 |
ANTRIM PLANNING BOARD
Minutes of the October 19, 2006 Meeting
Members & Staff Present:
Mary Allen |
Bob Edwards |
Mike Genest |
Bradley Houseworth |
Renee Rabideau |
Andrew Robblee |
Ed Rowehl |
Paul Vasques |
Kathi Wasserloos |
Members & Staff Absent:
Fred Anderson |
Scott Burnside |
Brian Sawich |
Alex Snow |
|
|
Public Attendees:
Peter Beblowski |
Thomas J. Benedict |
Kent Brown |
Norman E. Cody |
Marc Couture |
Nancy Couture |
Greg Halverson |
Kelly Henderson |
Janet Houseworth |
Phil Marrotte |
Matt Monahan (SWRPC) |
Peter Mellen, LLS |
Brett Murdough |
Darrell S. Murdough, Jr. |
Mark Murdough |
Scott Murdough |
Bob Pace |
Sarah Patriquin (SWRPC) |
Bess Robblee |
|
|
The members convened at 6:45 PM and reviewed the documentation on the agenda prior to the start of the meeting. Chairman Edwards called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM and appointed Ms. Wasserloos to sit for Mr. Anderson and Ms. Allen to sit for Mr. Sawich. Ms. Rabideau recused herself from the three public meetings scheduled for this evening. Chairman Edwards asked the Board to introduce themselves and explained the procedure of the public meetings.
Cody, Norman E. and Joyce G. File # 2006-18PB: Chairman Edwards continued the public meeting at 7:00 PM on the request of Norman E. & Joyce G. Cody for a Minor Subdivision. The applicants propose to subdivide property on 60 Meeting House Hill Road and Clinton Road, Antrim, NH, Tax Map 5, Lot 125 in the Rural District into two (2) lots. Chairman Edwards stated that the Board continued the public meeting in order to conduct a site walk and asked the Board to explain what comments or concerns came up during the site walk. Ms. Allen asked whether there was further information provided to the staff or Board regarding the driveway and the status of the existing NH DOT driveway permit. Mr. Vasques explained that he had spoken with Mr. Rene Fish, NH DOT, regarding the existing driveway permit and Mr. Fish
told him that he looked it up, it was a driveway permit from 1986, it didn’t say much, and looked like it needed to be renewed. Ms. Allen asked Mr. Vasques if there currently is a driveway permit, he stated that there is one but it seems that it needs to be reviewed.
Chairman Edwards expressed his concerns from the site walk stating that the driveway itself was approximately ten (10) feet to fourteen (14) feet wide in certain places and the question arose as to 1) how the driveway will be developed without disturbing the twenty five (25) foot wetland buffer setback, especially considering the fill dropped at the entrance of the driveway, and 2) how the existing driveway will be redesigned to provide access to the build-able areas on the lot and be suitable to meet existing regulations governing grade and width. Mr. Vasques stated that the driveway regulations are in the checklist and explained that the other issue to be considered is that the driveway regulations require the minimum width of the driveway at the property line to be twenty (20) feet. Chairman Edwards asked Mr. Mellen how the
driveway will be brought up to the proper width without disturbing the twenty five (25) foot wetland buffer setback. Mr. Mellen stated that the width of the driveway at the property line is approximately fifty (50) feet wide due to the turnout area that is present along Clinton Road (Rt. 31). He stated that at the property line the driveway is more than adequate and if expanded, the area is not within the twenty five (25) foot wetland setback. He also stated that they measured the width of the driveway, at the area over the culvert, and determined it was fourteen (14) feet wide. He stated that he doesn’t think there is a regulation governing the minimum width of the driveway once it gets past the property line so it appears that the applicant meets the criteria of the regulations. Mr. Mellen stated that obviously there will need to be some brush cut along the driveway but the material that was used to construct the driveway seems to be very
solid. He explained that since there hasn’t been any maintenance done to the driveway in the past ten (10) or fifteen (15) years and there weren’t any signs of erosion, the issue would more be a matter of clearing the brush and opening it up.
Ms. Allen expressed that she had concerns regarding the area of the driveway near the culvert, explaining that the existing slopes on the side of the driveway were pretty steep and that the buyer will probably want to fill in the wetlands to get a 3:1 slope on the side of the driveway because of how high up the driveway is from the adjacent wetland areas, approximately eight (8) feet above the adjacent land. Mr. Mellen replied that the Board must keep in mind that a standard parking space is ten (10) by twenty (20) feet and that usually is enough room to get out of a vehicle and park next to another vehicle. Ms. Allen replied that she is concerned with wider vehicles like a fuel truck and how they will access the proposed lot. She stated the width of the driveway is a viable concern for her and that a normal use of the lot
will most likely result in some fill going into the wetland buffer setback in order to expand the driveway to a reasonable width to provide for proper access. She also explained that another one of her concerns was the grade of the existing driveway, stating that a grade of the driveway was taken during the site walk, just east of the wetlands and it measured at twenty seven (27%) percent. She explained that because the access of the property is on a state highway, it is really up to the Board to make sure that the driveway is at a grade of ten percent (10%) or less. She stated that the applicant hasn’t requested a waiver regarding this regulation and she didn’t see too many places on the property where one could get to a building site on a driveway that didn’t exceed a grade of ten percent (10%). Ms. Allen also stated that perhaps the driveway is more of an issue than the Board previously thought and maybe the Board should ask the NH DOT
to come out and look at the existing driveway to get their input since the permit has already expired.
