ANTRIM PLANNING BOARD
April 5, 2012
Members & Staff Present: Diane Chauncey (Secretary) David Dubois (Chair) Mike Genest (Ex-officio) Jesse Lazar (Vice-Chair) Steve MacDonald (Member) Martha Pinello (Member) Sarah Vanderwende (Member) Carol Ogilvie (Consultant)
Members & Staff Absent:
Charles Levesque (Member)
Public Attendees:
Scott Burnside Jay Heavesides Karen Weisswange
Al Weisswange Ron Haggett Gordon Webber
Ben Pratt Janet McEwen
7:00PM Public Meeting:
Chair Dubois introduced himself and the Board members then introduced themselves.
Landsite Pit – Update DES plans – Scott Burnside (Operator) and Meridian Land Services
Chair Dubois asked Mr. Heavesides to present the update for the Landsite operated gravel pit.
Mr. Heavesides of Meridian Land Services, LLC explained ( he used the easel and showed a plan of the pit) that Scott Burnside of Landsite had hired Meridian to prepare an application for the Department of Environmental Services (DES) 5-year compliance update of the Alteration of Terrain (AoT) permit. He stated that the plan had been re-topographed because of an area of disturbed land had been erroneously left out of the original plan. The disturbed area had caused concern by DES. The area had been a former landing for a past logging operation. Landsite had used the area as a staging stockpile for topsoil that had been set aside for reclamation. No aggregate had been removed from this area. He further stated that the plan was the same plan as had been previously approved. The sediment pit (on the original plan) will be started this
month and should be completed by August. A portion of the pit will be re-graded.
Chair Dubois asked the Board if there were any questions.
Mr. Lazar asked what area had been reclaimed.
Mr. Heavesides used the plan to indicate the reclaimed area.
Chair Dubois asked if anything other than the log landing was different.
Mr. Heavesides stated that the sediment basin was not completed but was in the same position.
Chair Dubois asked the purpose of the presentation to the Planning Board.
Mr. Heavesides stated that the purpose was to update the Board and explain what was left to be done. The remaining work was very close to the original plan.
Chair Dubois asked if excavation of material had occurred in the area of concern.
Mr. Burnside stated that a windrow of material had been constructed to mitigate noise to the neighbors on the east side of the pit. He also stated that as soon as he received the DES letter pertaining to the updated AoT plan, the Board would be notified. He further explained that because of litigation that had occurred between one of the pit owners and Landsite, the excavation operation would be completed in three years.
Mr. Lazar asked if the deed had changed.
The secretary stated that the deed had not changed.
Chair Dubois thanked Mr. Heavesides and Mr. Burnside for the update.
Business Meeting:
February 6, 2012 Minutes
Motion to accept the minutes: Mr. Lazar, seconded by Ms. Pinello.
Vote: Minutes approved as amended.
March 22, 2012
Motion to accept the minutes: Ms. Pinello; seconded by Mr. Lazar.
Vote: Minutes approved as amended.
SEC - Petition for Intervention by Planning Board
The Board had approved the Intervention at the February 16, 2012 meeting.
Mr. Genest asked if the Board would be hiring a lawyer.
Mr. Lazar stated that an attorney would not be hired.
Mr. Genest asked if the Board would consider joining forces with the Board of Selectmen.
Chair Dubois stated that there were some contradicting issues between the Boards. He said that the Planning Board must stand for the Antrim Zoning Ordinance. He said that he thought the Board of Selectmen had taken the role of adopting Zoning Ordinance regulations – via the operating agreement. He said that Zoning Ordinances were not the purview of the Board of Selectmen.
Mr. Lazar stated that the Planning Board was looking out for Antrim’s citizens.
Mr. Genest questioned how the Planning Board thought the citizens felt about the ordinance - if the ordinance had been voted down twice.
Mr. Lazar said that there were many reasons why an ordinance may or may not pass, but he did feel the Boards could work together and that the Planning board wanted to do the best thing for Antrim.
Mr. Genest stated that the ordinance had failed and that was representative of the public.
Chair Dubois stated that the Boards should not talk about the past but rather mover forward.
The Planning Board would be asking for zoning relief. He said that the land use boards should handle those items and that would be a good reason to intervene.
Ms. Pinello said that she had reviewed the SEC rules and within those rules, it was stated that local Planning Boards qualify for intervention. She continued that the two Boards had overlapping community roles and the two Boards could work together for the benefit of Antrim’s citizens; but the Planning Board has different responsibilities from the Board of Selectmen.
The draft of The Petition for Intervention of the Planning Board was discussed. In paragraph 2, some felt that the first sentence was the only sentence necessary. The discussion continued with all Board members expressing their opinion, and although, there was some discussion of tabling the wording of the Petition for Intervention until the next meeting, the Board decided to go forward.
Motion: Move to adopt the Petition for Intervention of the Planning Board as amended.
Motion made by: Mr. Lazar; seconded by Ms. Vanderwende.
Vote: Unanimous to adopt the Petition for Intervention of the Planning Board.
