TOWN OF NEW BOSTON
NEW BOSTON PLANNING BOARD
Minutes of October 13, 2009
The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Chairman Stu Lewin. Present were regular members Douglas Hill, Peter Hogan and Don Duhaime, and Ex-officio Rodney Towne. Also present were Planning Assistant Michele Brown and Recording Clerk Valerie Diaz.
Present in the audience for all or part of the meeting were Raymond Shea, LLS, Michael Dahlberg, LLS, Sandra Martel, and Joe Beauregard.
Discussion, re: Potential Zoning Ordinance Amendments for 2010
The Chairman noted that the Board had received a list of potential zoning ordinance amendments for 2010. He suggested that the Board discuss which amendments would be adopted.
Douglas Hill addressed audience member Raymond Shea, LLS, and inquired if he was present with regard to a miscellaneous matter. The Chairman decided to suspend the discussion about zoning and address the matter involving Raymond Shea, LLS.
Miscellaneous Business
4. Letter received October 6, 2009, from Raymond P. Shea, Sandford Surveying and Engineering, Inc., to New Boston Planning Board, re: request for subdivision approval extension, for Jacqueline Bussiere et al, Tax Map/Lot #12/88 and SIB Trust (Formerly Mark LeBlanc 2004 Trust), Tax Map/Lot #12/89 and SIB Trust (Formerly One Chestnut Hill Development, LLC), Tax Map/Lot #12/93-38, for the Board’s action.
The Chairman asked Raymond Shea, LLS, to give the Board a brief synopsis. Ray Shea, LLS, stated that the above-referenced subdivisions were linked together by an extension of Susan Road and Indian Falls Road. He continued that the subdivisions were approved in May and July of 2007. He stated that last year a request for an extension was made and granted. He further stated that the reasons for the previous extensions were the death of Emile Bussiere, Sr., the state of the economy, and the three owners could not come to an agreement on how to move forward. He noted that Trustee Emile Bussiere, Jr., purchased the Mark LeBlanc subdivision as well as the One Chestnut Hill subdivision resolving the ownership issues. He noted that the purchase of the One Chestnut Hill subdivision was made in August
2009 which has not left enough time for satisfying bonding conditions and state approvals that need updating and renewal. He noted that the applicant had Thibeault Corporation on board to construct the road.
The Chairman clarified that only a one year extension was being requested and asked the Board for any comments or questions.
Peter Hogan stated that he believed many changes had been made to the subdivision and as such he had a reasonable expectation that the project would move forward. He also noted that he did not have any problems with granting an extension.
Ray Shea, LLS, noted that State approvals needed to be updated and that was the reason for the extension request.
The Chairman asked the Board for any further questions or comments. No discussion occurred. The Chairman asked the Board for a motion on extending the conditions precedent and subsequent.
Peter Hogan MOVED to grant the extension as outlined by the October 6, 2009, letter, from Sandford Surveying to extend the conditions to November 8, 2010, and November 8, 2011. Don Duhaime seconded the motion. DISCUSSION: Don Duhaime noted that repair work was needed to Indian Falls Road. Ray Shea, LLS, stated that Mark LeBlanc was responsible for the pending repairs. The motion PASSED unanimously.
Discussion, re: Potential Zoning Ordinance Amendments for 2010, cont.
The Chairman noted that the Workforce/Multi-Family Housing Committee would be present at the October 27, 2009, Planning Board meeting and would propose possible amendments at that time.
The Chairman stated that with regard to the Personal Wireless Services Facilities ordinance three changes may be needed: (1) the definition of an RF engineer, (2) diameter of antenna arrays, and (3) deciding whether or not the timing of operation requires that the tower to be operational within nine months of approval. He asked the Board if these issues should be addressed with the 2010 zoning amendments.