Mr. Mellen stated that he doesn’t think the existing driveway permit has expired. He stated that the Board doesn’t have anything in writing from the state. Mr. Vasques added that he was told that the existing driveway permit may need to be renewed but he didn’t say that the permit had expired. Mr. Mellen passed out a copy of the 1986 NH DOT driveway permit to the Board. Mr. Mellen stated that he would really need to speak with Mr. Fish regarding the status of the existing driveway permit and sit down with him to determine if the permit needs to be renewed and to explain further the conditions of the existing permit or the new one. Chairman Edwards stated that the Board wants to make sure the existing driveway permit is in compliance with what needs to be approved by the Board and if the permit
has expired or needs to be renewed, then the Board needs some written assurance from Mr. Fish that the existing driveway permit is sufficient or a new driveway permit is required. Mr. Vasques suggested to the Board that this issue could be addressed as a condition of approval.
Mr. Vasques stated that if the Board determines that the upgrade of the driveway will require a disturbance to the wetlands or wetlands buffer setback, then the Board must determine if they want to approve a special use permit for the applicant. Ms. Allen stated that she is uncomfortable giving final approval tonight because of the lack of information provided and explained that if the Board knew what disturbance was going to be done to the wetlands or wetland buffer, then the Board could make a prudent decision regarding the granting of a special use permit to disturb the wetlands. She explained that the existing driveway permit is twenty (20) years old, things have changed, and a lot of the details regarding the driveway are up in the air. Mr. Edwards asked Mr. Cody if he knew why a different size culvert was put in place
than what was described in the driveway permit. Mr. Cody replied that he wasn’t sure and that when the state issued the driveway permit, they were only concerned with the right of way and location of the stone walls.
Mr. Vasques stated that these issues can be broken down into two parts: 1) the potential disturbance of the wetlands buffer setback area and the need for a special use permit, and 2) what the Board will do with a driveway that is in excess of a ten percent (10%) grade. Mr. Mellen stated that his concern is that the Board knows that the existing driveway is fourteen feet (14) wide as it crosses the wetland but there is nothing in the regulations that addresses the width of the driveway or the steepness of the side of the driveway and therefore he is afraid the Board will require things to be done that the aren’t required by the Town’s regulations and therefore the applicant has nothing to follow in terms of what will be adequate to satisfy the Board’s concerns regarding the status of the existing driveway. Ms.
Allen reiterated her concern that realistically the driveway needs to be improved, possibly made wider in order to make it a useable access for the buyer, and her opinion is that right now it is not a workable driveway. Ms. Allen stated that essentially the applicant is requesting a waiver to the requirement that the driveway be at a ten percent (10%) grade or less, but no written waiver has been requested. Mr. Mellen stated that the driveway is already in existence; Ms. Allen added that regardless, it is not in compliance with the regulations. Mr. Mellen stated that it is hard to know what will be sufficient when the Town doesn’t have any regulations governing the driveway details to help guide the applicant. Mr. Vasques stated the Board needs to stay within their authority as far as requiring the driveway to have a ten percent (10%) grade or less and decide whether the applicant needs a special use permit to disturb the wetlands.
Ms. Allen suggested that the Board require the applicant to design a driveway with engineering and bring in the necessary written waivers. Mr. Mellen stated that if the Board wants to require the applicant to hire an engineer to design a driveway, how far onto the property should the engineer design the driveway? Mr. Cody stated that when it comes to hiring an engineer and establishing a driveway design, the responsibility falls on the individual buying and developing the lot. Mr. Cody stated that it is up to the buyer of the lot to decide where to site the house and to decide how far onto the lot the driveway will go; it’s the option of the individual purchasing the lot. Chairman Edwards replied stating that this is true but the Board has to be assured that the grade of the driveway will not exceed ten percent
(10%). Ms. Allen stated that if you don’t provide any written waivers to the regulations, then the Board will have to include notes on the plan stating that the wetlands and the twenty five (25) foot wetland buffer setback will not be disturbed in order to maintain the driveway and the driveway will not exceed a ten percent (10%) grade, which may in the end limit the applicant and, therefore the potential buyer, because of the lot restrictions noted on the plan and the location of wetlands and steep slopes on the lot.
