars and Hockey Players
Approximately 4am on Sunday morning, I had an epiphany. I realized what the fundamental difference is between the positions of the NHLPA and the NHL. Please note that, in order to achieve this epiphany, I consumed large amounts of sugar and Red Bull in a desperate attempt to cling to consciousness while stumbling my way through a night shift. Now that your expectations have been sufficiently managed, here is my thought: the owners and the players have different ideas of what customers are paying for. Similar, yes, but subtly different.
September 14 – Grizzly Adams Wolfsburg at Hamburg Freezers
Opening day on the road is always a tough game. Wolfsburg found that out on Friday as they traveled north to Hamburg to take on the rival Hamburg Freezers. Packing the O2 World Arena Hamburg were 10,183 rabid, flag-waving fans, and the home team sent them home happy, defeating Wolfsburg 4-2. Continue reading
Episode 46 – Pardon The Interruption
In an unprecedented show of ambition, Pucked in the Head is today releasing its second podcast episode in as many weeks. This is sure to prove to be an unsustainable production level, so get in while you can! In a desperate, and mostly unsuccessful attempt to keep on time and on topic, we've modeled this episode after Pardon the Interruption. Only in this version, we don't know which topics the other is going to bring to the debate. Very little lockout stuff within! Continue reading
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Belfast Giants Season Preview
Knowing little and less about the British league, we've reached across the pond to long-time Belfast Giants supporter Jim Doran. Jim's kindly agreed to keep us updated on the Giants' 12-13 campaign. Make sure to give Jim a follow on twitter at @jai_dee.
The Belfast Giants are quite possibly best known across the pond for large dancing elves and that Mariah Carey Christmas video, but they are a hockey team, honestly. In fact the Giants can even count Theo Fleury amongst their past players. Yes, that Stanley Cup winning, Olympic gold medallist Theo Fleury who racked up a more than impressive 24 goals, 70 assists and 308 PiM in his 45 games for the Giants during the 2005-06 Elite League season. Continue reading
EHC Wolfsburg Grizzly Adams… uber Alles?
With the prospect of an NHL lockout looming, Pucked in the Head is taking measures to ensure our hockey nerdery can continue unabated. So it is that we delve into the hitherto unexplored realm of European hockey. Jason has chosen the Belfast Giants of the UK's Elite Ice Hockey League to tide him over. Having German heritage on my mother's side, I'll be turning my attention to the Deutsche Eishockey Liga. For the duration of the lockout, and maybe even beyond, I'll be following the (let's face it, hilariously named) EHC Wolfsburg Grizzly Adams. Finally, a chance to use that first year German course I took in 2001. Continue reading
Episode 45 – When Millionaires Fight Billionaires
After way, way, WAY too long, we at Pucked In The Head have finally found the time to not only record, but actually edit a podcast and upload it to the server. Yes, thank you. We're a little out of practice, so forgive us as we get a little ranty about the current NHL labour situation. Continue reading
Podcast: Play in new window | Download


text:
The Chipmunk Adventure
Saturday, 28 April 2012 20:44
Bumper art by Andrew Dickman
04.28.2012 - 21:18 | Evil_Pun
04.29.2012 - 15:25 | theshak - green screen fail!
05.01.2012 - 05:42 | Skuzbucketlickmyponybutt
04.30.2012 - 23:57 | PlayMp1
05.12.2012 - 08:11 | Haon
05.17.2012 - 19:56 | KingGramJohnson - VIP!
04.28.2012 - 21:30 | HypnoticGenes
04.28.2012 - 22:06 | TheAngryAnimeAddictChick, Critic, Chipmunks? I shall enjoy myself these past 20 minutes... and just when I was running out of things to do on the internets.
BWAH! It is pronounced: "BAG-DEE-SARE-EE-UN"
I loved the Chipmunks as a Kid, ironically, their first movie was the one I hated the most. I prefer to watch their Halloween special movies any time of the year.
04.28.2012 - 21:54 | FullofQuestions - They finally succumbed to the popular demand.
04.29.2012 - 01:25 | VismuttiMy thoughts exactly, these two need to crossover more! Moulin Rouge doesn't count, it was more about Brentalfloss.
Btw, I love the fourth wall jokes in this. xD Especially the "it's as if I wrote this" bit acknowledging the obviously different writing styles that you can almost always see clashing in crossovers.
04.30.2012 - 00:31 | Linklex7
04.28.2012 - 22:01 | Ukyo Convoy - Did you forget?It looks like both of you forgot there was a chipmunk show in the 60's.
