MINUTES
CHARLESTOWN PLANNING BOARD
AUGUST 3, 2004
Members Present: Robert Frizzell – Chair; Sharon Francis – Vice-Chair; Steven Neill, Ex-Officio; Gail Fellows, Fred Poisson, David Sussman
Alternates Present: Eric Lutz, Linda Stewart, Roger Thibodeau
Staff Present: David Edkins – Planning & Zoning Administrator
Regina Borden – Recording Secretary
CALL TO ORDER & SEATING OF ALTERNATES: Chairman Robert Frizzell called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. He noted the absence of Robert Beaudry and called upon Alternate Member Roger Thibodeau to sit in Mr. Beaudry’s place.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 20, 2004:
Gail Fellows moved to approve the Minutes of the July 20, 2004, meeting as printed. Fred Poisson seconded the motion. With six members in favor, the minutes were approved. Roger Thibodeau abstained, as he was absent from the July 20 meeting.
MASTER PLAN PROGRESS – Vicky Boundy, UVLSRPC: Vicky Boundy requested that the Planning Board set a date to have Tara Bamford come in to talk about the Build-Out Analysis. The Natural Resources chapter is finished; it is being reviewed and will be ready for the next meeting. The Housing Chapter and the Population Chapter had been sent in the packets for the Board’s review prior to this meeting.
In the Housing Chapter, UVLSRPC tried to reflect and address the issues and wishes of the Community Goals process. They put forth their best recommendations based on what the housing issues are and what they think are good planning tools to advance those causes. Mr. Sussman said one of the things they included in the 1996 study was an analysis of the impact of types of housing based on the economics and tax base. That analysis is missing from this document and is important as the Town still has the one of the highest percentages of low cost housing in the area/state but that fact isn’t emphasized enough in this study. Ms. Boundy replied that they tried to integrate the issues into this report but the economic analysis isn’t something they customarily do. Mrs. Francis anticipated
the amount of work that would go into such an analysis but feels it would be possible, in this chapter, to say that an analysis done in 1996 found, identified and recommended that overall these trends are likely to continue and the analysis should be revisited in the next year or so.
She continued that at the Goals Workshop the first recommendation was to emphasize higher value housing development in the Town. Table VI refers to a projected demand for 740 dwelling units by households with greater than 120% of median income in the Claremont Labor Market Area between 2000 and 2010. How can Charlestown capture some of those higher value dwelling units? We need to balance Charlestown’s housing mix by concentrating on getting higher valued housing. Mrs. Boundy said this is addressed in the chapter but may not be emphasized enough. Mrs. Francis referenced page 9 – Diversity in Housing Types and asked how does Charlestown compare with other towns? Mrs. Boundy referred to page 4 – Table IV - Housing Stock by Type – 2000. Mrs. Francis questioned
page 10 –Density Bonuses asking does Charlestown need density bonuses for a variety of housing types? Mrs. Boundy responded that it allows for more creativity such as multi-family complexes, condominiums and single-family housing or cluster housing; they give more flexibility in the design of housing developments. Currently there can be little argument that mobile and manufactured homes are a disproportionate number in the community but the affordability issue is still there; there are other ways to get affordable housing.
Fred Poisson advised that the percentage of mobile homes in Charlestown has not significantly changed in ten years. We have 81 new mobile homes in ten years and almost 50 of those are accounted for in two projects; one a mobile home park that still has room to expand. The diversity issue is all high-end housing; it isn’t where he wants to be. He wants to live in a Town that has a good mix of housing. This Town doesn’t have room to put in more mobile home parks; although people will continue to put them on individual lots. To suggest that we require a foundation under every mobile home is ridiculous. Should we require a copper roof on every high-end house that is built? We have to allow for the working man to live in this Town. To straighten out our tax situation
maybe we ought to do away with Current Use. The only people that should be in Current Use are the farmers; that is what it was set up for not the people that buy up 200-acre lots.
Mr. Frizzell defended the Current Use program as it is saving the Town a lot of money because open land in current use doesn’t require any services. He doesn’t think that we are down grading anyone or mobile homes but just comparing Charlestown to other towns. Vicky Boundy said in this chapter we are just showing that there are other options to keep the community diverse.
