Newton Planning Board
Plan Work Session
April 25, 2006
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:17 PM declaring that a quorum of seven members was present. The meeting was posted in four town locations: Newton Post Office, Newton Junction Post Office, Rowe’s Corner Variety and Newton Town Hall. There was no challenge to the legality of the meeting.
2. ATTENDANCE
The following members were present:
Kim Pettit – Chairman
Ann Miles – Vice-Chairman
Mary Allen
Kip Kaiser
Richard LeClaire
Gary Nelson – BOS ex-officio member
Kim Vaillant
Also present:
Reuben Hull – Circuit rider/planner
Sharon Cuddy-Somers – Board Counsel
Dennis Fitzgerald
Frank Gibbs
Ned Nichols
Attorney Ed Woiccak
Ms. Pettit apologized for taking the agenda out of order but the meeting would begin with Attorney Somers.
Attorney Somers asked for an update regarding the Offsite Improvements. Mr. Nichols said that the situation had remained unchanged. Mr. Fitzgerald said that he had posted his fair share and Ms. Pettit said that the board was in receipt of the letter from the bank with regards to this.
There was discussion about the signing of mylars and then having them held in escrow. Mr. Nichols said that he would not be posting all of his bonds but he would like his mylars signed within a week of the bonds being posted.
Attorney Somers said that the Chairman could sign the mylars at the right time in the office, with permission of the Board. There was some discussion about signing the mylars and Mr. Fitzgerald said that to do this it would be like an insurance policy. Attorney Somers asked what would happen if Mr. Fitzgerald did not receive his DES permits. She asked if the Town could retain the $55,000.00 either way. Mr. Fitzgerald said that the conditions would be met.
Attorney Somers said that there were some fundamental problems with retaining the mylars in escrow because there was nothing in the regulations or statutes regarding this practice. The statute did say that with a signed mylar, there might have to be a revocation in the event that conditions were not met. The Board could potentially be in a bad situation if the mylars were recorded without the conditions having been met.
Motion made by Mr. Kaiser with a second by Ms. Allen that the Chairman, Vice-Chairman or designee can sign the mylars for Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr. Nichols, once their respective existing conditions of approval had been met, outside of a formal meeting or public hearing and to record the same within one week’s time of the signing. The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Nichols said that he would like something in return for his $90,000.00. Attorney Somers said that this was a condition of his approval. She said that it was always the understanding that a re-assessment would need to be done if for some reason not all three parties moved forward with their projects. Ms. Miles asked when a plan became official; at signing or at recording. Attorney Somers said that she had never been asked to sign a mylar and hold it in escrow so she did not know how to answer that. Mr. Fitzgerald asked if she had ever held a deed in escrow and she said that it was not the same thing; a signed mylar was governed by statute. Mr. Fitzgerald said that this conversation would be continued because he would like to speak to his attorney and Attorney Somers said that she would be happy to review
anything that his attorney prepared. She said that this situation had already been in litigation and she was sure that no one wanted to go there again. Ms. Vaillant asked if this was being requested because there had been past problems with mylars being signed in a timely manner. Mr. Fitzgerald said that there had been no problems but it was like buying a car you couldn’t drive.
Ms. Pettit asked if the gentlemen were saying that they would withhold the money until the mylars were signed. Ms. Miles said that the Board could re-assure them and that there was no ill-will on the Board’s behalf.
Mr. Nichols wished to discuss the fact that he was expected to post bonds for issues that Mr. Fitzgerald did not have to bond for because he was told that these were covered by occupancy permits. He spoke about the restoration bond, drainage and community center. He said that he had to build the community center but he requested that the Board reconsider this. Ms. Pettit said that there were a lot of issues here. Ms. Allen said that this would require a public hearing. Mr. Kaiser said that this was all a part of a phased project. He asked if this should be re-opened. Attorney Somers said that some of these issues were key. Mr. Nichols said he really wanted some modifications. Ms. Vaillant said that she was concerned that the Board was just hearing about these issues now.
Attorney Somers said that engineering input would be needed, abutter notification, noticing, etc. She said that this was separate and distinct from the Offsite Improvement bond. Ms. Allen said that the Fitzgerald project was being done in one phase and was not a like-project to Nichols. Attorney Somers said that all that could be done was to receive the request to modify the approval and then conduct a public hearing. Mr. Nichols said that he did not think that phasing was relevant. Ms. Vaillant said that if they were like projects she would entertain a review but because they were not, she had a problem stepping back in time and rehashing these issues. Ms. Miles said that some flexibility was needed as projects progress and the Board should work with him and she did not think that there was a case for this to change at this time.
Mr. Hull said that there was a process and the will to do this. He said that maybe there were issues on Phase 1 that could be open for discussion. He asked if the Board would want engineering input but that right now he was unfamiliar with this project but the question was would the Board entertain this and then schedule it for public hearing.
Motion made by Mr. Kaiser, with a second by Ms. Allen to hold a public hearing for the question of bonding on Nichols site, Sargent Woods. The motion passed 5-1-1 with Ms. Vaillant abstaining.
Altus Contract
There had been discussion about bidding out the Engineering contract. Packets were distributed. The contract expired on February 22, 2006.
Motion by Ms. Pettit with a second by Ms. LeClaire to extend the Altus contract, via letter until the end of June, while deliberating how to proceed. The motion passed with a vote of 6-0-1, with Ms. Miles abstaining.
Ms. Miles asked Mr. Hull if he could provide an RFP for the bidding process. Ms. Pettit said that there would be a TRC meeting on May 1st and this issue could be further discussed at that time.
