Planning Board
Preliminary Meeting Minutes –
Recorded by Sharon Rossi
August 26, 2013
Members present: RMarshall, PRenaud, AMoon, RWimpory, SChicoine, JFletcher, KO’Connell
7:00 p.m. Minutes
PRenaud began reading the August 12, 2013 meeting minutes. No substantive changes were made. PRenaud moved to accept the minutes as amended. AMoon seconded. Vote unanimous in favor.
7:09 p.m. Mail, General Information
No mail was received. RMarshall commented that the October 14, 2013 meeting is Columbus Day and inquired if the Board would rather meet on October 7, 2013.
AMoon motioned that the October 14 meeting be moved to October 7. PRenaud seconded. Vote unanimous in favor.
RMarshall commented that the Neighborhood Heritage District draft has been completed by Liz Hengen. She will make revisions and e-mail to RMarshall. The final version will be available to the Planning Board at the September 9th meeting. He passed around a copy of the mailer that JFletcher has created. The invitational card will be mailed to all town residents for the Neighborhood Heritage Meeting on September 17 at the Library at 9:30 p.m. PRenaud asked if the Planning Board members are to be observers or participants in the meeting. RMarshall explained that he needs three members to listen to individual group input and desires/emotions on the group’s assigned item. The three members will be acting as facilitators, but other members could choose to participate as private citizens.
7:15 p.m. CIP Spreadsheet/Preliminary Text Review
PRenaud advised that at the last meeting we agreed to go with each department’s priority.
Highway Department
Facilities
New DPW Garage with Salt and Sand Storage Building
PRenaud asked RWimpory if the salt and sand building needs to be combined with the garage. RWimpory said the DPW just finished reconstructing the current salt and sand shed using items that were already at the DPW garage and we are hopeful that will suffice for DES standards for the time being. Eventually we will need a DES qualified salt and sand building at the new location. However, if DES says to improve the current building, it would be of questionable value to make the improvements at the old location. The new salt/sand storage building and the garage could be separate projects. PRenaud will summarize RWimpory’s comments under the DPW CIP sheet. RMarshall asked RWimpory, “When would you like to see the new construction of the DPW facility done.” RWimpory said, “If the
selectmen had their way, ideally, both would be constructed in 2015…. More realistically, in 2015 we’d tentatively see construction of the salt and sand building, and 2018, tentatively, construction of the DPW garage.”
Vehicles:
Leave the priorities as listed. Recommendations and findings are “Necessary” in the final report. “Urgent” priorities are 2016-grader; 2015-trackless tractor and 6 wheeler, 2014-‘07 Ford F550 dump truck.
Roads: The DPW has a 2014 onward plan for both paved and unpaved roads. RWimpory advised working on roads in ongoing increments rather than all at once, so that ten years from now we don’t see all roads again needing reconstruction. Selectmen have asked the Road Committee to find out how wide roads are supposed to be, as the roads are getting graded wider and wider. It costs more to maintain those roads with more materials. For the CIP we need to get information on dirt/gravel roads, such as maintenance needs and cost of gravel.
Recycling Center:
PRenaud commented that the 6 items listed should be deferrable. JFletcher recommended that some of these items be evaluated for return on investment, but did rate the front and rear overhangs on the building as a “Necessary” project. RMarshall commented he is reluctant to invest money in the current Recycling Center facilities if the DPW building would be converted to the Recycling Center once the new DPW building is erected. He would prefer that we limit investments to equipment that would apply in either location. RWimpory suggested going to a town where they have closed their recycling center and have compactors available for purchase rather than purchasing new. He asked, “Where are the quotes for these items coming from? Is it possible that a regional recycling center could be a possible solution
to the expenses that are being asked for?”
RMarshall said EDAC could perhaps include the Recycling Center as one of their items for possible review and recommendation.
