Town of
PLANNING BOARD MEETING
November 14, 2006 7:30pm Town Hall
MINUTES
Presiding: Ch. Jeff Miller
Members Present: Bob Miller, V-Ch., Dave DeCoste, Henry Fletcher,
Eric Merklein, Ben Davis
Absent: Sheldon
Sawyer, Dave Edkins, alt., Fred Dill, alt.
Recording: Pamela Aslinger, alt. and Secretary
These minutes are unapproved
and will be reviewed at the December 12, 2006 meeting for errors, omissions and
corrections. (There were over 50 people
in attendance)
I. Meeting opened at 7:40pm
A.
B. Minutes of October 10, 2006 were approved as
presented.
II. Review applications submitted for
completeness
A.
Benson Woodworking Co. Inc./Emicor LLC: Proposed Site Plan Review.
Located
on
III. Meet Closed/Public Hearing Opened
A. Benson
Woodworking - Mr.
Walter described the proposal as being a free-standing unheated building of 56
x 100 ft. to be used for storage of raw materials and completed projects
awaiting construction during favorable building seasons. He indicated the location on the map noting
the site would be mostly screened by vegetation. He said they have been shrink
wrapping the materials but find it leads to other problems so they prefer to
have them “indoors” or under the protection of the generous overhang attached
to the building. There will be a bit of
lighting, very little in the way of infrastructure. The building is about 4 feet lower than the
existing building to allow for less visibility.
Ch. Miller called for questions
or comments.
Mr.
Robert Jasse commented that he thought the project was favorable, that the Town
was blessed to have such a project. Hearing
no further comments Ch. Miller closed the Public Hearing and re-opened the
meeting.
V. Action on Benson Woodworking Site Plan
Review
Ch.
Miller called for Board action. Sec.
Aslinger said the Board at the prior meeting had asked if any prior approvals
or conditions affected this new proposal.
She reviewed the original Zoning and Planning approvals and found no
restrictions, copies of the minutes and actions are in the application
folder. Ch. Miller called for a motion to approve the Site Plan Review as
presented. Henry Fletcher so moved, it
was seconded. Without further discussion
the motion carried by unanimous vote of the Board. The maps will be signed by special
arrangement at a later date, they were missing a
designated place for the signatures.
Sec.
Aslinger will make the necessary arrangements with Mr. Walters. He was advised to contact the Board of
Selectmen at their Thursday evening meetings for a Building Permit.
II. Review application submitted for completeness/Open Pubic
Hearing
B. Margaret P.
Cray Revocable Trust: Proposed Minor 2
lot subdivision located on
V. Action
on Cray 2 lot subdivision
Ch. Miller called for a
motion to accept the application as complete, so moved and seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Ch. Miller called for Board comments and action. Dave DeCoste added if
II./V. Review application submitted for
completeness/Board Action
C. Alyson’s
Orchard/Robert Jasse: Revision to approved
subdivision
located on Wentworth and
VI. Old Unfinished Business: Pending Applications
A.
Claire Whitcomb Trust - 3
Ch.
Miller announced the application was delayed from 10/10/06 meeting pending
further information regarding the State ROW approval and a maintenance
agreement on
showing that the portion of the road/access in question is owned by the Town
and is either a Class V or VI designation.
She submitted copies of a letter from DOT agent Rene Fish, (copy on
file) stating “the old portion of
the
State in 1963, at that time it was a Class V road owned by the Town, but
because it has not been maintained it is now a Class VI road. She showed on an overlay plan where the Town
owned portion is, where
Mr. Shupack said he had only seen this letter today
and when he talked to the State he was given conflicting information. He asked when did it get discontinued from a
Class V road and why? The Board said if
it isn’t maintained for 5 years it reverts to a Class VI. Ch. Miller said the Town has been maintaining
it by plowing up to their driveways. Mr.