It was called "The Alvin Show". It wasn't as good as the one from the 80's but it was OK for the time.
04.29.2012 - 20:14 | TragicGuineaPig
05.01.2012 - 15:54 | QuestionTheMajority
04.28.2012 - 22:04 | Ronka87I barely remember this movie, but I will never forget the Berlin Wall song. "Let the wall come down, crumble to the ground, and love will live in peace all around."
In hindsight it's got the cheesy, Captain Planet "If It's Doomsday It Must Be Belfast"-esque naive simplification of a complex idea, but at the same time as a kid I admired that it was talking about something relevant to the real world. Still cheesier than a ripe brie, though.
04.29.2012 - 09:01 | ladydisketteLOL, face it Critic, you knew it was only a matter of time until the pressure broke you. Almost everyone (including me) have been asking you to review this movie and you didn't disappoint. :)
I have to admit, watching this again, its alot more better and well-written compared to the live action movie and sequel despite its outdated eighties schtik. I would definitely show this to any little kids I know before I would let them watch the recent live-action movie version.
04.30.2012 - 17:57 | Ohsha - Lackadaisy Humans"bag-duh-czar-ian"
Wow the end song was bad.
Lindsay = Eleanor
Doug = Simon
You guys are missing an Alvin.
Klaus is a German name and German's are supposed to be acceptable targets b/c of the holocaust.
Notice too the apple they're fighting over is bigger than the rest.
You guys fuss alot about savages not steryotypical enough to be identified with any particular culture but don't mind Germans being mocked.
05.04.2012 - 18:51 | TheLaughingFishI'd argue that the French and the Germans aren't acceptable targets either. Nazi Germany was a FAR different place from what Modern Germany is, so the "They had the Holocaust so they're acceptable targets" is utter BS. Also, yeah we know France surrendered a lot. That was also a while ago. I don't get why they're acceptable targets now because of that.
I hate to be a Douchey McNitpick here, but the apple's only larger because 1) it's in front of the cart with all the other apples; the apples could actually *all* be that size and we just don't see it due to persepctive, and 2) Chipmunks aren't big animals to begin with even in the cartoon; that apple is about half the size of Alvin's head there so it probably IS a big apple to the chipmunks/chipettes.
I don't think it's the fact that pseudo-"savages" are being mocked in general, but the fact that the show is regarding tribal cultures as "savages" to begin with. It's the ethnocentric view that any person of tribal or native origin is a "savage" that is worrisome, not the fact that any one particular culture is being mocked.
05.01.2012 - 17:40 | 9anseanRonka87 are you sure that song was from this movie? I saw The Chipmuck Adventure quite a few times as kid (just because it happend to one of the few things my parents had taped off the Disney channel) and don't remember it having about the Berlin Wall. Plus the Wikipedia page has no song like that listed on the soundtrack though they did mention the whole Milibu Bikini Shop conection. I found that a little hard to believe initially and I've found some wiiiiiiiiiiiiiild conections to many a family movie that were not all that family friendly. I just never heard this one before and Lindsey gotten facts wrong sadly quite often (sorry to break it to ya). Though here's a little inconcissant. First we here the 1983 tv series was the first non-record production with the Chipmuncks, than ten minutes in were told they had "mostly" appeared in music only before the Chipettes.
Well anyway, the Malibu thing was right, but....I think you may have heard the song you remember from something else. BTW I tried googling the lyrics you posted, but didn't find anything.
05.01.2012 - 17:39 | 9anseanFOUND IT!
It was from a episode of the Chipmuncks tv series in the 7th season (OMG it really lasted THAT long!) from December of 1988. It was about Alvin trying to unite a girl with her brother who was living on the otherside of the wall and how he mobilizes a lot of other Berliners to tear it down. Ironicly this was less than a year before the wall really did come down. And here I though all the inspiration came from the Hoff!
04.28.2012 - 22:04 | musiclover9293I've actually wanted you to do this movie for a while. Thank you SO much!
04.29.2012 - 21:29 | Hinatachan360 - The Title Card...Squee!
04.28.2012 - 22:12 | kschenke
05.01.2012 - 17:12 | 9anseanIt's also weird to remember this was made back in the days were it was not uncommon to see adults smoking near kid in a resturant! One wonders if that would confuse today's kids, even if the only ones smoking are bad guys!
04.28.2012 - 22:12 | twistedpuppetReview was awesome, but I'm afraid the biggest thing I will take away from this is that Doug has a penis. :P
04.28.2012 - 22:15 | Lupucillo
04.28.2012 - 22:18 | JumpingGigawatt123 - lol
04.28.2012 - 22:20 | englanddg - Am I a bad parent?I shared this movie with my kid annually. We sing the songs together.
