DRAFT TO BE VOTED ON BY PLANNING BOARD AT OCTOBER MEETING
BERLIN PLANNING BOARD
Thursday September 6, 2007
Members Present: Vice Chair David Morin, Lucien Langlois, Nicole DeCosta, Andre Duchesne, Ralph Collins, Julie Cooney, Laura Jamison, Richard Cassidy
Members Excused: Diana Nelson, Aline Boucher, Ernie Allain, Fran Cusson
Members Absent:
Others present: Pamela Laflamme, City Planner; Don Bouchard, Steve LaFrance, Horizons Engineering; Curt Burke Sr.; Curt Burke Jr; Tom Burke; Jackie Burke; Kristin Labonte; Charlie Cotton, Northern Human Services; Barbara Tetreault, Berlin Daily Sun
Mr. Morin is chairing the meeting in the absence of Ms. Cusson. He appointed Ms. Decosta and Ms. Jamison as voting members for the evening.
Approval of August Minutes: August minutes approved. Moved by Mr. Langlois., seconded by Mr. Merrill, unanimously approved.
Public Comments: There were no public comments at this time.
Lot Mergers:
Fortin
Map 130 Lots 268 and 267, are properties owned by Mr. & Mrs. Fortin. They recently purchased Map 130, Lot 267 from the City and they wish to merge this new property with their primary parcel.
Moved by Mr. Langlois, to approve lot merger, seconded by Mr. Collins, and all voted in favor.
Site Plan Review – Northern Human Services:
Ms. Laflamme reviewed the application which is technically a governmental use review site plan. This is a courtesy review with Northern Human Services to address concerns that have been received by staff and City Council from adjacent property owners and concerned citizens. Charlie Cotton, from Northern Human Services was present to discuss the project and allow for public questions.
Mr. Cotton introduced his staff to the audience and briefly addressed the project as laid out in his letter (which is attached to the official minutes) and decided it was best to take questions at this time.
Olive LaCroix, Emery Street: Mrs. Lacroix asked about supervision of the building. Mr. Cotton explained that the building would be serviced by staff when needed during the day, but that there would not be overnight supervision directly in the building unless someone was staying in the brief stay unit. Mr. Cotton explained that the brief stay model was for individuals who needed some time with constant direct support from NHS. Ms. LaCroix asked about whether residents would be from Berlin or not. Mr. Cotton explained that this was difficult as it really depends on who needs the treatment, but that the majority of residents who will reside in the building are from the area. She asked about criteria used for residence, to which Mr. Cotton replied priority was given to residents of the community. NHS likes to treat people in their home communities and homes if possible.
Helen Gemitti, Emery Street – Asked about the length of stay for residents, Mr. Cotton stated it depends on needs, as NHS would like to try to get people back to their own homes ASAP – he told the audience that there could be as many as 6 people in residence at a time, with the average usually being no more than four.
Lena Parent, NHS staff person – Ms. Parent asked to make a clarification – she stated that the six people in residence is the total – not per apartment – that there are four apartments in the building, three are longer term apartments, while one unit will be the brief stay unit, which will only have about a 30% occupancy rate per year.
Harold Bigelow, City Councilor – Mr. Bigelow stated he has no problem with this project, but wanted to know how many properties had been looked at before buying this property. Mr. Cotton stated that they had looked about 20 properties. Mr. Bigelow questioned the taxes on the property and Mr. Cotton replied that NHS paid payment in lieu of taxes (PILT), Mr. Bigelow expressed concern about PILT, and again Mr. Cotton went over the fact that NHS does pay PILT, and that they are one of the only two non-profits that do. Mr. Bigelow questioned methods used for the project over all – why did NHS do this without the consultation of the community? Mr. Cotton stated they would use City services as much as a regular residence and that NHS will not use City Welfare and that they do not charge the City
and that they provide us with free services, Mr. Bigelow responded that this seemed like eminent domain without due process.
Helen Gemitti, Emery Street – asked if the funding was federal or not and whether NHS could possibly be without funding. Mr. Cotton stated that yes it is possible, as an example, the former NHS High Street property was sold to private home owner.
Roland Gemitti, Emery Street – spoke about the burden of taxes and Mr. Cotton maintained that NHS does make a PILT and that they have done this for years, they are a good neighbor, there was a brief discussion about the issues of taxes and the burden on residential tax payers, Mr. Gemitti asked how large the PILT is, Mr. Cotton could not recall.
Mark Dorval, Emery Street – questioned value of building and PILT and whether it made up for the taxes, he suggested that he wanted to see a reduction in the neighborhood to reflect the NHS property and the reduction it paid on its value.
He asked questions about a prior building built for NHS near the technical college, which state took over for education purposes and why he wondered why it was transferred to state, wanted to know why they didn't use that building.
