ANTRIM PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES
April 18, 2013
Three Public Hearings
Scenic Road Tree Removal; Subdivision & Site Plan Review Regs; Excavation Regs
Members & Staff Present: Diane Chauncey (Secretary) Chris Condon (Member)
Jesse Lazar (Chair) Charles Levesque (Member) Steve MacDonald (Member) Janet McEwen (Alternate) Martha Pinello (Member) Gordon Webber (Ex-officio) Sarah VanderWende (Member)
Public Attendees:
Chris Stuart Steve Jones Chip Craig Andrew Robblee
7:00 PM Public Meeting:
Scenic Road Tree Removal and Trimming - request of Clark Craig III, Road Agent for the Town of Antrim to trim and remove trees and brush in order to maintain a town road. The trees are located on Elm Avenue, Tax Map 214 Lot 88. File #: 2013-04PB
Chair Lazar opened the meeting at 7 PM, and asked for the Public Notice to be read. He asked Road Agent, Chip Craig to present his case.
Mr. Craig explained that two dead trees cause a narrow spot on Elm Avenue at the top of hill on the left in between Eddie Lemire’s driveway and his daughter’s driveway. He stated that he felt the trees were a hazard with dead limbs in the road whenever the wind blows. He said that he would like to cut the trees down and get them out of the way. He stated that Mr. Lemire is fine with the tree removal.
Ms. Pinello stated that she would like to repeat an ongoing request to cut the smaller trees in the Town’s right of way.
Public Hearing:
Mr. Robblee (Robblee Tree Service) said that scenic road designation began in 1973, and that since that time things have changed and it might be worth considering changing the rules; such as, raising the maximum diameter of trees [that can be removed without a Public Hearing]. He said that smaller trees hinder mowing and modern plowing; the roots present a water pathway under the road, and trees shading of the road. He repeated that the Planning Board should consider raising the diameter size at the next Town Meeting.
Mr. Levesque asked if Mr. Robblee was okay with the two trees on Mr. Lemire’s land.
Mr. Robblee stated – yes to the two trees and every tree in the right of way.
Mr. Burnside concurred with Mr. Robblee that the roots do cause a problem and the worst trees should be cut out.
Mr. Craig agreed that the road heaves near the trees.
Motion:
Mr. Levesque moved to approve the application of Clark Craig III, Road Agent for the Town of Antrim to trim and remove trees and brush in order to maintain a town road. The trees are located on Elm Avenue, Tax Map 214 Lot 88.
Mr. Webber seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote:
Name |
Approve |
Disapprove |
CONDON |
x |
|
LAZAR |
x |
|
LEVESQUE |
x |
|
MACDONALD |
x |
|
PINELLO |
x |
|
VANDERWENDE |
x |
|
WEBBER |
x |
|
MCEWEN (IF APPOINTED) |
|
|
The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Craig thanked the Board.
Public Hearing: Earth Excavation Regulations - The amendments to the Excavation Regulations consist primarily of clarifying the process for reapplications, consistent with state law.
Public Notice was read.
Chair Lazar stated that the regulation changes included clarifications to align the Town’s regulations with state regulations. He said that the biggest change was length of time of the permit.
Public Comments:
Recycled Materials:
Mr. Burnside was concerned with the language of recycled materials.
Chair Lazar said that it would depend on the level of offsite materials – if the pit operator was taking in material to process and resell, then it would trigger a Site Plan Review.
Ms. Ogilvie said that there were two scenarios: 1. an existing pit processing different materials;
2. a new pit which could include the recycled materials as part of its application
Mr. Stuart wanted to understand why recycled materials are an issue.
Mr. Levesque stated that recycled materials are not defined in RSA 155:E.
Chair Lazar said that the recycled materials are on a different level and that they should be defined and the Planning Board should approve the materials. He stated that they are currently falling under the radar, and if the material is not excavated from the operating pit, then it is a different use.
Mr. Levesque said that the Board is not implying that it is wrong, but rather a different use.
Mr. Stuart asked “what about our pits now?”
Chair Lazar stated that when the pits are reviewed, it would be addressed.
Mr. Levesque added that when the application is submitted, the recycled materials should be included as part of the application.
Mr. Robblee said that it is inefficient for a truck to travel empty and that the current pits are grandfathered.
Chair Lazar referred again to RSA 155: E and said that the Board was not looking to change the game, but wanted to address the issue of recycled materials.
Mr. Stuart stated that 155: E does not say it (recycled materials) cannot be done
Mr. MacDonald expressed concern of placing too many restrictions on a small business. He stated that during a high water event, local pits are an advantage.
Mr. Levesque said that he understands the concerns of the pit operators but that they will just be part of their future applications.
