PLANNING BOARD MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2003
41 South Main Street
Members Present: Jim Horgan, Hiram Watson, Charlie King, Bill Tsiros, Gerry White (arrived late),
Troy Robidas & Don MacVane called in absent (Gerry White seated for Troy Robidas)
Selectmen’s Rep: Barry Elliott
Staff Present: Paul Charron & Fran Osborne
Public Present: Mike Garrepy, Peter Landry, Peter Rizzo, Jenn Abell, John Theriault, John Law, Randy
Talon, Dan Woodman, Bob Talon, Thomas Demers, Brad Anderson
· Chairman Horgan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p. m. Minutes of September 16, 2003 were reviewed. Hiram Watson made a motion to approve as presented, Bill Tsiros 2nd, no discussion, motion carried.
· Under New Business: CEO Paul Charron asked that Don Rhodes might be able to present a new configuration of the road to the development off Elm St. by RSA Development. Engineer Don Rhodes wants to find out if the settlement agreement with regard to moving the road is acceptable to the Planning Board. Don has a plan with overlay showing the old line and new configuration placement of the road. In order to reach the settlement issue, the developer has moved the road beyond the 100’ setback in the LDZ which was to allow the least amount of wetlands involvement. Discussion of DES asking for moving the road further back from the LDZ (10’ more) to cross the brook at square 90 rather than at angle with more impact to the brook. It is about a 70’ shift to cross the Kicking Horse Brook and is impacting more square footage of wetland. DES would like us to go with as little impact as possible on the brook, even if more impact on wetlands.
Charlie King – discussion on impact on wetlands (DES). Charlie King was familiar with the court settlement agreement as he is liaison between the PB & ZBA. The ZBA approved the settlement with the Special Use Permit having to be reapplied for if necessary.
Don Rhodes – the new alignment must go to the ZBA. Charlie King feels the reasons Don Rhodes has presented are valid to move the road and doesn’t feel it will be a problem. Don Rhodes would like to move ahead and resubmit plans to staff so the application would be happening concurrently.
Hiram Watson & Barry Elliott think this is a good way to solve the road issue.
Gerry White – abstained from an opinion.
Bill Tsiros – discussion on ZBA vs. PB court case and Charlie’s remarks. It does meet requirement of this zone.
Don Rhodes – we need to satisfy everybody (DES, Planning Board & Zoning Board).
Mike Garrepy – I think what Don Rhodes is dong is the right direction. Submit new plans to engineer (SEA).
CEO – discussed a possible informational meeting on the 28 conditions. I questioned the public hearing itself and compliance.
Mike Garrepy – keep at the TRC and resolve before coming to the PB again. The compliance hearing is another public hearing notice in the paper, abutters & posting 3 places. Get with legal and hammer out any remaining issues.
Barry Elliott – Packy Campbell was at the Selectmen’s meeting asking for a bond. The conditions of approval need to be met.
Mike Garrepy – he starts the road at his own peril and his own consequence.
Jim Horgan – the general consensus of this board is positive (to Don Rhodes).
Don Rhodes – we need to clear issues with CEO, TRC and then bring back to the PB.
Mike Garrepy – work with Malcolm McNeill.
Charlie King – applicant is to meet with the TRC and resolve the 28 items.
Mike Garrepy – the PB will deal with DES’s requirement to move the road. Don will proceed as directed.
Planning Board Minutes October 7, 2003 (continued) Page 2
· CEO Paul Charron – Peaceful pines Mobile Home Park connector road. Hiram read a letter from park owner Kevin F. Grondin, partner (attached). They are asking clarification on the PB approval to re-arrange 13 lots per the phasing plan submitted. The last occupancy certificate is tied into completion of the connector road per the PB’s notice of decision. They are asking that it not be paved and stay gravel with jumpable curbs. It is about 700’ up about a 10% grade)
Charlie King – cost of paving this would be high. CEO feels skateboards and bikes would be using this and getting hurt if it was paved. They will keep it plowed and ready.
Hiram Watson – I don’t think the road is needed other than an emergency. Discussion on putting in an emergency access near A. J. Foss.
Mike Garrepy – who came up with the emergency access?
CEO & Hiram Watson – the PB required this.
Mike Garrepy – have those respond who would be answering calls at the mobile home park. Bring up before the TRC with Dept. Heads. Discussion.
Jim Horgan – refer to the TRC and bring back to the next PB meeting November 4, 2003.
