 |
ANTRIM PLANNING BOARD
Minutes of the February 15, 2007 Board Meeting
Members & Staff Present:
Mary Allen Fred Anderson Bob Edwards Bradley Houseworth Renee Rabideau (Late) Ed Rowehl Brian Sawich Alex
Snow Paul Vasques Kathi Wasserloos
Members and Staff Absent:
Scott Burnside Mike Genest Joseph Koziell Andrew Robblee
Public Attendees:
None
Chairman Edwards opened the public meeting at 7:18 PM and appointed Ms. Allen to sit in for the absent Mr. Robblee and Mr. Snow to sit in for the absent Mr. Burnside.
Approval of Planning Board Meeting Minutes: Mr. Sawich moved to approve the minutes of the February 1, 2007 meeting as corrected, which was seconded by Ms. Allen and unanimously passed. Mr. Sawich moved to approve the minutes of the February 5, 2007 meeting as presented, which was seconded by Ms. Wasserloos and unanimously passed.
Business Meeting – Schedule a 2nd Planning Board Meeting in March 2007: Mr. Vasques asked the Board if they wanted to hold a second planning board meeting in March. He explained that the third Thursday of March is March 15, 2007 and is the night of this year’s Annual Town Meeting, and therefore, the Planning Board Meeting must be rescheduled or cancelled. After a brief discussion, the Board decided to reschedule the second Board meeting in March to Thursday, March 22, 2007 at 7:00 PM at Antrim Town Hall. Mr. Houseworth explained that no public hearings are scheduled to date for this meeting and it will most likely be a ‘work’ session. Mr. Sawich, Mr. Snow, and Mr. Houseworth stated that they will not be able to attend this rescheduled
meeting due to previous commitments.
Town Excavation Site/ Steele Pond Development, LLC – Status; File # 2006-04PB: Mr. Houseworth advised the Board that he had a discussion with Mr. Bill Prokop, Town Administrator, regarding the status of Steele Pond Development’s application for a minor subdivision of property (Tax Map 8A, Lot 8) located off of Old North Branch Road, near the intersection with Rt. 31, in Antrim. He explained that a number of items (conditions of approval) need to be addressed by the applicants before final approval is granted by the Planning Board. He stated that once the subdivision approval is complete and has been finalized, the Town of Antrim will have to appear in front of the Board in order to submit and file a reclamation plan, an updated ‘pit agreement,’ and certify that the excavation meets a
number of state requirements, as required by RSA 155-E:2.IV – Highway Excavations. Mr. Houseworth explained that although the municipality is not required to obtain an excavation permit from the Board, it still must comply with RSA 155-E:2.IV, 155-E:4-a, 155-E:5, 155-E:5-a, and obtain all required permits from state or federal agencies. He explained that these requirements are usually addressed prior to the start of excavation, but because of the uniqueness of this situation, it may be easier for the Board and applicants to address these requirements after the final approval of the minor subdivision has been granted by the Board. After a lengthy discussion among the members, the Board agreed to wait until the final approval of the minor subdivision has been granted and then will send a letter to the Town Administrator requiring the Town to appear in front of the Board for the above required items.
Zeke and Mack’s Realty, LLC File # 2006-11PB – Reclamation Bond: Mr. Vasques explained to the Board that he spoke with Ms. Lisa Stewart and a representative from the bond company regarding which name should be on the Reclamation Bond (signed, sealed, and dated on January 5, 2007) for any necessary reclamation to the excavation site located off of Elm Avenue (Tax Map 8A, Lot 23) in Antrim. He explained that although the letter of intent is an agreement between the Town of Antrim and Francestown Sand and Gravel, Inc., the final reclamation bond will be an agreement between the Town of Antrim and Zeke and Mack’s Realty, LLC, not Francestown Sand and Gravel, Inc.
Zeke & Mack’s Additional Peer Review Expense; File # 2006-11PB: Mr. Vasques advised the Board that he sent a letter, dated February 12, 2007, to Ms. Lisa Stewart of Zeke and Mack’s Realty, LLC, requesting a check in the amount of four hundred and twenty dollars and seventy-two cents ($420.72) for Quantum Construction’s services regarding the preparation of an estimate for the reclamation cost for the excavation site off of Elm Avenue in Antrim. He stated that he sent a copy of the invoice from Quantum along with the letter to Zeke and Mack’s Realty, LLC, but did not specify a deadline or invoice due date.
