ANTRIM PLANNING BOARD
December 15, 2011
Members & Staff Present: Diane Chauncey (Secretary) Scott Burnside (Member) David Dubois (Member) Jesse Lazar (Vice-Chair) Charles Levesque (Member) Martha Pinello (Member) Andrew Robblee (Chair) John Robertson (Ex-Officio)
Carol Ogilvie (Consultant Planner)
Members & Staff Absent:
Mike Tatro (Alternate) Stephen Schacht (Alternate)
Public Attendees:
Ben Pratt Ron Haggett Wes Enman Mike Genest Sarah Vanderwende
7:00 PM – Public Meeting
CIP Committee present the 2012 – 2017 Capital Improvement Plan - Each department had been requested to submit a worksheet with proposed capital projects (over $5000 – 6 years out). Department heads then presented their proposals to the CIP Committee. Mr. Pratt reviewed each department’s requests line by line. He explained future projects for Water & Sewer – particularly the water mains on Pleasant Street and Highland Avenue and the drainage problems. He stated that the engineering for that project was never done (a warrant article in 2007 had been passed and the money appropriated). The final recommendation was that the Town should commit to funding Capital Reserve Funds(CRF) – as much as possible.
The Board members asked questions of the CIP Members. Bridges were discussed. Mr. Burnside stated that bridge maintenance should be a line item in the Highway Department.
Chair Robblee stated that the Town will need to double up in order to catch up. He used the Recreation Department as an example. He also said that some departments had not reported to the CIP. Ms. Ogilvie stated that in Peterborough – if a department does not report, their budget is not considered.
Mr. Lazar moved to adopt the proposed CIP budget sheet as presented to the Planning Board. Mr. Burnside seconded. All were in favor, except Mr. Levesque who abstained.
The CIP committee will attend the next Selectmen meeting on December 21, 2011.
Planning Department Budget – Revised budget as of BOS 12/12 meeting
Legal
Mr. Lazar felt that there was not enough money to cover legal costs. Chair stated that there will be a written policy (question of who would write the policy) and that $5000. Mr. Levesque would like the line to say: Legal consultation. Mr. Burnside stated that a policy should be in place so that the policy does not change from year to year. Chair Robblee stated that he thought it was good to have the $5000. Quality and timeliness of attorney response was better when the questions were written.
Consultant Planner Although the Planning Board continued to state that they would have liked a separate line for the Consultant Planner, they agreed to the budget as presented.
Chair Robblee and John Kendall, ZBA Chair, need to discuss the Planning Department budget.
Zoning ordinance recommendations for 2012 ballot
1. Large Scale Wind Ordinance
Mr. Levesque projected the Large Scale Wind Ordinance document template on to the wall and that document became the template for any edits. This set of minutes has the “red lined” document as well as the clean document attached. Mr. Levesque stated that if a change was recommended, the member was to state the reason for the change. The Notice of Public Hearing is also included as an attachment.
The following changes were discussed or made. The changes can be clearly viewed in the “red-line” version, which is available in the Planning Board minutes at Town Hall or will be on the website (antrimnh.org).
3.0 Mr. Robertson did not think that conditional use should be within 3.0. Other Board members did not agree with him. They stated that the entire ordinance was based on conditional use and that removing it from 3.0 did not make sense. 3.0 did not change
3.1 Mr. Robertson had a written suggestion for different wording. Although, some Board members saw conflict in the wording and Ms. Ogilvie suggested a language clarification, the wording was not changed.
5.1 Mr. Burnside stated that the last sentence should be deleted as it should not be necessary for a Meteorological tower to go through the same process as if a Wind Farm were being constructed. Mr. Burnside considered how a developer may look at the ordinance and did not agree with the word “waive”.
Ms. Ogilvie stated that it may be difficult to determine the intent of the developer until an application had been submitted – the temporary nature of the Met Tower would need to be stated.
The wording was changed to state the process for a permanent as well as a temporary Met Tower. If temporary, 7.1.1 (Design and Manufacture), 7.2.1 (Setbacks), 7.1.2.1 (Height), 7.1.6 (Color) shall apply.
7.1.2 Height Change “existing grade” to finished grade at the tower base to the highest tip of turbine blade.
7.1.2.1 Met Towers add “maximum” to Met towers must be a maximum of 200’
7.1.3 Collector lines Some members thought the entire section should be struck – first sentence was specifically an issue because of the wording “all collector lines and interconnect lines shall be below the tree line..”. The phrase “shall be below the tree line except where tied into existing transmission lines” will be added and the remainder of the sentence removed.
.
7.1.8 Blasting - Remove all but the last sentence which states the use of NH DOT standards.
7.1.9 Modification during Construction The wording “natural springs” was changed to ground water and the wording for existing grade will now state changes in grade by more than 2% for roadways and 5% for other changes.
7.2.1 Setbacks A request was made to change the number six (6) in the sentence - “Wind Turbines must be sited no less than six (6) times the turbine height from occupied buildings” to five (5) times the turbine height. There was a long discussion concerning acoustic standards, decibel levels and who determines the levels. Some members felt that the language should be clearer, simpler. Some members argued that the provision could be waived if the acoustic standards were met and that the affected property owner was supportive of the waiver.
It was determined that the Planning Board would waive the provision if the waiver request in 13.2.1 was supported by the property owner. Also, the Planning Board would waive the setback if the acoustic standards set forth in 7.2.2. The language was simplified to state that “additional setbacks may be required to meet noise standards in 7.2.2
At this point in the meeting (9:30PM and on page 3 of the ordinance) Chair Robblee and Mr. Burnside stated that the ordinance was better - less subjective and clearer.