Mr. Mellen stated that his is not sure that the approval of this subdivision necessarily ends the issue of the grade of the driveway. He said that typically, on Town roads, often times the driveway permit is issued when the building permit is issued. He stated that is when people know where the house will go and they can get more specific with the road agent in terms of where the driveway will be and the exact grade of it. Mr. Houseworth agreed but stated that this is the Board’s forum to address the driveway regulations such as grade and if they don’t address it now, how will the Board address it when the individual who purchases the lot goes to the building inspector to fill out a building permit and a driveway permit; will the individual, building inspector, or road agent come in front of the Board to get
approval for a driveway that is at a different grade? Mr. Mellen stated that if you want to take that approach in this particular case, the Board should be prepared to take this approach in all future cases. Mr. Mellen stated that the Board would then have to require that all new driveways for every subdivision lot be designed by an engineer if over a ten percent (10%) grade and that is not something that is in the Town’s regulations. In terms of consistency, he stated that if the Board is going to require it here, the Board has to require it in all future cases whether there is a wetland issue involved or not since it includes the grade of the driveway.
Ms. Allen stated that this is the Board’s one time to address the driveway regulations for each particular case. Mr. Mellen stated that in order to provide an engineered drawing of the driveway would require a great expense from the applicant subdividing. Mr. Vasques stated that one way to handle the driveway regulations is to address them when the individual that purchases the lot comes to the Town to apply for a building permit and a driveway permit. He explained that the Board may approve a subdivision but a driveway and house may not be built until ten (10) years after the subdivision was approved. Mr. Vasques stated that
the driveway permit is part of the building permit package and the driveway regulations aren’t addressed until an individual applies for a building permit and builds a house. He stated that at this time, it is the Road Agent’s responsibility to go out and issue a driveway permit based on the Town’s driveway regulations. If the Road Agent finds a driveway to have a grade that is greater than ten (10%) percent, then this is the time for the Board to get involved and address the driveway regulations.
Chairman Edwards asked if this situation is different because the driveway is already in existence as opposed to a lot where the location of the driveway has not already been established. He continued stating that his concern is that the individual that purchases the lot will think the driveway is already all set and the road agent may not see a need to review an existing driveway with an existing driveway curb cut and permit. After a lengthy discussion, the Board decided to address the driveway regulations at the time when a building permit is applied for by the individual that purchases the lot and not to be required of the applicant subdividing, Mr. Cody. Mr. Mellen suggested putting a note on the plan stating that any improvements or alterations to the existing driveway are subject to the Town’s driveway
regulations and approval from the Road Agent and Planning Board. Mr. Vasques suggested putting a note on the plan stating that if the driveway is altered and the wetlands or wetland buffer setback will be disturbed, then the individual improving the driveway needs to come to the Board to obtain a special use permit to disturb the wetlands or wetlands buffer setback.
Mr. Vasques reviewed the checklist with the Board, addressing the items on the checklist that were deemed by the planning staff to be incomplete or not satisfied. Mr. Vasques stated that a written waiver request was submitted to waive section B.3.a (18) of the Antrim Subdivision and Site Plan Review Regulations, requiring that topographical contours be completed an shown on the plan for Lots 125 and 125-1. Mr. Vasques asked the Board if they are going to grant the waiver request. Mr. Genest made a motion that the written waiver, as requested by Mr. Mellen’s letter dated August 25, 2006, be granted by the Planning Board, which was seconded by Ms. Allen and unanimously approved. Mr. Houseworth asked the Board how they are assured that there is enough contiguous upland to meet the wetlands overlay and steep slopes
overlay districts? Chairman Edwards stated that it is adequate based on visual observation from the site walk. Mr. Houseworth warned the Board that it is not a good practice to determine if there are enough contiguous uplands present on a lot to meet the wetlands overlay and steep slopes overlay districts based solely on visual observation. Mr. Rowehl stated that the note on the plan showing the acreage and square feet of contiguous uplands is sufficient and the Board agreed that this note and visual observation is sufficient.
After reviewing the checklist, Chairman Edwards asked the Board if they feel sufficient information has been provided for the Board to make an informed decision and approve the application, several members stated yes. Mr. Rowehl made a motion to conditionally approve the application of Norman E. & Joyce G. Cody, File # 2006-18PB for a minor subdivision of property located at 60 Meeting House Hill Road and Clinton Road, Antrim, NH 03440, Tax Map 5, Lot 125 located in the Rural District. The applicant proposes to divide the property into two (2) lots. The following conditions apply to this approval:
Planning Board requirements, commitments and agreements made by the applicant and/or his agent as recorded in the meeting minutes dated October 5, 2006 and subsequent meetings as they pertain to this application are a conditional part of this approval.
The applicant is to obtain a building permit for any construction or alteration and adhere to all building, health and fire codes.
Subject to confirmation from NHDOT that a current and valid driveway permit has been issued.
A note shall be placed on the plan that no further subdivision of lot 125-1 shall be permitted.