Parks & Recreation:
RMarshall noted that there is no Parks & Recreation department. He asked if there is a possibility of it being restored. “If this isn’t restored, parks and recreation type activities begin to be integrated in to activities promoted by other departments. If we are going to build community as the Master Plan suggests, we need to re-establish this department.” RWimpory suggested that we could hire someone part time to promote and work in this department. This will be considered as report output for CIP.
Library:
The Library is proposing to install a climate management system. RMarshall said they propose three sources of revenue for this project: one third from fundraising, one third from grant money associated with Emergency Management grants, and one third through taxpayer contributions.
Administration:
Furnace: RMarshall said new LCHIP grant money is available now and we should apply for it for the furnace. PRenaud will check on LCHIP money for the two furnaces. RMarshall asked “Why are we proposing two separate furnaces? Why not have one furnace with two zones and the water heater could be included with furnace cost?”
Town Clerk: PRenaud commented that there is plenty of storage in the Town Office building basement. The town clerk and the tax collector want to combine their offices. However, citizen confidentiality could be an issue. RMarshall suggested that we ask APatt to conduct a study of the office space and then make recommendations to us for the CIP.
PRenaud asked if we should change the inflation rate escalator built in to the CIP. It was decided to leave the 3% rate as is because it allows us to compare for consistency.
All members agreed that we as a community must vote to fund the capital reserve accounts.
PRenaud asked if the line related to lease purchase and proposed bond issues including an interest rate of 6% should be deleted from the recommendations. Members agreed that this should be deleted from this CIP report.
Master Plan references:
PRenaud noted several Master Plan references in the CIP needs:
· Page 94… upgrades to meetinghouse and town offices relate to community facilities
· Page 97… the road plan being developed relates to establishing standards for traffic and construction
· Page 95… upgrading the library infrastructure in such a way to provide alternative uses relates to expansion of municipal services
For the September 9th meeting PRenaud plans to have all of the draft spreadsheets along with commentary and a brief description of the road maintenance plan for final review. APatt has offered to come to that meeting. RMarshall said that Sawmill Estates is slated for deliberations at the September 9th meeting. Since they didn’t come to tonight’s session, he assumes that they are falling back to that date. He suggested that the CIP spreadsheet and commentary be scheduled for September 23rd and that discussion of the final draft be planned for October 7th. The public hearing for CIP would be moved to October 28th. All members agreed with those agenda changes.
9:34 p.m. Roger Williams
Mr. Williams said he was here to ensure that he had clarity on the information provided previously as to the ZBA variance from the requirement of the frontage. He asked for guidance on the rationale he should provide to the ZBA for variance. Having done some further research, KO’Connell found that RSA 674:41 specifically prohibits use of a private easement or right-of-way as sufficient access to a property. Our ordinance requires frontage on a Class V road or better for issuance of a building permit.
RMarshall said that based on what KO’Connell has learned, Mr. Williams needs 250 feet of frontage on a Class V road in Lyndeborough. If abutting lots R9 lot 50 in Greenfield and Map 8 Lot 8 in Lyndeborough are combined, either through a voluntary merger or a lot line adjustment, that would give him 250 feet on a Class V road. The CEO could then issue a building permit. RWilliams said he would like to go back to Lyndeborough and say that Greenfield is in agreement to a lot line adjustment as it appears this would be the easiest solution.
RMarshall said we need some legal guidance to make sure that all parties are covered. KO’Connell said the Planning Board should initiate contact with Lyndeborough’s Planning Board about a possible joint meeting. RMarshall will contact and try to schedule a joint meeting with the Lyndeborough Planning Board.
RMarshall asked that it be noted that the Planning Board at this time rescinds the previous advice given to Mr. Williams based on these new findings.
K’OConnell also found that the fire departments of both communities would need to reach an agreement as to who will cover this property in case of emergency since the access would be in Lyndeborough. Mr. Williams thanked the Board for their time and aid in getting this completed.
10:25 p.m. Adjournment
Prenaud motioned to adjourn. JFletcher seconded. Vote unanimous in favor.
| 