Shupack and Mr. Horton said the Town only plow until
the end of
Ms. Fernall said it was her understanding that the
Town takes care of some of it but the 2 property owners take care of the bulk
of it. She said she thought this issue
was irrelevant to obtaining subdivision approval. Mr. Shupack said the Town maintains only up
to Rte. 12, which is before where the sign for
Dave DeCoste said he thought from the last meeting
that Mr. Shupack, Mr. Horton and the Whitcomb property all share a State
ROW. Mr. Shupack said he assumed that,
but now it is not true. Attny. Fernall agreed saying she has a deed (1973) that
shows where Mrs. Whitcomb conveyed the property to the Webster’s, she granted a
ROW for access to the 2 lots. Ms.
Fernall said the State did not own anything to give a ROW over. \Mr.
Horton said from the information they received today from DOT, it is now known
from the end of, the very southern tip of
Ms. Fernall said the second issue was the
maintenance agreement for the shared use of the small portion of
Ch. Miller
called for further comments, being none he called for Board action. He said he thought clarification of the Class
VI portion of the road should be brought to the attention of the Selectmen for
their formal comment and action. He
called for a motion to approve the subdivision as presented but with the
condition that the Board of Selectmen agree with the Class VI portion and
condition of the Road. Mr. Merklein
asked if it pertained to the maintenance
Walpole
Planning Board Minutes 11/14/06 page 4
agreement? Ch. Miller said no, the Board of Selectmen
need to say if it is a Class VI Road and whether they need a letter signed
releasing the Town of any liability.
Attny. Fernall asked if the Planning Board was going
to grant a conditional approval once they confirm the status and agreement with
the Planning Board by the Selectmen? Ch.
Miller said he wants to make certain the Board of Selectmen are aware of the
road status and have input regarding the road.
Ch. Miller called for a motion to
approve the subdivision with the condition the Board of Selectmen are made
aware by the applicant and Planning Board of the status of the Class VI road
and for the BOS to take the necessary action required. Motion was seconded. Being no further discussion the vote was
taken. The motion carried
unanimously. Ch. Miller suggested
the maps and mylar be signed once the Selectmen have been notified and taken
the appropriate action. Mr. LaHaise
asked if they would be delayed another 30 days, Ch. Miller said no, to see the
Selectmen at Thursday’s meeting. He said
to contact Sec. Aslinger to make arrangements for signing. Mr. LaHaise kept the mylar, the maps on file. A copy of the minutes will be forwarded to
the Selectmen.
Old business cont’d
B. Marvic Management LLC - 4 lot subdivision
North Walpole
- Continued Review/Action
Ch. Miller began the discussion stating the Board
had asked for additional input from the North Walpole Zoning and Village
Commissioners regarding access, drainage, erosion and tree removal. Attny. Rob Kasper was present representing
the Castellano’s. Mr. Joseph DiBernardo
was also present. New maps were
presented to the Board allowing for setbacks from the River to conform to the
Shoreland Protection Act Regulations. A
letter was submitted to the Planning Board from the N. Walpole Village
Commissioners raising their concerns.
The applicant asked to take a few minutes toreview the letter.
Attorney Kasper stated tonight was a continued
hearing, noting the Village Commis-sioners had also held one meeting on the application. He said in the N. Walpole Zoning Ordinance
lot sizes and frontage requirements are not limited in the industrial
zone. He said they have listened to the
concerns of the abutters and consulted with the State and Shoreline Protection
Act, resulting in the revised maps. The
new information delineates protected no build zones and the 150 ft. of
woodlands protection. He said any buyer
would be aware of these restrictions.
Mr. DiBernardo pointed out an additional modification on Lot 2’s lot
line to allow Lot 4 and 3 more building area due to the added protective
buffers. Lot 2 went from 1.4 to
.9acres. Lot 3 is off of Marshall St.
the access is owned by the Town in reserve for future development. They have an access permit pending, depending
on the Board’s action tonight. Once Lot
3 is developed the access would be developed.
Attny. Kasper reminded the Board they are only subdividing the land, not
developing it at this time. He said once
the land is developed, the Planning Board would then review the proposal under
the Site Plan Review. Ch. Miller asked
about the access off of Rte. 12. Attny.
Kasper said the application is pending the NHDOT is behind in permitting but
they expect a permit soon. They have
resolved the issue of giving up the ROW behind the building and granting a new
ROW to Mr. Gee’s on the other side.
