PLANNING BOARD MEETING
September 11, 2007
7:30pm Town Hall
MINUTES
Presiding:
Jeff Miller,
Members
Present: Eric Merklein, Ben Daviss,
Bob Miller, V-Ch., Henry Fletcher, Charles Miller, Select., Jeff White, alt.,
Shane O’Keefe, alt.
Members
Absent: Dave DeCoste, Fred Dill,
present but recused and in audience.
Recording: Pamela Aslinger, Sec./alt.
These minutes
are unapproved and will be reviewed at the October 9, 2007 meeting for errors,
omissions, and corrections. There were
over 50 persons in attendance.
I. Meeting opened at
7:40pm.
A.
Alternate
Pamela Aslinger was designated for Mr. DeCoste.
B. Minutes
were passed over until later in the meeting.
II. Unfinished Business
- Pending Application Review and Action
A.
Walpole D & D, LLC - Major 8 Lot Subdivision located on Hooper,
Wentworth and
- Road Specifications,
submit a plan approved by the road agent as previously agreed to, post a
performance bond based on road agents specifications, to insure completion and
compliance with the Town’s standards for a Class V road. Road must be completed before the first
building permit is issued as a timeline guide.
- Approval of a Storm water Drainage Plan.
- Approval of submitted plans to increase
recharge, conservation and water
recapture drainage as recommended in
the Weston Sampson report and criteria.
- Collection of outstanding fees noted in the
8/24/07 letter.
- State subdivision approval must be granted.
Mr. Bob Miller so moved, Mr. Chas. Miller seconded. Ch. Miller called for discussion:
Alternate
P. Aslinger asked if the recommendations mentioned in the Weston Sampson report
were to be put in the form of deed restrictions would the Board have a copy of
them as a part of the conditional approval?
Ch. Miller said yes the Board must accept the wording as part of the
approval.
Mr.
Merklein asked when the Board reviews if the conditions are met? Ch. Miller said as the items become available
the Board would review them at future meetings.
Sec. Aslinger suggested the Board hold a compliance hearing to address
the data once it is gathered and complete.
Ch. Miller called for a vote hearing no
further discussion. Motion passed
unanimously in favor. Mr. Dill
submitted a check for $100.00 to cover fees and asked if the Weston Sampson
bill was ready for payment? Sec.
Aslinger said she had not received it she would double check with the Town
Office and report back to Mr. Dill. Mr.
Dill submitted a letter of agreement with the road agent outlining his road
improvement requirements. (on file) Mr. Joe DiBernardo asked when the mylar was needed?
Answer was not until the conditions had been met, changes might result
depending on the pending information to come.
III. Review New
Applications Submitted:
Accept/Reject/Delay
A.
Travis Hearne and David Hearne - Lot Line Adjustment located on 95 and 97 Church
St. in N. Walpole, Map 30, Lot 35 and 36 in the Residential B zone. Purpose is to adjust the line between the
lots by adding 10,203 sq. ft. to Lot 35 from
Ch.
Miller closed the meeting - opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Matt Drew was present representing the
applicants. He referred to the maps and
described the plans noting the hatched area is the area being moved. No questions or comments were made from the
public. Mr. O’Keefe noted the variance
allotted a zero setback to a 5 foot setback.
Hearing no further questions, Ch. Miller closed the hearing and
re-opened the meeting.
Ch.
Miller called for Board review and questions, being none he called for a motion to approve the lot line adjustment as
presented. Mr. Merklien so moved, it was
seconded. Mr. O’Keefe suggested
amending the motion to include reference to the granted variance. All agreed.
The motion was amended.
B.
Hubbard, LLC and Chamberlain Machine Inc. - Special Exception
Recommendation located on Rte. 12 N. Map 12 Lot 4-2 of 12.15 acres in the
Rural Ag. and Commercial zones. Purpose of the recommendation is to comply
with Article III. Rural Ag. District
C. Special Exceptions 1. a. i. and ii. of the zoning ordinance. The Board will review the criteria and hold a
public hearing and take action whether to favorably or not favorably recommend
that the Zoning Board of Adjustment grant a special exception for an industrial
use in the rural agricultural zone.
Ch.
Miller described the proposal noting the Zoning Board will review the proposal
in the future and determine whether to grant the special exception based on the
remaining criteria outlined in the zoning ordinance. He reiterated the Planning Board’s role in
reviewing two criteria mentioned above as:
i.) property currently zoned for
industrial, manufacturing and commercial operations is either unavailable or
inadequate for the proposed use; and
ii.) the proposed use is
appropriate and consistent with the Town’s Master Plan. He said the remaining criteria would be
reviewed by the Zoning Board. He said
the purpose of the meeting and hearing was to listen to a description of the
proposal as presented by Attny. Gary Kinyon representative for Chamberlain
Machine, take public input and have the Board review the criteria and make it’s
recommendation. He called for Mr. Kinyon
to speak.
Attny.
Kinyon introduced himself, Mr. Chris Miller, Bob and Scott Boynton.