Peter Hogan stated that there was not a definition of an RF engineer and inquired if there had been any concerns with regard to the diameter of the antenna arrays. The Chairman believed that because technology changed since the original ordinance was created the diameter of the antenna arrays may not be current. Peter Hogan inquired that if an RF engineer did not exist and the term appeared to be a typographical error could the term be removed and corrected as the Board saw fit. Rodney Towne added that a typographical error had not occurred and that the intent of the Committee was to have an engineer of some kind evaluate the output of the device. Peter Hogan stated that he understood and agreed with Rodney Towne’s statement. He continued that he did not want to eliminate the review of the
engineer from the ordinance but wanted to treat this as a typographical error. The Planning Assistant noted that the use of RF Engineer was not a typographical error. Peter Hogan again stated that an RF Engineer did not exist. Rodney Towne stated that the use of RF Engineer was not necessarily a typographical error but could be viewed as inaccurate and inappropriate information. He further stated that he was unsure if the problem needed to be presented to the voters to make the appropriate changes. Douglas Hill suggested replacing the RF engineer with “Engineer.” The Chairman believed that replacing the RF Engineer with “Engineer” would not be a sufficient replacement as a specific engineer was required. Peter Hogan recommended reviewing past evaluations to determine what type of engineer had completed the required work.
The Chairman noted the question of the diameter of the antenna arrays could be further looked into.
The Chairman asked the Board if there were any issues with requiring towers to be operational within nine months of approval.
Douglas Hill believed that nine months was not long enough and suggested a limit of one year with the ability for an extension.
Peter Hogan inquired what current time limit was. The Chairman answered that currently the ordinance allowed for nine months and added that the recently approved cell towers may not be completed within the nine month requirement.
The Chairman moved on to the next potential zoning ordinance amendment that had been suggested by the Small Scale planned Commercial District Committee. He continued that the Committee had made recommendations to change the zoning to commercial for the Klondike Corner area, a section of Route 77, and a section of Route 13 South.
Rodney Towne questioned the location of the zoning change on Route 77. Douglas Hill asked to see a map of the proposed locations. A map was displayed to show Tax/Map Lot #5/28, 21-2, 23, 25. Don Duhaime noted that changing the zoning to commercial would tie all the other commercial surroundings together. Peter Hogan asked if the owners of the property were okay with the zoning change. Don Duhaime stated that the Committee had never approached the owners and that the proposed zoning change would need to be presented as a warrant article. He also noted that it was the Committee’s intention to have the locations zoned as Residential/Commercial. Rodney Towne thought the Board should ask the surrounding property owners for their thoughts on
rezoning their property. The Board agreed that letters should be sent to the property owners that will be affected by the proposed zoning change to advise them of the recommended change and ask their opinions. Douglas Hill noted that the Town did not currently have a Commercial/Residential zone. He continued that he felt that the Board should start a discussion to that effect. Peter Hogan stated that discussions about Commercial/Residential zoning had taken place years ago. He continued that problems occur when the residents want to put limitations on the commercial aspect of the zoning. Don Duhaime stated that the Committee agreed to leave the areas zoned the way they currently were “slash commercial.”
The Chairman stated the other proposed changes re: signs were with regard to current allowance to date, different sizes, free standing versus on a building, signs based on lot size, sign based on the size of the building needed. Peter Hogan stated that the real estate office on River Road had a sign that was legal size. The Chairman stated that documentation regarding that particular sign’s approval had been lost during the floods, and he did not believe that sign was of legal size. Don Duhaime stated that the Committee wanted the Board to review the zoning ordinance and decide what to do with what the Committee was proposing. He continued that the Planning Board needed to come up with standard specifications. Rodney Towne believed that sign size
based on the size of the lot had merit. The Chairman asked if the Committee had looked at other towns. Don Duhaime answered that the Committee had reviewed other towns and had details on what constituted a reasonable sign.
The Chairman noted that there were several housekeeping items that could be discussed further at the October 27, 2009, meeting.
VISTA ROAD, LLC
Submission of Application/Public Hearing/Major Subdvision/2 Lots
Location: Wilson Hill Road
Tax Map/Lot #6/33
Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District
Present in the audience were Michael Dahlberg, LLS, Sandra Martel, and interested party Joe Beauregard. The Chairman read the public hearing notice. The Chairman noted that there was an outstanding balance as well as a few items missing from the checklist. He pointed out that some waivers had been requested that needed further discussion because of a change in the state laws.