Mr. Merklein asked who owns the “no build
zone”. Mr. Kasper said it is still owned
by the property owners of each lot but is subject to a Conservation Easement
with the State. Ch. Miller noted the
area is a minimal set back as required by the Shoreland Protection Act.
Mr. DeCoste asked for clarification on the Marshall
St. access. Mr. DiBernardo said the
access was set aside by the Village prior to this application for potential
later development of the back lot(s).
Barbara O’Brien, N. Walpole Village Commissioner was
asked to comment on their letter, (on file).
She said the access was presently a heavy woodland, inappropriate for
use.
Ch.
Miller clarified it being an “access” by saying if Lot 3 is sold for
residential use, when they apply for a building permit they will need to gain
access from the Village, similar to applying for a driveway permit. The costs would be incurred by the Lot 3
owner to improve the access. Mr.
DiBernardo said an application for the access is pending. Mr. Kasper said whomever develops Lot 3 would
need to insure the access construction would not create drainage problems for
abutting lots or for the Town.
Ch. Miller said he would like to hear from Ms.
O’Brien. She stated that cutting of
trees cannot be greater that 59% over 20 years and no soils could be removed. Mr. Kasper said the new buffer takes that
into consideration.
Mr. Foster abutter said he is concerned about the
delineation of the high water mark. He
said the overhang should not be considered part of the high water mark. Mr. Kasper said they took that into
consideration allowing a 76 ft. setback.
Mr. Foster said this site is one of two of the worst areas in NH and VT
along the River for erosion.
Mr. Merklein asked who enforces the restricted
building areas. Mr. Kasper said any
developer would be responsible for keeping within the restricted areas. Mr. Merkein asked about reinforcing the shoreline? Mr. DiBernardo said some measures have been
taken to stabilize the banks with barriers in the river to build up a sandbar
to keep the water away from the shore.
Audience members said it has provided little protection.
Ken Wright stated he is the District Commissioner
from Cheshire County Conservation, was contacted by property owners regarding
the erosion on the bank and also being a former dumpsite. He said the bank is very unstable one of two
spots on the River where they hope nothing happens, there are no plans to doing
anything about it. He said the DES
requires a site preview if the land is developed and DES determines the high water
mark, he said he doubts they would accept the overhang as part of the high
water mark. He said the site is a former
dumpsite formally or informally and can be verified by the Soil Conservation
Survey. He said it is an area of fill,
there are certain requirements that need to be added to a deed, that soil
removal would need special permitting. Attorney
Kasper said they have no information indicating the area was a former dumpsite,
no land records show anything. He said
even if it were a former dumpsite, it is a non-issue regarding the subdivision
application. They are simply drawing
lines, someone wanting to develop the land will be faced with those
issues. If preliminary results of soils
testing by a developer reveal those problems, it must be handled by the owners
and developer. He said there is no
requirement for a DES site assessment as Mr. Wright states, this land is serviced
by Town sewer and water. Mr. Wright
disagreed, saying DES has several other departments, one addressing silt and
water quality, he wasn’t referring to wastewater and sewer. He said the subdivision process will create a
deed change, the deed will need to reflect the dumpsite information. Ch. Miller said if it were a former dumpsite
that information should be there now.
Mr.
Kasper agreed saying there is no indication, this will not be a deed change until
the property is transferred. Mr. Wright said it is a pre 1983 closure,
which is not tracked, he said refer to the soils map showing the whole area as
fill. He said persons remember dumping
on the site, people in the room.
Mr. McCormick said the Shoreland Protection
information states all newly created lots including those greater than 5 acres
are subject to DES State Subdivision approval.
He said the lot behind the existing building had been approved by EPA,
but they have no documentation.
Attny.
Kasper said the State Subdivision approval is for lots having there own septic
systems installed, does not apply to lots serviced by Town water and
sewer. Mr. McCormick said there should
be documents showing where EPA clean up has taken place. Attny. Kasper read from NH RSA 483-B: 9
V(b)(1) “Septic Systems” where a State subdivision approval is required for on
site septic systems only.
