PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
December 12, 2007
APPROVED as AMENDED & CLARIFIED:
12/19/07 jrl____
AGENDA: CONTINUED SUBDIVISION: JEREMY MITCHELL/PAUL MORRISSETTE, 8 Central Square, #114-173
SUBDIVISION: HEMLOCK BROOK LLC, Lake Street, #205-017
PCC: DAVE WHITE
PCC: MARSHA ELDER
ATTENDING: Dan Paradis (Chairman), Elizabeth Seeler (Vice-Chair), Steve Favorite (Sel. Rep.), Janice DellaCroce, Denice DeStefano, Don Milbrand
Alternates: Murray Campbell, Jerry McGwin
ABSENT: Clay Dingman (work).
Alternates: Tom Babcock (ill), Bob Duquette, Don Martin (conflict).
OTHER: -----
The meeting opened at 7:00 pm. Mr. McGwin sat in for Mr. Dingman.
CONTINUED SUBDIVISION: JEREMY MITCHELL/PAUL MORRISSETTE
Mr. Paradis read a letter from Mr. Mitchell asking for a continuance of this Subdivision.
D. DeStefano made a MOTION, second by J. DellaCroce, to CONTINUE THE SUBDIVISION OF JEREMY MITCHELL AND PAUL MORRISSETTE TO JANUARY 9, 2008. The motion CARRIED.
SUBDIVISION: HEMLOCK BROOK LLC/BOB CARPENTER OF GRANITE STATE SURVEYING
Ms. DeStefano stepped down as her husband is involved with this subdivision. Mr. Campbell filled in. Mr. Paradis explained the procedure for hearings and the secretary read the application, referral, list of abutters notified, where the hearing was advertised, and stated that there were no telephone calls and there were two written e-mails.
Mr. Carpenter introduced himself and stated that he is here to represent James Keenan. Mr. Carpenter then pointed out the lot on a plan he had brought in. He stated that it consists of 6.36 acres with 680+’ of frontage. It is in the Lake District, category 3. They wish to divide this lot into 4 lots. There is a house under construction on lot 17-6. Mr. Carpenter went on to say that the 4 lots would be as follows: lot 17 = 1.13 acres with 289.53’ frontage, lot 17-7 = 1.20 acres with 117’ frontage, lot
17-6 = 1.68 acres, 128.18’ frontage, and lot 17-5 = 2.35 acres, 148.18’ frontage.
-2-
Planning Board Minutes
12/12/07
HEMLOCK BROOK LLC SUBDIVISION continued:
Mr. Carpenter stated that each lot will have a well and septic system. They would like to waive #15, 16, 23, and 24 of the checklist and have not received the subdivision permit from DES as yet. They applied to the State for a second driveway (it and the existing driveway will access two lots each).
The State has asked for drainage changes on the first driveway before they allow this and the applicant are working on that now. At this point, Mr. Paradis read the e-mails received: one from Dennis Ford and one from Bob Eaton, in regard to these drainage issues. Mr. Paradis then asked if the tree line is shown on the plan and Mr. Carpenter pointed this out. Mr. Paradis then stated that this is mostly open land and then asked, on lot 17-5, what the octagon was and was told that it is trees.
The checklist was then addressed. It was felt that both #18 proposed public improvements and #25 other permits required (Subdivision and State Driveway) are incomplete. The requested waivers were then addressed:
#15 Other conditions on tract: Richard Hallberg, abutter across the street, stated that a lot of water comes off the property. The State and he have asked for them to address this and nothing has been done. Mr. Hallberg feels that a drainage study is needed. Ms. Seeler felt that this should be marked as insufficient. Mr. Carpenter felt that water courses to be pointed out on the plan should be for general flow. A discussion followed. Mr. Paradis feels the requirement to show water courses is in lieu of a drainage plan. Ms. DellaCroce felt that, on lot 17-5, there may be run-off to go to the proposed culvert. Mr. Paradis stated that this culvert is already there. Mr. Carpenter explained that the State wants swales 100’ up the driveways with a catch basin culvert at the end of each drive and a swale along Route 3A. Ms. DellaCroce asked if we should have a copy of the State’s outline for this. Mr. Carpenter stated that they will give the Board a copy of what they submit to the State.
David Hill, Pike’s Point, stated that the Boards normally do a conditional based on the State and Mr. Paradis agreed but added that the Board may feel that they need more than what the State wants. It was decided to hold off on #15 for awhile.
#16 Other conditions on adjacent tracts: Mr. Paradis stated that we have routinely waived this as the reference is to 6.12 A & B. Mr. Paradis read this and felt that it must be from an earlier time and
The reference has changed.
