Planning Board
Tuesday/September 21, 2004
Members Present: Barbara Freeman (Chair), William Weiler (Vice Chair), Al Bachelder, Travis Dezotell (Alternate), Peter Fichter (Alternate Ex-Officio), Lacy Cluff (Alternate) and Ken McWilliams (UVLSRPC).
Mrs. Freeman opened the meeting at 7:10 p.m.
The Board reviewed the minutes from 8/14/04 and made corrections. A motion was made to accept the minutes as corrected. It was seconded. All were in favor.
The Board reviewed the minutes from 9/7/04 and made corrections. There were some comments towards the end of the meeting that were missing. The Board asked Mrs. Cluff to review the tape and submit another draft of the minutes.
Mrs. Freeman passed out a letter that she had drafted to the State regarding Mt. Sunapee’s proposed Master Plan to be reviewed at the next meeting.
Paul LaCasse, Code Enforcement Officer, passed out some materials on what other Town’s were charging for building permit fees vs. what the Town of Newbury was charging. He said that Sutton’s fees were low, New London’s and Claremont’s were higher and Newport’s were about equivalent. He said that the reason that he was approaching the Planning Board regarding these fees was because the Selectmen wanted him to revise the fee schedules.
Mr. Weiler said that we should only be charging what it actually costs for the service. He said that we would also need a list of what we were not charging for.
Mr. LaCasse said that the Town was not charging for demolition, electrical and plumbing.
Mrs. Freeman said that perhaps the Selectmen feel that the fees are not covering Mr. LaCasse’s costs.
Dennis Pavlicek, Town Administrator, said that the Town was averaging $13,000 a year in fees, but paying Mr. LaCasse an excess of that.
Mrs. Freeman said that she recommended that Mr. LaCasse, with the help of Mr. Pavlicek, do an analysis of the cost and submit a proposal to the Board.
Mr. LaCasse asked if she wanted him to do the proposal for new buildings only.
Mrs. Freeman said that she would like him to do it for everything.
Mr. LaCasse said that he currently only inspected the electrical in new homes. He said that inspecting all electrical work was part of the IRC, but not in the regulations.
Mrs. Freeman said that this would need to be done in two steps. She said that we need to study the existing inspections and fees and decide what fees to change and the Board needs to discuss what to charge for and what to require building permits for.
Mrs. Freeman asked Mr. LaCasse if he could come up with a proposal and come back to the Board so that they could try to get any changes passed this March.
Mr. LaCasse said that he could do that.
Mrs. Freeman introduced Deane Geddes and Elizabeth Ashworth who were both sitting in on the meeting to see if they were interested in becoming alternates on the Board.
Mrs. Freeman announced some upcoming meetings and events and said that they would all be posted on the Events Board if anyone was interested.
Mrs. Freeman gave some updates on projects that were going on. She said that Provan and Lorber had been reviewing the Allwood subdivision and reporting to Cal Prussman, Highway Administrator. The developer was doing what was recommended. Mrs. Freeman said that the materials that the developer had been using in the Southview subdivision were not meeting Mr. Prussman’s approval and there had been an ongoing debate.
Jim Powell, Selectman, said that Mr. Prussman contacted the company that the developer of Southview was purchasing the materials for the road from. He found out that it was not just asphalt. It was reclaimed material that included materials that came from gas stations and was mixed with sand. The Selectmen had met with Robert Scott, one of the developers of Southview, and he admitted that it did not meet the Town’s standards. He said that Robert Bell, the other developer of Southview was going to be coming in to talk to the Selectmen at their next meeting to discuss the issue.
Mrs. Freeman said that the Town was considering a new contractor to take over the mapping of the Town tax maps. She said that the company can do layering of information and could provide a more detailed topographical map of the area. She said that they were going to take aerial photos to establish a base. They could color code wetlands, steep slopes, etc. Mrs. Freeman said that they were going to be doing a presentation to the C.I.P. Committee.
Mr. Fichter asked how often they would do a fly over.
Mrs. Freeman said that they usually just did it once, unless the Town requested that they do it again.
Mr. Powell said that they were very flexible. They could do a fly over say every five years if the Town felt that it was developing rapidly.
Mrs. Freeman said that another benefit of this mapping company was that if the Town wanted to do master planning, they could get very specific topography of certain areas.
Dennis Pavlicek said that the mapping company would also include a street map and a 911 map.
Mr. Powell made a suggestion that the Board have an informational meeting for the public on the changes that were going to take place with the Zoning Ordinances. He said that it was going to be a dramatic change and felt that it was important to go over those changes with the public using some common language so that they understood what those changes were going to be.
Mrs. Freeman said that that was a good idea and that the Board would take it under advisement. She said that the Board would be going over a lot of that information later on tonight.
