Town of Walpole, NH  03608

Planning Board Meeting

May 9, 2006  7:30pm Town Hall

 

Unapproved Minutes

 

Members Present:  Jeff Miller, Ch., Bob Miller, V-Ch., Eric Merklein, Dave DeCoste, Henry Fletcher, Sheldon Sawyer, Ben Daviss, Ray Boas, alt., Pam Aslinger, alt., Fred Dill, alt., Dave Edkins, alt.

Presiding:  Jeff Miller, Ch.

Recording:  Pamela Aslinger, Secretary

 

These minutes will be reviewed at the May 9, 2006 meeting.

 

All notices were posted and the public notified for all hearings.

The meeting was called to order at 7:35pm.  All regular members were present, no alternates appointed.  There were 60+/- persons present, the PA system in operation.

Only the second half of the meeting was tape recorded due to a technical error, tapes are being kept on permanent file.

 

Ch. Miller passed over agenda items I. B., C., D., began the meeting with the review of the John A. Hubbard and Carol A. Hubbard 2 lot subdivision located on 17 Old Drewsville Rd. in the Rural Agricultural Zone, Map 10, Lot 7.  Lot 1 of 2.76 acres with existing house and Lot 2 of 9.31 acres.

(Eric Merklein recused himself from discussion since he is an abutter)

Mr. DiBernardo (Dibo) presented the application stating the application for a 2 lot subdivision was in error, Lot 1 and Lot 2 were already 2 separate lots of record.  In fact what was needed was a simple Lot line adjustment between the 2 lots resulting in Lot 1 (with the house) acquiring an additional .48 acres from Lot 2. 

The Board agreed the applicant would need to reapply for a Lot Line Adjustment, abutters re-notified and the legal notice reflecting the correct description.   The Public Hearing was cancelled.  A motion was made and seconded to place the Lot Line Adjustment on the June meeting and to re-schedule the public hearing.  Motion carried.  Mr. Dibo was asked to submit additional fees for abutter notification only.

 

(Mr. Merkein rejoined the discussion)

 

Ch. Miller proceeded to the next application Dean Prentiss and Robert L. & Stacie M. Gay lot line adjustment located on the Alstead Center Rd. in the Rural Agricultural Zone, Map 15, Lots 29 & 29-1, the purpose is to straighten an “L” shaped center line between the two lots.  Ch. Miller called for a motion to accept the application as presented.  Secretary Aslinger stated an abutter did not receive their notification due to an incorrect address, however Ms. Koster had been made aware of the lot line adjustment by contacting the Selectmen’s Office, and she was present at tonight’s meeting, therefore the Board had met their notification obligations.   The motion was made and seconded, motion carried.

Ch. Miller opened the Public Hearing, Virginia Foote of Bill Lawrence Associates represented the applicants.  She described the intent of the adjustment and noted the changes as shown on the map.  An abutter Mr. Walter Bauer was concerned about his and Ms. Koster’s right of way ie;  if the lot line adjustment would remove it.  Virginia pointed out that a right of way was in the description of the deed for the Prentiss lot referring to the “Woods Road”.  The right of way gives

Walpole Planning Board Minutes 5/09/06 page 2

access to Ms. Koster’s landlocked parcel Map 15 Lot 28.  The right of way did not specify the exact location or exactly to whom is it currently granted, originally dated 1973.  Mr. Bauer was concerned that he had not been able to use the right of way and whether he or Ms. Koster would loose their access once the Lot Line Adjustment approved and subsequent house was built.  Mr. Prentiss agreed to speak to Mr. Bauer and had already spoken with and walked the property with Ms. Koster.  Ms. Koster said she was satisfied with the proposal.  Mr. Bauer asked how Ms. Koster would be able to build on her land if the ROW was not available to her.  Mr. Sawyer reminded that Ms. Koster’s parcel lacked the required 200 ft. of frontage and was a non-buildable lot.  Ms. Koster agreed.  While the ROW referred to the Woods Road, it was noted that a ROW doesn’t necessarily require an exact placement, as long as the property owner allows for “passage”.  Mr. Prentiss said the ROW would incur a slight move but remain mostly along “Woods Road”.  Mr. Bauer asked how he could obtain access to the ROW, that he had been denied “passage” for 28 years.  The Board said it would be a civil matter or to work it out with Mr. Prentiss.   Mr. Prentiss stated he had never denied access to nor had ever met Mr. Bauer.