Gary Sharkey, abutter said the drainage is still an
issue and if the Marshall St. access is turned into a roadway, the drainage is
going to run into his basement, which is 12 feet away.
Kathleen Foster, abutter said she has spoken with
several people about these issues, one being Maggie who works with Mr.
Wright. She mentioned a report from Doug
Kemp, DES, Waste Management that regards old landfills. The report suggests the need for a hydro-geologic
evaluation and monitored test wells that could cost as much as $10,000.00. She received
Walpole
Planning Board Minutes page 6
information
from Don Bufort a NH Compliance Officer who looked at the site noting certain
restrictions. She referred to the
Shoreland Protection Act, read through some buffer requirements and setbacks,
she agreed with Mr. McCormick in regards to the State Subdivision approval
being needed. She is concerned about the
site being disturbed and taking several other surrounding properties with it. She said it will be the responsibility of the
current owners because they have knowledge of the former dump and the potential
erosion problems. She stated there are
people in the room that remember dumping there.
She said her property is only 35 feet from the river, she feels any
disturbance to the bank will cause the surrounding properties to erode, that
the Town’s water plant is just down the River which would be jeopardized, she
worries about it falling into the River.
She said to go to the Chinese “Joy Wah” restaurant and you can see the
impact, she’s seen the bank fall away 60 feet in one year, 6 feet in one
night. She said 30 years ago they
couldn’t see the River at all, now they have only 25-35 feet of land left to
the River’s edge. She does not think it
is a good place to build residences.
Mr. Jasse asked what the elevation of the River to
the land. Mr. Wright answered 10-15
feet. Mr. Jasse said that wasn’t much
protection.
Mrs. Foster noted that the maps are not the same
maps they saw at the Village Commissioners meeting, she thought more land was
promised that what the new maps show.
She had the previous map not showing the new setbacks. Ch. Miller said the new maps show the 76 feet
of buffers. Attorney Kasper said he
understands the concerns that have been brought up. It is why they have added the 76 feet of
buffers and easements to the proposal.
He said there is anecdotal reference but no facts about a dumpsite. He said in order to be classified a dumpsite
there would be records with the State.
He said both issues would be faced by a potential buyer but not to be
addressed during this subdivision review by the Planning Board. Audience members were concerned the issues
would be passed off to someone else. Ch.
Miller asked Mrs. O’Brien if there were any Town records to verify if it was a
dump. She answered there were no records
but remembers as a child going there, that it was active during the 30’s, 40’s,
50’s, 60’s.
Attorney
Kasper said Mr. DiBernardo has extensively walked the property and he
personally has walked the property. They
have not seen evidence of it being a dumpsite such as buried cars and batteries,
he wondered whether vegetation would grow on a toxic waste site. As far as the erosion factor, he said Mr.
DiBernardo had studied the maps from 1981of the Connecticut River and found 10
feet of erosion since 1981. Most
happened during the ice dam period in 1996.
A
measure
was taken to prevent future erosion by placement of barriers in the Riverbed to
create a sandbar that deflects the water from the bank. Ch. Miller and Mrs. Foster remembered it was
enough of a problem that the Governor and other officials came to view the
site, $150,000.00 was raised by the Village but not matched by the State to
save the bank. Mrs. Foster said as far
as the dumpsite, registration was not required with the State prior to 1983. Town inquiries have been made into all the
previous owners to determine if it was a dumpsite, she said many townspeople do
remember it as a dumpsite. Mr. Kasper
said the question of a dumpsite would be addressed by a future developer, it is
not part of the subdivision review. Mrs.
Foster said a conscientious owner should take care of it and not pass it
on. Ch. Miller said the present owners
would have known when they bought it, why didn’t the Town notify them if they
knew there was a dump there, isn’t that passing it on to someone else? Mr. Foster suspected the Town records may
have been lost in a fire. All Town
records were lost about 1948 in the Town Hall, it was in North Walpole at the
time. He personally remembers it being a
dumpsite with transmission fluid and asbestos.