He said the company has been family owned and
operated since the 1940’s in Bellows Falls.
The Boynton’s are the present manager’s Bob’s father had owned the
company prior. Chamberlain is a
manufacturer of high quality precision machined products sold to various
markets including medical. Unlike many
industries in the US over the last years who have been lost to outsourcing,
Chamberlain has thrived and grown now requiring expansion. They found the site recently subdivided by
Hubbard to be suitable for their needs.
He pointed to the site on the provided maps, Sec. Aslinger noted the
application materials included a traffic study, letter from Brackett Geo
Science regarding the water protection area and site maps. He described the previous Hubbard business
and buildings saying the past and recent tax assessments show the land use as
industrial use. He said it has Town
water and sewer and most importantly 3 phase power needed specifically for
Chamberlain’s machining. He pointed out
access to the site as being Huntington Lane off of Rte. 12. He noted the surrounding property uses. He said the property is located in two zones,
200 ft. in the Commercial and Rural Agricultural the rest. He noted lot requirements
Walpole Planning Board Minutes 9/11/07 page 3
for the zones, and permitted uses reading directly
from the zoning ordinance. He said in
both of the zones an industrial use is allowed by special exception. He said they are proposing a roughly 40
thousand sq. ft. building to include manufacturing facility and office
space. He said the current site employs
about 50 persons the plan is to maintain that number at the new site. He said the employees are skilled laborers
making from $12 -$24 per hour. He said
one of the attractions of this location is Chamberlain’s ability to keep the
skilled workforce they have by limiting additional commute times for key
employees traveling as far south as Hinsdale and north from West Lebanon. He said the facility would be about as clean
a manufacturer as possible, with no emissions, no noise or hazardous waste
production. Currently in Vermont where
hazardous waste laws are very restrictive, Chamberlain is exempt because they
do not produce any. He said it does not
draw a lot of water or produce excess water or sewer. Once up and running the facility will provide
about $80K per year in taxes based on 2006 figures. He said the proposal is to build a state of
the art facility at this site in order to keep Chamberlain competitive and to
thrive in its present market and into the future. He said they thought it would provide the Town
with a very dependable employer and future employer. He pointed out their need for a special
exception in order to proceed, specifying the two mentioned criteria. He supported criteria i.) by pointing out the
only zoned industrial property known as
the industrial park is inadequate due to the fact 3 phase power is unavailable
and Chamberlain must have 3 phase power.
Secondly Chamberlain feels it is inadequate because it is not “ready for
building” like the new site is and the new site is located within the preferred
commuting distances for their key employees.
The industrial park is out of their preferred commuting area. The new site is located to all the convenient
commercial services and main routes. He
said based on the fact the industrial park is not adequate for Chamberlain, it
ruled it out for consideration nor are there other adequate locations. He said the second criteria ii.) regarding
uses appropriate and consistent with the Master Plan can be considered by how
the zoning ordinance is written usually based on what is in the Master
Plan. He thought the language in the
zoning ordinance outlining uses for the zones and criteria for allowing an
industrial use by special exception, not prohibiting them, was a clear decision
enacted in the zoning ordinance reflecting consistency with the Master
Plan. He referred to the Transportation
section of the Master Plan looking for mention of industrial uses stating under
the goals: “To provide for adequate
streets, street systems, in all existing and future residential, commercial and
industrial subdivisions”. He thought it was fair to say this site was
consistent with the Master Plan regarding the fact it is located on Rte. 12 a
main access and thoroughfare connecting the interstate and routes north and
south. He referred to the Land Use Goals
and Objectives stating “to insure Walpole has a diverse mix of commercial and
industrial uses”. He said for years the
Town has had a level of industrial uses this proposal is actually replacing a
bygone industrial use. He did not think
anyone knowing the US economy is under any illusion a rush to expand industrial
uses over residential uses would occur in any small town. Having an opportunity to enhance the
diversity of industrial, residential and commercial uses in Walpole is
consistent with the Master Plan. He
added the proposal is a golden opportunity for Walpole and Chamberlain to bring
a proposed use with its very good scale based on the population, it is an ideal
spot for both. He reiterated the lack of
adequate industrial space and the consistency with the Master Plan asking the
Board to grant a favorable recommendation to the Zoning Board for their
proposal.
Ch.
Miller recognized Board member Ben Daviss who asked how many current employees
live in Walpole? Mr. Chris Miller
answered 4 and about half their employees live in NH. Mr. Daviss asked if the 80K tax revenue is
more than what is generated now? Mr.
Kinyon said it was 80K in total, not in addition to. Selectmen Miller asked what would be the assessed
value of the building? Mr. Kinyon said
roughly 3 million dollars.
Ch.
Miller called for other public comments:
Walpole Planning Board Minutew 9/11/07 page 4
Ms. Barbara Dretzin asked if
they had spoken with the present owner of the industrial park, she thought he
was willing to install 3 phase power.
Mr. Kinyon said no, but it was his belief the owner did not have the
ability to install 3 phase power to the site.
An audience member said it was common knowledge the site would not
support 3 phase power.