Alterations to the existing driveway shall be in conformance to Section IX, paragraph F (Driveway Permits) and Article XI, paragraphs E & G regarding the disturbance of the 25-foot buffer zones to wetlands.
Mr. Genest seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Mr. Rowehl – aye, Mr. Genest - aye, Ms. Allen - aye, Mr. Robblee – aye, Ms. Wasserloos – aye. The Application has been approved. Mr. Vasques advised the applicant that he will receive an official notice of decision.
Murdough, Estate of Darrell S. File # 2006-19PB: Chairman Edwards continued the public meeting on the request of the Estate of Darrell S. Murdough for a Minor Subdivision. The applicants propose to subdivide property on 22 Old Turnpike Road, Antrim, NH, Tax Map 7, Lot 44 in the Highway Business and Rural Districts into two (2) lots.
Chairman Edwards stated that the Board continued the public meeting in order to conduct a site walk, is now in the deliberation stage, and asked the Board to explain what comments or concerns came up during the site walk. Chairman Edwards explained that the two main reasons for conducting the site walk were: 1) to determine that the proposed lot, Lot 44-1, is a build-able lot and, 2) that there is a proper area to site a driveway along the frontage of the proposed lot. In order to address the second concern, He explained that the Board walked along the entire frontage of the proposed lot, lot 44-1, and determined that there was an area that would be suitable for a driveway curb cut. He stated that in order to address the first concern, the Board discussed with the applicants one option of requiring that a test pit be done
on the proposed lot to prove that the soils could handle a septic system and therefore constitute a build-able lot. Mr. Genest clarified by asking if the purpose of requiring the test pit on the proposed lot is because the wetlands were not delineated on Lot 44-1. Chairman Edwards replied yes and stated that this would confirm to the Board that it is a build-able lot and a septic system could be sited on the lot. Ms. Allen stated that she would be very happy if the Board required a test pit as a condition of approval to provide the Board with assurance that the lot is build-able because the wetlands have not been delineated and to be consistent.
Mr. Beblowski raised concern about the Board requiring a test pit to be done to prove that a thirty three (33) acre lot is a build-able lot. He stated that if this thirty three (33) acre lot, Lot 44-1, is ever further subdivided in the future or remains a single house lot, a septic system approval has to be performed before any building occurs on the lot(s) and at that time the State requires that a percolation test is conducted. He stated that it is a burden on the applicants and it doesn’t make sense to require a test pit in this case. Mr. Beblowski stated that a test pit isn’t going to tell the Board if it is a wetland or not, and the applicant is going to have to pay the expense of having a machine brought to the proposed lot to do one test pit. Ms. Allen stated that the Board is concerned with being
assured that the newly created lots are build-able and stated that the expense of the test pit will be much less than the expense of having all of the wetlands delineated on the entire thirty three (33) acre lot, as required by the ‘Antrim Subdivision and Site Plan Review’ regulations. Mr. Beblowski replied that there is already a house on the existing lot of similar land and that is only three (3) acres out of the total thirty six (36) acres and the house already has an existing private septic system in place.
Ms. Allen stated that the Board needs some prove that the new lot is a build-able lot. Mr. Beblowski explained that the applicants aren’t planning on developing the lot and the Board is still requiring them to pay this expense to make it a build-able lot. He stated that the State only requires subdivision approval on newly created lots that are less than five (5) acres in size. Mr. Beblowski suggested a note on the plan stating that before any building or subdivision of the lot, the wetlands need to be delineated. Ms. Allen stated that this is not what the Board required in the past. Mr. Mellen explained that what he recommended in his waiver request was that a note be put on the plan stating that the delineation of the wetlands, topographical contours, location of streams and rock ledges, and the approval
of the NH DOT or the Antrim Road Agent for a required driveway permit and curb cut are required to be conducted prior to the approval by the Board of any subdivision of any portion of the remaining acreage. Chairman Edwards asked Mr. Mellen if had written his statement yet assuring the Board that the remaining land does contain sufficient upland and suitable soils to meet the town’s requirements for a build-able lot and stated that he would like a note to that affect put on the plan. Mr. Mellen stated that he hasn’t written the potential statement/ note to be put on the plan but would have to spend sometime deciding on the proper text to use and explained that he is not prepared now to come up with the wording.
Chairman Edwards asked Mr. Vasques to review the file and read aloud the reports from the various Town Departments regarding concerns about this application. Mr. Vasques reviewed the site walk meeting minutes, all waivers that were submitted, and mentioned that the applicants have already filed with NH DES for a subdivision approval for the three (3) acre house lot. Mr. Vasques reviewed the checklist with the Board, addressing the items on the checklist that were deemed by the planning staff to be incomplete or not satisfied.