Being no further comments, Ch. Miller closed the Public Hearing and re-opened the meeting.

 

Mr. Jeffrey White asked Ch. Miller if he would take up agenda item I. C. regarding the Petition to re-zone Dearborn Circle/Burrows Lane Subdivision from Commercial to Residential B.

Ch. Miller stated the Board had received the properly written petition via the Board of Selectmen, however the petitioning time line according to the RSA’s is between 90 and 120 days prior to the March Town Meeting for 2007.  Mr. Miller said the petition should be re-submitted to the Board of Selectmen during that time.  Mr. Sawyer said the Planning Board could also decide to put up the amendment as a zoning change recommendation without Mr. White submitting a petition.  Members agreed.   Mr. Edkins said he thought the change whether by petition or by planning board recommendation had merit.  He noted the Board would need to be reminded to take it up in the fall, the Board’s deadlines where roughly 11/15-12/15 for processing amendments.   Mr. White said he would stay in touch with the Board. 

 

Ch. Miller called for final action on the Prentiss/Gay lot line adjustment.  A motion was made and seconded to approve the application as presented.  Mr. Sawyer suggested the Board ask to have a notation made to the plans referring to any deeded rights of way within the lots, so it may be recorded and remain with the plan.  He asked if it should actually be referred to by a person’s name.  The Board agreed it should be referenced as assigned to the property not a specific person.  The amendment to the motion passed unanimously.  The final motion to approve the lot line adjustment with the condition the notation be added to include a reference to any deeded rights of way passed unanimously.

Virginia will have Mr. Lawrence make the change and contact Sec. Aslinger for filing of corrected mylar/maps.

 

Ch. Miller called for approval of the April 11, 2006 minutes.  Mr. Sawyer made a motion to approve the minutes as presented, seconded, carried.

 

Ch. Millers called for  NEW BUSINESS:

 

Mr. David Westover presented a description of a plan to open the Walpole Creamery with his partner Steve Caswell of the Goodie Shoppe in Keene.  It is to be located at 423 Main St., on the north side of Tire Warehouse and the laundromat on Rte. 12.  He said they would be producing a high quality ice cream and open a seasonal scoop shop.  There is approximately 1000 sq. feet of space.  He said he was before the Board because of a requirement that the Planning Board make a

Walpole Planning Board Minutes 5/09/06 page 3

recommendation to the Zoning Board while they are applying for a special exception to open a manufacturing operation in a commercial district at the May 18 meeting.  He said 3/4’s of the space will be for the ice cream making, 25% for storage of containers etc.  They will have 3 - 4 employees to run the scoop shop only.  In the future they are also planning to open a bottling plant for whole milk, but not at this location.

Mr. Edkins asked if this would require Site Plan Review.  Ch. Miller said no since they were using an existing retail building. 

Mr. Westover said the renovations were minimal to include new floor drains and some interior improvements.  Mr. Sawyer asked about State requirements involved in the selling of raw milk.  Mr. Westover said they would not be bottling milk at this facility.

A motion to favorably recommend the Walpole Creamery manufacturing facility in the commercial district to the Zoning Board of Adjustment in the form of a letter, was seconded, with no further discussion the motion passed unanimously.

 

Mrs. Elizabeth Cashel of Main St. requested an application for a Lot Line Adjustment and to be placed on the agenda for the June meeting.  She stated she and her in-laws Mr. and Mrs. Tom Cashel Sr. were moving a shared line in the rear of their properties along a tree line, no frontage was changing, a survey has been prepared.   She was given an application and the deadline of 5/29/06 for submission of materials in order to be placed on the June agenda.  A motion to place her on the agenda pending receipt of the application, fees and materials was made and seconded, carried unanimously.

