Newton Board of Appeals
P.O. Box 378
Newton, N.H. 03858
MINUTES OF THE MEETING of January 20, 2015
CALL TO ORDER at 7:30 PM by Chairman Tom McElroy
ROLL CALL: Chairman Tom McElroy, Vice-Chairman Alan French, Bradley Cardoso, Jack Kozec, Alternate Michael Connolly
Absent: Dana Allison, Alternate Ken Pelletier
Guests: Attorney P. Parry, Nancie Conlon, Scott Frankiewicz (engineer), Abutters: Megan Sweeney, Margaret Sweeney, Dan Sweeney, Roger Hamel, John & Nancy Harland, Dave Constantino, Cherie Berry, Jill Meuse, Steve & Charlene Becht, Jason Piterak, Lynne Jeffrus , Rick Milner, (representative of the Planning Board).
Mr. Connolly was made a voting member.
ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES:
A motion was made by Mr. Kozec to accept the minutes of the meeting of December 16, 2014 with the following amendment “Roger Hamel was not the representative of the Homeowners Association”. Second by Mr.French. Motion passed with a unanimous vote.
NEW BUSINESS:
Nancie Conlon
7 Bear Hill Road
Newton, NH 03858
(Map #010-05-013-1)
The Applicant is requesting sideline setback variances for additions to the home, which were built prior to her ownership and without the proper permits (a variance of 9‘ 9” for the already constructed deck, and a 6’4” variance for the already constructed octagonal addition. Newton Residential A Zone Regulations: Section XV, paragraph 3 (location on lot).
Attorney Philip Parry explained the need for sideline setbacks. A permit had been issued, to a previous owner, JULY 6, 2009 for a 10’11” octagonal addition. There was no permit available for the deck construction.
Review of plan.
Review of Criteria:
- Public interest – all agree
- Spirit of ordinance – all agree
- Substantial justice – all agree
- Values of surrounding properties – all agree
- Hardship – all agree
A motion was made by Mr. Cardoso to grant the two variances: a 9’9” variance for the already constructed deck, and a 6’ 4” variance for the already constructed addition, for property at 7 Bear Hill Road, in Newton, as per Drawing #2078 – W. DWG, Job No. 14-2078, drawn by Surveying & Engineering Consultants & Associates, Inc., of Plaistow, NH. Second by Mr. Kozec. All in favor. Motion passes.
The Applicant was reminded that it was necessary to obtain another permit. Also, the 30-day waiting period was explained.
7:45 pm : Mr. Kozec made a motion to close the first Public Hearing. Second by Mr. Connolly.
All in favor. Motion passes.
- Review for Legends Baseball, LLC
Lot 27-3 Puzzle Lane
Newton, NH 03858
(Map #014-01-027-3)
The Applicant is requesting numerous variances– (Within 200’ structure setback for baseball field, parking areas, access road, sidewalks, walkways, landscaping, drainage, & related infrastructure & appurtenances – no buildings, within 75’ front yard setback for baseball field, batting cages, parking areas, access road, sidewalks, walkways, landscaping, drainage, and related infrastructure & appurtenances – no buildings), and also within 50’ wetlands No-disturb setback for wall, fence, movable bleachers, track, poles, scoreboard , and all appurtenances thereto) from the Town of Newton Zoning Ordinance Section XXV, Paragraph 1 – Light Industrial/Commercial Zone Area Regulations, Location on Lot.
At the last meeting, members of the Board had requested that 2 plans be submitted: 1. A sub-division plan, and 2. Baseball field area plan, so they could be dealt with separately . There are 2 separate issues. One should be dealt with first. If the Board grants variances for the sub-division/ road plan, then the Applicant could go ahead with the baseball field plans. The Board felt that this was not done as requested. Attorney Parry explained that the first 4 variances requested were on the roadway. The remaining 7 were concerning the baseball field area.