Public Hearing 7:30 p. m.
· Application for Minor Lot Line Adjustment, Pike Industries, Inc. grants Farmington 500 Boys & Girls Club permission to apply & act as their agent for minor lot line adjustment on Paulson Rd. (Tax map R36, Lot 1-1 and Lot 1-2).
Bob Talon is representative. Narrative was read into the minutes (attached). Bob explained where the line will be moved because of ledge present where the ball field was proposed to be placed. It would cost $128,000 to get the ledge blown out. The solution is what we have presented here tonight which makes it feasible and workable (September 17, 2003 plan).
John Law – I would recommend the PB approve the recommended changes. This will be a welcomed change and something beneficial for years to come.
Hiram Watson made a motion to approve the Application for Minor Lot Line Adjustment, Pike Industries, Inc./500 Boys & Girls Club as presented, Barry Elliott 2nd, motion carries.
· Application for Site Review continuation, Tom Demers, 516 Rte.11 Tax Map R31, Lot 25), change of use for residential mobile home to drive thru coffee & donut shop, retail/office space. Tom Demers read narrative (attached). New plans were handed out to board members. Tom Demers presented conceptual drawings of the building as to what it would look like.
Mike Garrepy – there is still a lot of work to finish before the application is complete.
Tom Demers – asked if the board had reviewed the drainage report that was presented and the DOT driveway permit.
CEO – the TRC met and reviewed Tom’s latest plans on 9/22/03, findings were written up by Gerry Mylroie of SRPC and given to the PB (see attached). There is no traffic study need per Gerry Mylroie. Signs will be needed. We have water & sewer approval per Dale Sprague’s letter in file.
Mike Garrepy – stressed he feels the need for a traffic study. He disagrees no traffic study is needed. A traffic engineer is needed to analyze the site due to the mixed use there – a more detailed analysis than with DOT. I am concerned about what goes on the site. Discussion on parking spaces. Major concern is – no licensed professional engineer has worked on this plan. This will be required for roadways and drainage.
Hiram Watson – questioned the need for the traffic study. Mike Garrepy – I don’t mean a detailed traffic study.
Mike Garrepy – the internal traffic should be looked at. DOT for the 2 curb cuts will be involved. You need someone who is trained to do this type of site.
Barry Elliott - #6. in reference to septic approval and grease trap. He doesn’t think architectural review is necessary. I think we delve into areas we shouldn’t be concerned with.
Planning Board Minutes October 7, 2003 (continued) Page 3
Bill Tsiros #6 – the state has rules he has to comply with in regard to the restaurant. We can’t do that. Dale Sprague did comment on water & wastewater discharge.
CEO – the state licensing process will do the requirements he needs to meet. Bill Tsiros mentioned the state did a traffic study and last count was 22,000 cars a day on Rte. 11 that he saw. Discussion on entrances and exits onto Rte.11. DOT should cover this. We can ask detail on landscaping and building permit requirements.
Charlie King – existing parking is not delineated. Smaller issues are finalization of fencing, lighting, and signage. What about #5 – is that required? It is not a requirement. Is the applicant willing to pay for this? I don’t know if we should ask a consulting firm to provide a traffic study on the inside area.
Mike Garrepy – all DOT cares about is their road, not what happens within the site. There will be a lot of projected traffic. Discussion on professional engineer for drainage report and traffic study.
Bill Tsiros – discussion on traffic numbers. How can this be accurately projected until in place?
Mike Garrepy – it is done on statistics available to engineers. They have studies they analyze.
Bill Tsiros – this meets all the requirements of all the buildings I’ve seen.
Charlie King – concern is for traffic flow through the site. Can we get a cost estimate for engineering? This board may want to have a professional engineer & licensed land surveyor stamp the plans showing the site will work..
Discussion with Tom Demers and Mike Garrepy on the plans and interior traffic flow and signage. The plan needs to be professionally done from what I fee.
Tom Demers – the Police Chief said the two businesses there now are very low impact. Discussion on parking space requirement. Tom said 19 were needed and we have 27 spaces.
Jim Horgan – questioned paving as to whether the whole lot including what is there now would be paved. Tom Demers – ultimately the whole area will be paved. Jim Horgan – this needs to be addressed. Show existing and proposed conditions on separate sheets. Discussion on TRC review.
Jim Horgan – delineate improvements and what is required.