Mark Houghton of the Town
water department was concerned the proposed site sits atop the well source
protection area. Attny. Kinyon said they
were unclear as to whether they were infact within the protection area and
asked if better maps were available. Mr.
Houghton said he could provide a better map but he is certain they are in the
protection area.
Ms. Barbara O’Conner asked
what criteria the Planning Board uses in order to determine whether the
applicants have made a good faith effort to try to find suitable and adequate
land for Chamberlain’s purpose. She is
concerned they have not spoken with the owner of the industrial park, an
obvious choice, are they saying the proposed site is simply very convenient for
them so they don’t believe there is any other site available.
Ch. Miller said in previous
preliminary meetings the subject was raised as to the lack of 3 phase power
which is essential to Chamberlain’s operation.
He believes bringing 3 phase to the current industrial park would be
very costly, time consuming and possibly unlikely based on some limited
knowledge of the process. He said it is
likely with general flow of electricity in that area “hiccups” could occur
leading to a quality issue with precision machining.
John Almsbury asked what
types of solvents, lubricants and product shipping preservatives are used, and
secondly does NH have equivalent hazmat regulations to VT?
Plant manager, Chris Miller
stated they use a wide range of LPS preservatives and machine oils, some
solvents. Whether NH hazmat is
equivalent to VT he doubts it but stated they would certainly comply with
whatever the requirements are and he is highly confident given the exempt
status they have in VT they will be able to meet the NH standards. They have zero production of hazardous
materials.
Mel Schupack said the
proposal is not consistent with the Master Plan with goal # 4 calling to
preserve agricultural land. He said the
site is prime agricultural land and is one of the best agricultural soils in
the State. While it may not be farmed in
the near future, paving it over now and destroying it is not consistent with
the Master Plan. He said the
Conservation Commission voted at their last meeting to recommend against
allowing an industrial use on the parcel.
He said it is part of the Master Plan to preserve farmland. He said it is also over the well-head
protection area. He said there is a 16
acre commercial parcel for sale north east of there out of the protection area,
he wondered why it wasn’t considered.
Mary Lou Montgomery read a
letter from Jennifer Palmietto, PhD Granite State Rural Water Association Lead
Staff Officer stating their opposition to the proposed application for a
conditional use permit for a machine shop in the River Well wellhead overlay
district. Allowing the use will increase
the well long-term susceptibility to pollutants such as heavy metals. It refers to the ordinance prohibiting auto
service and machine shops within the district and how the overlay district, was
researched and enacted and refers to the Natural Features section in the Master
Plan. It states Walpole is fortunate to
have two quality wells. It being necessary to have two sources to provide a
back-up for the system. Recently the
Watkins Hill well was inoperable for ten days, the River Well became the Town’s
sole source, stressing the importance of protecting the quality and quantity of
the River Well.
Sheldon Sawyer offered
comment as a Selectmen, not the Selectboard.
He said many concerns he hears in Town besides high taxes, is not being
able to afford to live in Walpole. There
are not enough reasonable paying blue collar jobs, in years past Hubbard and RN
Johnson have played a major part in providing jobs but it hasn’t been the case
recently. He said the abatements to
Hubbard has lowered the tax base although there have been a few new industries,
such as Bensonwood and Burdick’s. He
said the lower paying jobs have increased in the commercial shopping center
area. The demand for house lots has
increased substantially as well
Walpole Planning Board Minutes 9/11/07 page 5
as the building of larger homes. He feels the Town needs to have a good
balance of businesses to have a good effect on the tax base. Recently the power company has helped but recently
that dropped from 8 million to 6 million, a drop of 2 million. Hopefully it will improve over time. He feels Walpole is suffering from not having
good clean industrial uses, the Town does not have an adequate industrial area
providing 3 phase power, town water and sewer.
He said if not on this site, then where?
He strongly feels this site could be made to safely accomplish the
concerns of the Conservation Commission and Water Department. Along with the Planning Board, engineers and
Chamberlain Machine and others, this would be a great asset for Walpole. An industry need not threaten the safety of
the Town’s water supply if properly designed and engineered. On a final note Selectmen Sawyer added each
year the Board of Selectmen are faced with turning down justifiable projects
that would be good for the Town, it’s harder all the time. The highway
department has greatly increased, salaries could be raised for dedicated
qualified employees but it is tough to afford.
This site would be an asset.
Ms. Barbara O’Conner said
the recent vote not to rezone this entire parcel substantiated the community’s
desire to prevent an industrial use. She
said she did not think it was appropriate for the Planning Board to ignore the
vote. The fact this is a subdivision of
the larger plot is immaterial it is still within the water protection area.
Mel Schupack said taxes are
always a pain in the neck, but Walpole has actually maintained a lower increase
in the municipal portion of the taxes, lower than the rate of inflation since
the year 2000. He said the BOS are doing
a better job than they are admitting too.
He said there are other sites to consider and the Planning Board should
do a study to take into account all the potential areas as part of the
process. He said approving something
that is opportunistic for one developer is not the way to go.