Case: 2004-006: Continuation of Final Hearing - Angel Hawk - Major Subdivision - Sutton & Nelson Hill Road - Map 48 Lot 599-442.
Notice is hereby given that the Planning Board will receive submission of an application from Angel Hawk, LLC for a final hearing for a Major Subdivision off Sutton Road and Nelson Hill Road, Tax Map 48 Lot # 599-442, on Tuesday, May 18, 2004 at 7:30 p.m. in the Town Office Building at 937 Route 103 in Newbury, N.H. If the application is accepted as complete, a public hearing on the accepted application will commence at the same meeting.
Copies of the plan are available for public review at the Town Office Building during regular business hours.
Mrs. Freeman read the above public notice and explained that this hearing was continued. She said that it was her understanding that the developer was going to be asking for a continuation tonight as well.
Robert Stewart from RCS Designs introduced himself as the authorized agent for Angel Hawk, LLC. He explained that they were going to need an extension because there were some off site issues that they needed to work out due to changes in the intersection as recommended by Lou Caron. They had to do some additional work due to these changes and they were unable to complete it in time for the Board and consulting engineer to review it prior to tonight’s meeting. He said that they had also been working on the easements.
Mr. Stewart said that they had decided to eliminate lot 21 and make it part of the open space. He said that they decided to eliminate that lot because of the length of the driveway and Selectman Wright’s comments about the deer yards in that area. He said that that change would be reflected in the new plans and the rest of the lots would remain with their original configurations.
Mr. Stewart said that at the last meeting the Board told him that they would need to get approval from the Town of Sutton because part of lot 13 was in Sutton. He said that per RSA 674:53, lot 13 was considered a separate lot of record and therefore did not require further subdivision.
Mrs. Freeman asked if they were two separate lots of record.
Mr. Stewart said that they were and that they would be sold separately.
Mr. Bachelder asked how many lots they would have total if that lot were sold separately.
Mr. Stewart said that it was a separate lot of record today and the total number of lots would be 20.
Mrs. Freeman said that because the access to the subdivision was from Sutton Road, according to the RSA’s they would need a sign-off from the Town of Sutton.
Mr. Stewart said that they were currently working with the Town of Sutton to get that.
Mr. Stewart said that Eckman Engineering would be taking Mr. Caron’s recommendations regarding the drainage and road design.
Mrs. Freeman said that she felt that it would be useful to have the Board’s observations from the site visit.
Mr. Bachelder said that he walked the trail and was confused as to where the property line was.
Mr. Stewart said that the trail started on an abutting piece of property, went off site and then came back onto the property and stayed on site out to Old Province Road. What they would like to do was make the trail contiguous and have created an easement. He showed the location of the trail on the plans.
Mrs. Freeman asked if it was going to be common land.
Mr. Stewart said that it was a public trail.
Mrs. Freeman asked what protected it if it crossed private land.
Mr. Stewart said that it would have easements and each deed would have the same language.
Mrs. Freeman said that Ron Williams was unable to attend tonight’s meeting, but submitted a letter with his comments. His comments were as follows:
1. The property is very rugged and has many beautiful features.
2. There are many ledge outcrops and the overall site is similar to characteristics typical of expansive granite ledge throughout.
3. There are numerous steep slope to extremely steep slope and cliffs with sharp drop offs.
4. There are many signs of wildlife habitat.
5. There are many stone walls which are not shown on the proposed plans.
6. A number of proposed driveways are at places with steep slope and limited site distances.
7. The proposed internal roadway has a generally straight alignment and involves areas of very steep slopes and heavy rock outcrops.
In his letter, he also said that in his opinion, the proposed subdivision layout does not respect the physical and ecological features of the land. The proposed density was excessive for the area and the site. He said that heavy construction, blasting and excavation, would be required to develop the site as proposed and would violate zoning and subdivision conditions.
Mrs. Freeman said that she had all the same concerns that Mr. Williams did.
Mr. Weiler said that he had a concern about the road alignment. He said that the proposed road would go through rock instead of around and he found steep slopes on a section of the road. According to the regulations, it is prohibited to develop in steep slopes.
Mr. Bachelder said that there was a lot of acreage, but not a lot of buildable space.
Mr. Stewart said that the developer felt it was important to maintain an internal road, so that all the houses wouldn’t be all in a row. He said that they could have done it different, but this was what they felt would make an attractive subdivision.
Mrs. Freeman asked for additional comments from the Board.
Mr. Dezotell said that he didn’t feel that the subdivision followed the natural topography of the land either.
Mr. Fichter said that he noticed a number of proposed driveways that appeared to be in the steepest areas and could have been better placed (Lots 16, 17 & 18).