He said there was a running joke in North Walpole about seeing a car
fender sticking out of the riverbank, back when the River was a real
disaster. He said if it is not part of
the subdivision review he is mostly concerned about development and disturbance
of the property causing the Village to end up down river in Vernon. Ch. Miller asked if his property was part of
the dump, Mr. Foster said no, the Castellano’s property was the old Cray
property. He did not
Walpole
Planning Board Minutes page 7
realize
when they bought their property how close they were to the old dumpsite, they
fell victim to not knowing.
Mr. Jasse said he has gotten signatures on a
petition to limit dumpsites, he is currently working on re-wording to say
“visible” because many of the farmers he has spoken too are concerned about the
petition effecting their old underground equipment dumpsites that are not
registered with the Town or State, he wonders if this could have been an
undocumented farm dump. He wonders if
there have been any aerial photos over the past 25 years that could document
the erosion.
Mr. Wright said he could do a time-line review using
photographs and soils maps.
Mr.
Kasper said it wasn’t pertinent to the subdivision review, they were in
compliance with the current requirements for subdivision.
Mr. McCormick asked if the Board was going to
consider the DES subdivision approval.
Ch.
Miller and Mr. Kasper said it would only apply to on site septic systems.
Mr. Wright restated that DES sets the high water
mark, he wonders if the plan reflects DES measurement.
Ch. Miller
called for the Board to take action or to wait for a final decision until the
next meeting. He said once the property is sold the lots
would come under further review, there is no documentation on the dumpsite, although
it could be an issue once the property is sold, it is recorded in the minutes
and on record. He said the applicants
have improved the plans by incorporating the buffer restrictions. He said he’d like to postpone the decision
until the next meeting.
Mr. McCormick said this subdivision is going to be
residential so any residential uses would have to come before the Zoning
Commission for approval and would be required to meet the Residential zone
requirements for frontage and setbacks. Attorney
Kasper said that was incorrect information, there is no residential proposal on
this subdivision plan, it is being subdivided for industrial use lots. Mr. McCormick said the Planning Board
required the Cray subdivision to seek a variance because it did not meet the
frontage requirement, this subdivision does not have the 75 feet of
frontage. Mr. DeCoste said the Cray
property was granted a variance, this proposal is not in a residential zone. Mr. Kasper said if a lot is purchased and
changed to residential the residential regulations apply.
Mr. Kasper asked if the Board could take action
tonight, give a conditional approval subject to a DES assessment and to remind
that any industrial development will be subject to full site plan review.
Ms. Aslinger asked if any of the lots would be
residential? Mr. Kasper stated the lots
were being subdivided as industrial lots.
Ms. Aslinger asked if the Board could make a condition of the approval that
none of the lots could be used for residential purposes? She said it seems many of the issues would be
resolved in the neighborhood and protect future buyers and the current property
owners. Once the lots were sold and
developed they would be required to come back to the Planning Board for Site
Plan Review because of the Industrial use only restriction. Ms. Castellano said she would not agree with
additional restriction to industrial use only since the proposal is subdividing
4 Industrial Lots already. Ms. Aslinger
said it was hard for the Board to erase the idea that they would be building
residences on the lots as mentioned in the earlier review. Ms. Castellano said if lots were sold and
someone wanted to build a residence they would have to seek a variance from the
Zoning Commissioners.
Ch. Miller said the subdivision as proposed was all
the Board was required to review at this time.
Future development, whether industrial or residential would require
further review by the Planning Board under site plan review or review by the
North Walpole Zoning Commi-ssioners. Ch.
Miller reviewed the Zoning Ordinance where it states a residential use must
meet all the conditions of Residential A such as set backs, frontage and lots
size. Ms. Aslinger said none of the
newly created lots would meet the residential requirements. Mrs. Castellano said
Walpole
Planning Board Minutes page 8
someone
could buy more than one lot and conform to the Residential requirements. This was another reason she would not be
willing to have the lots be restricted to industrial use only.
Mr. Daviss asked if the Board would consider acting
on Attorney Kasper’s suggestion to grant a conditional approval. Secretary
Aslinger noted if the Board wanted to delay their action until December 12,
2006 meeting the Board would be 5 days beyond the 60 day decision period. The Board would need to ask the applicant for
a 5 day extension, if they decline, the Board could request the extension from
the Board of Selectmen.