Attny. Kinyon said
Chamberlain is not shirking any responsibilities regarding the development of
the site and to make certain it is not a threat to the well protection area,
they will comply with all the standards.
He said given the minimal impact this use will have, you have to
consider the other potential uses for the site such as agriculture with the
fertilizers and pesticides, residential uses with water requirements, they are
permitted uses. He applauds the Town and
persons who have spoken tonight, but insures they will do what is needed to
insure the water is protected. He said
whatever the future use might be, they could be of a greater threat than their
proposal, because they are permitted uses for the zone.
Charles Miller mentioned
knowledge of Chamberlain speaking with Mr. Dill about his available land but
did not know the outcome. Mr. Dill said
he had spoken with Chamberlain about his site.
Mary Lou Montgomery asked if
an approval is granted for special exception is there anything guaranteeing
Chamberlain and their level of operations would always occupy the site? Ch. Miller said the Board only makes a
non-binding recommendation to the Zoning Board, the Zoning Board acts on the
special exception, if granted Chamberlain must return to the Planning Board for
a full site plan review to further address all issues in detail. He said 20 years down the road if they sell
out to a different company then it would be a change in use triggering all new
requirements and review, the special exception and it’s pertinent conditions is
granted to specifically Chamberlain Machine.
He mentioned his own knowledge of industrial material handling leads him
to be less concerned over safety issues because of the detailed recording of
the materials from receiving to disposal.
Shane O’Keefe noted the
handling of the materials was not something likely to be addressed in the
zoning. Ch. Miller said but they could
be made part of the conditions during the Site Plan Review process. He mentioned Pinnacle View had to provide
similar information. He said they have
similar materials to what Chamberlain uses such as machine oils and solvents.
Charles Blount said he
didn’t believe anyone present was opposing Chamberlain Machine, but he thinks
the Board should be convinced they have made a good thorough effort to
Walpole Planning Board Minutes 9/11/07 page 6
identify every piece of commercial and industrial
land available, to investigate whether 3 phase can be brought to the current
industrial park. Ch. Miller said he
thought after 25 or 30 years since it hasn’t been brought in, it wasn’t likely
to be done. Mr. Dill said he looked at
the site 24 years ago and it wasn’t feasible for one business to put it
in. He said on another note, his recent
experience with the hydrologist, it was explained to him the flow goes with the
river, this site is away from the well site.
Gail Siddell asked about
traffic concerns for the area. Sec.
Aslinger said a traffic study was included with the application materials. Ch. Miller said it would be addressed during
the Site Plan Review if they receive a special exception.
Mr. Merklein agreed with
Selectmen Sawyer about the need for businesses to contribute to the tax
base. He asked if Chamberlain had indeed
thoroughly looked at all the available sites, perhaps not within the well protection area specifically.
Chris Miller of Chamberlain
answered saying they had looked at a number of sites, but kept coming back to
this site because of the 3 phase power, town water, town sewer and location for
their employees. They spoke with Mr.
Dill, looked over the industrial park only briefly being no 3 phase power, and
a site in North Walpole. He said at the
time they did there search, this site was the best available.
Mr. Toby Tousley, the new
owner of the property, said he has read the Master Plan which states the Town
needs to be sustainable, not just focused on agriculture. He said while the site has been designated as
prime agricultural soil, it is not immediately farmable. There are several large buildings, and a vast
amount of concrete and concrete surfaces making it unlikely it will ever be
farmed. He said he has the right to put
40 houses on the parcel, and has seen preliminary plans for such a
development. He believes the impact of
40 residences would have a far greater impact on the water supply through
unchecked contaminants, such as car oils, pesticides and fertilizers. Chamberlain Machine must account for every
pound of materials that goes in and out.
He said currently the maps the Conservation Commission have shown a
current farming operation is within 400 ft. of the well, what about herbicides
and manure used being unchecked? He said
Chamberlain’s proposal is a great opportunity for the Town. He didn’t grown up in Brooklyn or move here
from Connecticut, he is from the area having grown up and lived in Keene all
his life, attended school with many people in the community, so he is aware of
the concerns and opportunities the proposal presents.
Board member Ben Daviss said
being the designated Board website manager reading the comments he would like
to follow up on what Mr. Tousley said and to put into context some of the
townspeople’s concerns before the board votes.
He said the proposed industrial use may be the best use for the land
even though the vote to change the zone was unfavorable in March. He disagrees the land can’t be farmed again,
relating in 1962 he was told Mr. Nixon would never have a political career and
in 1980 the US Steel Industry was dead and gone forever, he doesn’t put a lot
of faith in those kinds of predictions.
He said it is true a Mom and Pop farmer is not going to pay Mr.
Tousley’s price for the land and farm 40 acres of corn. He said the alternative best use may be light
industrial, it would have less of an impact overall than a large scale housing
development. He said the industrial use
and economic benefits are not what the Board must consider at this time, only
whether there is existing adequate industrial land and whether it is
appropriate and consistent with the Master Plan, this is what the Board will
vote on. He said in the Master Plan
under Land Use, the goal is to protect Walpole’s land. For some this proposed use might not be
everyone’s idea of land protection. Goal
#2 says to insure there is a diverse mix of commercial and industrial
uses. It also notes general satisfaction
be met with existing business planning in Walpole, noting that the most
important use is to have businesses that serve the needs of the residents
rather than regional markets.