7.2.2. Acoustics
Mr. Robertson stated that he thought the property lines should be removed and substituted with residence. Mr. Dubois disagreed with him. Mr. Burnside said that he would like a simpler explanation of the acoustics levels. Mr. Dubois stated that an acoustic study was not required unless requested.
A long discussion concerning sound, decibel levels, the difference between 43dBa and 45 dBa.
Mr. Levesque stated that he could live with 43 dBa, but 45 dBa was marginal.
Mr. Genest stated that if it doesn’t match Lempster, then it will not pass.
The discussion continued. Emphasis placed on “making to ordinance workable” so that it will get passed. It was stated again that all needed to be supportive of the ordinance – the Planning Board and the Board of Selectmen.
The level needed to be somewhere between 40 dBa and 45 dBa. Ms. Pinello suggested a compromise of 45 dBa daytime (6AM to 8PM) and 43 dBa nighttime (8PM to 6AM).
A long discussion followed. The importance of all Board members supporting the ordinance was stressed. If all (all = Planning Board members and SelectBoard members) were not in support of the ordinance, some Board members stated that the ordinance would not be passed.
Mr. Levesque stated that the voters were not clear about what they wanted. Mr. Dubois stated that changing the location of the property lines was a significant compromise for him. Mr. Robblee stated that if the Lempster project is meeting the standards, that he would like to see their post-construction report.
7.3.1 Steep slopes – the intent was to protect steep slopes - the structure of the sentence should be changed. The wording was changed.
7.3.2 Water Quality Protection – the second sentence was struck.
7.4 Visual Impacts
7.4.1 The list of scenic areas was eliminated.
7.4.3 through 7.4.3.3 were eliminated
Mr. Dubois moved to waive the rule of ending a Planning Board meeting at 10:30PM. Mr. Levesque seconded the motion. The Board unanimously voted to continue the meeting.
There was a suggestion to eliminate 7.4.2 – 7.4.3.3. Ms. Pinello stated that 7.4.2 should remain, but to eliminate 7.4.3 – 7.4.3.3
8.3 Shadow flicker – well sited wind facilities – an issue of the past. Board members agreed that shadow flicker was an easily mitigated issue as turbines that caused a “flicker” problem could be shut down for the “flicker”.
8.8 Hazardous lighting mitigation – Strike last sentence or change equipment to turbine upgrade
8.10 Add “The PB may waive these requirements according to 13.2
8.10.2 Groundwater Quality Study Remove all wells and springs
9.1 Add “to two feet below grade” in the parentheses to say (including foundations to two feet below grade)
9.4 Remove annually from last line (Failure to update the cost of decommissioning annually…)
10.3.2 The phrase “line denoting a” a one mile radius beyond the project boundary … was deleted.
Mr. Dubois moved to adopt the LWEF Ordinance with the edits of 12/15/2011. Mr. Lazar seconded the motion. All (by a voice vote) voted in favor of the changes.
The Public Hearing schedule was set as follows:
January 4, 2011 Wednesday First Public Hearing
January 19, 2011 Thursday Second Public Hearing
February 6, 2011 Monday Third Public Hearing (if necessary)
Other Zoning Ordinance Amendments
- Article V (Manufactured Housing) – The amendment is considered a “housekeeping” issue. A reference number was corrected.
- Article III (Cluster Housing Development) – The amendment is considered a “housekeeping” issue. A reference number was corrected.
4. Article XIV-B (Personal Wireless Service Facility) – Was changed to read:
Section 4. DISTRICT REGULATIONS:
Location – PWSFs proposed to be located in or on existing structures shall be permitted in all zoning districts. PWSFs shall be an allowed use in the Highway Business district, and by a Special Exception from the Zoning Board in the Rural, Rural Conservation, and Lakefront District. Ground-mounted PWSFs will not be allowed in the Residential or Village Residential Districts. In any district where ground mounted PWSFs are allowed by Special Exception no portion of the facility except roads, shall be located within 300 feet of any abutting structure.
- Article XIV (Supplemental Regulations) - The amendment is considered a “housekeeping” issue. A reference number was added.
6. Article XVII (Sign Ordinance) Section E, 3 (Sign Ordinance) was amended for clarity.
.
Chair Robblee proposed that the amendment concerning Excavation Sites should remain on the ballot (as it had been proposed for the March 2011 ballot).
Mr. Burnside stated that the Master Plan states that Excavation Pits need to be addressed. All the existing Excavation sites in Antrim are in the rural district.
Chair Robblee stated that both businesses and residences needed gravel.
Vice-Chair Lazar expressed his concern for opening up the whole town to gravel pits.
Consultant Planner Carol Ogilvie stated that RSA 155: E states that excavation sites shall be permitted in a town – somewhere. Possibly – conditional use permitting process could be used.
Ms. Ogilvie stated that most towns have complied with 155:E.
Vice Chair Lazar continued to express his concern for residents. Ms. Ogilvie stated that the law states that excavation sites must be permitted somewhere in a municipality.
Chair Robblee suggested that the Board should take a close look at Excavation Sites in 2012 and find ways to open up districts in the Town of Antrim.
Mr. Lazar moved to strike proposed Amendment #3 and move forward with the ballot articles as presented. Mr. Levesque seconded. All (by a voice vote) were in favor of the draft ballot as presented.
At 11:54 PM, Mr. Dubois moved to adjourn. Mr. Robertson seconded. All approved to adjourn - by a voice vote.
Respectfully submitted, Diane Chauncey, Secretary of the Planning Board
| 