Administrative - Procedure for Notification: Mr. Vasques explained that at the last Board meeting on February 5, 2007, Ms. Wasserloos suggested that RSA 676:4 may have been amended, essentially eliminating the need for a return receipt when sending out certified mail to abutters of a property that is in front of the Planning Board for a subdivision or site plan review. Mr. Vasques stated that he reviewed the current version of RSA 676:4.(d) and determined that this state regulation doesn’t require a returned receipt. However, he stated that there are two main advantages to using a return receipt: 1) it provides the Planning Staff with a change of address (if applicable) so that we can update the property files, and 2) it is a way to prove receipt and notice by the addressee without having to request
confirmation delivery information from the Post Office which can be costly and may take a few days to obtain. Mr. Vasques stated that the Planning Staff will continue the current policy of sending notices by certified mail/ return receipt.
Final Draft of the March 2007 Zoning Ordinance Ballot: Mr. Vasques provided the Board with a copy of the final draft of the March 2007 Zoning Ordinance ballot for their review. He explained that there are seven (7) zoning ordinance ballot items and after each one the language, ‘Recommended by the Planning Board,’ has been added to help guide voters.
Presentation – Land Conservation and Estate Planning for Private Landowners: Mr. Vasques advised the Board of a presentation that will be hosted by the UNH Cooperative Extension, Monadnock Conservancy, Harris Center for Conservation Education, and Antrim Conservation Commission regarding land conservation and estate planning techniques for private landowners on Tuesday, March 6, 2007 at 7:00 – 9:00 PM at Antrim Town Hall. He explained that the presenters will be Phil Auger (UNH Cooperative Extension Educator), Meade Cadot (Director of the Harris Center for Conservation Education), and Dick Ober (Director of the Monadnock Conservancy) and refreshments will be provided.
Zsofka/ Enman – Code Violation/ Enforcement; File # 2004-22PB: Mr. Vasques provided the Board with a copy of an agreement, dated February 5, 2007, drafted by Mr. Jeff Parsons, Antrim Code Enforcement Officer, between Mr. Wes Enman and Mr. Matt Zsofka regarding a violation of one of the notes on the subdivision plans that were granted conditional approval by the Planning Board on March 26, 2005 and were registered at the Hillsborough County Registry of Deeds. Mr. Vasques explained that this was a minor subdivision (File # 2004-22PB) of property located at 20 Pierce Lake Road (Tax Map 7A, Lot 60) in Antrim and the violation is in regards to note 17 on the subdivision plan completed by Meridian Land Services, Inc. and dated September 3, 2004. He stated that note 17 stipulates that: “The proposed
driveway for Lot 7A-60-2 shall be constructed…in order to maintain the maximum possible vegetated buffer along the property lines of Lots 7-10 and 7-8.” According to the agreement, Mr. Parsons was made aware of the violation by a complaint from Mr. Wes Enman that the driveway was being ‘roughed in’ too close to the stone wall, which serves as a boundary for the two properties. Mr. Vasques explained that this agreement was drafted by Mr. Parsons to make both parties involved aware of the subdivision plan requirements, the status of the current violation, and the course of action if the violation is continued. Mr. Houseworth noted that the agreement was signed by Mr. Parsons and Mr. Enman, but was not signed by Mr. Matt Zsofka.
Whiting – Code Violation/ Enforcement: Mr. Vasques provided the Board with a copy of a letter, dated February 6, 2007, sent from Mr. Jeff Parsons to Mr. and Mrs. Fairfield Whiting, to serve as a notice of his intention to inspect the Whiting’s property on Monday, February 19, 2007 at 10 AM. Mr. Vasques explained that Mr. Parsons made it clear in the letter that prior notification is required by a Court Order and the owners or their representatives may or may not choose to accompany Mr. Parsons during his inspection.
Skrable – Code Violation/ Enforcement: Mr. Vasques provided the Board with a copy of a letter, dated February 6, 2007, sent from Mr. Jeff Parsons to Ms. Diane Fenton (Regional Prosecutor), regarding a request to postpone or eliminate a Notice of Violation for Mr. Kenneth Skrable for his property in Antrim. Mr. Parsons stated in the letter that the reason for the request is due to the fact that Mr. Skrable is currently in Florida tending to his mother, whom has cancer, and he has already removed many unregistered vehicles, has removed 80% of the junk and miscellaneous materials from the property, and has received a proper septic system design from the state for the proposed rehab work on the existing dwelling.