 

Attorney Nathan Lynch asked Ch. Miller to speak.  Ch. Miller asked him to proceed.  Mr. Lynch stated he was the Attorney for the Walpole Tomorrow group, the group had submitted on Friday, May 5, 2006 a Petition for injunction and declaratory judgment to the Board.  He stated the injunction relates to the conflict of interest of members Henry Fletcher, Fred Dill and David Edkins, the petition calls for the three to recuse themselves from participation on the Walpole Properties/Berkshire Development proposal currently before the Board, the reason being the three had signed a petition to require a 2/3rds vote on the 2006 petitioned zoning amendment put forth by the Walpole Tomorrow group.  He asked if the Board would ask the members to recuse themselves through internal housekeeping, if not the injunction would be filed.  He asked for Board comments.

 

Mr. Edkins called for a point of order stating the Board had been threatened in writing with legal action, he asked that the Board take the matter up in a non-public session.  He further stated that if he, Mr. Dill and Mr. Fletcher were being asked to recuse themselves then so should, Mr. Ray Boas, Mr. Ben Daviss and Mr. Eric Merklein since their names all appear on the website membership list of Walpole Tomorrow.  He said he asked to be removed from the same list as of 4 pm today since he has had no participation with the group since 2000.  He said he didn’t feel it was appropriate for members to be involved with the Walpole Tomorrow group that has now threatened legal action against the Board.

Mr. Merklein said he was not aware he was on any list or that there was a list, nor did he have involvement with the group.

Ch. Miller asked for the discussion to stop, that he had a comment for Mr. Lynch regarding conflict of interest, recusal and disqualification of members.  He said the Board’s Internal Rules of procedure state a member may remove themselves or may be removed by a  Board vote at the request of another Board member only.  (refer to page 2 III. Standards of Conduct, A, B, C.)  He said this issue had come up at the previous meeting regarding Mr. Fletcher and Mr. Daviss, the Board did not object to either of them sitting on the Walpole Properties proposal.  He said he had

 

Walpole Planning Board Minutes  05/09/06 page 4

not received any requests from Board members to have other members disqualified so the issue was closed.  He took no further discussion and moved on with the meeting.

 

Mr. Daviss asked if Ch. Miller would return to agenda item I. C.  Discussion of Legal Findings.  Mr. Miller had followed through with the Board’s request to have him contact Peter Heed regarding interpretation of the 40,000 sq. foot retail establishment limitation.  Mr. Heed did not offer a formal opinion at this time, he felt he needed more time to research the issue and establish a more formalized arrangement with the Board.  He did not come to a definite conclusion and was reluctant to spend the time and money until the Board asked him to go further.

 

Ch. Miller moved to UNFINISHED BUSINESS:  Continued review and continuation of the Public Hearing on the Walpole Properties/Berkshire Development.

Mr. Hanna said the Architect for the project was on hand to describe the architectural details as well as offer samples of the siding and colors as requested by Mr. Merkein.

He handed out copies of a materials list, (on file)  A representative from Omega Design Architectural Firm made the presentation.  Through prior study, early in the project, they took certain elements of Walpole’s existing architecture and added it to the design such as the steeply pitched dormers, columns and standing seam roofing.  He described the color choices of Colonial Revival Grey and Tan on the composite siding, Slate grey metal roofing and Oxford grey stone as being in keeping with the surrounding area and of the efficiency of the materials being used.  He submitted a panel with samples of the materials being used and the colors.  An elevation plan in full color was also submitted.  They will be using a stone brick on the lower portion of about 2 feet of the building with a course of 2 or 3 bricks spaced above the main courses.  He noted they worked to design the building at a pedestrian size scale. 

 

Mr. Jeffrey White of Dearborn Circle asked how high the tallest part of the building would be, answer was 35 feet.  He asked if the brick detail would wrap around the building, answer was no.

 

An audience member asked where the HVAC would be located, answer was screened on the roof top, but it has not been definitely determined at this time. 

 

Mr. DeCoste confirmed all walk-ways would be covered by the roof overhang.

