ANTRIM PLANNING BOARD
Minutes of the March 1, 2007 Board Meeting
Members & Staff Present:
Mary Allen |
Fred Anderson |
Scott Burnside |
Bob Edwards |
Mike Genest |
Bradley Houseworth |
Renee Rabideau |
Andrew Robblee |
Ed Rowehl |
Brian Sawich |
Alex Snow |
Paul Vasques |
Kathi Wasserloos |
|
|
Members and Staff Absent:
Joseph Koziell
Public Attendees:
None
Chairman Edwards opened the public meeting at 7:18 PM, introduced himself, and thanked everyone for attending.
Approval of Planning Board Meeting Minutes: Mr. Sawich moved to approve the minutes of the February 15, 2007 meeting as presented, which was seconded by Mr. Snow and unanimously passed. Mr. Burnside abstained from voting.
Scott Burnside – Recommendation from the Board for a new Excavation Site: Chairman Edwards recused himself from the Board for this portion of the meeting and appointed Mr. Sawich to act as Chairman Protem. Mr. Burnside recused himself and explained that he is in front of the Board in order to receive a recommendation for a new excavation site on three contiguous parcels of land off Smith Road near the intersection of Elm Avenue, as required by Article XIII – Special Exceptions, paragraph A.4. Mr. Vasques explained to the Board that because excavation sites are not a permitted use in Antrim, Mr. Burnside needs to obtain a special exception from the Zoning Board of Adjustment in accordance with RSA 155-E:4 III.
Mr. Burnside presented the Board with copies of a survey plan that showed the layout of the three lots, the boundaries, and the existing topographical contours. He is proposing two different development options for the three lots, depending on the outcome of the granting of the special exception by the Antrim Zoning Board of Adjustment: 1) an excavation pit, or 2) a residential development that involves some incidental excavation of materials. Mr. Burnside explained that of the two proposed options he would rather open up the site as a gravel excavation site due to the amount of material available on the site. He explained that it will be easier to manage, and easier for the Town to inspect, if the site is an excavation site because of the necessary annual inspections for operational and reclamation standards. He
stated that if the Zoning Board of Adjustment denies his request for a Special Exception, his course of action would be to re-subdivide the land and propose some type of residential development (cluster housing, condominiums, etc.), which would include the removal of some materials from the site as incidental excavation for building construction. He stated that regardless of which of the two options is pursued, materials will be removed from the site.
Mr. Burnside explained that if he is granted a special exception by the ZBA to establish an excavation site, then he would approach the development of the land in two phases: 1) receive an excavation permit from the Planning Board and remove the majority of the materials from the site, and then 2) appear in front of the Board for a site plan review/ subdivision for the actual development of the property and the establishment of a residential development. He explained that one of the reasons he is trying to establish a new excavation site is that the Chauncey excavation site on Smith Road has a very limited life left to it and materials will most likely be depleted from the pit within a year. Mr. Burnside asked the Planning Board for a favorable recommendation to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for a special exception to establish
an excavation site near the intersection of Smith Road and Elm Avenue.
After a lengthy discussion among the Board members and the applicant, Mr. Anderson moved that the Planning Board has no objection to the operation of the sites known as Map 8A, Lots 18, 19, and 20 as an excavation site providing an excavation permit is obtained, and the operation is managed, inspected, and reclaimed in accordance with the Town of Antrim’s Earth Excavation and Reclamation Regulations. Mr. Snow seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Ms. Rabideau abstained from the roll call vote as she is a legal abutter of the proposed lots.
Robblee – Is this a Change of use? Is a Certificate of Use & Occupancy Required?: Chairman Edwards rejoined the Board as acting Chairman and Mr. Robblee recused himself from the Board. Mr. Vasques advised the Board that Mr. Robblee questions whether his proposal to have Robblee Tree Service, LLC utilize a section of the first floor space of the Antrim Mills Building for office space, storage, minor repair, maintenance of vehicles and equipment, and the parking of trucks and equipment overnight meets the criteria to be considered a change of use. Mr. Vasques stated to the Board that the key question in front of them is whether this proposal is a change of use or simply a change in tenant.