Mr. Vasques explained that a written waiver request was submitted for item B.3.a (11) on the checklist requiring the delineation of all wetlands an the one hundred year flood elevation line, if applicable, and asked the Board if they want to grant this waiver request or not. Mr. Genest replied that this is a tough decision for the Board because in the recent past the Board has been requiring that the wetlands be delineated for all cases and granting this waiver request would be opposite of what the Board has been consistently requiring of other applicants. Mr. Mellen stated that if a test pit would satisfy the Board, the applicants would be more than willing to do a test pit. Ms. Allen stated that she would agree to grant the waiver request if the Board required that a test pit be done or a note placed on the plan stating
that the surveyor assures that it is a build-able lot and if it is further subdivided it must comply with the Town’s subdivision regulations. Ms. Allen suggested that a test pit be required by the Board and it be a condition of the application approval. Ms. Allen made a motion to grant the waiver requests for the following items on the checklist: 1) B.3.a (11) – Delineation of the wetlands; 2) B.3.a (12) – Location of all waterbodies, streams, rock ledges, cemeteries, drainage ditches, and bridges; 3) B.3.a (18) – topographical contours; and 4) B.3.b (4) – Approval from NH DOT or the Antrim Road Agent for any required driveway permits or curb cuts. Mr. Genest seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.
After reviewing the checklist, Ms. Allen made a motion to conditionally approve the application of the Estate of Darrell S. Murdough, File # 2006-19PB, for a minor subdivision of property located on 22 Old Turnpike Road, Antrim, NH, Tax Map 7, Lot 44 in the Highway Business and Rural Districts. The applicant proposes to divide the property into two (2) lots. The following conditions apply to this approval:
1) Planning Board requirements, commitments and agreements made by the applicant and/or his agent as recorded in the meeting minutes dated October 5, 2006 and subsequent meetings as they pertain to this application are a conditional part of this approval.
2) The applicant is to obtain a building permit for any construction or alteration and adhere to all building, health and fire codes.
3) Pending the approval by the Planning Board of test pit data to confirm that lot 44-1 will support a septic system; hence is a build-able lot.
4) Property lines showing delineation of abutters between lots 70 & 71 and 68 & 80 shall be added to the final drawings.
Ms. Wasserloos seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Mr. Rowehl – aye, Mr. Genest – aye, Ms. Allen –aye, Mr. Robblee – aye, and Ms. Wasserloos – aye. The application was formally accepted by the Board. Mr. Vasques advised the applicants that they will be receiving an official notice of decision from the Board in the mail.
Robblee, Andrew and Bess - File # 2006-21PB: Chairman Edwards asked Ms. Allen to act as chairman pro-tem and recused himself. Chairman Allen opened the public meeting on the request of the Andrew J. & Bess L. Robblee Rev. Trust for a major subdivision of property at 115 Pierce Lake Road, Antrim, NH 03440, Tax Map 7A, Lot 100 in the Rural and Lakefront Residential Districts. The applicant proposes to divide the property into five parcels. Chairman Allen asked Mr. Vasques to read aloud the public notice that was posted by the planning staff. Chairman Allen welcomed the applicants and asked them to present their application and proposal. Mr. Mellen, acting as agent for the applicants, explained that the applicants propose to do a five (5) lot subdivision on Pierce Lake Rd. and the entire property
is a little over twenty two (22) acres.
Mr. Mellen reviewed the plans with the Board and explained that sheet 1 shows an overview of the entire property. He explained that there is an existing house and barn on Lot 100 where the applicants reside, Lot 100-1 is a proposed back lot, and the other three (3) lots are standard lots with the required frontage. Mr. Mellen stated that the wetlands were delineated on the ground for the entire property and they exist in two areas: 1) a larger wetland complex on Lot 100 (existing house lot) which drains towards the road and underneath Franklin Pierce Road, into the Pierce Lake Estates subdivision and 2) a smaller wetland area which straddles the property boundary line of the proposed lots three (3) and four (4). He explained that the property is located in both the Rural and the Lakefront Residential Zoning Districts and
has two overlay districts, the steep slopes and wetlands districts. Mr. Mellen explained that sheet 2 of the plan encompasses the southern portion of the proposed subdivision in more detail and at a larger scale while sheet 3 includes the northern portion of the proposed subdivision, containing the northern end of the proposed lots 1, 2, and 4. He stated that the frontages of the proposed lots are listed in a table on the plan on sheet 2 and sheet 4 shows the soil type boundaries based on the County Soil Survey. Mr. Mellen stated that the topographical information was conducted on the southern portion of the proposed lots and is shown on sheet 4, along with the test pits that were done for each proposed lot, and the proposed locations of the septic systems. He explained that sheet 4 also includes the protective well radii for the proposed lots, the location of boulders, and location of the exposed ledges.