 

Ms. Concerta asked about lighting, Jennifer Rzepka offered a review of the proposed lighting there being no changes since the prior meeting.  She described the lighting as being a zero spillover system, with the interior of the lot being lit only. 

 

Mr. Daniel Schwenk asked about the parking lot and drainage systems saying the site develops puddles especially at the proposed entrance.  Ms. Rzepka gave a brief overview of the system, siting the results of the independent study M & W Soils prepared for the Board at the previous meeting.

 

Mr. Jeffrey White reiterated his concerns over the lighting, saying the present lighting at the Plaza effects the Dearborn Circle area and  he would hope the new proposal not add to an existing problem.   He said the Job Lots building is 22 ft. high, the 35 ft. lights are taller than the building, he said with the new site and the quantity of light islands he does not believe the light will be completely contained.  Ms. Rzepka said the lights at the Plaza are an older style with covex lenses that allow the light source to be seen.  The new site will incorporate an improved flat lenses, “full cut off” that does not allow the light source to be seen.    

 

Walpole Planning Board Minutes 5/09/06 page 5

Ms. Jennifer Rzepka presented the Board with an overview of two new revisions since the April 11 meeting.  The first being the side parking field near the Walpole Savings Bank, due to the potential for high traffic volume in that area, they have reconfigured the parking area eliminating one portion and changing the shape to a curve.  This also allowed for a new park like area.  The second revision, due to a suggestion made by Kevin Russell of SWRPC, incorporates a 6 foot wide raised sidewalk connecting the main store area to the proposed restaurant building at the corner of the property.

 

Christina Marcum asked if the building could be repositioned to face the existing plaza, to relate the two developments and whether the two centers could be connected by sidewalks.  Ms. Rzepka said the two centers would be connected by sidewalks, but the site did not allow for any repositioning of the new buildings because of the triangular shape.  She said they were constrained because of separate ownership issues regarding the adjacent parking areas.  Ms. Marcum said she thought the new site was “unfriendly” to the older site. 

 

Mr. Joe Dion asked how the Board could go into such a detailed review of the project when the 40,000 sq. ft. zoning determination had not been clarified and without knowing what the actual size of the building should be.  He stated he was not a proponent of either side but thought it was confusing without a determination. 

 

Ch. Miller said he made a good point and at an appropriate time.  He asked for any other information the applicant could provide as a continuation of the public hearing.

 

Ms. Rzepka said she had received comments from Kevin Russell of SWRPC earlier in the day, wondered if the Board had received the comments.  Sec. Aslinger had handed out copies of the comments to the Board at the beginning of the meeting.  Ms. Rzepka said the comments were a scaled down version of the original comments.  He addressed possible conditions of approval but no new issues were brought up. 

 

Mr. Edkins asked about Dept. of Transportations report.  Ms. Robin Bowser of VHB, said she had called DOT three times last week but they have no new information.

 

Mr. Merklein asked about the baseball field.  Mr. Traynor answered that until they have a reason to replace it, they won’t be replacing it.  He said for the record, it should be a condition of approval, they would provide a new location, replacing it like and kind.  They look forward to working with the athletic group in charge, they will need to provide a certificate of insurance and the use will be free to them. 

 

Mr. Cliff Cooke asked if the new pass through by the Walpole Saving Bank would allow for two cars passing.  Ms. Rzepka stated the width of the connecter is 26 ft. wider than required (24 ft.) for two opposing lanes. 

 

Mr. DeCoste asked if the spillover had been incorporated in the drainage plans as discussed at the last meeting, answer was yes it will be incorporated.

 

Mr. Hansel stated the present owner Barbarow of Ocean State Job Lots is not in favor of any use of his parking lot to service the new site and are not supportive of the pass through connector roadway.

 

Walpole Planning Board Minutes 05/06/09 page 6

Mr. Hanna said he did not think ownership and lease agreements were the concern of Mr. Hansel, that the applicants have obtained and plan to implement the connector agreement. 