I loved it as a kid. Sure, it's not the best movie, but that's part of it's charm. Even as 10 year old I knew it was sloppy scripting and stereotypes...but it's still fun.
04.28.2012 - 22:28 | Kumi
04.28.2012 - 22:28 | FieldMarshalPatton^3I'm with Doug,the chipettes didn't win because they had to got the boys so that means it was a tie, so both won
04.29.2012 - 21:07 | BloodrealmIt's true. The girls COULD HAVE won, but chose not to. Therefore, due to plot convenience, it is a tie.
04.28.2012 - 22:28 | MalchikLOL Germans, the French, and rich Italian Americans are fair game.
04.28.2012 - 22:32 | DacilrielI have been coming to watch videos on TGWTG for ages, but I have never registered until now. I just had to comment on this review.
I have been waiting to see a review of this movie, but I couldn't decide whether I wanted the Critic or the Chick to do it. To have it be a crossover is perfect. I loved the sing-off.
This was one of my favorite movies as a kid, and I could sing along with all the songs. Now that I'm older I can appreciate how simultaneously wonderful and offensive it is in all its squeaky glory.
I'm a bit surprised the Chick didn't make a big deal about the fact that when the girls got captured they rescued themselves, and when the boys got captured they needed the girls to rescue them.
Oh, Critic, I love the NC shirt.
04.28.2012 - 22:37 | HakajinI loved the Chipmunks when I was a kid. Heard a lot of popular songs for the first time on that show. And I definitely remember this movie.
Great review. Especially loved it when Doug was practically reading off what Lindsay wrote. And the song was awesome, of course, that made me lol. Always love it when you guys collaborate!
04.28.2012 - 22:48 | MovieNerd17
04.28.2012 - 22:50 | Blackwolf0925I gotta say this is one of my guilty pleasures, I always love the chipmunks as a kid and still do to this day, but that my love only stems up to the 80's version of it.
Funny fact, I enjoyed this movie so much I actually recently acquired the soundtrack to it. Anyways I loved the review guys this was one I was looking forward to for a long time. Thanks
04.28.2012 - 22:51 | ClintonYeah, the really weird animation style of the villains creeped me out as a kid as well.
Am I the only one who immediately thought of Riff Raff from Rocky Horror when Doug started singing?
04.28.2012 - 22:53 | jtspgs - giggle
04.28.2012 - 23:00 | TimTE01 - My ThoughtsReview begins...
'Have I seen this movie?
1 minute later...
'I think I've seen this movie.'
30 seconds later...
'Damn it- I've seen this movie!'
This movie was good for its time, provided that you didn't analyze it, think about what was happening and/or possess ears.
Seriously, Alvin lost that race. Deal with it, World!
04.28.2012 - 23:01 | jellydonut
04.28.2012 - 23:19 | HondaCello - o-o
04.28.2012 - 23:25 | world_dancerI loved this movie as a kid. It was the music, really.
And even if they were distaff counterparts, at least the Chippettes were a full complement of girls, rather than just a token girl. I took what equality I could get as a kid.
04.28.2012 - 23:28 | Underdog10
04.29.2012 - 19:48 | Semudara
04.28.2012 - 23:31 | DarkPhoenixMishima
04.28.2012 - 23:33 | Gundam4ever
04.29.2012 - 14:19 | Valis77
04.28.2012 - 23:34 | Oreo1223First of all... ABOUT FREAKIN' TIME. This review has been long awaited, maybe just by me, but... still. LONG. AWAITED.
Uhmmm... Overall... kinda dry, but then again... so was the movie. Loved the brother and sister, though, they're always a BLASTY-BLAST! I bet somewhere out there are some twisted fanfics with the two of them... *sighs*
So... yeah! Good job, I... think...
04.29.2012 - 13:44 | Tactlesscat
04.28.2012 - 23:41 | Leon Reallmao Okay, add this one to my list of guilty pleasures.
So how come there wasnt any comment over Brittany's flippant morality? In the scene where the Chipettes are being made up for the sultan she goes, "I don't care how powerful he is! How rich he is... By the way, how rich is he?"


text:
In case you didn't realize it, we live in a credit-based society. That means our economy is literally based on borrowing and leverage.
Credit is the amount of capital you can access against future earnings or existing assets. For business, credit is like food for the corporate soul. Without credit, most corporations would cease to exist. A company needs credit to fund payroll, manage operating costs, maintain product and service lines, and bridge the gap between sales and receivables. If a company creates new products, it may need to raise capital for research and development and marketing the product to consumers. It may also need expansion capital to build new facilities and infrastructure and hire new employees.
