 |
Lyme Planning Board
Minutes: December 6, 2007
Board members: Present - John Billings, Dick Jones
Absent- Jack Elliott, Chair; Stephanie Clark
Alternate members: Present - David Roby, John Stadler
Staff: Adair Mulligan, recorder
Public: Luc Beaubien, Michael Hinsley, Ray and Tina Clark
Acting Chairman John Billings called the meeting to order at 7:30pm at the Fire Station. He appointed David and John Stadler to sit as regular members. Since members had not seen the minutes of November 15, they took no action on them.
Peter and Janice Treadwell, Applicants, Permit Application 2007-14, Map 408 Lot 47.1
Project: permit existing telecommunications tower and extend it 30 feet at 36 Horton Lane.
Dick explained that the Treadwells are applying for a conditional use permit and site plan review for this tower, which has been in place for several years without permits. The tower is located below the top of the trees, and Luc Beaubien of Finowen wants to extend it by 30 feet. The tower, which is pinned into ledge at a site off the summit of the Pinnacle, currently cannot be seen from the road, although it is visible from the summit. There are no applicable requirements for a conditional use permit, other than sufficient information to make a decision. Members reviewed the list of requirements for site plan review. David asked for a letter from the Conservation Commission. While Dick noted that the Conservation Commission had never been asked to comment on a Ridgeline application before, David said that not doing so
might set a precedent for deliberations on other tower applications, and that the Ridgeline district is indeed a conservation district. Luc said he had no problem with having the CC review the application, and offered to participate in a site visit. Luc noted that he had measured the tower site distance from property lines with Peter Treadwell, and gave the distances. He said that Vickie Davis had indicated on the application that the area is in the Steep Slopes Conservation District. The 50 watt electrical line is in a conduit, lying on the ground because of the presence of ledge, and goes straight from the tower to the Treadwells’ home. Luc explained why a license from the FCC is not needed.
The board voted on a motion by Dick seconded by David to waive requirements of sections 10.4, 10.5.1, 10.5.3, 10.5.4, 10.5.6, 10.5.7, 10.5.9, 10.5.9.3, 10.5.9.4, 10.5.9.5, 10.6, 10.7, and 10.8.1, and agreed that the application is complete except for comments from the Conservation Commission. A potential condition will be approval of the ZBA. Voted to recess the hearing until January 17, 2008, at 7:30 pm.
Ray & Tina Clark, Applicants, Permit Application 2007-098, Map 416 Lot 7&10
Project: utilize a new structure as a woodworking shop for a cottage industry at 226 Pinnacle Road.
The Clarks propose to use a new structure on their property in the Rural District as a woodworking shop. A cottage industry requires a site plan review and a conditional use approval under section 4.47. Ray noted that he had submitted his original application in August, and could offer substantial detail on the subjects of steep slopes, road setbacks, agricultural soils, and deliberations of the zoning board. He has received a permit to build the structure on the site, and is now seeking approval to include a cottage industry in the building. His business, Recreate, Inc., has at least one employee but no more than three, and he expects little traffic. Dick noted that the agricultural soils were professionally investigated. Ray said that there could be unlimited parking in the field, and that there is already a gravel
drive. Utilities will be underground electric. He plans to phase the project, and the next level would be septic. There will be no exterior lighting or signage other than an entrance light. The phone line will be underground. The building will be heated with wood. It is to be located in the woods at the end of the road.
Michael Hinsley, Lyme Fire Chief, read his letter of comment, noting that he will require access to a complete set of drawings for a full technical review. His prime concern is the need for a hydrant in the pond that will make water accessible within 10 feet of the road and an easement for use of the hydrant. He would give until July 1 for installation. He also recommends a fire alarm system. He added that he had evaluated the pond on Davison Lane and deemed that it is too far away and not accessible. Ray said he supports the idea of a hydrant but that the pond close to his building is surrounded by ledge. Mike explained that he cannot tank water up the steep Pinnacle Hill Road, and that without construction of a hydrant he cannot access the water in the nearby pond. Ray
said he thought that it is impractical to impose the hydrant requirement. Dick asked why this would be required when it was not required for a house, which has more impact. Mike said he has required it for a single family home, and gave an example. Ray said that an alarm system
could cost $3,000-5,000 and that a hydrant could cost $5,000-10,000 even though he has 200,000 gallons of water in the pond above the barn, and questioned Mike’s authority to require them. Dick referred to section 10.16, saying that there is no requirement for the Planning Board to agree with the Fire Chief. Mike cited sections 10.5.9.1 and 10.5.10. Dick said that the board has the authority to waive requirements because this is a cottage industry. Mike said that the water supply for fire-fighting is not adequate. Ray asked if he was building a simple barn whether the comments would apply, and noted that there are many more cottage industries on Pinnacle Hill Road, including Wayne Pike’s large shop, that do not have such water access required. Mike said that because of a recent change following construction of
the Hano house on Acorn Hill Road, this is a new requirement.
The board then reviewed the information needed for site plan review, and voted, on a motion by John Stadler seconded by Dick, to waive 10.4, 10.5.3, 10.5.5, 10.5.9, 10.5.9.3, 10.5.9.5, 10.5.12, 10.6.5, and 10.7. John Billings said that the application is therefore deemed complete, and opened the public hearing on the case. Hearing no public comment, he closed the hearing and reopened the public meeting.
Dick reviewed section 12.20.A of the zoning ordinance. Ray said he planned to have the structure look like a barn, and would use parts of old structures. Regarding section 12.20.A.11, Mike said that the structure would not create an additional burden on town fire protection because the present Recreate shop is located near a hydrant. He is weighing in only because there is currently inadequate water that he can access with a fire truck. Dick pointed to the board’s authority to impose conditions in 12.20.B. David said that the proposal has to meet specific and general standards of 12.20.A and meets all except water supply for fire fighting. Dick suggested requiring a fire protection plan approved by the Fire Chief. Ray pointed out that if he fired his employee, he could
save $15,000 because he would not have to apply for a cottage industry. Mike explained that the alarm system is a request, not a requirement. Members agreed that the only unresolved issue is fire protection.
David moved to find that the property satisfies all the requirements of the zoning ordinance, and is approved on the condition that water supply for fire protection purposes should be developed to the satisfaction of the Fire Chief. The motion was seconded by John Stadler. David, John, and John Billings voted in the affirmative, and Dick voted in the negative, saying he considered the requirement unreasonable. The board voted unanimously that the project meets the requirements of site plan review, on a motion by David seconded by John Stadler.
Ray said that the process to gain approval for this structure had taken 14 weeks, and that he had had to hire much professional help to navigate through it, something which might be out of the reach of many applicants. He said that the burden the town puts on applicants is onerous, especially the imposition of requirements for an alarm system and fire protection system. Mike reminded that the recommendation for an alarm system has no force.
Dick and David both distributed copies of their suggested language on the definition of lot. Dick will ensure that absent members receive copies.
Meeting adjourned 9:15 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Adair Mulligan, Recorder
| |