Michael Dahlberg, LLS, indicated that he was unsure if the outstanding balance was due to Vista Road, LLC, or to the town. The Planning Assistant noted that an outstanding balance of $125.00 was owed to the town. She further explained that the applicant was erroneously charged for a minor subdivision when in fact the project was a major subdivision.
The Chairman pointed that the applicant was creating a new lot on a Class 6 road. He continued that because the Town did not allow for new development on anything less than a Class 5 road the applicant needed to request a variance from the ZBA. Michael Dahlberg, LLS, stated that he called the Planning Office with regard to this matter and was told to proceed with a note stating it was a non-building lot. The Chairman noted that the act of creating a non-building lot was not allowed and restated that a variance was needed. The Chairman stated that the applicant could continue with their presentation but the application would need to be adjourned until a variance was obtained.
Michael Dahlberg, LLS, inquired about the acceptance of the waivers that had been requested, i.e. sediment control, traffic study, environmental study, fiscal study, watershed outline, drainage, and driveway upgrade. He further stated that all the above issues were addressed at the site plan level and he did not understand the need to replicate all the data for a non-building lot. The Chairman noted the NH RSA addressing waivers eliminated the wording “in the Board’s opinion” with regard to identifiable hardships. He continued that this change requires the applicant to show any identifiable hardship. Douglas Hill suggested that all the work for the application was complete and having to repeat the work would be a hardship.
The Chairman noted that the Coordinator thought the plan note re: no residential construction should be placed in the deed because the plan is not enforcing and the town did not allow for a non-building or cell-tower -only lot to be created. He continued that by placing the note in the deed the Town was ensuring that the applicant would need to come back to the Board for approval of development of the site other than the cell tower should the plan fall through. Michael Dahlberg, LLS, understood the Board’s position but noted the purpose of the plan is to build a cell tower and should that plan fall through then the plan would not be valid. Douglas Hill suggested that the applicant create a deed restriction that would state if the lot was not used for a cell tower then the lot would be dissolved. Michael Dahlberg, LLS, disagreed that the lot would be dissolved should the cell tower plan fall through, stating that the applicant would come back to the Board for a variance for an
alternative use. The Chairman pointed out that the Board would be subdividing the land and creating a lot. Peter Hogan added that other instances have occurred in the past where smaller lots were incidentally created and applicants have requested variances to allow them to build. Douglas Hill suggested adding wording that the road would need to be upgraded to a Class 5 road before the lot would be allowed to become a building lot. The Chairman advised the applicant to speak with the Coordinator further on this issue prior to the submitting a final application. Michael Dahlberg, LLS, felt that the ZBA would place a restriction on the variance.
The Chairman asked the applicant to present their plan to the Board.
Michael Dahlberg, LLS, pointed to a displayed Tax/Map Lot #6/33. He noted that the location was on the easterly side of Wilson Hill Road and was 139 ½ acres in size. He continued that the applicant planned to have a 5 acre lot on the northern half of the frontage approximately 500 feet off the road. He added that the proposed lot had an existing gravel access road. He noted that currently there was one house across the street. He also stated that topography had been completed that showed wetlands and existing conditions.
Peter Hogan asked how many feet of Class 5 road ran along the frontage. Michael Dahlberg, LLS, stated approximately 390 feet was Class 5 road. The Chairman added that the Class 5 road ends before the proposed 5 acre lot. Peter Hogan asked the Board how this proposal differed from the approved lots on Lull Road that only required the applicant to approve to the end of his driveway. Douglas Hill believed that in the situation Peter Hogan was referring to the applicant went all the way to the property line. Rodney Towne agreed with Peter Hogan that the applicant only had to go as far as the driveway cuts. Peter Hogan noted that the 5 acre lot might be subdivided as it met the frontage requirements. Douglas Hill added that the road would have to be changed to a Class 5 road.