In the corporate world, this is called corporate finance. A publicly traded company can raise capital by issuing stock and selling shares or by creating fixed income securities (aka bonds). Entire industries are built around securities. Investment banking raises capital for corporations by issuing bonds against future earnings and taking a fee for their services. Short-term financing can help cover working capital costs, while longer-term capital in the form of bonds can defer the costs of acquisitions and R&D. Essentially this means that corporations with bonds outstanding are commonly leveraged – aka "in debt" in order to stay afloat.
Large corporations can easily obscure their liabilities by moving debt "off the balance sheet" and into SPV's (special purpose vehicles: i.e. Citigroup, Bank of America, Countrywide Financial, Washington Mutual), inflate profits and fake earnings (i.e. Enron), and hide leverage positions (i.e. Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns). To determine real company value, an investment bank, ratings agency, and accounting firm with vested interest in fee-based valuation is only as good as its talent, reputation, and ethical standards (cite Arthur Anderson, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Standard & Poor's).
The old adage that "it takes money to make money" sums up the business of corporate credit. Credit is also necessary when earnings projections are poor. A distressed economy pushed corporate America to high levels of borrowing and bond issuance to weather the financial storm throughout 2009 and 2010. Investment banks and large financial institutions received vital credit lifelines to provide this financing from the Federal Reserve and US Treasury during the financial crisis. This arrangement continues today through the Fed Discount Window, Quantitative Easing, and other federal credit-based programs. The reason the Fed does this is simple: our economy is based on credit, therefore if credit dries up as it did in October 2008, our economy would cease to function.
Does Big B need credit more than Small B?
So why is access to credit good for the goose (Corporate America) and not for the gander (Small Business America) according to big business advocates like Forbes Magazine?
According to Forbes, unlike like large private and public companies, small businesses don't need credit to operate. The Forbes claim is based on a "survey of small businesses" by the National Federation of Independent Businesses (NFIB).
Contrary to what we are told seemingly every day, the lack of growth in small businesses is not due to a lack of credit. The same NFIB survey showed that 22% of small businesses report their credit needs are fully met, and 52% report they don't want or need any credit at all. Add to this the 12% that did not answer this set of questions, and a full 86% of small businesses are not expressing concerns over borrowing. Their main concern is much easier to identify, but much harder to fix – fewer clients.
(Note: no link or criteria for the survey can be found in the Forbes article or elsewhere.)
Growing Your Small Business
As small business veterans ourselves at Good-b, we understand that small-b's need credit to survive just like their big brothers and sisters. We too, need cash to make payroll, manage operating costs, weather financial storms, and bring new products to market. If small business has few customers or clients, just like the big guys, it needs access to credit all the more. Credit allows a small business to innovate new products and services and promote them in the marketplace. If nobody knows about the product, how small-b's reach new customers?
The truth is that every big-b was a small-b at one time. A good revenue model and product can catapult a small-b to become a global corporation. Yet credit, resourcefulness, and luck all contribute to corporate success. Where would Bank of America be without credit? Who would ever had heard of Hewlett Packard if its founders couldn't get a loan to move out of the garage?
Three of the biggest businesses of our time: Twitter, Facebook, Google were launched and operated for a few years without a saleable product or revenue model. To remain operational, they received oodles of cash to promote their services and develop a loyal customer base. To this day, do you know what Twitter sells? How many of you have ever spent a dime on Facebook products? Google is a household word, but have you ever paid for a search?
Groupon is one of the most popular names in business today, yet despite being four years old and post-IPO, the billion-dollar company doesn't have net revenues. In fact, according to most sources, Groupon, the Deal of the Day King, operates a few hundred million dollars in the red. So how do they keep going? Credit, stocks, bonds…i.e. other people's money! The hope is that the company, like Google and Facebook will figure out a way to be profitable. In the meantime, they rely on credit to keep going. Without it, Groupon has little chance to survive.
So what does all this mean for small business? It means that contrary to the Forbes report, small business like its bigger counterparts needs access to credit to not only survive, but thrive.
For more information on Small Business Credit see other related articles:
Raising Capital for Your Small Business
How to Fund your Social Enterprise


text:
Or view our complete list of FREE newsletters and downloadable resources.
By definition, a narcissist is a person who believes the world evolves around them to such an extent their own desires blind them to relational reality which makes them insensitive to the needs and perspectives of others. One of the sad realities in our consumer driven, hedonistic culture is that we are producing millions of narcissistic people including leaders of large organizations.