He also asked about funding issues for building related to the closure of Riverside 2 at Androscoggin Valley Hospital to which Mr. Cotton indicated is really an issue for AVH according to and as he didn't want to answer for AVH he referred Mr. Dorval to Russ Keene at AVH.
Olive LaCroix, Emery Street – Mrs. Lacroix asked about why NHS services did not have this meeting before the purchase of the house – Mr. Cotton indicated that the process was completely open except the purchase which was done after due diligence was done by their agency.
Someone in the audience asked about advertising for the hearing and why it was done so close to a busy holiday weekend – Ms. Laflamme clarified that it was an error of the Planning Department's and not NHS. There were then general questions about the tax issues, why NHS didn't do the site plan first, market value diminishing neighboring properties, etc.
Mark Dorval, Emery Street – Mr. Dorval again talked about the PILT, and asked if residents are already in building. Mr. Cotton stated that residents were getting ready to move into the building.
Pam Laflamme, City Planner – Ms. Laflamme explained the Site Plan process to the audience.
Larry Kelley, Emery Street – Mr. Kelley stated he was here as a neighbor, however he talked about the good work done by NHS and that he feels that they will do their job well. He has a lot of confidence in NHS & Cotton. Mr. Kelley asked about supervision whether it was onsite or how immediate the response is to the site.
Mr. Cotton responded about how concerns will be handled and that NHS will be beefing up their response/back up call center and that he is confident that they will do a good job with it
Larry Kelley – asked about PILT and property values, he indicated that if there were concerns about the property values then one should go to assessor to make their case.
Mr. Dorval – asked about if the site will be a locked facility, the response was no it will not.
Lena Parent – Ms. Parent indicated that if there was a crisis, NHS always will have a person on call, and that they will respond if that is not satisfactory then they will involve the Police Department. She stated that they currently maintain a five minute response time.
Mr. Morin thanked public & Mr. Cotton:
Board comments: Mr. Collins indicated that he felt it was most unfortunate that this went this way and that if we had heard this beforehand that he would have voted against it,
Mr. Morin said that he wanted assurances from NHS that services are parallel to other communities, etc.
Mr. Cotton indicated that there are services in operation in Conway – similar to brief stay model. He also stated he was happy to give regular reports to City Council. He has worked in Berlin for a long time sensitive to serving community needs and residents.
Ms. Laflamme had no conditions or suggestions for the board.
Mr. Morin thanked everyone for coming.
Mr. Cotton passed out his business cards and offered to talk to citizens after this part of the meeting.
The Planning Board moved into the Executive Council Chambers at this time.
Final Review – Tom & C Realty LLC, Riverside Heights Manufactured Housing Park:
Ms. Laflamme introduced Steve LaFrance from Horizons Engineer who is here this evening.
The applicant was at the August meeting for design review and is back for final review with the Planning Board.
Ms. Laflamme indicated that the plan was complete. Ms. Cooney motioned to accept the plan as complete, Mr. Collins seconded, and the board voted in favor.
Ms. Laflamme turned over the discussion to Stephen LaFrance from Horizons Engineering at this time.
Mr. LaFrance briefly reviewed previous discussions. This manufactured housing subdivision will be located on approximately 50 acres and have 88 units of housing. The board then listened to the waiver request list from the applicant.
Waiver #1 is a waiver from the City's standards for length of dead end streets. Skipper Lane is being proposed to be longer than 1,000 feet. The Fire Department had concerns about the private roads & the maintenance. He is comfortable with the cul-de-sacs, but has issues with the length waiver and at this time recommends the Planning Board not grant this waiver.
Waiver #2 is in regards to drainage. However, they are no longer asking for this waiver.
Waiver #3 is related to the City's standard for gravel base in road construction, the City asks for 12 inches of bank run gravel, the applicant is asking for 6 inches, the Public Works Director recommends a compromise of no less than eight inches of bank run gravel on top of 12 inches of crushed gravel for a base no less than 20 inches.
Waivers #4 and #5 are related to pavement width and gravel shoulders – see attached letter for specific waivers. The Public Works Director recommends both of these waivers be granted.
Waiver #6 is related to ditches and culverts – the Public Works Director has asked for more information about this request. This will be addressed by the next meeting.
Waiver #7 is in regards to the driveway access widths. The City's standard allows for 12 feet of curb cut per 50 feet of frontage – the request is for 24 feet of curb cut. The Public Works Director is recommending 20 feet as a compromise.
In reviewing the letter of response from Horizons Engineering, Ms. Laflamme added the board will need to see a letter of agreement from the Berlin Water Works regarding the approval for the water system.
Mr. LaFrance indicated that an agreement has been reached with Ms. Sullivan, and abutter, to purchase her water rights she has on the property. Another abutter, Mr. Dufresne, has not agreed to a purchase of his rights at this time. There is question as to whether the well he has rights to still exists.