Chamberlain Machine will not make products directly serving the
residents. One of the objectives is to
support the continuation of existing land uses, granted agricultural use will
not continue therefore rezoning it to industrial does not
Walpole Planning Board Meeting Minutes 9/11/07 page
7
preserve existing land uses. If the Board is going to play by the rules
set, they would need to see more in the Master Plan weighing against it than in
favor of it. He thought the Board should
not take lightly the Granite State Rural Water Association, the Town’s water
department, the Master Plan, and voters are all being against the proposal. To play by the set rules and to keep faith
with the Town, the Board is obligated to vote against recommending it.
Mr.
Tousley said the voters voted against rezoning the entire parcel to
industrial. He said he thought the
opposition was not against an industrial application in the rural agricultural
district, which is allowed by special exception but that they were voting
against a blanket zone change to industrial.
8:45PM, Ch.
Miller receiving no further comments closed the public hearing and opened Board
discussion.
Mr. Bob Miller said the vote
against the zone change was 591 to 501, he did not think it was an overwhelming
majority against an industrial land use for the parcel.
Mr. Fletcher said if the
vote were to happen today it might go the other way, he thought the voters were
misinformed thinking the developer’s were “taking” a big piece of
property.
Ch. Miller said having been
on the Board for many years participating in the original Master Plan and
rewrite, one major concern has been to limit strip commercial development along
Rte. 12. He referred to the Master Plan
promoting nodal development along Rte 12 over strip development. He said it was an ideal to work at promoting
light industrial nodal areas along Rte. 12 to break up the commercial strips. He said over the years there has been
discussion about changing some of the zoning to industrial/commercial but never
enacted through zoning changes. He said
now there is an opportunity for a light industrial operation on land zoned in
the 1960’s Rural Agricultural, zoned specifically because Hubbard Farms owned
the land and they housed chickens on it.
He said once they built the large barns it actually went to a commercial
poultry enterprise owned locally. He
said it is no longer owned locally so it is being sold as a commercial piece of
land with commercial uses on it. He said
it is a prime opportunity being a clean industry without actually impacting the
water at all, the well is to the North the water flows to the South. He said all State requirements would be met,
he would rather see three commercial/industrial businesses owned and operated
by local people with roots in the community who will value the community they
are part of as is evident in Bellows Falls.
He said one of the reasons they expanded the commercial zone for
Pinnacle View is because they were local people, they would do right by the
Town. He sees the same situation here,
local people involved in the community they are a part of. Hubbard Farms did as well as they did in
Walpole because they were local and part of the community. He thinks it will be a great interlude to the
strip development on Rte. 12. He
reminded that it wasn’t too many years ago when the IGA was leaving the Village
everyone was scared about what would happen to the Village without a grocery
store. He said the IGA considered
keeping a presence in the Town, the Bank purposely stayed in Town, there were
many old houses people turned into Bed and Breakfast’s and restaurants, all
local people to trying to revitalize the Town.
Walpole is lucky because local people take an interest in their
community they were able to build things up and revitalize the Town. He sees the Rte. 12 area as similar. He said Hubbard Farms has provided a great
deal of tax revenue for the Town, but less successfully in the last 10 years
saying it could change more quickly, loss of revenue and jobs. He said the land owned by non-Walpole
residents is for sale leading to a possible larger impact if developed
residentially. He said it is
commercially zoned land and historically operated as commercial land. The criteria the Board needs to review for
its recommendation has been met favorably with the Master Plan mention of
promoting nodal development on Rte. 12 and the inadequacy of the only
industrial land available in the Town being the industrial park. He said the proposal meets the two criteria
the Zoning Board has the balance of the criteria to review. He reiterated what a great opportunity it is
for the Town, having lived here all his life he sees potential.
Walpole Planning Board Minutes 9/11/07 page 8
Eric Merklein said he hopes
if it goes through, Chamberlain will design a site and building in keeping with
the Town’s architecture.
Henry Fletcher moved to favorably recommend the special exception to
the Zoning Board of Adjustment based on the two criteria being met. Seconded by Bob Miller. Vote was 2 against, 5 in favor, motion
passed.
Ben Daviss followed up
saying he voted based on the rules, not necessarily against the proposal. Ch. Miller said he wouldn’t argue with his
reasoning or Selectman Miller’s opposition, he understood his reasoning because
of the Town vote in March. Mr. Daviss
said part of the problem might be due to the lack of an economic development
plan in the Master Plan, he would like to see it added to the work session
agenda later in the month.
A five minute break was taken to allow the audience to disperse.
VI. New Business: Preliminary Conceptual Consultations
A.