Because of our sinful nature as human beings, all of us have some narcissistic tendencies to deal with.
The following traits identify leadership narcissism:
It has been well documented that today's culture craves authenticity in leadership. It shouldn't be, but many times it is hard to find in leadership, even in the church. One of the fastest ways for a leader to lose loyal followers is to fall short in the area of authenticity.
I was talking with a young staff member of another church recently. She said the reason she struggles to follow her pastor is the pastor isn't off stage who he claims to be on stage. I get that. I think all of us struggle with that one … both in living authentic lives and in following an inauthentic leader.
How do we remain authentic as leaders? Here are 7 thoughts on remaining an authentic leader:
Jesus' brothers said to him, "Leave here and go to Judea, where your followers can see your miracles! You can't become famous if you hide like this! If you can do such wonderful things, show yourself to the world!" — John 7:3-4
The pressure was on. Michelle was really being pushed to launch the new product in the spring and get a jump on the competition. Everything was ready--almost, but not quite. It was the "not quite" that caused Michelle to hold back and reexamine the data. By the time the product was ready to be launched in the fall, the product had required critical changes. In the end, Michelle's ability to stand firm against outside pressures ensured the viability of the product and preserved the integrity of the company.
Jesus faced similar pressures in John 7. His brothers were pushing him to go to the Feast of Tabernacles early and show off his miracle-performing abilities. Like many Jews, these brothers were looking for someone to "wow" the crowds and eventually lead the people in a rebellion against the Romans. The Feast would have been an ideal platform for launching Jesus' political career.
But Jesus could not be persuaded to become a crowd (or brother) pleaser. Jesus knew that his mission on earth was not to win fans, but to redeem people from their sin. Keeping his ultimate purpose in mind, Jesus chose to go to the festival, but in secret. In his wisdom, Jesus could not be persuaded to veer from his purpose, not even for one day of earthly glory. His choice to enter the festival quietly, instead of with a fanfare, led to a day of heated debates with his enemies and intense discussions with the crowd but no flashy miracles. By the end of the day, "many among the crowds at the Temple believed in him" (v. 31).
Regardless of the agenda others have, a leader needs to stand firm and keep her goal in focus. Leaders with integrity know that they cannot allow themselves to be persuaded to cave in to people-pleasing or glory-grabbing decisions. Pursuing integrity may not always be the popular or easy path, but it usually proves to be the wiser path.
For more than 15 years, I have studied the biblical reality of spiritual warfare. Many of my writings (e.g., Discipled Warriors, Putting on the Armor) address this topic that evangelicals have often neglected. I regret that evangelicals have been afraid of this topic because the enemy is nevertheless real.
Recently, a church leader asked me what tactics I've seen the enemy most use against leaders. In no particular order, here are the 10 most common strategies I've seen.
I'm not sure most of us preachers fully believe the scriptural command to avoid word fights:
"Remind them of these things, and solemnly charge them in the presence of God not to wrangle about words, which is useless and leads to the ruin of the hearers" (2 Tim. 2:14, NASB).
After all, aren't some words worth wrangling over?
"Wrangling about words" conjures images of cowboys at the corral trying to tame a bucking theological term that won't hold still.
If you love to learn, improve and grow, think back on who helped to ignite that fire within you.
A mentor in my late teen years, Ray Crowell, was the first person to inspire me to grow as a person. He taught me to think, and he challenged my thinking. From philosophy to human nature—oh yeah, and girls—we talked about everything. My world became larger because of Ray.
John Maxwell is my longtime friend and mentor in life and leadership. I graduated from Asbury Theological Seminary thinking I was ready to pastor and lead. Little did I know—and it's a good thing John was there. From attitude to relationships, he poured into me as a young leader. My life would never be the same.
Stay in touch with the news, bloggers and articles that you enjoy.
Or view our complete list of FREE newsletters and downloadable resources.


text:
The Top 10 College Application MythsBusted!
Think if youre a legacy youre automatically in? Or that early decision and early action are the same thing? Think again. Seventeen spoke to Lillian Luterman and Jennifer Bloom, authors of IN! College Admissions and Beyond, to get the real deets on college admissions.
By Lillian Luterman and Jennifer Bloom
Myth: Don't rush to visit colleges before you apply. Wait to see where you have been accepted and visit then.
Fact: Colleges think you're a more serious applicant if they know you've visited their campus. But don't just take the tour — audit a class and arrange to spend the night (slumber party in a real college dorm!) to get the true feeling of the school.