Mr. LaFrance indicated that the buffer will remain as natural as possible and that they will only disturb what is necessary for construction. Ms. Laflamme shared with the board a letter from an abutter and a visit from another abutter concerned about the buffer and water line. Mr. LaFrance indicated that the water line issue has been resolved.
There had been questions about the sewer permit application, it was indicated to the board that there would be an application to the Public Works Department in the near future. There will also be an application to NHDES. Mr. LaFrance indicated that a berm will be built to protect the City's pump station as requested by the Waste Water Superintendent.
There was discussion about the fire access lane from Skipper Lane to Victoria Lane. As stated previously there is concern from the Fire Department about the lengths of the road to the last cul-de-sac.
Mr. LaFrance shared with the board plans for street lighting. They did not have exact locations at this time, but that they would be working with Lee Carroll to develop a design that would likely highlight the intersections and more for safety purposes than anything else. They showed the board an example of lighting they would likely use.
The subdivision plan now calls for only two lots to be divided rather than three. This will require the large lot to a bit over fifty acres, but the frontage issue made this a necessary change and there also needs to be a waiver regarding the plan being drawn at 100 scale rather than 50 scale as our regulations require. Ms. Laflamme requested that both waivers be granted to the applicant for these items. There should also be a few points of elevation shown on the plan and Ms. Laflamme requested that these be added to the plan.
Ms. Laflamme indicated that we want to be certain that PSNH is directly involved as there were some communication problems regarding the development and which departments at PSNH needed to be involved. PSNH's right of way department needs to be involved in any and all construction under the power lines within their easement.
Mr. LaFrance indicated that they have not yet applied for their wetlands permit. The board would like to see that application and there are concerns about how this permit process could affect the layout of the sites. There was discussion about the compensatory mitigation required by NHDES for wetland impact projects. There have been preliminary discussions about having a conservation easement and it is most likely that NHDES would agree to this scenario.
There was discussion about the waterline easement and hydrants. The Fire Department has indicated it is satisfied with the hydrant locations.
The drainage has been redesigned to meet the City's standards. The waiver for this item has been withdrawn.
Mr. LaFrance indicated that NHDOT is satisfied with the drainage design for the bottom of the development. He indicated that they may have to replace a culvert.
Public Hearing &Public Comments:
Richard Defense, 2049 Riverside Drive, asked about his deeded water rights to the property. He has a lot of questions which technically need to be worked out with the property owner and him directly.
Ann Morin, 164 Church Street and 24 Tamarack Lane, had many questions about the pictures, the ownership structure, trash pickup, tax revenue, etc. Her questions were answered.
She did point out concern about use of the natural gas transmission line for property owners who might use the trails for snowmachining leading to an increase in traffic at her property. She was told this might happen, but could happen without the development as well.
The public hearing was closed.
There was a discussion about general maintenance, which indicated what the leasee is responsible for and what the developer is responsible for as well.
Mr. Morin indicated he wanted to see a landscaped entrance to the project, however there was no formal plan for landscaping at this time.
Mr. Merrill indicated he was curious about length of the last cul-de-sac and was concerned about safety.
Ms. Laflamme asked for an updated punch list of waivers. Mr. Bouchard will try to get that to her as soon as possible. She shared concerns about all the permits still needed that had not yet been applied for at this time.
Mr. Morin had concerns about the wetlands, the right-of-way construction, and indicated that while he thought the applicant had a good start on the project, he recommended the board table this discussion to the next meeting.
Mr. Langlois motioned to the table the application to the next meeting, Mr. Merrill seconded the motion and all voted in favor.
Ms. Laflamme reminded the audience & the board that this motion constituted the public notice for the next meeting and hearing.
Master Plan Update/Progress:
Ms. Laflamme indicated that proposals were due back in the next week and was pleased at the positive response she had had so far.
Public Comments:
There were no public comments.
Member Comments:
Laura asked about sidewalks & design of homes, utilities buried, etc. Ask about sidewalks, etc., will be using shoulder as sidewalk – questions about access in and out. Purchase the unit; rent the property – issues of covenants, etc. Mr. Morin cautioned her about the difference between the technical issues vs. internal workings.
Planner Comments:
Ms. Laflamme shared with the board various trainings that are being offered in the North Country this fall related to planning. If anyone wishes to attend, please let her know.
Ms. Laflamme reminded the board about the NHDOT hearing with Councilor Burton on the ten-year plan which is next week at City Hall.
Route 110 – Ms. Laflamme has heard from Senator Sununu's office – City's alternative is still being reviewed and there was reason for cautious optimism.
Adjournment: Mr. Morin moved to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Collins and all voted in favor.
The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, October 2, 2007.
Respectfully Submitted,
Pamela E Laflamme
| 