Appointments
Ms. Pettit said that there were four individuals interested in the full member and alternate positions.
Deborah Finnegan, Traffic Engineer in Portsmouth. More than 12 years experience. Resides on Pond Street. Provided a brief overview of her qualifications and interests.
Also James Doggett, Ms. Allen spoke about his qualifications, saying that he had served as a full member last year and would not consider an alternate position.
Motion by Pettit with second by LeClaire to appoint Deborah Finnegan. Passed 6-0-1, with Ms. Allen abstaining.
Motion made by Ms. Allen and seconded by Mr. Nelson to appoint Carl Malm as an alternate member to the Planning Board for one year and Leslieann Petz as an alternate member to the Planning Board for two years.
Fitzgerald – Pond Street
Ms. Pettit recused herself from this as she is an abutter to this project.
Mr. Fitzgerald said that he was not trying to pull a fast one by changing certain issues at his approved two-lot subdivision on Pond Street but sometimes situations changed, there were on-site adjustments and he thought submitting an as-built would be fine. He said that he had met with Mr. Weinreib.
The topography had been done and an as-built plan should be submitted in time for the next meeting. Mr. Kaiser asked when this was approved and he was told that it was approved in June 2005. There was discussion about the amended plan and why a Cease and Desist had not been issued.
Mr. Nelson said that he did not want to verbally relay messages from the Planning Board to the Selectmen and that everything should be in writing. Ms. Vaillant said that the former ex-officio member had inspected the site and had had no issues with it. The excavation was now completed and Mr. Fitzgerald will be taxed. Mr. Fitzgerald asked who had complained and he was told that several neighbors and residents had complained and Ms. Pettit said that as an abutter, with concern for run-off onto her property, she had complained as well.
Distribution of member packets was discussed. Pertinent information regarding applications, including comments from the Town Engineer and the Circuit Rider will be mailed, faxed or E-mailed to the members on the Friday prior to the meeting.
The submittals received for the May public hearing were discussed. There was extensive discussion regarding completeness vs. accuracy.
Abutter form from Rochester offered for adoption from Mr. Hull.
Letter from C. McDonough requesting to be on 5/9/06 meeting agenda was read and discussed. The letter also stated that three businesses were preparing to move into the site. The Board asked if a submittal had been received and they were told there had been no submittal.
Ms. Miles said that the Board had been generous with this applicant because the road had not been built properly. It is the understanding of the Board that Mr. McDonough is seeking a denial for a second building on-site. Ms. Miles said that nothing had been remedied so why would the board entertain seeing him. It was felt that the Building Inspector could be used as leverage. Ms. Allen said that he should be told unless there are changes, nothing will be done. Ms. Pettit suggested that a plan be sent to Altus. Mr. LeClaire said that those businesses should be in before the board as well for site review.
A Dealer Desk application was received for 78 South Main Street for Automotive Inspection. Mr. Kaiser said that there was an approved site plan for this address.
Motion by Mr. Kaiser with a second by Mr. LeClaire to pull file for this to be reviewed at the next meeting. The motion passed unanimously.
A letter was received from Whispering Pines regarding their annual spring cleanup. The Chairman said that this site would need to be watched. It was suggested that the Board ask for schematic plan on where work will be done and hope that it will not affect any future projects. Mr. LeClaire asked about renting out boat slips. Mr. Malm said that there was huge State involvement for docking boats.
Ms. Pettit said that there had been issues about State correspondence being brought forth for Board review.
Mr. Kaiser asked if the Board was done with Country Pond Fish & Game. Ms. Pettit said that the Board needed to keep an eye on this.
A Dredge and Fill packet was received from Woodhouse and it will be reviewed at the TRC meeting.
Manifest.
Newton Planning Board
Manifest – Operating Budget
April 25, 2006
Budget Item Balance Expense New
Balance
Facilities Expense
ChoiceOne Telephone $ 611.82 $83.43 $ 528.39
Other Expenses
Legal Advertising $1500.00 $81.58 $1418.42
Administrative Expenses
Recording Fees $ 200.00 $6.00 $ 194.00
(Internet copies)
Total Operating Expenses: $171.01
Newton Planning Board
Manifest – NPREA
April 25, 2006
Category Charge Amount Received
Legal Ads $113.64 $60.00 x two applicants = $120.00
Seacoast News (Marra and Essex Equity Trust)
Recording Fees $ 26.00 UNK (Breeze Realty Account)
Total NPREA Charges $139.64
Motion by Allen second by LeClaire to approve Operating Budget manifest for April. PUNA
Motion by Allen second by LeClaire to approve the NPREA charges. PUNA.
NPREA Review
Ms. Pettit said that they were waiting for formal report from Mason and Rich.
The Administrative Assistant asked for permission to have Ms. Wrigley authorize East Coast Office Machines to change the Board’s code on the office copier. This would improve usage tracking.
Motion made by Ms. Allen, with a second by Ms. Miles to authorize changing the copier code. The motion passed unanimously.
Ms. Vaillant spoke about the Day Care business operating on Peaslee Crossing. Ms. Allen said that there needed to be a permit process to insure the safety of the children being cared for. There was also discussion that there were several in-home day care centers operating without review in town and 44 North Main Street was mentioned among them.
Motion made by Ms. Vaillant, with a second by Ms. Pettit to send a letter and application to address the daycare at Peaslee Crossing and 44 North Main Street. The motion passed unanimously.
Motion made by Ms. Miles with a second by Mr. Nelson to adjourn at 10 PM. The motion passed unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Sally E. Cockerline
Administrative Assistant
Newton Planning Board
| 