D. Milbrand made a MOTION, second by E. Seeler, to WAIVE #16 OF THE CHECKLIST. The motion CARRIED.
#23 Construction drawing for roads = It was pointed out that this subdivision does not have drives but instead has private driveways.
E. Seeler made a MOTION, second by J. McGwin, to WAIVE #23 OF THE CHECKLIST.
The motion CARRIED.
-3-
Planning Board Minutes
12/12/07
HEMLOCK BROOK LLC SUBDIVISION continued:
#24 Drainage plan = Mr. Paradis felt that, in reading the e-mails from the State, there is a lot of run-off here. Any new building will create more. Mr. Carpenter stated that, typically this is only considered when it is a large subdivision. These lots will be sold and we do not know what they will be building, Mr. Carpenter stated. Mr. Paradis said that, basically you are going with the State septic plan. Mr. Carpenter answered that it is usually a house and garage, which is not a lot. Mr. Hill stated that the drainage is a concern where there is a brook all along the rear of these lots. This all drains to the Lake and then it affects the cove. Mr. Paradis also mentioned that chemicals used on lawns would add to this problem. Ms. Seeler asked how large the buildings will be; how many bedrooms for the septic system? Alan DeStefano, broker for the project, stated that the septic area is only for so many bedrooms no matter what size the buildings will be. There are setbacks for building away from Hemlock Brook. Mr. Paradis mentioned our setbacks which they have complied with. He asked about not being allowed to increase run-off from the property. Mr. DeStefano answered that this is why they are to catch the run-off from the driveways. There is some wetland at the north end of this property. Mr. Hallberg stated that there never was a water problem until they began to build.
Mr. Favorite mentioned that, in the Shackett and in Corey Johnson’s projects, we requested a drainage study. He wondered if we might not need that in this case. Mr. Hallberg had passed around some photos of the drain problem that the State is addressing. Ms. DellaCroce asked if photos from 2005 and 2007 was done to show the difference and was told that it was. Mr. Hill asked about the slope and Mr. Hallberg stated that there is a problem on the north side of the lot. Mr. Carpenter said that there is a 10’ drop over 300’. Mr. Hill felt that providing vegetation would be the best control. Mr. Carpenter stated that they used to collect for a slow rate of impact and now are trying to get to a natural run. Drainage runs parallel to the brook, he added. Mr. Paradis asked if all are going to one catch basin and was told that it is. The State is comfortable with that, Mr. Carpenter added, and felt that it would be difficult to know what is to be built. Mr. Paradis explained that it is hard for the Board as we have no control over the building permits. Mr. DeStefano suggested that a condition be made in which any further building on a lot requires silt fencing until vegetation is restored. Mr. Paradis asked about the long-term concern. Mr. DeStefano said that you could have the same argument for a building on a hill. Ms. Seeler questioned lot 17-5 as a buildable lot and mentioned that it would require a long water line to the house. Mr. Carpenter stated that it is buildable. The new owner could get easements from the neighbor so as to put the well closer. Mr. DeStefano stated that most people like to build in the back. This lot has an odd triangle available and they probably will not build there as it would be difficult.
Mr. Carpenter felt that they could grade so that it would not drain as much to the down-slope areas. Mr. Hallberg thinks they should do what the State is asking before they can do the subdivision. Mr. Paradis asked about using hay bales. Mr. Carpenter stated that they could add notations to the plan requiring this. Mr. Hill thought it better to base our approval on the State approval. He added that snomobiles and ATV’s go across that field now. Mr. Paradis asked if it is part of a trail system. No-one knew for sure but Mr. DeStefano did not think so as there are no signs.
Mr. Paradis stated that the Board could waive a basic mitigation plan but could base approval on condition of State approvals.
-4-
Planning Board Minutes
12/12/07
HEMLOCK BROOK LLC continued:
Mr. Campbell stated that when a developer is doing the building of the lots themselves, the developer is to complete the drainage system in advance. Mr. Paradis asked if the State would require adequate plans to do this. Mr. Campbell said that there were no tack pads to reduce mud from trucks on Route 3A. He favors some type of Master Plan be done in the first development. Mr. Hallberg said that the problem with that is that they have a year to do it in. Mr. Paradis said that, if we approve we can do it with the condition that it be done before any building permits can be given out. Mrs. Hallberg stated that Manganiello’s, across the street from this project, have had run-off from there once. Mr. Carpenter stated that this is the reason for the swale. Mr. Milbrand asked if the 100’ along the driveway will interfere with lot 17 septic. Mr. Carpenter felt that this can be worked around.