Mr. and Mrs. Mack - Voluntary Merger, various others. Sec. Aslinger said the recent reassessment
has spurned several voluntary merger applications. She put together a general instructions guide
for Elaine to hand out. Betty Mack was
present and turned in an application form.
Sec. Aslinger said several applications will be presented at the October
meeting, no public hearing is required but abutters must be notified. Ch. Miller disagreed abutters need to be
notified. (please note: Ch. Miller was
correct, voluntary mergers according to RSA 674:39-a do not require abutter
notification or public hearing but should appear on the Board’s agenda the
night of review. Ch. Miller obtained
this information shortly after the meeting.) Mrs. Mack will need to provide
the fees at a later time. Mrs. Mack
asked if they would need to have a deed written, answer was yes and the Board
will provide a signed form for her to be recorded at the registry of deeds at
the next meeting.
B.
Toby Tousley - Future
development of Rte. 12 parcel Map 12 Lot 4-1 Mr. Tousley presented an outlined
map showing the larger parcel designated as mainly in the Rural Agricultural
zone. In order to determine what to do
with the remainder parcel he has been in contact with Bensonwood. He said he wished he had spoken up earlier
regarding availability of suitable land for industrial uses beyond the
industrial park. He said the reason this
site is desirable is because of the 3 phase power. Mr. Benson is interested in it for that
reason, his present site does not have 3 phase and he is built out. He is interested also because there is plenty
of land for expansion. He said although
Mr. Hansel in a previous meeting had mentioned how good 3 phase generators are,
Mr. Benson disagrees otherwise he would continue with what he has, although he
can’t specifically speak for Mr. Benson, they do not have an agreement. Mr. Tousley stated he has an lease agreement
for a time, possibly a number of years with Hubbard for three of the large
buildings with some chickens currently in them, #14, #17 #18, and they are
currently occupying the lab building. He
questions if he sells the operation to Bensonwood knowing they would need to
acquire a special exception like Chamberlain’s process, is putting a different
business on the same site as Hubbard’s leased space a conflict?
Ch.
Miller said if Bensonwood expands their current operation to the site the
existing buildings would be accessory buildings being leased for a time
certain. He does not see a conflict,
they are existing buildings and currently used.
Bensonwood could use them for storage but they would be leased for a
time in the future. He said he thought
they had the right to lease them if they want.
Mr.
Shane O’Keefe agreed saying since they exist and are being used as an
agricultural/industrial use, only a change in use would trigger a site plan
review, but it may need to be better defined.
Selectman
Miller though a legal opinion could clarify it.
Ch. Miller thought if the Board agreed on the interpretation a legal
opinion would not be necessary.
Walpole Planning Board Minutes 9/11/07 page 9
Mr.
Tousley said if he sells it to Bensonwood, hypothetically only, then Bensonwood
would be leasing the buildings to Hubbard.
He said there are two issues to consider one being Hubbard was planning
on leaving Walpole entirely, keeping them here is a help. He said there has been a fair amount of
concern over the access to the lot as being Huntington Lane only, however the
other access is a legal curb cut, would the Board prefer to see a purchaser use
Huntington or Edwards Lane? Ch. Miller
said without knowing exactly who would buy the parcel it would be hard to
determine a preference, noting the State would be the determiner based on the
needs. Members agreed it would depend on
the needs and the State requirements. Mr. Tousley said preliminary discussion
with the State was favorable to using Edwards Lane, he wanted to know in
general if the Board had any concerns.
Mr.
Daviss asked how large an operation Bensonwood would be building? Mr. Tousley said he was not certain but
thought they were planning on one building they like the site because there is
plenty of room to expand in the future if needed. Bob Miller noted the parcel is 3 times the
size of their current operation. He said
there is a large pond and septic located on their current location.
Ms.
Aslinger said in order to help clarify whether two businesses could occupy the
same lot, and she will do further research, she thought if it were to be
granted a special exception as an industrial use in a rural agricultural zone
the use would fall under the zoning requirements under the industrial zone much
different from the rural agricultural zone where it talks about one building on
one lot. She said there are no building
size limits in the industrial zone, it is only for retail commercial buildings. She thought the existing buildings would
become accessory buildings to the owner of the property but putting an
additional industrial building on the same lot would be creating two buildings
and uses on one lot with the same frontage.
She thought it was correct to think the industrial use criteria would
apply to the lot rather than the rural agricultural or commercial districts
criteria if a special exception is granted.
The industrial zone criteria does not speak of “a” building on “a” lot
as in the Rural Ag and Commercial districts.
Ms.
Barbara Dretzin asked to speak, Ch. Miller allowed her question. She asked if a special exception is granted
for an industrial zone change is there no limit to the building size? Ms. Aslinger said the special exception
doesn’t change the zone, the Boards are not changing the zone but the use
within the zone and there isn’t a building size limitation for industrial. Ch. Miller said the zone would always stay
the same until the Town votes to change it.
Ben Daviss thought it was a play on words because if the land stays
zoned rural agricultural but a special exception is granted for an industrial
use then it doesn’t matter what is zoned rather what it’s used for. He thought in one night between this plan
and Chamberlain’s the Board has disregarded the intent of the ordinance. Selectman Miller said it made the Town vote
ridiculous.