Bill Tsiros – asked when the TRC meets and felt a PB member should attend. CEO let Bill know they meet every Thursday from 9:00 to 11:00 a. m. here.
Approved septic design plans and restaurant plans should be submitted.
Bill Tsiros – explained the State comes in and verifies what you are proposing. Discussion on this issue.
Hiram Watson – what can we do here? I’d like to see the business come into the town – we need businesses.
Jim Horgan – the plan is not complete and we should not act on it until it is.
Tom Demers – lighting specs were not provided. Jim re-iterated he needs to come with completed plans.
Bill Tsiros – I make a motion to accept the application subject to the following: #3 regarding outdoor lighting in the TRC comments; exit signage, drainage calculations of the whole site to show projected paving; interior flow of traffic; additional parking; and landscaping – all to be reflected on the plan, Barry Elliott 2nd. Discussion. Hiram questioned traffic.
Charlie King – the last thing we should do is give conditional approval of an application as complete. I urge the applicant to finish his application for completion.
Barry Elliott – I would hate to see Tom Demers have to go back to the TRC and the PB and have further requests made of him.
Bill Tsiros – we need to start somewhere. This is what I see is needed.
Charlie King – this board voted to have the TRC review – why are we reviewing this when the application is not complete?
CEO – in the future if the applicant is not complete they will not be allowed to come to the PB.
Motion as above carried with 4 in favor – 1 opposed to accept the application with conditions are above.
Tom Demers – I have to meet the conditions and come back to the board when complete.
Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 7, 2003 (continued) Page 4
John Law – when did you 1st develop this plan? If you can’t develop a plan and bring it back as complete, there’s something wrong. Discussion on who has jurisdiction and the need to help business – this is stonewalling and it stinks.
CEO – specify if this plan takes into consideration a 25-year storm or whatever.
Mike Garrepy – when plans come back, they need to reflect requested conditions of acceptance.
Hiram Watson made a motion to continue Application for Site Review by Tom Demers to November 4, 2003, Charlie King 2nd, motion carried.
· Hiram Watson made a motion to recess at 8:45 p. m. for 10 minutes, Bill Tsiros 2nd, motion carried. Meeting reconvened at 9:00 p. m.
· Application for Subdivision Review continuation by Peter Rizzo, 9-lot subdivision, Phase III at Cherub Estates (Tax Map R61, Lot 5). Pete Landry is representing Peter Rizzo. He stated a waiver asked for was denied. What the board has before them is what I know to date you have requested including Mike Garrepy’s comments. The TRC – no comments and SEA Consulting – no comments. Discussion on proposed “Land Exchange & Amendment to Walking Path Easement – Cherub Estates, Phase III (Map R62, Lot 1 – approximately 2.18 acres). Width of walking path increased to 20 feet (see attached
memo.) Street names have been reviewed by the Board of Selectmen. Pete Landry asked about a Special Use Permit and procedure for same. The subdivision has been sent to DES for approval. Pete Landry addressed requests from Mike’s comments as follows from 6/29/03 memo:
(1) Preliminary layout – boundary survey date – (this is 2nd sheet of plans)
(2) Buildings within 200’ & driveways – (this is sheet A – Holly Lane & Cherub Drive)
(3) Note natural features – large trees – (this is sheet A – utilities added, electric & cable)
(4) Driveway permits – waiting for Clark Hackett
(5) Drainage Analysis – submitted for review
(6) Stamps for licensed engineer –
(7) Plat certification
(8) Road profiles to SEA
(9) Monuments to be set – iron pins with I.D. cap
(10) Common drive easement to get over wetlands is being worked on with Conservation Commission.
10’ path changed to 20’ wide walkway to back land (connects to Town Forest).
(11) Written statement from Tax Collector
(12) Bond – waiting for Board of Selectmen
(13) Pedestrian walkway – 10’ easement around road & cul de sac for slopes, snow & sidewalks
(14) Subdivision approval pending DES wetlands comments.
Discussion on Phase II to new road, will add stop sign, speed limit sign at discretion of road agent.
Mike Garrepy – has TRC reviewed?
CEO – no. They reviewed swap of land with town and questioned streetlights. The PB had asked review of the 100’ tangent by SEA. SEA Consulting gave us a $1,000 estimate for this but we need motion by the PB to go ahead with it. Discussion on this. This would be a full review based on the length of the road. Road and drainage was discussed from SEA Consulting.