Ms. DellaCroce asked about the easement for driveway A. Mr. Carpenter explained that this is shown as a typical driveway for this area. The language will be the same for both driveways. Mr. Paradis felt that we could handle this by not granting the waiver but to accept the State permit as a condition. Mr. Milbrand stated that this is the way that he is leaning. Mr. Paradis said that, if we do this, we need to address #15 again. Mr. Milbrand felt that most requirements for #15 are shown. Ms. Seeler stated that the water courses are the same every year but not year round. Mr. Carpenter stated that there are water courses when it rains but are not necessarily designated as water courses. Mr. Paradis asked how relevant it is for our application acceptance. The run-off goes towards the brook and the road. Mr. DeStefano mentioned that the pre-existing lots delineated as abutting had similar concerns and that the corner in Bridgewater is all wet land. Mr. Milbrand felt that a waiver is not needed for #15.
D. Milbrand made a MOTION, second by S. Favorite, to ACCEPT #15 AS FULFILLED AND A WAIVER IS NOT NEEDED. The motion CARRIED.
Mr. Paradis brought the Board back to #24 and asked if they are willing to base this according to the State. Mr. Hallberg still feels that a drainage study is needed. Mr. Milbrand asked how confident are we with the State. Mr. Hill felt that the State is only interested in the road. Mr. McGwin would like to see a drainage study as it appears to have increased with one house already. A discussion followed. Mr. McGwin felt that we need the State plan and a drainage study and the Board concurred. Ms. Seeler thought that we might want to continue this until we get these so as to not start the clock ticking.
E. Seeler made a MOTION, second by J. McGwin, to CONTINUE THE HEARING FOR HEMLOCK BROOK LLC TO JANUARY 9, 2008. The motion CARRIED. Ms. DeStefano returned to the table.
PCC: DAVE WHITE
Mr. White is an architect who has been hired by Southern NH Services for the property on Lake Street and Ballou Rd. They have received a grant for an elderly housing complex. The initial plan is for 19 units and, if sewer comes in, they would like as many as 30. They are designing the site for septic, which they shall do for Phase 1. They shall go to the State about a change; it is his thought that they go by 70 gallons per day in-flow. At any rate, they wish to go forward with the 19 units. If septic can be done for 30, they will go for a variance. The septic field will pump up-hill and they shall put in a sewer pipe connection.
-5-
Planning Board Minutes
12/12/07
PCC DAVE WHITE continued:
The units will all be for 1-bedroom. There will be a couple of retaining walls built. Mr. Paradis explained that, with commercial, all parking is to be behind the building. Mr. White felt that this is difficult due to the slope of the land. Marsha Elder asked why this is not considered commercial as it is rental property. The Board agreed. Mr. White continued by saying that the building they would like is 43’ high and he asked that the Board look at the one they just built in Ashland. He then asked if there is any reason why they should not go to ZBA for this. Mr. Paradis stated that we cannot speak for the ZBA. Mr. Carpenter stated that, if it is by the average grade, they could go 40’. Mr. Paradis advised that he speak with the Fire Chief first.
Mr. Carpenter stated that access will be from Ballou Road not Lake Street. He felt that parking in back would be difficult due to the slope and they would probably give a really good landscaping plan instead. Mr. DeStefano asked if they are in the Shoreland Protection area and was told that the front part is. Mr. Favorite stated that they will need a drainage plan. Mr. Paradis added that they might think about impervious pavement. Mr. Milbrand added that cisterns for run-off is a thought. Mr. White said that they will collect the drip edge around the building unless the soil is good for absorption. Mr. Paradis advised Mr. White to read the parking requirements in the Site Plan Regulations. He added that parking in the rear is not in the Zoning Ordinance but in Site Plan so it will be dealt with by the Planning Board.
At this time, Mr. Paradis reminded everyone that things said at a PCC are not binding, either by the Board or by the applicant.
PCC: MARSHA ELDER
Ms. Elder explained that she got a letter from Sheryl Montague, Land Use Officer, about her steel storage unit, saying that it is not allowed without Planning Board approval. This is located at her property on 200 Summer St. Ms. Elder added that, 2 or 3 years ago, someone in the town office told her that it was okay. Mr. Paradis looked at page 19, Manufacturing Storage Containers and feels that he doubts that the original intent was for commercial manufacturing storage. The Board agreed.
Ms. Elder stated that hers is a 10’ x 20’ container for storage and is behind lilac bushes. Mr. Paradis asked what brought Ms. Montague to her and Ms. Elder thought that maybe she was citing someone else and they told her about this one.