Mr. Robblee questioned whether his proposed activities are significantly different from those activities that were conducted by the previous occupant in the same commercial space, Boxes on Board. Mr. Robblee also stated that the situation is further complicated by the fact that Robblee Tree Service, LLC is on a month to month agreement with the owners of the building and they aren’t sure how long they will use this office space; it may be for two or three months or could be up to a few years.
Mr. Houseworth explained that the Board has to be consistent when determining what constitutes a change of use, especially when it involves a large building like the Antrim Mill with several tenants with different commercial operations. Mr. Houseworth stated that the Board recently determined that the establishment of a holistic shop in another office space in the same building was a change of use and explained that his initial determination was that this proposal by Mr. Robblee is also a change of use, regardless of the time the unit is occupied by the applicant. Mr. Houseworth pointed out to the Board that one of the reasons they determined that the establishment of a holistic health store was a change of use was due to the fact that the office space was previously unoccupied and stated that the same reasoning could be utilized
in this particular case for Robblee Tree Service, LLC since Boxes on Board has already vacated the office space and it is currently unoccupied.
After a lengthy discussion among the members and Mr. Robblee, Mr. Snow moved that the Board consider this particular case a ‘Change of Use’ and therefore require the applicant to appear in front of the Board for a minor site plan review. Ms. Allen seconded the motion which passed in the affirmative (5 Aye, 2 Nay); motion carried.
Chairman Edward’s letter to Selectmen requesting a meeting of Dept. Heads: Mr. Houseworth provided the Board with a letter drafted and revised by Chairman Edwards and Mr. Vasques 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. Mr. Vasques explained to the Board that it is a revised version of the letter that was in front of them at the last meeting and that it was sent to all involved parties on February 22, 2007.
Mr. Vasques stated that he has not yet received a response to the letter from any of the involved parties and asked Mr. Genest if the Selectmen have discussed the letter and the proposal to schedule a meeting. Mr. Genest explained that they have read and discussed the letter but have decided to wait to schedule the meeting until they can get a written confirmation letter from Town Counsel stating that it is in fact legal to require a Certificate of Use and Occupancy in situations where it is not required by the 2000 International Building Code (IBC), it is not deemed a change of use, and is essentially just a change in ownership. Mr. Genest stated that there is some concern from the Selectmen whether the newly created Certificate of Use and Occupancy requirement and procedure for commercial activities is legal and whether the
Town should be requiring such ‘Big Brother’ inspections when the business simply changes hands in terms of ownership.
After a lengthy discussion among the members regarding the legality of the requirement and when the meeting should be scheduled, the Board agreed to wait until the Town officials receive a response from Town Counsel on the matter before scheduling a time and place for the meeting regarding the newly created Certificate of Use and Occupancy regulation.
Zeke & Mack’s Realty, LLC; File # 2006-11PB – Revised Reclamation Bond: Mr. Vasques provided the Board with a copy of the revised Reclamation Bond (Bond No. 0118613-A) for any necessary reclamation to the excavation site located off of Elm Avenue (Tax Map 8A, Lot 23) in Antrim. Mr. Vasques explained that the name on the Reclamation Bond was changed from Francestown Sand and Gravel, Inc. to Zeke and Mack’s Realty, LLC in order to make it clear that the agreement is between the Town of Antrim and Zeke and Mack’s Realty, LLC, not Francestown Sand and Gravel, Inc.
Homes at High Hills – Town Counsel’s advice regarding a Cease and Desist Order: Mr. Vasques provided the Board with a copy of a letter dated February 20, 2007 from Mr. Barton Mayer, Town Counsel, regarding his opinion on the Homes at High Hills situation where the developer and contractor have failed to fund the costs associated with subdivision road inspections. Mr. Vasques explained to the Board that he submitted all of the necessary documentation to Town Counsel in order for them to determine whether the Town can legally issue a cease and desist order on the construction of the subdivision road. He stated that Town Counsel not only suggests that the Town issue a cease and desist order but also initiate the process of subdivision approval revocation due to the failure of the developer to respond.