John Law – questioned trade off of land in the back. He feels Peter Rizzo is being held hostage by access to the back land. Who’s going to be liable for people going in on the private road and stuff being dumped along the way. I think the easement trade off needs to be looked at.
John Theriault – concerned about drainage issue and retention pond. Discussion on paving and town taking the roads over. He asked about the right-of-way of 20’ and questioned future logging possibility. I don’t believe Phase III approval should be given until phase 1 & 2 are complete.
Brad – Peter Rizzo came to the Conservation Commission to discuss the possibility of access to the Town Forest. Applicant was accommodating to do this. The road is under covenants of the subdivision. The pedestrian access is what we were after. The other entrance is Waldron Grant property off Old Bay Road.
Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 7, 2003 (continued) Page 5
The 20’ width is for emergency vehicles only. Discussion on ATV restrictions, etc. Brad presented letter on purchase of this Conservation easement. The law provides that there is no liability by private landowners on conservation easement land for recreation. Discussion.
Barry Elliott – we have previously discussed Phase 1 & 2 completion. We can attach conditions for this before approving Phase III.
CEO – the spillway and retention pond run out to Old Bay Rd. Clark and SEA Consulting have agreed to what is here. The drainage analysis has been stamped by a licensed engineer. SEA is doing the engineering review.
Hiram Watson – questioned if Cherub Drive & Holly Lane will be paved & sealed upon completion.
John Theriault – concern about breaking up of present paved surface.
Charlie King – do we have a list of Phase 1 & 2 issues.
CEO – yes, it is coming up to snuff. Culverts are being worked on in Phase 1 (part of the original plan) and close to completion.
Charlie King – questioned parked cars to walk in to new easement pathway. Peter Rizzo – we can put up “NO PARKING” signs if it is a concern. Charlie gave CEO information from Parks & Recreation for access to pedestrians.
John Law – questioned public access to public land. Who pays? What are parameters for cleaning up and maintaining it? Discussion on private road and access.
Bill Tsiros – concerned about accepting the easement and litigation, policing, etc. The PB should not allow this access. There are other ways to access the town forest.
Mike Garrepy – no comments.
Charlie King – does Map R62, Lot 1 connect to Town Forest (back land)?
Brad – this transaction is reviewed by a different process. There will be public hearings with the Conservation Commission and the Selectmen on this purchase. Parcel A is being traded for current use taxes. Discussion on private road and public access.
Mike Garrepy – this is access for residents to the public access. Discussion on others feeling they should have access.
Brad – this is a public conveyance.
John Law – questioned letter Brad submitted and scrutinizing it.
Barry Elliott – the access to this land is secondary. This gives residents there access and connects to our town forest. We felt the 20’ allows emergency access to this land. People will go to the easiest access off Old Bay Rd. The important thing is to access the town owned land. Restrict access here and improve the other access area.
Discussion on a motion to approve the application per Mike Garrepy’s comments, appropriate stamps on plan; bonding figure; sidewalk issue (Phase II Holly Lane to intersection). Discussion – John Law asked CEO & Peter Rizzo to work out problems and come up with a solution. Need motion for SEA to review easement language on the sidewalk issue.
Mike Garrepy – the Special Use Permit – applicant is to submit to the Conservation Commission, Health Officer and CEO 30 days prior to the PB meeting to allow comment on impact. Work on these conditions at next TRC meeting.
Charlie King made a motion to continue application for subdivision review by Peter Rizzo until November 4, 2003 to allow applicant time to determine the need for a Special Use Permit and allow applicant time to address & complete a detailed list by CEO on what is to be agreed upon for the developer to complete in Phase I & II, Hiram 2nd. Discussion on items to be addressed for completion and addressing SEA Consulting, Inc.’s comments, all in favor, motion carried.
Motion by Bill Tsiros to sign the contract allowing SEA Consulting, Inc. to do a full road and drainage engineering review, Hiram 2nd, motion carried.
Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 7, 2003 (continued) Page 6
· Planning Board Rules of Procedure. After review by board members, Bill Tsiros made a motion to accept the Planning Board Rules of Procedure as amended and presented tonight (amended October 7, 2003), Hiram 2nd, motion carried.
· With no further business to discuss, Hiram Watson made a motion to adjourn at 10:15 p.m., Barry Elliott 2nd, motion carried.
APPROVED
________________________________________ ____________________________________
Jim Horgan, Chairman Date
Planning Board
Town of Farmington
| 