The Board looked at the definition of Structure and Accessory building. They determined that, if it is not registered, it is an Accessory building. Mr. Milbrand felt that it is the same as a pre-manufactured shed. The Board determined that just a building permit is needed. Ms. Elder asked what would happen if she were to sell the property and remove the container. The Board felt that it would then come off the tax rolls.
-6-
Planning Board Minutes
12/12/07
MINUTES OF 11/28/07: The following amendments and clarifications were made:
Page 2, 2nd line, delete “the” before “Condominium Act” and replace with “Section 356-B:5 of the”. 2nd paragraph, 6th line, delete “definition to be in the same envelope” and replace with “restriction on expansion to be the same” and at the end of the sentence, insert “existing restriction”. 3rd paragraph, 3rd line, add “s.”” to “overhang”. Last paragraph, 6th line, following “feet” insert “””. Page 3, 1st paragraph, 5th line, replace the “40’ x 40’” with “40’ x 10’” and replace the next sentence to read “These would be 80’ x 60’ allowing for a 20’ setback.” Under AMENDMENT #5, 1st paragraph, 1st line, replace “Pemi-Overlay” with “Pemi”. Page 4, 1st paragraph, 3rd line, delete “specifically page 225” and in the next line, delete “latter in which it” and replace with “Section 236.124 on page 225 which”. Under AMENDMENT #9, 3rd paragraph, 3rd line, eliminate the second apostrophe in “today’s’”.
D. DeStefano made a motion, second by S. Favorite, to accept the minutes as amended. The motion carried.
COMMUNICATIONS:
The office catalogue was taken by Don Milbrand and the card from Century 21 was read.
REPORTS:
DOWNTOWN: Mr. Favorite stated that they are going to have a poor showing by the Elementary School (only 6) for decorating the trees this year. The alternative wheels program is being phased out due to the fact that it is not functioning well.
HDC: The meeting was cancelled due to the storm. The town bulletin board was on the agenda.
SELECTMEN: Mr. Favorite stated that they are in budget crunch time and are finalizing the wage study. Tax bills will go out either tomorrow or Friday. The teacher’s contract held up setting the rate. They also found close to 18 million dollars that was not in the system (2.2 million being the boat slips).
When asked where the money was coming from for the Police Station planning, Mr. Favorite stated that there was $60,000 left from the original $90,000. There will be minimal changes to this building. Most of the change will be to the Old Town Hall. Parking is to come in from the back. The floor plan is pretty much done.
CIP: Mr. Campbell reported that there is an article in the Record Enterprise. He has set up the 2008 schedule in which we shall meet two nights in January, February, September and October (3rd & 4th Tuesdays). The rest of the months shall be for one meeting the 3rd Tuesdays. As there is an absentee problem, Mr. Campbell would like to create one alternate. In the meantime, he would like the members to look at the Master Plan and Chapter 6 again. The next meeting will be on Jan. 15th. On Jan. 7th, we are to present the CIP to the Budget Committee. Mr. Paradis added that the Library project is now at 1.8 million.
-7-
Planning Board Minutes
12/12/07
SURVEY: Mr. Dingman has e-mailed the final results and Mr. Paradis will remind him that we still need the remarks section. Ms. Seeler mentioned a couple of omissions. Mr. Paradis advised her to e-mail Mr. Dingman direct on these. Ms. DeStefano feels there should be a press release of the results. Ms. Seeler suggested they be placed on the web site.
OLD/NEW BUSINESS:
Mr. Paradis stated that Corey Johnston thinks we should look at 9.4 of the Zoning Ordinance. He feels we need to clean it up and clarify it to indicate the 50’ building setback applies only to the Overlay district and not to wetlands smaller than one acre. Mr. Paradis spoke with Mason Westfall, Conservation Commission, who disagrees. Mr. Paradis advised Mr. Johnston to speak with Mr. Westfall. Mr. Johnston also feels we should consider basing the septic setback on soil conditions (now at 150’).
Mr. Paradis spoke with Ms. Corrow, Town Manager, and received a favorable response on Plan NH. Mr. Paradis will work on this. Ms. DellaCroce asked if there is a potential cost and Mr. Paradis answered in the affirmative but added that Plan NH sometimes helps us find grants.
NEXT MEETING: The next meeting is Dec. 19, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. We shall have the public hearing on proposed zoning changes and will vote to bring excavations to a public hearing. Neither Ms. DeStefano nor Mr. Milbrand will be able to attend. At our January 9th meeting, Ms. DeStefano and Ms. Seeler will be unable to attend.
With no other business, D. Milbrand made a motion, second by D. DeStefano, to adjourn at 9:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jan Laferriere, secretary