Mr. Vasques explained that Mr. Mayer also provided an example ‘Cease and Desist’ letter which specifically gives the developer, Mr. John Cook, up to seven (7) days of the date of the letter to send a check to the Town for the amount of nine thousand ($9,000) dollars in order to cover the additional costs associated with subdivision road inspections. He stated that he feels Mr. John Cook should be given up to fourteen (14) days to provide the nine thousand ($9,000) dollars to the Town in order to provide ample time for the applicant to receive the letter and respond accordingly. He explained that if the letter is sent by Wednesday, March 7, 2007 and Mr. Cook is given fourteen (14) days to provide payment to the Town, then this payment would be due on Wednesday, March 21, 2007. Mr. Vasques stated that if the
payment is not received within the fourteen (14) days, then at the next Planning Board meeting on Thursday, March 22, 2007, the Board can vote to decide whether or not to proceed with the revocation of the subdivision approval and the scheduling of a public hearing if necessary. Chairman Edwards recommended that language be added to clarify the point that additional peer review costs, above the nine thousand ($9,000) dollars, may be required from the applicant by the Town in order to finish the construction of the road. Mr. Burnside stated that his company, Landsite Corp., has already filed a lien against the entire project and is still awaiting partial payment for their services and has asked the Town to not give final approval of the subdivision until the lien is released.
After a brief discussion among the members, Mr. Sawich moved to follow Town Counsel’s advice and send a cease and desist letter to Mr. John Cook regarding the failure to fund the peer review costs associated with subdivision road inspections and inform him that if the payment is not received by the Town, the Board may initiate the process of subdivision revocation. Mr. Anderson seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Mr. Burnside abstained from the vote due to a professional involvement with the project.
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.
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 is now available at NH OEP’s website (www.nh.gov/oep).
Ordinances – Sign Ordinance; Suggested Revisions from Ms. Allen: Ms. Allen provided the Board with a memo titled ‘Sign Ordinance Revisions,’ and dated March 1, 2007, regarding some proposed language to amend the sign ordinance, examples of sign regulations and definitions for other NH towns, and four (4) discussion points to review with the Board. She stated that she had met with Mr. Vasques and Mr. Houseworth earlier in the week to brainstorm ways to amend the sign ordinance and four (4) discussion points came out of that meeting that we would like to discuss with the Board including: 1) Trailer signs, 2) Temporary signs, 3) Neon signs, and 4) Real-Estate signs. After an hour long discussion about the four (4) topics, the Board made significant progress towards amending the sign
ordinance and Ms. Allen stated that she would take the feedback and work with the planning staff to incorporate the suggested changes into a revised sign ordinance proposal for 2008 Town Ballot.
Regulations – Addition of Regional Impact Requirement to Subdivision Regulations: Mr. Houseworth provided the Board with a memo, dated February 27, 2007, proposing to add language to the Antrim Subdivision and Site Plan Review Regulations regarding a regional impact review requirement by which the Board must determine whether all proposed site plan reviews and subdivisions ‘could reasonably be construed as having the potential for regional impact,’ as required by RSA 36:56 – Review Required. Mr. Houseworth explained that RSA 36:56 requires that all local land use boards promptly “…determine whether or not the development, if approved, reasonably could be construed as having the potential for regional impact,” and added that whenever there is doubt concerning whether a
development could have a regional impact, “…[it] shall be resolved in a determination that the development has a potential regional impact.” He stated that in order for the Town of Antrim to be in compliance with RSA 36:56, the planning staff is proposing the following language be added to the Antrim Subdivision and Site Plan Review Regulations:
“The Board shall determine whether or not the development, if approved, could reasonably be construed as having the potential for regional impact.”
- As Item number (9) in Section V: Submission Requirements for the Subdivision of Land, C. Major Subdivisions, 1. Information required for all major subdivisions, b. Additional Information;
- As Item number (6) in Section V: Submission Requirements for the Subdivision of Land, B. Lot Line Adjustment, Annexation, or Minor Subdivisions, 3. Information required for all Lot Line Adjustments, Annexation, and Minor Subdivisions, b. Additional Information;
- As Item f. of Section VI: Submission Requirements for Site Plan Review, B. Submission Requirements for Minor Site Plan Review and additions to Home Occupations, 3. Additional Information;
- As Item (i) of Section VI: Submission Requirements for Site Plan Review, C. Submission Requirements for Major Site Plan Review, 3. Plan of Development, b. Proposed Development, (21) Other information.