Ch. Miller asked what the Board preferred.
Mr. Merklein asked about erosion and drainage and
how a future buyer would be protected, how would they know about the issues
brought up at the meetings. Members all
agreed that whether the lots sold for industrial use or residential use, either
the new owner would come to the Planning Board for Site Plan Review or go to the
North Walpole Zoning Board for a change to residential, at either of those
times further review of the sites would address the issues of drainage, erosion
etc. brought out of this review.
Mr. Foster asked if the Board approves this
subdivision, would they be able to begin cutting trees immediately, the answer
was the current owners may cut at anytime.
He is still concerned about the subdivision triggering development and
changes to the property.
Ch. Miller said the resolution coming from this
review is to treat this proposal as presented as a 4 lot subdivision in the
industrial zone that meets the subdivision regulation requirements and the
Shoreland Protection Act setbacks, even though some organizations feel the
setbacks should be greater because it is a sensitive area on the River. He feels reassured that the future
development of the lots will create further detailed review by the Planning
Board and the North Walpole Zoning and Village Commissioners to address some of
the other concerns raised during this review.
He noted it is appropriate to clearly answer everyone’s concern, nothing
is going to happen without further discussion once the lots are built on. He suggested all concerned parties should
carefully watch for development of the parcels to re-voice their concerns at
that time.
Ch. Miller
suggested the Board approve the subdivision “as amended’ with the new setback
changes and lot size adjustments, calling for a motion, so moved and
seconded. With no further discussion the
motion carried unanimously. The maps and mylar were
signed. Mr. DiBernardo agreed to record
the mylar with the Cheshire County Registry in Keene, notifying the Secretary
of the Cabinet and Drawer #’s.
VII. New Business:
Preliminary Conceptual Consultation
A. Eric Frink - Class VI Road resolution
Merriam Rd. Mr. Eric Frink was present
with his Grandfather, owner of the parcel Map 3 Lot 54, 18 acres. He said he would improve the Class VI portion
to his lot only and build his private driveway approximately 1600 feet from
Merriam Road to his future house site.
He said he builds roads for a living so he has the experience to do the
work. The Board noted where the Class V
ends, what portion he would be responsible for, there are a few lots in between
the end of the Class V portion and Mr. Frink’s site. He mentioned the Patenaude parcels. Sec. Aslinger said she gave Ms. Patenaude an
application for a lot line adjustment for those parcels today, wondered if he
knew about that, he did not. Eric wants
to upgrade the Class VI portion just to access his own lot. Sec. Aslinger said she looked up the parcel and
determined it to be in the Rural Agricultural District, so a residence is
allowed. Ch. Miller said for Mr. Frink
to meet with the Selectmen and explain what he wants to do, upgrade the road
for his personal use. He asked about the
condition of the road up to his property.
Eric said it was mostly level, without any serious conditions, one
culvert needed upgrading. Ch. Miller
said the Town sees several Class VI road issues every year and is concerned
that he might petition the Town for an upgrade, that it creates problems for
Town budget and emergency services. He
said to be aware that other property owners may want to use the road he
upgrades.
Walpole
Planning Board Minutes page 9
Lou Shelly of the Conservation Commission said there
are other issues down Merriam Road with property owners wanting to upgrade the
road to Class V.
Ch. Miller said a public hearing is held with the
Selectmen, that the road will remain a Class VI road but Mr. Frink would sign a
waiver of Town liability. He said
basically he will be using the Class VI road as a long driveway. Ch. Miller said he fears that as many more
people gather along the road they decide to petition the Town to upgrade it to
Class V. Ch. Miller asked where this
property was in relation to the Merriam Farm property, Mr. Frink said it was
just down the road with some of the backland bordering his property. Grandfather said at one point the Merriam
Farm people had approached him to purchase a tiny section at the end of the
property off the Tower Rd. to access from the Surry side, he declined, saying
it would not be sold to them.