Mr. Frankewicz, engineer, provided everyone with copies of the plans…and the need for 11 variances.
Mr. McElroy expresses the Board’s desire to do a site walk of the property.
Mr. Kozec is concerned about the roadway. He suggests that the roadway should be addressed before variances for baseball fields can be considered.
Mr. Frankewicz explains that the road is going to be a 24’ wide pavement road, a standard town road.
Discussion and questions:
Distance to property lines… what happened to 200’ that voters requested?
24’ drop, from high to low - yes
Pavement or paths for handicapped – yes
Permanent structures on site: no
Sprinkler system – not yet, still under discussion
Speaker system – nothing loud enough to even disturb other field activities
Lighting – no
Gate at entrance to road to be maintained – no, taken down (will mean police patrol)
Signage / lighting at entrance – still under discussion
Attorney Parry begins review of variance requests. The first four, (concerning the road), need to be revised. Points and measurements on the other side of the road (abutters) need to be included.
Attorney Parry requested that David Constantino, of Legends Baseball, tell the audience about the business itself. He explained that the hours of operation (at maximum) are 7 am to 8 pm, from April through October. The facility is closed during cold/winter months. It’s mostly tournaments. Mr. John Harland, of Dogwood Lane, enquired about lights, noise levels, security. He was told no lights, no speaker systems, possible field rentals, maintenance workers, and security lights, only if the town requested. There would be a portable rest room trailer provided.
Rick Milner, Administrative Assistant to the Planning Board, requested the need for separate decisions on these matters. Also, that plans be stamped to facilitate viewing by the Planning Board.
Sandy, from 10 Howard Lane, stated that there were only 55’ from the proposed road to her property line. She also voiced concern about additional fields being built.
The abutters were reminded that this was a ‘Light Industrial Area’.
Stephen Becht, of 20 Ridgewood Road, Plaistow, voiced concern about the use of a public address system, and noise ordinances. Who is to decide the acceptable level of sound?
Mr. French explained that the Board of Appeals deals with the dimensional aspects of the property, not the physical restrictions on the use of the property. Those would be Planning Board issues. Megan Sweeney also voiced concern on the physical restrictions that could be imposed.
The Board tried to explain that not every property can conform to the 200’ setback. That is where the Board of Appeals comes in, to grant variances.
Mr. Milner said there were always other options. There is more land available out back.
Mr. Becht inquired about a cul-de-sac, and the wetlands. What would happen to the water if the lawns were fertilized, watered, and cut on a regular basis? He was told that there would be a fully engineered plan presented, at the request of the Planning Board.
Nancy Harland of Dogwood Lane inquired about the rights of citizens. Property owners had purchased and built in a quiet residential neighborhood. It is far from that now. It was again pointed out that this area was zoned ‘Light Industrial’.
Mr. McElroy returned to the discussion of the site walk. Mr. Kozec made a motion to go on the site walk in February. Mr. French invited all the Abutters to come on the site walk. He requested that Attorney Parry get a letter of approval for the Board and all the Abutters to do the site walk together or separately if needed. The walk was then scheduled for Saturday, February 7 at 7:30 am. Everyone should meet at the front gate on Route 108.
An Attorney for the Property owner questioned the need to open communications with the Planning Board, on an informal basis. Discussion ensued on restrictions, public meeting laws, quorums and other restrictions.
Mr. Becht inquired if variances were also needed from Plaistow. Mr. Milner replied “yes” & that this was already in the works.
The second Public Hearing will be continued at the next meeting, Tuesday, February 17, 2015.
Discussions followed.
The Public Hearing for Baseball Legends was adjourned at 9:20 pm and will meet again in February.
OLD BUSINESS:
None
ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made at 9:30 PM by Mr. McElroy to adjourn. Second by
Mr. Kozec. All in favor! Motion carries.
Next meeting will be Tuesday, February 17, 2015 at 7:30 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeannette Clark, Secretary
| 