Mr. Mellen stated that the applicants have submitted a written waiver request to the checklist item B.3.a (18) of the Antrim Subdivision and Site Plan Review Regulations, requiring the topographical contours be shown on the entire property, as it pertains to those portions of the proposed lots 100-1, 100-2, and 100-4 that lie north of the match line and encompass the northern portions of these lots (sheet 3). He explained that the reason for the waiver is that a sufficient amount of topographic data was taken on the ground and has been supplied to the Board to show that each of the proposed lots meets or exceeds the lot size requirements of the Town of Antrim Zoning Ordinances. Mr. Mellen stated that he has included the lot size calculations with the application and they are also shown on the plan on sheet 4 for each of the
proposed lots. He added that if the Board conducts a site walk on the property, the members will understand why the topographical contours were not completed on the northern portions of the lots, as it is very steep. Mr. Mellen asked if the Board had any questions.
Chairman Allen asked Mr. Mellen about the lot size calculations and if they included the entire lots or just the areas of the proposed lots that were topographically surveyed. Ms. Rabideau replied that the percentages of contiguous uplands were based solely on the areas of the proposed lots that were topographically surveyed. Mr. Mellen stated that basically what they have provided to the Board is enough information to determine that each of the lots is a build-able lot. Chairman Allen if there were any other questions from the Board. Chairman Allen asked if the wetlands were delineated on the entire property, he replied yes.
Chairman Allen asked Mr. Vasques to review the file and read aloud the reports from the various Town Departments regarding concerns about this application. Mr. Vasques stated that the Board has been provided with the following documents: 1) the application, 2) the checklist, 3) the contiguous uplands/ lot size calculations, 4) six (6) pages of test pit data, 5) reports from the Fire Chief, Water and Sewer Department, Building Inspector, Conservation Commission, and the Police Chief. Mr. Vasques explained that the Fire Chief’s report stated that water for this subdivision will be available from a tanker and a water hole that is located about one (1) mile down the road. He stated that the planning staff didn’t receive a written report from the Road Agent but mentioned that a verbal report was received from him
stating that he had no problems with the proposed subdivision. Mr. Vasques explained that the Water and Sewer Department report and Building Inspector report both stated that they had no issues with the proposed subdivision. He explained that the Conservation Commission report stated that it appears to them that the proposed subdivision will not have any impacts to the twenty five (25) foot wetland buffer zone and therefore they have no issues. Mr. Vasques read aloud the Police report from Lieutenant Scott Dunn stating that in the past, the police department has received several complaints from residents on Pierce Lake Road regarding construction vehicles speeding up and down the road and suggested that if this subdivision is approved by the Board, this may be an issue for the new residents and the police department would like to take steps to avoid it from occurring in the future. The applicants replied that they have asked the police department to put up a
speed radar detector along the side of the road and it hasn’t happened yet to date.
Mr. Rowehl made a motion to accept the application of Andrew J. and Bess L. Robblee, File # 2006-21PB for a major subdivision of property located at 115 Pierce Lake Road, Antrim, NH, Tax map 7A, Lot 100 located in the Lakefront Residential and Rural Districts, into five (5) parcels, which was seconded by Ms. Wasserloos. Roll call vote: Mr. Rowehl – aye, Mr. Genest – aye, Ms. Allen – aye, and Ms. Wasserloos – aye. The application was formally accepted and Chairman Allen closed the public meeting and opened the public hearing.
Chairman Allen asked if there were any abutters present that wanted to speak in favor or against the proposed activity, no one answered. Mr. Vasques stated that he had received an e-mail, dated Oct. 9, 2006, from a concerned citizen, Kim Devlin, whom opposes the proposed subdivision. Mr. Vasques read the e-mail aloud and stated that a copy of the e-mail will be kept in the planning file. Mr. Vasques stated that it was the only comment he received from any abutters or concerned citizens. Chairman Allen closed the public hearing and the Board opened the deliberation period amongst themselves.
Mr. Vasques reviewed the checklist with the Board, addressing the items on the checklist that were deemed by the planning staff to be incomplete or not satisfied. After reviewing the checklist, Chairman Allen asked the Board if they feel a site walk is necessary for this proposed application. The Board and applicant agreed to schedule a site walk for Monday, October 30, 2006 at 4:00 PM and agreed to meet at the driveway of the existing house. Chairman Allen continued the public meeting to Thursday, November 2, 2006 at 7:30 PM, after the Board conducts the site walk, and thanked the applicants and Mr. Mellen.
Torino Development Company (Cluster Housing Subdivision) – File # 2006-23PB: Ms. Rabideau and Mr. Robblee rejoined the Board. Chairman Allen opened the public meeting on the request of the Torino Development Company for a major subdivision with a cluster housing development on land on the west side of NH Route 202 (Concord Street), Tax Map 7, Lot 102-1. The applicant proposes to divide the property into ten parcels. Chairman Allen asked Mr. Vasques to read aloud the public notice that was posted by the planning staff. He stated that all abutters’ receipts were returned except for Tamara Pagano and it was advertised in the NH Contender in the October 5, 2006 edition. Chairman Allen welcomed the applicants and asked them to present their application and proposal.