Mr. Shelly said the Merriam Farm area is all
surveyed along the road, he said his main concern was if Mr. Frink sold his
property, then Merriam Farm would have access to their lands from his
driveway. Ch. Miller said they would
have access only to build one single family home because they would not have
frontage. Mr. Frink’s lot has 365 ft. of
frontage so could not be re-subdivided. The property surrounding the radio
tower is being considered for conservation, details are almost finalized.
Sec.
Aslinger said Mr. Frink should meet with the Board of the Selectmen for the
public hearing, the Planning Board needs to comment to the Board of
Selectmen. The Board will forward their
comment to the Board of Selectmen by letter and a copy of tonight’s minutes.
VIII. Communications and Miscellaneous
B. Zoning
Amendment Proposal 2007 - Dearborn Circle
Ch.
Miller reminded the Board about Mr. and Mrs. Jeff White appearing before the
Board with a petition to change the Dearborn Circle development from Commercial
to Residential B. The Board of Selectmen
asked the Planning Board to research the request and to submit a warrant
article for Town Meeting 2007, copy of letter on file. Members agreed to present the warrant article
sponsored by the Planning Board and to hold the first Public Hearing at the
December 12th
meeting. Ch. Miller asked for the Boards permission to
write the language and present the map changes along with Secretary Aslinger at
the December meeting. Henry Fletcher asked
how much would be changed? Ch. Miller
said only the current residences within the Dearborn Circle. He said the Board was sensitive to the
commercial areas and would not make any changes to existing commercially used
properties. It was noted the commercial
district goes up to the Cold River. Mr.
White will be kept informed.
C. Mr. Hansel asked what the final date is for
submitting a zoning amendment to the Planning Board. Ch. Miller said the final date is the
second Tuesday in January although if any changes occurred to the amendment
after the Public Hearing there is not enough time to hold an additional hearing
causing the amendment to be heard the following year. Mr. Hansel said Bob Miller attended their
meeting last week, he asked if the Board would schedule a work session to
review what they have. He was concerned
with the late hour and would submit the ideas in letter form at a later
date. Ch. Miller asked what they
were. Mr. Hansel said they were
proposing 2 zoning changes, the first being to change retail “establishment” to
“building”, the second to reduce multifamily housing to 2 stories from 3
stories. Mr. Hansel felt they both warrant comments but due to the late hour
thought it would be best to wait. Mr.
Hansel said he has persuasive information to justify going back to 2
story.
Ch. Miller asked if the Board would like to comment
on the “establishment” to “building”.
Members agreed in principal it would be reasonable. Ch. Miller said the Board would work on that
change and present it to the Town. Eric
Merklein asked about changes to the Site Plan, Ch. Miller said the zoning
changes were on a stricter time limitation, to focus on those changes
first. Mr. Hansel asked the Board if
they would consider the story change.
Mr. DeCoste felt there were already buildings in Town that were 3 story,
not seeing the need to make the change.
Mr. Daviss asked Mr. Hansel to prepare his reasoning and present it to
the Board. Sec. Aslinger asked if the
Board could discuss and vote on the 2 story issue at the next meeting, Ch.
Miller said it would be too late for Mr. Hansel to present it as a petition if
the Board didn’t agree to present it.
Mr. Hansel said he would not be presenting it as a petition if the Board
did not believe it was the right thing to do.
Mr. Hansel will send a letter regarding his reasoning on the 3 story
issue to the Planning Board for their review at the December meeting. If the Board decides to pursue it, they will
hold a Public Hearing in January.
Mr. Hansel said he would prepare the Site Plan
Review recommendations also.
Ch. Miller said he and Sec.
Aslinger will prepare the amendment wording for the “establishment” to
“building” change, in keeping with the wording present in the ordinance for the
December 12, 2006 meeting/public hearing.
C. Master Plan Revisions/Budget Review
Ben Daviss asked if the Board could initiate the
update of the Master Plan, he called on the Walpole Leadership Academy to
perhaps become involved in the process, whom were present in the audience. He thought the Zoning Ordinance could be
revised based on the new Master Plan revisions.
Mr. DeCoste asked if the Board could change it at anytime, Ch. Miller
said yes and suggested involvement with SWRPC.