NH OEP News – 14th Annual Spring Planning and Zoning Conference: Mr. Vasques advised the Board that the New Hampshire Office of Energy and Planning (NH OEP) is holding another planning and zoning conference in the spring of 2007 on Saturday, April 28, 2007 at the Center of NH, Radisson Hotel, in Manchester, NH. He stated that the registration information will be available at NH OEP’s website (www.nh.gov/oep) on February 23, 2007.
Ordinance & Regs –Cluster Housing Developments in the Rural Conservation District?: Mr. Houseworth provided the Board with a memo proposing to amend Article XIV – Supplemental Regulations, Section O.3. – Regulations and Standards for Cluster Housing Developments, Paragraph a. – Minimum Tract Area and Tract Frontage, regarding where cluster housing developments are permitted in Town. He explained that this section currently permits cluster housing developments in all zoning districts in Town except the Lakefront Residential District and the Rural Conservation District. Mr. Houseworth stated that the planning staff is proposing to amend this section to permit cluster housing developments in the Rural Conservation District and only prohibit them in the Lakefront Residential District. Mr. Vasques suggested that the Board may also want to think about permitting cluster housing developments in the Lakefront Residential District also because conventional subdivisions are allowed in all
zoning districts in Town. After a lengthy discussion among the members regarding whether to permit cluster housing developments in the Lakefront Residential District, the Board came to a general consensus that Article XIV, Section O.3., Paragraph a. should be amended to permit cluster housing developments in all zoning districts in town, including the Rural Conservation and Lakefront Residential Districts. Mr. Anderson moved to adopt the following proposed language, essentially permitting cluster housing developments in all zoning districts in Town: “Cluster Housing Developments shall be permitted in all zoning districts on tracts of single or consolidated ownership,” to replace the following existing language: “Cluster Housing Developments shall be permitted in all zoning districts except the Recreational Lakefront Residential and Rural Conservation Districts on tracts of single or consolidated ownership. (Recreational changed to
Lakefront March 13, 2001).” Mr. Sawich seconded the motion which unanimously passed in the affirmative.
Ordinances – Proposed Deletion of the Front Yard Setback Exceptions (XIV, N.3): Mr. Houseworth provided the Board with a memo proposing to delete Section N.3. - Yard Requirements of Article XIV – Supplemental Regulations regarding exemptions to front yard setback requirements due to the proximity of adjacent buildings to the street or right of way. He explained that the reason for the proposed deletion is that these requirements essentially allow new primary structures to be erected and encroach into a particular front yard setback because the adjacent, abutting landowners have an already existing, non-conforming structure in place. He stated that zoning districts and setback requirements are established for a reason, zoning ordinances should not allow exceptions unless specifically permitted as a
special exception, and it is really the duty of the Antrim Zoning Board of Adjustment to determine when to grant variances or special exemptions to existing zoning district ordinances and setback requirements. Mr. Sawich moved to delete Section N.3. of Article XIV, regarding front yard setback exceptions, as proposed in a memo to the Board from Mr. Houseworth and dated January 17 , 2007 and revised on February 14, 2007. Mr. Anderson seconded the motion which unanimously passed.
Ordinances & Regs – Further Subdivision of Preexisting Back Lots: Mr. Houseworth provided the Board with a memo proposing to create two different categories for Back Lots: 1) Back Lots with a minimum frontage of fifty (50) feet which WILL NOT be permitted to be further subdivided; and 2) Back Lots with a minimum frontage of one hundred (100) feet which WILL be permitted to be further subdivided. Mr. Houseworth explained that due to the fact that Section S (Back Lots) in Article XIV – Supplemental Regulations of the Antrim Zoning Ordinances doesn’t clearly permit or restrict the further subdivision of a back lot after its creation, the planning staff felt it was prudent to clear up this issue by establishing two (2) different categories for Back Lots where one may be further
subdivided and the other may not. He stated that the planning staff is proposing to amend Article XIV, Section S.2.b. to read as follows:
“2. The back lot shall:
b. The two (2) options available for Back Lots are as follows:
1. Have a minimum frontage of fifty (50) feet which shall serve as access right-of-way owned in fee simple by the owner of the back lot. The area of the right-of-way shall be included in the size of the back lot. Back Lots established with a minimum frontage of fifty (50) feet to ninety-nine (99) feet will not be allowed to be further subdivided once created.
OR
2. Have a minimum frontage of one hundred (100) feet which shall serve as access right-of-way owned in fee simple by the owner of the back lot. The area of the right-of-way shall be included in the size of the back lot. Back Lots established with a minimum frontage of one hundred (100) feet will be allowed to be further subdivided once created.”