Mr. Kent Brown, Brown Engineering, introduced himself and Bob Pace, Torino Development Company, and explained that Karen O’Rourke is the project engineer from Brown Engineering for this project and she asked Mr. Brown to represent her at the meeting because she couldn’t make it. He stated that the applicants have already met with the Antrim Planning Board in May 2006 regarding a conceptual consultation for this proposal and the discussion was mostly focused on whether the Board would prefer a cluster versus conventional subdivision. Mr. Kent stated that the cluster housing subdivision was chosen and the proposal is for nine residential lots to be developed (6 single family homes, 3 duplexes) and one open space lot. After some discussion about the proposed subdivision, the Board decided that more information
needs to be submitted to the Board regarding how the lot yield was calculated for the entire tract of the property (considering the number of wetlands, amount of steep slopes present, and the presence of the commercial lot) and the justification for why the cluster housing subdivision design was favored and chosen versus the conventional subdivision design. Ms. Rabideau also pointed out that the wetlands as delineated on the conventional plan and cluster housing plan were slightly different and she questioned as to which one is correct.
Mr. Brown suggested that perhaps the planning staff could meet with the applicants to work out the lot yield calculations. Mr. Pace suggested that perhaps they can take the checklist with them to update the plans, determine how the lot yield calculations were conducted, and set up a time for the Board to conduct a site walk before snow falls on the ground. Mr. Brown stated that it seems that there needs to be another meeting with the applicants and the Board regarding how the lot yield calculations should be done, including the steep slopes and wetlands, and justify why the cluster housing subdivision design is appropriate over the conventional subdivision design. He stated that they may have a more fundamental place to begin once the lot yield has been completed and is accepted by the Board. Mr. Pace stated that he
would like to see a site walk conducted soon on the property, before it snows, so the Board has a good idea what the topography of the property is like, while the applicants are working with the Board and Planning Staff to come to an agreeable lot yield calculation and therefore a justification for a cluster subdivision versus a conventional subdivision.
Chairman Allen stated that the applicants could meet with the planning staff to work out these details, with an open invitation to all Board members and Mr. Beblowski, and perhaps the input from this meeting could be used to redraft some plans so the applicants could resubmit their proposal to the Board at a later date. Ms. Allen stated that the Board needs to do a site walk on the property and the Board needs to spend sometime reviewing other cluster housing developments in the region and do some research on what regulations exist in other NH rural communities for cluster housing developments. The Board and applicants decided to table the proposal to a future date and decided to schedule a site walk for Saturday, November 4, 2006 at 9:00 AM and agreed to meet at the NH DOT Rest Area. Chairman Allen tabled the public
meeting to Thursday, November 16, 2006 at 7:30 PM, after the Board conducts the site walk, and thanked the applicants for coming and their time. Mr. Brown agreed to have revised plans to the Planning Staff by November 9, 2006.
Steele Pond Development, LLC – File # 2006-22PB: Mr. Vasques advised the Board that this public meeting was moved to November 2nd at the request of the applicant because the plans and other application materials were not yet ready for presentation to the Board.
Phil Marrotte (Conceptual Consultation) – Cluster Housing Development: Bob Edwards rejoined the Board and assumed his position as Chairman. Chairman Edwards opened the conceptual consultation on the request of Phil Marrotte regarding a potential ten (10) lot major subdivision. Thomas J. Benedict (Meridian Land Services) acting as agent for the applicant, explained that Mr. Marrotte is considering purchasing the Old Harriman pit, Tax Map 1A, Lot 62, off of Pleasant Street. Mr. Benedict explained that the parcel encompasses thirty two (32) acres, includes an open pit, and has fifty (50’) of frontage on Pleasant Street. Mr. Marrotte is proposing to purchase the parcel and subdivide it into approximately ten (10) lots. Mr. Benedict stated that the applicant has been debating between a
conventional subdivision design and a cluster housing subdivision design, but stated that the parcel would lend itself very nicely to a cluster housing subdivision. The applicant explained that if the Board would prefer the cluster housing subdivision design, he would like to put approximately forty percent (40%) of the parcel or fourteen (14) acres into open space to be linked up with the adjacent open space/ conservation land in the Bryers Lane Subdivision. Mr. Marrotte explained that he wants to do a cluster housing development with smaller lot sizes, minimum one (1) acre lots, in order to create affordable housing in Antrim. Mr. Vasques explained that due to the Town’s cluster housing regulations, which requires that the entire parcel have a minimum frontage of one hundred and fifty (150’) feet on an existing road (Class V or better), if the applicant decides to go with the Cluster Housing Subdivision design, he may want to first go in front of the
Zoning Board of Adjustment to get a variance to this requirement in order to create a cluster housing development on a parcel with only fifty (50’) feet of frontage. There also were considerable discussions regarding the location of wetlands, location of the seasonal high water table, whether to deed the open space to the Town or a conservation organization, and whether the open space would be open to the general public or just to the residents.