Another theme in the Goals Workshop was to centralize development such as in the Town center. An option might be to renovate older dwellings for multi –family use. Mrs. Francis took the position she did as the taxpayers are paying stiff taxes because the tax base isn’t as high as it should be. We are trying to bring in more businesses. Mr. Sussman said there has to be balance. The 1996 Housing report addressed the economic impact of housing as an industry; different types of jobs are created in housing construction.
Mr. Edkins referred to page 10 –Accessory Apartments - our Zoning Ordinance allows for two family dwellings in almost all zones. On page 11 – the last sentence – he noted that mobile homes are taxed as real estate whether or not they are on a foundation or not; however the foundation would increase the taxable value. When a mobile home is moved into the Town we make sure that it meets the current HUD standards but a mobile home already in Town can be moved to another location. On page 14 –Goal 5- talking about changes to the Town Center District, Mr. Edkins feels that it is pretty well built-out and doesn’t have a lot of land available for new development.
On page 11 – Roger Thibodeau asked if we know where the “home repair funding programs” will come from? Those things need to be addressed; people need to know where that money is available. Linda Stewart feels that the majority of people don’t have the money to make some improvements; it is an economic issue. Mr. Edkins said property is assessed for tax purposes based on its fair market value as of April 1st each year; if it isn’t finished, it isn’t worth as much. The Town could apply for a grant through the Community Development Block Grant Program to assist low and moderate income people to repair their homes. Under No. 7 – the labor market analysis - migration from the Hanover/Lebanon area appears to be a potential factor for Charlestown,
as it is an easy 30-minute commute to the Upper Valley area. Mrs. Francis said this is a ten-year plan so we can say that Charlestown can expect it.
Roger Thibodeau asked if we should look at breaking up Zone E into more zones. Vicky Boundy said this would be addressed more in the Land Use chapter.
Population Chapter: Mrs. Francis had the following editorial comments: Page 1 – the sentence “all communities analyzed” should include “in the state or region”. Page 3 – age characteristics – start by saying that “Charlestown has ‘__’ number of residents”. Under the table “While during the 1990s” – instead of saying “a dramatic impact on communities” say “on Charlestown”. Page 5 – Factors Influencing Population Growth – “taxes” should be added to the list. Mr. Sussman felt there should be some analysis on the dynamics of population growth.
Ms. Fellows would like to have a separate meeting to devote to the Master Plan rather than having it on the regular agenda, as there is a lot to discuss. Suggested dates were Tuesday, August 31st or a Thursday evening.
Additional comments are to be submitted within one week to Dave Edkins who will forward them to Vicky Boundy.
SIGN PERMIT – Leahy & Denault, LLP – 181 Main Street: Jim Feleen of the Leahy & Denault law firm, submitted a Sign Permit application. There are two units on the first floor but the other unit is vacant. Two sign options were presented but Mr. Feleen was not sure which one would be chosen by the firm – one is a wall mounted sign and the other is a hanging sign that would be more visible, a better option but more expensive. Andy Jellie, the previous tenant, had an awning on the building.
Mr. Thibodeau moved to approve both sign options with the condition that they can only use the one of their choosing. Mr. Poisson seconded the motion. With seven members in favor, the motion was approved.
JOANNE LEMIEUX & SUSAN BARNA, Cont’d – Two (2) Lot Subdivision – Old Claremont Road – Map 14, Lot 14 – Zone E (Mixed Use): Fred Gregoire, the applicants’ representative, was present and distributed new plans of the proposed subdivision. Mr. Edkins summarized the four items that the Board requested at the last meeting. 1) – the 75- foot well radius on lot #2 extended into the roadway. That has been adjusted on the revised plan. 2) – the private water service to the Salsi property. How will it be protected? Mr. Gregoire advised that the water line is shown on the revised plan. The water line will not be touched but if it is by accident, Mr. Lemieux will repair it. A letter to this effect was given to Mr.
Frizzell for the records. Mr. Frizzell asked if there would be anything in the Deed about the right-of-way? Mr. Gregoire responded that Mr. Lemieux will see that it is in the Deed. 3) – What would it cost to replace the existing 2” water line to 6”. Municipal water service in this area is marginal; there are thirteen customers that are served by that line. Dave Duquette, Water and Sewer Superintendent, estimated that the construction cost would be $77,500 to upgrade the water line from Hidden Valley to the end. These two lots are proposed to be served by private wells. 4) -Mr. Gregoire advised that the Fire Chief said he treats this as a rural area and always brings a tanker truck to these areas. Mr. Edkins added that the Fire Chief said even if the water line was upgraded to 6” he would still treat it as a rural area as it will not significantly increase fire protection. There were no abutters present.