Mr.
Tousley said he understood by the Town voting down the zone change it caused a
more detailed review by going through the special exception process. Ms. Aslinger said he made a good point, if
the vote had gone in favor of changing the zone the site could have housed a
huge industrial complex with few restrictions and would have been promoted as
an industrial park and an owner would have had to develop it in that way. This way by leaving it zoned as is requiring
a special exception for an allowed use it keeps the development on a slower and
smaller scale and impact. It doesn’t
take a huge piece of property and turn it into an industrial park. She said from the onset she did not like the
idea of the parcel’s rezoning to industrial due to the lack of restriction in
the zoning ordinance and the potential for a too large scale of development for
the Town.
Ch.
Miller used Ms. Aslinger as an example showing how she didn’t support changing
the zone because the ordinance already allowed the use by special exception, so
why supercede the zoning ordinance by changing the zoning by a Town vote. He thought she knew since it was already a
permitted use the additional criteria needing to be met through the special
exception process would be better for the Town, so it could be taken piece meal
on a smaller and slower
Walpole Planning Board Meeting Minutes 9/11/07 page
10
scale. With
meeting the additional criteria it allows for a more careful and detailed
preliminary review rather than just the site plan review. She agreed saying the special exception
process causes the developer to jump through more hoops, it brings proposals to
the public forum, one extra step rather than directly to the site plan
review. She said the industrial zone
does not have many restrictions on it until it can be changed, so it seemed
premature to re-zone a whole piece of land to industrial before the ordinance
can be adjusted to accommodate needed changes such as limitation to building
sizes.
Ms.
O’Conner asked why then is this proposal being considered? Answer because it is a permitted use in the
ordinance by special exception. She
asked why if the voters turned down the zoning change did the Board recommend
the special exception to rezone the land.
Ms. Aslinger said no rezoning is taking place they are confusing the
issue. Ch. Miller said the original
proposal to rezone the parcel was one of two options the developer had and they
wanted to try it first. Ms. Aslinger
said the special exception process is the better way to go. Ch. Miller agreed saying the Board is
following the zoning ordinance. Ms.
O’Conner said what about the vote of the Town.
Ch. Miller said the Town also voted to adopt the zoning ordinance and it
is being followed correctly and according to it. Ms. O’Conner said a precedent was set tonight
by the Board granting the special exception.
Ch. Miller said the Board did not grant the special exception but has
only made a recommendation to the zoning board based on the criteria outlined
in the ordinance. He said the Town vote
had nothing to do with the criteria the Board needed to review to make its
recommendation although he knew some members did consider it. Ms. O’Conner said what the Board did tonight
was to make it so easy for anyone to come in and say I want and get a special
exception.
Mr. Tousley interjected he
was not proposing special exception at this time. Selectman Miller said if they disagree with
the Planning Board’s decision the next step is for the Zoning Board to make its
review suggesting they should attend those meetings to make further
comment.
Ms.
Aslinger said she does not think the board made their decision or voted lightly
on anything to do with the proposal, stating they are planners, its what they
do. She referred to the Master Plan
stating the known conflict of trying to keep agricultural land protected and
encourage development, as things come to the board they need to be
weighed. She said you can pick through
the Master Plan only picking the things that you want to focus on but if you
read the entire plan you’ll find the whole overall picture showing developing
the Town for sustainability for the tax base and agricultural preservation go
hand in hand, we have to do both. In
order to do both we have to take into account these projects when they
come. On a scale of projects it happens to
be a pretty good one compared to other proposals she’s seen having sat on another
NH Town Planning Board. She said they
are local people they will take care of the Town because they will be a part of
the Town.
Mr.
Tousley submitted a copy of his preliminary plan for the Board’s file.
C. Delbert Frost - Secretary Aslinger said Mr.
Frost was not present nor asked to be, she was simply asking the Board to
instruct her as to whether Mr. Frost needed to have his 1991 Lot Line
Adjustment revoked since the Board approved it but he never had a deed written
or recorded to reflect the change. Some
years later his neighbor purchased the small amount of land at a tax sale
thereby invalidating the Lot Line Adjustment.
Mr. Frost has called Sec. Aslinger a few times and attended Selectmen’s
meetings recently. He has notified the
Town he no longer owns the property but has been taxed on it since 1991. Sec. Aslinger asked the Board whether he
should go through the revocation process or simply handle it by letter, but she
is concerned at present it appears to be valid until revoked or acknowledged. Ch. Miller thought it was a property dispute
and not for the Board to handle. He said
if there is no dispute with the abutter then ask Mr. Frost to make a written
request to the Board to revoke the 1991 Lot Line Adjustment due to the
circumstances that have taken place. Ms.
Aslinger will notify Mr. Frost on how to proceed.