Rodney Towne inquired whether the abutter was currently on a Class 6 road. Michael Dahlberg, LLS, replied that the abutter was on a Class 6 road. Peter Hogan suggested creating a note that stated any use on the lot other than a cell tower would require upgrade of the road.
The Chairman asked the applicant for the reason of the subdivision. Michael Dahlberg, LLS, answered that the applicant wanted to keep title clean and clear.
The Board decided that a site walk was not necessary as one had been previously conducted. Peter Hogan noted that he did not have any issues with the requested waivers. The Chairman noted that he also did not have any issues with the waivers; however, he would like the wording to reflect the changes that have recently been made to the RSA.
The Chairman asked the Board for any further questions or comments. No discussion occurred. The Chairman addressed the audience for any questions or comments.
Joe Beauregard of 68 Popple Road asked the applicant for clarification of the height of the cell tower above the tree line. The Chairman stated that the tower would extend twenty feet above the tree line. Douglas Hill noted that no changes had been made to the plan since the approval. Joe Beauregard asked if the company that is installing the cell tower purchased the 99 acres of land. Douglas Hill answered that the company is leasing the property from Vista Road, LLC.
The Chairman indicated that for approval of the application the applicant needed to pay the $125.00 outstanding fee, update the waivers, request a variance from the ZBA, and speak with the Coordinator about her concerns with the Class 6 road.
Douglas Hill MOVED to adjourn Vista Road, LLC, Submission of Application/Public Hearing/Major Subdivision/2 Lots, Location: Wilson Hill Road Tax/Map Lot #6/33, Residential-Agricultural “R-A” District to November 24, 2009, at 7:30 p.m. Peter
Hogan seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
Miscellaneous Business, cont.
1. Approval of minutes of September 8, 2009, distributed by email.
Douglas Hill MOVED to approve the minutes of September 8, 2009. Don Duhaime seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
2. Approval of minutes of September 22, 2009, distributed by email.
Douglas Hill MOVED to approve the minutes of September 22, 2009. Don Duhaime seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
3. Letter received September 25, 2009, from Suzanne O’Brien, Recording Clerk, to New Boston Planning Board and Nic Strong, Planning Coordinator, re: resignation as Recording Clerk for the New Boston Planning Board, for the Board’s information.
The Chairman acknowledged receipt of the above-referenced matter and no discussion
occurred.
5. Discussion, re: proposed improvements to Neville Mill Hall, 35 Mont Vernon Road, roof over handicapped ramp. (Plan available in office)
The Chairman stated that the owner planned to construct a roof over the handicap ramp that was being built. Rodney Towne asked if the ramp was located at the old main entrance. The Planning Assistant clarified that ramp was located at the new main entrance. The Board determined that no further site plan review was necessary.
6. Discussion, re: mobile generator, Sizemore Truck & Auto, Tax/Map Lot #5/29-1.
The Chairman explained that the site plan would be modified to accommodate a mobile generator to be parked at the above-referenced location at the beginning of the summer and removed at the end of the summer. He continued the purpose of the generator was to provide supplemental energy for air conditioners. Rodney Towne believed that the transformers would not be removed from the location. The Planning Assistant believed that the transformers would be removed with the generator at the end of the summer.
Peter Hogan MOVED to approve the mobile generator site as an amendment to the Sizemore Site Plan. Douglas Hill seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
7. Copy of September 2, 14, and 28, 2009, Workforce/Multi-Family Housing Committee Minutes.
The Chairman acknowledged receipt of the above-referenced matter. He noted that the Committee would be present at the next meeting to present their results.
8a. Copy of Chapter 307 SB 147-FN-FINAL VERSION, re: unnecessary hardship, for the Board’s information.
8b. Copy of article titled NEW LAW DEFINES UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP, by Cordell A. Johnson, from September 2009, NH Town & City, for the Board’s information.
The Chairman noted that 8a. and 8b. were related. He advised that any specific questions should be directed to the Coordinator.
9. Copy of Chapter 73, HB 156-LOCAL- FINAL VERSION, 2009 SESSION, re: third party review & inspections, for the Board’s review.