Mr. Poisson moved to accept the application as complete. Mrs. Francis seconded the motion. With seven members in favor, the motion was approved.
CHARLESTOWN BIBLE CHURCH – New Public Assembly Building (Church) – Hammond Road – Map 20, Lot 28-4 – Zone F-2 (Industrial/Business): David Becker, Pastor, and David Bascom, Elder of the Church, were present representing the applicant. Mr. Becker advised that the church has been in Charlestown for many years and in the building on East Street for about 20 years. They are in need of a better facility as the current one is on three levels and it is difficult for some people to climb the steps, etc. They are seeking to purchase two acres of land off Route 11, the Old Springfield Road, and Hammond Road. They are under contract to purchase that land from Mr. Pickul providing they have approval from the Town to build there.
Their plans are to build a one story building, 36’x 60’, that would suit their church for approximately 75 people. A second phase would include a 36’x 50’ addition to build a sanctuary. Before they purchase the land they would like to have clearance from the Town to eventually build the second phase; they would continue to build straight back toward Hammond Road. Right now they have between 30 and 40 members. They would like permission to clear the land of trees to Route 11 for better visibility but keep a buffer on Hammond Road as well as between the three residential lots and the church. The three lots below them have pretty much been cleared of trees by the developer. The state will not grant access to Route 11. Last week the Zoning Board of
Adjustment granted a Special Exception to build the church.
Mr. Thibodeau noted that this is an Industrial area; down the road Mr. Pickul’s business might go day-and-night or it might be sold – what about the noise? Mr. Becker responded that on a Sunday morning there are probably houses closer to Mr. Pickul’s business than the church; there would have to be a lot of noise to disturb the church. The Planning Board explained that they do not want noise complaints in the future.
Mr. Thibodeau noted that the engineer of record is licensed in Florida but the regulations state that the plans have to be signed by a New Hampshire licensed engineer.
Mr. Becker said they would like two spotlights on the building and floodlights for the parking lot. These are shown on the plan. Ms. Fellows asked about the hours of the lighting. Mr. Becker said they would prefer that the building lights remain on until 10:00 pm but the parking lot floodlights would be used only during service times.
Mrs. Francis questioned the landscaping and will it be attractive? Mr. Becker would like a manicured lawn to the highway, a tree line by the residential section, 30 feet of natural tree buffer between them and the residential roadway and toward the Pickul property they would like it to be grass. There are no wetlands. Mr. Edkins noted that the landscaping needs to be clarified on the plans. The surface of the parking lot will be crushed stone-gravel and may eventually be paved. The property will have its own well and septic system. It will need to have a septic design and the well may need a greater than 75’ protective radius because it is a public building. Mrs. Francis felt that the property boundaries are not clear; the abutters’ names should be indicated all on one
map. Mr. Edkins is concerned with the drainage; there isn’t any information about why the drainage swale was there. A copy of the Driveway Permit will be given to Mr. Edkins.
Mr. Logerfo, an abutter, lives across from Joe Pickul’s property on Hammond Road. Noise, traffic and the lighting are his concerns. He would like some restrictions on the bell tower. There should be some restrictions on the speed because there are a lot of children and at the end of the street there is no stop sign. He has had problems with Mr. Pickul’s lights shining into his bedroom so he wants to be sure that the buffer will prevent the lights from going across Hammond Road. Mr. Becker responded that they have no plans for a bell at this time but if they did it would probably be heard just before the 11:00 am Sunday service. If the Town wants to put in a stop sign the church will give their full cooperation. Their evening services are over by 9:00 pm and they would
turn off the lights after that. As a church they would like to live peaceably with their neighbors.
Mr. Poisson moved to table this application until a revised plan is submitted addressing the issues discussed tonight, particularly drainage, landscaping and the utilities. Ms. Fellows seconded the motion. With seven members in favor, the motion was approved.
The Planning Board took a break from 8:38 to 8:45 pm.
VICTOR R. & NANCY J. ST. PIERRE, Cont’d – Fifteen (15) Lot Subdivision – Great Country Road – Map 3, Lots 17 & 18 – Zone E (Mixed Use): Victor St. Pierre advised that at the last meeting Mr. Jim Belanger said he had deeded rights to the springs on top of the hill on the property next to this proposed subdivision. Mr. St. Pierre reported reached an agreement with Mr. Belanger and he has relinquished his rights to the springs; they will add five feet to the Belanger property so there will be a lot line adjustment.