 

Ch. Miller said Mr. Hanna as requested by the Board had provided the written agreement between the Walpole Savings Bank and Berkshire Development for the connector roadway.  Mr. Miller and Dave Edkins reminded that abutting property owners with concerns should appear directly to the Board.  Mr. Miller stated he would like to close the public hearing.

 

Mr. Hanna said he would like the Board to address the present engineers if they have any questions before the public hearing is closed and he would like to address certain concerns of Mr. Russell’s comments regarding conditions of approval specifically on the landscaping.  Mr. Hanna said they would provide a letter of credit to guarantee/secure against loss of plant materials or on any other types of conditions.  He asked that if the discussion of the 40, 000 sq. ft. limitation would be discussed after the public hearing is closed, if so he had a submission to make within the Public Hearing.  He submitted a letter (on file) stating the applicant’s position on the interpretation of the 40,000 sq. ft, establishment limitation,  noting their proposal was in compliance. 

 

Mr. Daviss asked if the applicant thinks of the two centers as one big shopping center, not just legally but conceptually.

 

Mr. Traynor answered that they are two distinct shopping plaza’s.   That there is a commercial synergy, however, there are limitations because of the triangular shape of the new proposal’s lot.  He felt they were consolidating the site and making the best use of the site.  He said there isn’t a cohesion within the commercial district as it is presently and suggested the Town might consider setting up an advisory board to direct the commercial district similar to what is being done in other NH Towns.   He said they had submitted a thoroughly studied plan created within the rules of the zoning ordinance by talented architects and engineers.  He hoped the Board would look favorably on the proposal.

 

Mr. Dion said he would still like to have his previous question answered   Ch. Miller said it would be addressed at the appropriate time.  Ch. Miller closed the Public Hearing on the Walpole Properties application.  Sec. Aslinger submitted an invoice to Walpole Properties for the M&W Soils review of the drainage and aquafir protection plans.

 

Ch. Miller asked for further Board discussion or action regarding the proposal.   He said he is still concerned about traffic and safety issues.  He would like the Board to send a letter to DOT regarding the safety issues.  Mr. Daviss asked if DOT would meet with the Board.  Ch. Miller said Mr. Wilkey would be willing to address the Board’s concerns either by letter or possible attendance at our meeting.  Mr. Sawyer stated since the driveway permits had not yet been granted, he felt the Board would not be able to take action on the application tonight.   Mr. Daviss suggested the Board consider hiring an independent review of the traffic and DOT approvals once granted.  Mr. Sawyer felt DOT and Berkshires experts were adequate.  Mr. Edkins was concerned about asking for other studies after the public hearing was closed.  He thought those processes would be taken up only during the Public Hearing phase thereby allowing the applicant to comment.

 

Ch. Miller suggested we ask the DOT to attend a meeting.  Mr. DeCoste agreed, saying he felt is was necessary to address the reality of the traffic, that the Townspeople are the ones driving it everyday, and it is a serious concern.    

 

Walpole Planning Board Minutes 05/09/06 page 7

Mr. Edkins revisited the idea of holding a work session to review all the materials submitted by the applicant and to perhaps see if DOT could attend.  The Board agreed to hold a work session on Tuesday May 23, 2006 by a motion that was seconded and carried.  An alternative meeting date was set for Tuesday May 30th.

The meeting will be dedicated to the review of the Walpole Properties application and is open to the public but will not include a public hearing.

 

V-Ch. Bob Miller said it would seem that the Board needed to take a stand on the 40,000 sq. ft. building/establishment limitation requirement/issue.  Selectman Miller asked Ch. Miller if Peter Heed was ready to move forward with Board direction?  Ch. Miller said yes but he would like Board consensus to have Mr. Heed retained.  Ch. Miller said he would like to clarify the wording and to call for a Board vote on the issue.

Mr. Daviss asked Ch. Miller whether Mr. Heed was prepared and whether the Board would agree to retain Mr. Heed.  He asked if any members were undecided as to whether the ordinance referred to building/establishment.  Ch. Miller said Mr. Heed was not prepared at this time.  Mr. Bob Miller said he would like the opportunity to hear what Mr. Heed has to say on the issue.  Mr. Sawyer said he didn’t know if the Board had ever formally taken a stand on the issue, he was on the Board at the time the 2000 amendment was made the Board understood it to mean a 40,000 sq. ft. establishment, it did not say building and that was the reason he did not support the 2006 amendment to add “building”.