The Chairman acknowledged receipt of the above-referenced matter. No discussion
occurred.
10. Copy of Chapter 114, HB 44-LOCAL- FINAL VERSION, 2009 SESSION, re: local land use board’s alternates, for the Board’s information.
The Chairman explained that this meant the Planning Board Chairman was able to
appoint an alternate into a vacant full seat until such time that a permanent replacement was appointed by the Board of Selectmen, rather than the current practice of appointing the alternate on a meeting by meeting basis.
11. Copy of Chapter 292, HB 43 – FINAL VERSION, 2009 SESSION, re: subdivision & site plan waivers, for the Board’s information.
The Chairman noted that the above-referenced change added a second reason for
granting waivers. He continued that in addition to the Board reviewing unnecessary hardship in the granting of waivers they could also consider specific conditions of the property if granting the waiver would perpetuate the spirit and intent of the regulation.
12. Copy of Chapter 49, HB 210 – FINAL VERSION, 2009 SESSION, re: minutes, for the Board’s information.
The Chairman explained that meeting minutes completion time has changed from 144 hours to 5 business days.
13. Copy of Chapter 266, SB 189 – FINAL VERSION, 2009 SESSION, re: land use board’s decisions, for the Board’s information.
The Chairman explained that the above-referenced matter required that decisions be sent to the applicant and posted. He noted that the decision needed to be recorded at the Registry of Deeds at the applicant’s expense.
14. Memorandum dated October 6, 2009, to Chairs, Planning Boards, from David Preece, AICP, Executive Director, Southern NH Planning Commission, re: Invitation to participate in the Regional Comprehensive Plan Update: SNHPC Economic Development Survey, for the Board’s information.
The Chairman acknowledged receipt of the above-referenced matter. He noted that he had a link available to anyone who wished to complete the survey.
15. Letter received October 8, 2009, from Dwight D. Sowerby, Esquire, Attorney at Law, Drescher & Dokmo, P.A., to Nic Strong, Planning Coordinator, Town of New Boston, re: Town of New Boston Commercial Design Guidelines, for the Board’s information.
The Chairman stated that the above-referenced letter explained that the Board could not create regulations for the proposed Commercial Design Guidelines. He also noted that Dwight D. Sowerby, Esq., believed that providing picture examples of what not to do in reference to the Commercial Design Guidelines could create liability issues. The Chairman stated that the Committee responsible for creating the Commercial Design Guidelines no longer existed and suggested having the Coordinator implement the changes. Don Duhaime suggested getting the Committee together for one meeting to review the proposed changes.
16. Email copy from Jack Munn, SNHPC, to Stuart Lewin, Planning Board Chairman, re: Regional Economic Development Plan – September 29, 2009, Meeting Notes and Plan Update.
The Chairman acknowledged receipt of the above-referenced matter. He noted the next meeting would be held in November 2009.
17. Read File: Notice of Public Hearing from Town of Antrim, re: installation of a wireless telecommunications facility.
The Chairman acknowledged receipt of the above-referenced matter. No discussion
occurred.
18. Letter dated October 14, 2009, to Mark Leblanc, re: pavement crack on Indian Falls Road, for the Board’s review.
The Board reviewed the above-referenced letter with regard to releasing the maintenance security to the Town of New Boston to repair Indian Falls Road.
Peter Hogan MOVED to implement what the letter says to do. Don Duhaime seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
19. Discussion, re: Page Lane compliance inspection, Tax Map/Lot #2/62
The Planning Board Assistant stated that she had spoken with Kevin Leonard, P.E.,
regarding the as-built and noted a few minor adjustments needed to be completed on the as-built.
She continued that in the interest of scheduling a compliance hearing a site walk needed to be scheduled. The Board agreed to schedule a site walk once the project has been completed.
Peter Hogan MOVED to adjourn at 7:50 p.m. Douglas Hill seconded the motion and it PASSED unanimously.
Respectfully Submitted,
Valerie Diaz, Recording Clerk
| 