He said involving the Leadership Academy was a good idea. He suggested Mr. Daviss contact the SWRPC to
update the Land Use section, to get an estimate to be included in this year’s
budget. Mr. Merklein asked if the Board
would work directly with committee members.
Ch. Miller said prior updates were done without the Planning Board, an
adhoc committee including his Dad worked on the update. He suggested we could set up work sessions to
do the review or do an adhoc group like before to include the Leadership
Academy volunteers. He thought $1500. to
$2000. would be a fair estimate to do just the Land Use section. Sec. Aslinger suggested the Planning Board
be involved and sponsor the committee to insure minutes are taken and
information is provided for review, to avoid what happened in the past such as
trying to determine intent without record keeping. Ch. Miller agreed the best approach is to
have everyone at the same meeting/table so it’s an all inclusive group.
Mr. Merklein asked if the Board should wait until
the budget is approved? Ch. Miller said yes.
Sec. Aslinger said she had prepared some preliminary budget figures
based on this year’s Master List , it is still 2 months incomplete but she was
able to report that the Board has collected $5600.00 in fees. She said while that was a substantial
increase over past years, the Board may need to have an additional fee increase
to cover the entire budget. She said the
ZBA has requested to separate their budget from Planning, which has been agreed
to by Teresa and the BOS. Sec. Aslinger
said she has been consulting with Ch. Mansouri on some of the shared items and
are working on the 2007 budget breakdown.
She reported on the numbers of applications processed, noting the Board
created 21 lots, held 14 meetings. She
reviewed the line items noting where increases are required. The Board agreed to put in a legal line with
1000.00 set aside for fees and the ability to select our own
representation. She said the postage is
part of the application fee and is running close to what was budgeted but it
needs a slight increase for the coming year, although the fees collected are
more than the expense. The advertising
line is not being specifically recouped in the fees and is running close to
what was budgeted but it too will need an increase for the coming year. She said this is the area that may cause a
fee increase since it is not being recouped at present. Ch. Miller said to put $3000.00 for the
Master Plan. Sec. Aslinger said by February
enough figures would be in to determine a fee increase of roughly $50.00 per
application. She noted the fee increase
did not slow the Board’s activity, Ch. Miller said he did not receive one
complaint either, much to his surprise. Mr.
Merklein asked if the Board could create a slush fund for unknown
projects. Ch. Miller said those expenses
could be requested of the Selectmen, they are good about approving items from
the general fund.
Walpole
Planning Board Minutes 11/14/06 page 11
Sec. Aslinger said she would not be away this winter
so she is completely available to do extra meetings and volunteer time on
subcommittees to revise the regulations, Master Plan etc. She would like to put together a subcommittee
to work on the subdivision regulations.
D. Other
1. Sec. Aslinger said a question was raised by Teresa
regarding changes to the Capital Improvements Program, who is responsible for
updating it and how. Sec. Aslinger said
she reviewed the document but did not find any direction. She referred to the RSA’s under 674:5 that
states the BOS is responsible for authorizing either the Planning Board or a
Capital Improvements Program Committee to create and amend the CIP every 6
years. There has been a request by the
Police Department to increase their cruiser amount. Ch. Miller suggested changes be filed and when
the CIP is updated every six years, the figures could be referred to at that
time. She will notify Teresa.
2. Mr. Merklein asked if the Site Plan Review could be
updated to increase the open space percentage in the Commercial District,
similar to the multifamily open space Dave Edkins allowed for in the 2006 multifamily
amendment. He asked if he could present
the Board with some wording that would possibly exclude a developer using a
drainage ditch as “open space”. Members agreed.
3. Sec. Aslinger said the Town had submitted a plan to
clean up certain streams and brooks within the Town, the Conservation
Commission had commented favorably with the areas. The plans are on file in the Planning Board
office. Henry Fletcher said property
owners are also responsible for 10% of the cost.
Motion
to adjourn, seconded, carried.
Meeting
adjourned at 10:10PM
Cc: File, All PB members, ZBA, Town Offices
Posted: Town Hall, Lobby, Burdick’s Market, www.walpolenh.us,
www.thewalpolean.com