Holistic Health and You - Request to Waive the Minor Site Plan Review Requirement, File #2006-25PB: Mr. Vasques advised the Board that he received a letter dated October 12, 2006 from Leslie Belliveau of the Antrim Mill Corporation requesting that the minor site plan review required for all commercial development be waived in this particular case for the new ‘Holistic Health’ store proposing to move into an open office space in the Antrim Mill Building (Tax Map 1A, Lot 170-1) off of Main Street in downtown Antrim, NH. Ms. Belliveau stated in her letter that the enterprise will be a very low impact business and they believe it will enhance the downtown Antrim experience by bringing people to the Antrim Mill. Ms. Belliveau stated that the reason for the waiver request it because the owner and
operator of the store, Kristin Potito, would like to open in early November and they are not changing the use of the building. After a lengthy discussion regarding the written waiver request, the Board decided to deny the waiver request and require the minor site plan review in order to follow their recently established policy, be consistent with all applications, and comply with the current Antrim Subdivision and Site Plan Review Regulations.
Tyler – Letter from Planning Board regarding need for New Deed, File #2006-16PB: Chairman Edwards stated that he hasn’t had a chance yet to draft the letter to James Tyler regarding the need for him to have a deed written up annexing the two lots together but that he will do it soon.
2006 NH OEP Fall Planning and Zoning Conference: Mr. Vasques reminded the Board about a Fall Planning and Zoning Conference that is being put on by the New Hampshire Office of Energy and Planning (OEP) in the Waterville Valley on Saturday, October 28, 2006. Mr. Vasques advised the Board that the deadline to register for the conference is October 20, 2006 at 4 pm. He also stated that the planning staff has reserved the Community Bus to use as transportation to the event, which will be leaving promptly at 6:15 am.
Homes at High Hills – 10/4 and 10/11 Daily Reports on Road Construction: Mr. Vasques advised the Board of the 10/4 and 10/11 daily reports on the road construction from the Town Engineer, Peter Pitsas, from Underwood Engineering. Mr. Vasques explained that there has been a disagreement between the contractor, Tom Thibeault, and Mr. Pitsas over what is acceptable in regards to the sub-base layer on Green Ridge Road. Mr. Vasques stated that Mr. Thibeault noted that he would have Mr. Ogden submit a plan to Peter Pitsas that noted the proposed elevations for the sub-base layer on Green Ridge Road. Mr. Vasques explained that as of this morning, Mr. Thibeault stated that he wouldn’t do it unless he gets a directive from the Planning Board so that he can show it to the developer, KateCo Development. Chairman Edwards stated that he feels that Mr. Pitsas is contracted out by the Town and has the best interest of the Town in mind. He stated that the Board is here to support Mr. Pitsas
and the Board will agree with any directives that Mr. Pitsas sees fit to require in order to protect the Town and be sure that the road is built properly. Mr. Vasques suggested that a directive be written from the Board requiring that Mr. Thibeault comply with Mr. Pitsas requirements and a statement be added that if he doesn’t comply with the requirements, than Mr. Pitsas will issue a stop work order on the project.
Capital Improvement Plan (Status): Mr. Snow advised the Board that the planning staff will begin soon testing out the software program, Plan-IT, to see if the Town wants to purchase the program to use for generating all CIP reports.
Master Plan: Mr. Houseworth advised the Board that the next Master Plan meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, October 24, 2006 at 7:00 PM in the Antrim Town Hall. Mr. Vasques added that the next Route 9 Study Committee Meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, November 8, 2006 at 7:00 PM in the Antrim Town Hall.
Tyler – Standard Dredge & Fill Application, File #2006-16PB: Mr. Vasques advised the Board that he has received a NH DES Standard Dredge and Fill application from James Tyler regarding filling the wetlands in order to construct another driveway on the Tyler’s Small Engine Repair property to allow access on to Elm Street, which essentially goes through the truck and trailer rental parking lot that was just approved by the Board. Mr. Houseworth stated that the Town of Antrim doesn’t have a formal procedure for reviewing State permits and the Board should really start to take the time to review these State permit applications before they are issued and approved. Ms. Allen suggested that perhaps a subcommittee should be formed that incorporates individuals from the Selectmen, Conservation
Commission, Planning Board, and Planning Staff in order to review these State permit applications.
Charrette Workshop: Mr. Houseworth advised the Board that this workshop on October 24, 2006 has been canceled and as of yet has not been rescheduled.
Mr. Rowehl moved that the meeting be adjourned. Ms. Rabideau seconded the motion which unanimously passed. Mr. Edwards adjourned the meeting at 12:15 AM.
Respectfully submitted,
Bradley J. Houseworth, Planning Technician
Antrim Planning Board
| |