Mr. Poisson asked if Mr. St. Pierre had a map showing the adjoining land. Mr. St. Pierre owns 99 acres – this subdivision is 33 acres. Mr. Edkins displayed the tax maps pointing out Mr. St. Pierre’s other parcels. Mrs. Francis asked if at some point in the future would Mr. St. Pierre consider developing other portions of his property. Mr. St. Pierre explained that it is his intent to call this Phase I. He would like to loop the road back in a circle, perhaps creating another ten lots on the upper parcel. It is his intent to retain Lot No. 9 to keep his options open and retain the right-of-way for future access. Another option might be to annex lot No. 9 to the next phase.
A letter from Wakeman Industries was received and copies distributed. In his letter, Mr. Wakeman expressed concern that a new residential development adjacent to his existing industrial facility should not result in additional restrictions on his business.
Mr. St. Pierre noted that a 1”=50’ scale of the 33-acre parcel is being difficult to produce. He distributed plans of the 1100’ cul-de-sac that is being proposed and is asking for a waiver for the extra 100 feet. He will be going to the Selectboard tomorrow evening with his plans to upgrade Great Country Road and to ask them to accept it as a Class 5 road when it is finished. There was discussion relative to the definition of back lots; a request for waiver of the 200’ frontage requirement on the cul-de-sac lots was submitted. Mr. Sussman felt that the size of the lots compensates for the reduced of frontage. Mr. Edkins confirmed that the lots conform to the standards contained in Section 4.6.5-2 of the Subdivision Regulations. If the configuration on the plan
meets the Board’s approval then it is acceptable. Mr. St. Pierre distributed copies of the proposed covenants, which are similar to those in the Cedarwood development. Mr. Poisson suggested scheduling a site visit to see the overall project and development possibilities. There was a consensus to schedule the site visit for Thursday, August 12th at 6:00 pm.
Mrs. Francis moved to table this application until the next meeting. Mr. Poisson seconded the motion. With seven members in favor, the motion was approved.
PLANNING, POLICY & REGULATORY ISSUES:
There were no planning, policy or regulatory issues at this meeting.
ADMINISTRATION & CORRESPONDENCE:
Upper Valley Lake Sunapee Regional Planning Commission: Mr. Edkins announced that Eric Lutz has agreed to serve as a representative from the Town of Charlestown to the UVLSRPC. The Selectboard has signed this appointment.
Mr. Edkins advised that the following correspondence was received:
· The Fall Planning & Zoning Conference will be held at the Waterville Valley Conference Center, 12 Snow’s Brook Road, Waterville Valley, NH on Saturday, October 30, 2004.
· Steve Neill submitted information on Low Impact Development (LID) Workshops sponsored by the Home Builders Association in connection with the EPA. They are being offered to residential builders and county officials to highlight and promote the benefits of LID. It sounds like it would be a good session. One will be held on October 19, 2004, at the Radisson Hotel/Center of NH in Manchester, NH.
· The next meeting on the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) for Sullivan County will be held on Thursday, August 19, 2004, from 6:30 pm to 8:00 pm in the Charlestown Municipal Building.
· The Summer 2004 newsletter of the NHDES Drinking Water Source Protection Program, “The Source” was received.
· The 2004 newsletter from the International Sign Association, “Signline”, was received.
· Information was received from the United States Bankruptcy Court regarding the Adelphia Communications Corporation, et al.
Morningside Flight Park: Mrs. Francis asked for an update on the Morningside Flight Park. Mr. Edkins said they did submit the plan that the Board required and he was inclined to accept it. Mr. Sussman said the plan isn’t exactly what they were looking for but it is reasonable and they are recording every flight with the GPS. Jeff Nicolay has been delivering the flight data to Mr. Edkins on a regular basis. The trial on this matter is scheduled for August 25th.
There being no other business, Mr. Poisson moved for adjournment. Ms. Fellows seconded the motion and, with seven members in favor, the meeting adjourned at 9:35 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Regina Borden, Recording Secretary Minutes Filed: 8-6-04
(Note: These are unapproved minutes. Corrections, if necessary, may be found in the minutes of the August 17, 2004, meeting.)
| 