Approve reimbursement of copying and mailing for Antrim Planning Board letter of 3/9/2012
Mr. Genest asked if the Board had approved a town wide mailing.
The Board had decided to write a letter in support of the Ordinance (to be drafted by Mr. Dubois, Mr. Levesque, and Ms. Pinello) at the 2/16/2012 meeting. It was discussed that the copying of $325.00 could have been done at the Town Hall with support staff. The Board of Selectmen would have preferred that method. The Chair agreed that it had been a learning experience and that different avenues would be explored in the future.
Motion: Move to reimburse Mr. Levesque for expenses incurred ($525.00)
Motion made by: Mr. Lazar; seconded by: Ms. Vanderwende.
Vote: Pinello, yes; Dubois, yes; Lazar, yes; Vanderwende, yes; MacDonald, abstain; Genest, no.
Hard copy of by-laws - Board members received hard copy of by-laws for their reference
Year to Date Expenditures – Budget - Monthly update for the Board
Antrim Zoning Ordinance Question – Amend or Adopt – answer by LGC Legal Services
The question had been asked of the LGC legal services of whether the word adopt or amend should be used when noting changes in the Zoning Ordinance. The answer from the LGC is attached.
By consensus: Amend is the word that will be used.
Excavation Sites – Review of Excavation Site materials
The Board had been emailed the Handbook for NH Municipalities (RSA 155-E: The Law Governing Earth Excavations) that had been prepared by Southwest Region Planning commission in 1991 and then revised in 1999; and the Town of Antrim’s (TOA) Earth Excavation and Reclamation Regulations adopted by the Planning Board on October 15, 1992 and amended January 20, 2005. The board was to review the manuals and ask questions of Carol Ogilvie, the author of the SWRPC Handbook.
Mr. Lazar asked questions concerning amendments, renewals, and what determines a significant change. He stressed the importance of regulations.
Ms. Ogilvie stated that the TOA regulations have a waiver provision and that regulations that assist in clarification are helpful.
Ms. Pinello asked how other municipalities dealt with the recycling and reprocessing of materials as part of a construction project that sometimes end up in the excavation pit.
The meeting was opened to the public attendees. Mr. Burnside stated that recycling aggregates are considered. The material is sometimes run through a crusher and added with other product to meet the specifications of a project.
Ms. Pinello had questions about new excavation pits and construction materials – how do other communities deal with these issues.
Ms. Ogilvie said that she was not aware of any town adopting new regulations for Excavation pits and she was not aware of any new pits that had been opened.
Mr. Burnside further explained stockpiled materials and how a pit operator deals with aggregates. He compared the pit operators’ materials to an operation that did stumpgrinding.
Ms. Pinello stated that [pits] aren’t always encouraged, but necessary.
Mr. Burnside stated that he does not ever remember Excavation Pits being encouraged.
Ms. Ogilvie stated that an incidental excavation should be reviewed carefully to make sure that the owner or operator had other permits in hand and to make sure that the law is still being followed. She gave an example of the excavation not going below the water table, and of an incidental excavation that had occurred years ago for a grocery store on Route 202 in Peterborough. The developer did not have a building permit, performance standards were not followed. The Board should be aware of the market component and whether or not the material in the incidental excavation can be sold.
Mr. Dubois asked about the degree of disturbance.
Ms. Ogilvie said that some towns have tried to put something in the regulations but it is difficult to do. She said that the permit should be processed properly at the beginning of an application.
Mr. Burnside stated that a pit producing gravel is a commercial operation. In an incidental excavation, much of the time, the material is traded off for the excavation work.
An example was given of an incidental excavation in the Town of Greenfield in which 200,000 yards of material had been removed – was that an incidental excavation?
Ms. Ogilvie said that it was a good point to utilize the commercial component. She stressed that the very important issue is the impact on the land.
Chair Dubois stated that it might be difficult to determine [incidental or not]. Possibly the Building Inspector would have insight.
Mr. Burnside stated that most pit operators would rather have sand and gravel permits. Material could leave the site but no new material could be brought in.
There was a short discussion of reviewing the TOA Excavation Regulations and creating regulations that would be similar to the Site Plan Review regulations. The Board could come up with a new version and Ms. Ogilvie could review the proposed regulations.
The board determined that they would review the Town Excavation regulations.
Correspondence:
Preliminary Licensing Proposal and Updated Study Report – Monadnock Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 6597) – The Town of Antrim Town Planner is on the distribution list for this project. The Updated Study Report is on a cd for anyone who is interested FYI
Other Business:
Janet McEwen had attended the PB meeting to express her interest in participating as an alternate.
Motion: To appoint Ms. McEwen as alternate to the Planning Board
Motion made by: Mr. Lazar; seconded by: Mr. MacDonald
Vote: Unanimous approval
Ms. Ogilvie will present a list of possible workshops for the Planning Board – educational - in light of the fact that NHOEP will not have their usual educational workshops.
8:59 PM
Motion: to adjourn meeting
Motion made by: Ms. Vanderwende; seconded by Mr. Lazar
Vote: Unanimous to adjourn
Respectfully submitted, Diane Chauncey, Secretary of the Planning Board
| 