Mrs. Freeman said that she also thought that they were all struck by the historic aspect of the property that was not addressed. There were old maple sugaring sites that the McNamara’s had expressed concerns about in a letter submitted to the Board. There were also a lot of stone walls that she felt efforts should be made to preserve.
Mr. Fichter said that there were a number of places where guard rails were going to be needed be placed and felt that that would take away from the rural character of the neighborhood. He asked if it was possible to choose a different route to minimize that.
Mr. Stewart said that the guardrails are required by the regulations when you have a 2:1 slope. He also said that some driveways would show improvements to help the site differences in the revised plans. He also said that he would look into the maple sugaring lots and preservation of the stone walls.
Mr. Stewart offered for the Board to pick two lots and he would do a development plan for them.
Mrs. Freeman said that they need the calculations for the wetland and steep slopes. They only had the final number now.
Mr. Stewart asked if she wanted the steep slopes and wetlands to be separate.
Mrs. Freeman said that she did.
Mrs. Freeman opened the hearing to public comment.
Tom Vannatta, ZBA Chair, said that he walked the site and had similar concerns to Board.
Mr. LaCasse asked about the dead end road from a safety standpoint.
Mr. Weiler said that the road had been discussed in the past and it was within the regulations standards.
Marcie McNamara, an abutter, asked what the total acreage of the open space was with the addition of lot 21.
Mr. Stewart said that it was an additional 3.78 acres.
Ms. McNamara said that with that addition, they are now approaching 10% open space. The regulations recommend 10-15%. She also said that there were more deer yards in the area other than lot 21. She said that there were also deer yards in the back of lot 20. She said that Mr. Caron had said that most of the traffic would go through Newbury. She did not feel that that was accurate because it would be easier to access the highway through Sutton.
Mr. Weiler said that he wanted to clarify that the regulations recommend 5-10% for open space.
Ms. McNamara asked if this subdivision were approved, what regulations would effect how much could be cut for views.
Mrs. Freeman said that the regulations prohibit cutting in steep slopes.
Mr. Stewart said that the land drops off so steeply that not a lot of cutting was going to be required.
Robert Nelson, an abutter, asked for clarification as to whether or not they were going to need to go before the Sutton Planning Board.
Mr. Stewart said that the Town line was going to separate lot 13, so they did not need to go before the Sutton Planning Board. However, access to the subdivision would be from Sutton Road, so they would need to get permission from the Selectmen in Sutton, but not the Planning Board.
Mr. McWilliams recommended that the Board consult with the Town Attorney about lot 13.
Sue McNamara said that there had been a lot of accidents in that area and was concerned about the driveways on lots 17, 18 and 19. She felt that perhaps two of those lots should be combined.
Mrs. Freeman said that the Board agreed with her.
With no further questions from the public, Mrs. Freeman closed the hearing to public comment.
A motion was made to continue the hearing on October 19, 2004 at 8:00 p.m. It was seconded. All were in favor.
Mrs. Freeman said that Mr. Weiler had handed out final drafts of the subdivision applications. She said that these drafts reflected the changes that were discussed at a previous meeting and she would like to vote to approve the applications tonight.
A motion was made to accept all three applications (Conceptual, Preliminary and Final). It was seconded. All were in favor.
Mrs. Freeman had emailed everyone the 6th draft of the Residential Zoning. She said that the subcommittee decided to fine tune the final issues with the Planning Board.
The Board reviewed the draft and made typographical corrections.
Mr. Powell asked if these regulations were going to effect individual lots.
Mrs. Freeman said that they were only going to apply to subdivisions.
Mrs. Freeman said that in future meetings, they want to apply these regulations to certain areas in Town and analyze. She said that they needed to be applied so that the Board could determine if they were possibly too restrictive or not restrictive enough.
Mr. Powell was concerned that these new regulations would change the value of the land, especially with the unbuildable lots.
Mrs. Freeman said that the existing lots would be grandfathered. However, the building envelope would affect all lots, so that would be a conflict.
Mr. Bachelder said that it could be re-worded so that you did not have to subtract for deer yards and aquifers on existing lots.
Mrs. Freeman agreed that it needed to be clarified.
Mr. Weiler said that earlier in the meeting Mr. Powell had suggested having an informational meeting, but he was concerned if they did that, there would be a rash of subdivision applications.
Mrs. Freeman agreed with him and suggested having the public hearing before the informational meeting.
The Board felt that would be a good idea.
Mrs. Freeman asked the Board if they wanted to continue this discussion about the residential zoning at a working session.
The Board agreed to have a work session on Wednesday, October 13, 2004 at 7:00 p.m.
A motion was made to adjourn. It was seconded. All were in favor. Meeting adjourned at 10:05 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Lacy L. Cluff
Land Use Board Coordinator
| 