Mr. Houseworth recommended that the Board move to hold a public hearing to incorporate the above-mentioned language in order to comply with RSA 36:56. After a short discussion among the members, Mr. Sawich moved to hold a public hearing to incorporate the recommended legislation regarding the addition of a regional impact requirement to the Antrim Subdivision and Site Plan Review Regulations, as proposed in a memo to the Board from Mr. Houseworth and dated February 27, 2007. Ms. Wasserloos seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
Ordinances – Town Counsel’s Opinion on Pre-Existing Back Lots (50’ of Frontage): Mr. Houseworth advised the Board that he has spoken with Mr. Barton Mayer, Town Counsel, regarding how to handle pre-existing Back Lots with fifty (50) feet of frontage that were established prior to the proposed 2008 Back Lots amendment and he said that it essentially comes down to a case by case basis. He explained that the recourse for individuals with back lots is for them to request a variance from the Zoning Board of Adjustment but Mr. Mayer cautioned about doing this as a standard practice and explained that it should be handled in a case by case basis to eliminate any potential lawsuits regarding the taking of land. Mr. Mayer explained that a situation where an individual owned a sixty (60) acre back lot
and was only allowed to develop a single family home on it could be construed as taking by the courts. Mr. Houseworth explained to the members that making the determination on a case by case basis will allow the Board to consider the specific circumstances of the situation and make the best decision for the Town and the landowner.
Ordinances & Regs – Proposed Changes to Deck Setbacks in the LFR Zoning District: Mr. Houseworth provided the Board with a memo proposing to amend Article XIV (Supplemental Regulations), Section N (Yard Requirements), Item # 5 regarding the construction or expansion of a deck on an existing building in the Lakefront Residential District into the one hundred (100) foot setback area from the high water mark/ reference line because the adjacent neighbor(s) also has/ have an existing, non-conforming deck within the 100 foot setback zone. He proposed the following amended language for Section N (Yard Requirements), Item # 5, in order to prevent further encroachment of new decks towards the high water mark in the Lakefront Residential District and to better align the town ordinance with the requirements of RSA
483-B:11 regarding nonconforming structures and the construction of decks under the jurisdiction of RSA 483-B (Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act):
5. The requirements for yards fronting on the water in the Lakefront Residential District (LR) heretofore established shall be adjusted in the following cases:
For an existing, nonconforming building located within one hundred (100) feet for existing buildings or decks that are facing the water, of the high water mark reference line, a deck may be erected into the setback area extending no further than a line drawn between the waterfront edges of the two adjacent buildings or decks. closer to the high water mark reference line than twelve (12) feet; specified by RSA 483-B:11 for the expansion of decks of Nonconforming Structures towards the reference line of water bodies protected under the Comprehensive Shoreland Protection Act . In no case shall such deck be roofed over and/or enclosed.
Mr. Houseworth stated that subparagraph b. of Item # 5 in Section N (Yard Requirements) is proposed to be deleted due to the amendments made in the rest of Item # 5. After a brief discussion among the members, Mr. Sawich moved to adopt the proposed language regarding the distance decks may be extended off existing, non-conforming structures within the Lakefront Residential District as proposed in a memo to the Board from Mr. Houseworth and dated February 28, 2007. Mr. Rowehl seconded the motion which unanimously passed.
Awards Ceremony for members that are resigning from the Planning Board: Chairman Edwards stated that there are three (3) people leaving the Planning Board tonight and he would like to present them with an award for their dedication to the Board. He stated that he took the liberty, on the behalf of the Board, to express appreciation for all the effort and time these three (3) individuals have contributed to the Board over the years and awarded Mr. Anderson, Ms. Rabideau, and Mr. Rowehl with Certificates of Appreciation. Chairman Edwards stated that since Mr. Rowehl has been a Board member since 1992, his certificate recognizes him for many years of continuous dedicated services both as a member and Chairman of the Planning Board. All three individuals will be greatly missed.
Mr. Anderson moved that the meeting be adjourned. Mr. Sawich seconded the motion which passed. Mr. Edwards adjourned the meeting at 10:15 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Bradley J. Houseworth, Planning Technician
Antrim Planning Board
| 