Ms. Ogilvie stated that it was “just about knowing” that part of the operation.
Mr. Levesque stated that it would not change anything.
Vegetative Buffers:
Mr. Burnside stated that examples should be listed because Boards change and the pit operators would be at the mercy of the Planning Board.
Ms. VanderWende said that the Planning Board would not put an undue burden on the applicant.
Ms. Pinello agreed that examples such as “blueberries” and “deciduous sapling” could be added.
Mr. Burnside said that vegetative buffer does not necessarily mean trees; grass can also be a vegetative buffer.
Mr. MacDonald said that there would be a negotiated understanding between the applicant and the Planning Board.
Mr. Condon said that abutters should have input.
Mr. MacDonald said that this was a good example of reviewing the pits on a case by case basis.
Mr. Burnside repeated the need for definitions such as grass, shrubs, trees, etc.
Ownership Transfer:
Mr. Stuart questioned ownership transfer.
Ms. Ogilvie stated that the permit cannot transfer from one owner to another without the permission of the Planning Board.
Future pits:
Mr. Robblee asked if the Zoning Ordinance will be changed to allow gravel pits in other parts of town.
Ms. Pinello stated that she would be addressing the Excavation chapter in the Master Plan.
Chair Lazar stated that excavation was working okay as it is and there would need to be a compelling argument to allow it in another part of town.
Mr. Robblee said that so much work has been done on the regulations, new areas should be made available.
Mr. Levesque said that the regulation were revised in order to be consistent with RSA 155: E – not to create new pits.
Six-year Permit and Reclamation:
Mr. Burnside was concerned with the 6-year permit and the reclamation aspect. Did the 6-year timing mean that reclamation must also be completed?
Chair Lazar stated that although the permit would end, as long as the pit was to continue operating, the reclamation would not need to be completed.
Ms. Ogilvie stated that the change in timing was to make the time frame consistent with the State and DES.
Some attendees and Board members thought that the reclamation language was confusing.
Mr. Robblee stated that the cost of reclamation was not addressed.
Mr. Stuart did not want the reclamation costs left to the Town Engineer. He told of an instance in which a Town Engineer had quoted $50,000 an acre for reclamation cost.
Mr. Burnside thought that there should be a base line.
There was a short discussion of standards.
Ms. Ogilvie stated that she would be reluctant to put a number in the regulations. She said that the cost would depend on what is needed, and that an appendix with examples of materials, equipment, etc. could be included and based on that the numbers could be adjusted.
The Public Hearing was closed.
Deliberation:
Mr. Levesque stated that a definition of vegetative buffer. Definition: Trees, shrubbery, grass, or other vegetation appropriated for the site and situation.
There was a short discussion concerning reclamation.
Ms. Ogilvie said that she would reorganize the information so that it made more sense and that an appendix should be created to describe components for factoring in the cost of a bond, labor, equipment, top soil, grasses, etc. It would be a way to estimate the cost. She said that she would rely on Natural Resource and Conservation District for costing it out.
It was determined that Ms. Ogilvie would make clerical corrections for the May 2, 2013 meeting. The appendix would be done at a later date.
Public Hearing: Proposed Subdivision &Site Plan Review Regulations - proposed amendments to the Subdivision and Site Plan Review Regulations and proposed amendments to the Excavation Regulations. The amendments to the Subdivision and Site Plan Review Regulations consist primarily of reorganization, clarification, and consistency with state law.
Chair Lazar asked for comments from the public.
Mr. Robblee questioned Section XI concerning waivers.
It was explained that the State has provided language that should be used, but the Planning Board still has the capability to grant waivers.
The Public Hearing was closed.
Deliberation:
Mr. Levesque moved to adopt the Subdivision & Site Plan Review Regulation changes as printed. Mr. MacDonald seconded.
Roll call vote: Ms. VanderWende, yes; Mr. Condon, yes; Chair Lazar, yes; Mr. Levesque, yes; Ms. Pinello, yes; Mr. MacDonald, yes; Mr. Webber, yes.
The Subdivision and Site Plan Review Regulations were adopted on April 18, 2013
Business Meeting:
Approval of April 4, 2013 minutes
Ms. Pinello moved to accept the minutes; seconded by Mr. Webber. All were in favor of approving the minutes, except for Mr. Levesque and Ms. VanderWende who abstained.
Workshops and Trainings:
19th Annual Spring Planning & Zoning Conference – May 11, 2013 – Agenda handout – Does anyone wish to register?
Correspendence:
Southwest Regional Planning Commission Newsletter - FYI
At 9:19pm, Mr. MacDonald moved to adjourn; Mr. Webber seconded.
Respectfully submitted, Diane Chauncey, Secretary of the Planning Board
| 