Mr. Merklein said he thought the Board was roughly divided in two on the interpretation and that it is likely to cause litigation in either direction if a vote is taken.  He felt a vote was not appropriate until the Board had definite legal opinion and maybe more than one opinion. 

Sheldon Sawyer made a motion to have Ch. Miller re-contact Peter Heed, to have him continue with the research and offer an opinion.  The motion was seconded.  Discussion regarding the lack of funds in the Board’s budget to cover the expenses, and how the communication would happen, Ch. Miller offered to have more than he interview with Mr. Heed.  Mr. Sawyer said he supported involving Mr. Heed, that the ordinance has been interpreted both ways and it needs to be fully defined for the Board, regardless of the money and budget.  Vote was unanimously in favor of the motion.

 

Mr. Merklein asked if Berkshire would consider taking some of the pressure off the proposal regarding impact due to its size and scale, he felt there was little opposition to having a new grocery store but cautioned that much of the resistance to the current proposal was because of its overall size.

 

Ch. Miller called for a motion to adjourn.

 

Mr. Edkins was concerned about being threatened with litigation and what will the Board do if Walpole Tomorrow follows through with the filing, is it another issue for Mr. Heed?  Ch. Miller said the Board had made an adequate ruling and would have the full support of the Board and Board of Selectmen.  Mr. Dill said he would be willing to pay his lawyer, but doubted whether Walpole Tomorrow would pay for theirs as well as the Town’s. 

 

Mr. Boas asked to go on record as stating he had asked to have his name removed from the Walpole Tomorrow Group, he had not checked the website or attended any meetings other than the first meeting when he initially put his name on a sign up sheet.  He felt if he now would have to retain a lawyer, that would be a surprise.  He did not appreciate being accused of being party to

this threatened litigation.  Mr. Edkins said he was only pointing out that Mr. Boas was on the

Walpole Planning Board Minutes 05/06/09 page 8

groups mailing list.  Ch. Miller said he did not think any individual was being threatened.  Rather it would be due to the action of the Board ruling there is no conflict of interest, that the Board/Town would be held accountable.   The Board would support its decision and have the support as a Town Board.  Mr. Merklein asked if the Town had an insurance policy that covered individuals.  Selectman Miller stated that the Board of Selectmen are protected as are other Board members are protected on official actions or decisions made.  If a member takes an action on their own, then they would not be protected.  Mr. Boas said he understood that suits are directed at a member’s official position and they can also bring personal charges so you would need a personal attorney.  Mr. Edkins said he did not agree as long as it was a matter of a Board decision or action.  Mr. Boas agreed but stated in other cases it was a possibility.  Mr. Dill asked when the internal rules were referred to by Ch. Miller, did the Board feel as a whole feel that the policy is agreed to when a member is sworn in?   That the policy reflects the procedures of the Board?  Ch. Miller said absolutely, Mr. Edkins said the policy reflected the State RSA’s as well.

 

Mr. Sawyer brought up the Board budget concerns, the Capital Improvements Program final bill came in after the 2005 budget expired.  The amount set aside was not encumbered and now will come from the 2006 budget which did not allow for an additional $2000.00.

Ch. Miller felt it should have been carried over since it was not a warrant article rather a commitment, it was budgeted in its entirety for in 2005, that is was non-lapsing.  Mr. Sawyer said it was not a non-lapsing warrant article and was included in the budget for 2005.  Mr. Sawyer said the Board is already close to being over budget.  Mr. Edkins said it was entered into by contact, if it wasn’t completed it should have been carried over.

 

Ch. Miller closed the meeting at 9:30pm.

 

Cc:  file, all PB members, all ZBA members, Select’s Office

Posted:  Town Hall Lobby and outside, Burdick’s Market, Town website:  www.walpolenh.us