Walpole Planning Board Minutes 9/11/07 page 11
D. Virginia Foote of Lawrence Associates presented a lot line
adjustment between N. Walpole Village District/Police Station and Norman Firenz
located on Russell St. off Rte. 12. Map
30 Lot 1 and 2. Purpose is to annex .02
acres from Lot 1 to Lot 2 removing the old line that ran through the garage and
to meet the 5 foot setback requirement. A motion to place the application on the
October meeting was made and seconded, motion carried. Sec. Aslinger asked to have 3 more copies
of the map submitted as soon as possible the application, abutter list and fees
were submitted. There was some
discussion about who owns some of the land.
It was determined there is a 100 x 100 ft. parcel owned by the Police
Station.
E. Ms. Foote also brought in a plan to be
submitted at the October meeting for the November meeting regarding a 2 lot
subdivision on Ramsay Hill Rd. for Jack Franks.
He
is subdividing 1.6 acres from 11 acres with 200 feet of frontage. Purpose is to provide a ROW across his land
to a landlocked parcel so the person can own his driveway. Ms. Foote did not have the application
complete for submission but will have it ready for the October meeting Sec.
Aslinger will add her to the agenda for another preliminary in October.
F. Myra Mansouri of the Zoning Board - She brought up a zoning
amendment change to the Rural Agricultural District to allow home business as
it is in the other zones. She read a
letter from the Zoning Board where they voted to request the Planning Board
amend the zoning ordinance Article VIII Section B. to reflect the same language
as shown in the other zones permitting home businesses. Ch. Miller suggested the ZBA write the
amendment, the Board will hold the Public Hearing, to check the dates. Shane O’Keefe asked why it wouldn’t be added
to all zones including the Timberland district.
It was thought because there is no building allowed in the Timberland
district. Referring to the zoning
ordinance under the Timberland zone, any use permitted in the Rural Ag. Zone is
allowed but for a building a permit from the ZBA and Planning Board is required
and meet several other restrictions.
Henry Fletcher noted the Timberland district does not have road frontage
due to it being set back 1200 feet from the other zones.
G. Ernest and Wanda Way - Attny. Rebecca Todd showed
maps of the minor proposal wanting the Board look at Lot 2’s shape. She noted it included a long strip (50ft
wide) of land along Santaw Lane accessing the back portion of their remaining
lot. Rather than deeding a ROW over the
lot they prefer to retain ownership of it.
Their daughter is going to own the new lot, if she decided to sell it in
the future they would like to retain owned access instead of a deed
restriction. There is also another
access to the back lot on their retained lot as well, 20 feet wide. They are trying to prevent future problems. She asked if the Board has concerns? Members did not see any problems with the
configuration although it is oddly shaped.
The lots meet all the other requirements. They are planning to submit the application
at the October meeting.
VII. Communications and Miscellaneous
A. North Walpole Village Commissioners Letter - Sec. Aslinger reported
members have copies of recent correspondence in their agenda packets. She suggested everyone read it for discussion
at the next meeting, noting the Board should be deciding on whether NWVC have
complied with the conditions of approval.
B. Site Plan Revocation - N. Meadow Plaza - Sec. Aslinger reported
members have copies of the correspondence in their agenda packets, suggesting
they read it and discuss it at the October meeting. She said some of the recommendation depends
on past site plan review regulations in reference to time limits. She researched this, there were no reference
to time limits until the 2004 revision.
She noted while Attny. Hockensmith believes there are good grounds to go
forward with the revocation, it raises the question if it is challenged legal
fees may mount for the Town. Ch. Miller
says in the long run, anything done to the parcel will need to come for a Site
Plan Review and it is not likely to resemble what was previously approved. He doesn’t feel it is critical. He mentioned Berkshire taking the Town to
court over a March zoning amendment regarding building vs. establishment, a
case is pending in the courts. He said
the Selectmen are
Walpole Planning Board Minutes 9/11/07 page 12
currently handling it without the Planning Board’s
input. Sec. Aslinger said she has a few
copies of Hockensmith’s response for those interested.
D. Ch. Miller announced the Work Session for 9/25 would be
held, summer vacation is over, reminding it starts at 7:00 pm rather than 7:30
pm.
C. Handouts - Sec. Aslinger asked members to sign up for
the DRI workshop to be held in October.
She passed out OEP’s Fall conference sign up also.
Ben Daviss reminded minutes need approving. A
motion to approve the minutes from July and August was made and seconded,
motion carried.
At a point in the meeting Joe DiBernardo of
DiBernardo Associates submitted an application to Sec. Aslinger for a lot line
adjustment on behalf of Chris and Kathy Monahan previously discussed at the
August meeting located on 42 Barnett Hill Rd. Map 9 Lots 48 and 48-1 in the
Rural Agricultural zone. It adds 3.81
acres with the existing house to Lot 48 for a total of 13.81 acres with 456.72
feet of frontage and Lot 48-1 of 11.01 acres with 200 feet of frontage. Sec. Aslinger will process the application for
the October meeting.
VIII. Meeting Adjourned 10pm
cc. file, PB
members, ZBA, BOS, WCC, Water, Road Agent
posted: Town
Hall, Lobby, Burdick’s Market, Town website www.walpolenh.us