The above proposed language would replace the existing language in Article XIV, Section S.2.b. which reads as follows: “2.b. Have a minimum frontage of fifty (50) feet which shall serve as access right-of-way owned in fee simple by the owner of the back lot. The area of the right-of-way shall be included in the size of the back lot.” Mr. Houseworth explained that this proposal partially stems from the Board’s previous conclusion that fifty (50) feet of road frontage is simply not enough distance to construct a new Class V town road within while still providing enough buffer to abutting property owners. Mr. Sawich moved to adopt the proposed amendments to Article XIV, Section S.2.b. to allow the establishment of two (2) categories of Back Lots as proposed by a memo to the Board from Mr. Houseworth and dated
February 15, 2007. Mr. Anderson seconded the motion which unanimously passed. After a lengthy discussion among the members regarding whether existing Back Lots with fifty (50) feet of frontage can be further subdivided, the Board tasked the Planning Staff with the duty of asking Town Counsel’s advice on how to address existing Back Lots. Mr. Rowehl also questioned the Board regarding whether the members want to continue to permit Back Lots in the Village Business and Highway Business Districts. He suggested that the Board put some thought into what zoning districts these Back lots should be permitted in and prohibited in.
Ordinances & Regs – Cluster Housing Tract Minimum Frontage Requirement: Mr. Sawich had to leave the meeting at this point. Ms. Rabideau arrived at the meeting and Chairman Edwards appointed her to sit for the absent Mr. Sawich. Mr. Houseworth provided the Board with a memo proposing to amend and reduce the Cluster Housing minimum tract frontage requirement found in Section O.3.a – Regulations and Standards for Cluster Housing Developments – Minimum Tract Area and Tract Frontage, of Article XIV – Supplemental Regulations of the Town of Antrim Zoning Ordinances, from one hundred and fifty (150) feet to one hundred (100) feet. He explained that there are three (3) main reasons he is proposing to amend this requirement: 1) In order to be consistent with recent amendment proposals
to the definition and criteria for Back Lots, which essentially permits further subdivision of back lots when a minimum frontage of one hundred (100) feet on an existing road (Class V or better) exists; 2) Conventional Subdivisions have no such minimum tract frontage requirement and the reduction of the cluster housing minimum tract frontage requirement to one hundred (100) feet will provide more options for developers in terms of residential development design without the burden of having to obtain a variance from the ZBA by proving a hardship; and 3) the proposed amendment seems to be more in line with the purposes section of the Cluster Housing Development ordinance (Section O.1 of Article XIV), for example: “To enable flexibility in layout of residential developments,” and “To provide for the most appropriate and efficient use of buildable land in harmony with the natural terrain.” Ms. Allen moved to adopt the proposed language to reduce the
cluster housing development minimum tract frontage from one hundred and fifty (150) feet to one hundred (100) feet as proposed by a memo to the Board from Mr. Houseworth and dated February 14, 2007. Ms. Rabideau seconded the motion which unanimously passed.
Ordinances – Proposed Amendments to the Sign Ordinance (Article XVII): Mr. Vasques advised the Board that he will be meeting with Ms. Allen next week on Tuesday, February 20, 2007 at 1:30 PM at the Antrim Town Hall in order to draft proposed amendments to the existing Article XVII - Sign Ordinance.
Letter to the Board of Selectmen regarding the New Certificate of Use & Occupancy: Mr. Houseworth provided the Board with a letter drafted by Chairman Edwards and addressed to the Board of Selectmen essentially requesting a meeting be scheduled with the Planning Board, Board of Selectmen, and all Department Heads involved regarding the newly created Certificate of Use and Occupancy form and procedure. Chairman Edwards explained that the letter’s intent is to schedule a meeting in order to be pro-active, inform all department heads what the new procedure is and what is expected of them in terms of inspections and signatures for the Certificate of Use and Occupancy, and to address any potential or anticipated problems. After a lengthy discussion among the members regarding the proposed language in the
letter, Mr. Vasques agreed to work with Chairman Edwards over the next week to revise the language and intent of the letter before sending it out to the Board of Selectmen.
Ms. Allen moved that the meeting be adjourned. Mr. Anderson seconded the motion which passed. Mr. Edwards adjourned the meeting at 9:15 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Bradley J. Houseworth, Planning Technician
Antrim Planning Board
| |
