Town of Newton, New Hampshire
Newton Planning Board
Public Hearing
June 13, 2006
1. Call to Order
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:15 PM, declaring a quorum of eight members present. The meeting was posted in four town locations: Rowe’s Market, Newton Post Office, Newton Junction Post Office and Newton Town Hall and was published in the May 30th edition of the Carriage Towne News. 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
Deborah Finnegan
Kip Kaiser
Rich LeClaire
Leslieann Petz
Kim Vaillant
Also, present:
Reuben Hull – Circuit Rider/planner
Eric Weinreib – Town Engineer
Bob Donovan - Selectman
Frank Gibbs – Road Agent
Bill Ingalls – Fire Chief
3. Manifest
The manifest for the Operating Budget was presented for payment. Ms. Pettit reviewed the charges for DTC and discovered that some of them could be applied to a specific applicant: 125 Development. She made the adjustments and announced that the actual charge to the Legal line was $450.00 and that the remaining $649.70 could be billed through NPREA.
Motion made by Ms. Allen with a second by Ms. Miles to approve the manifest for the Operating Budget as amended. The motion passed unanimously.
Motion made by Ms. Allen with a second by Ms. Miles to apply $649.70 from the DTC bill to the NPREA account and to approve the expenditures from the NPREA account with a new total of $8,691.66 with the Legal Fee portion amended to be $1,429.70. The motion passed with a vote of 6-0-1, with Ms. Vaillant abstaining.
Newton Planning Board
Manifest – Operating Budget
June 13, 2006
Budget Item Balance Expense New
Balance
Legal Fees - DTC $4731.62 $1100.70 $3630.92
(Non-applicant related)
Total Expenditures from Operating Budget $1100.70
Newton Planning Board
Manifest –NPREA
June 13, 2006
Category Charge Amount Received
Eagle-Tribune
Legal Ads $ 95.06 Two applicants
(Marra and LeClaire)
DTC
Sargent Woods $ 150.00
Applicant Review
Fitzgerald Estates $ 285.00
Applicant Review
Second Storey Homes $ 345.00
Applicant Review
Sub-Total Legal Charges $ 780.00
Air & Noise Compliance $2,100.00 Retainer of $1,200 received, $900.00 due from
Sound Study for McDonough Mr. McDonough. Please pay $1200.00.
Altus
Ned Nichols (P3723) $ 186.80
Nordic Woods (P3751) $ 239.20
Fitzgerald Estates (P3790) $ 907.49
Father & Son (P3822) $1003.52
Puzzle Estates Lot 27-3 $1028.84
(P3839)
Donald Richards (P3967) $ 767.72
Winston Nomine (LaBelle) $ 448.54
(P3968)
Woodhouse (P3914) $2084.79
Sub-Total Altus $6666.90
Total NPREA $8741.96
4. Approval of Past Meeting Minutes
The Board reviewed the minutes of April 25, 2006. The following changes were noted:
1. Page 1 into Page 2: Strike first and last sentence.
2. Page 3, change first sentence to read: Mr. Hull said that there was a process that the applicant would need to follow.
3. There was extensive discussion about how TA Wrigley had contacted the State regarding the non-permitted excavation at the Fitzgerald site on Pond Street and that the State had inspected and charged the appropriate amount of excavation tax after the fact. It was stated that this initial, extensive discussion had been reflected in the March 28th minutes.
4. Ms. Pettit requested that the acronym for Passed Unanimously (PUNA) no longer be used and to write out the results of the votes.
Motion made by Mr. Kaiser with a second by Ms. Allen to approve the minutes of April 25 as amended. The motion passed with a vote of 6-0-1, with Ms. Finnegan abstaining.
5. John & Constance Marra and Marley Builders
23 Whittier Street
Tax Map 6/Block 9/Lot 9
This was a public hearing in which the applicants were requesting review and approval for a five-lot subdivision on 23 Whittier Street. The property is owned by John & Constance Marra and is referenced as Tax Map 6/Block 9/Lot 9. Ms. Pettit read the abutter list aloud. The applicant was represented by Lavelle Associates and James Lavelle provided the presentation. He said that the site was comprised of 9.4 acres and this would be subdivided into five lots. He said that there was one lot with an existing house and the existing garage was slated to be removed. He said that it was 500’ to the end of the cul-de-sac and there was a small wetlands crossing. He explained the plans in order.
Cover sheet: General layout, abutters list, locus, title block information.
Sheet 2: lots were shown at :50 scale, there are two culverts , each placed in a separate direction to help maintain the integrity of the wetlands.
Sheet 3: Contained same information as Sheet 2 as well as topography and soil types. This had been stamped by Timothy Ferwerda as both a wetlands and soils scientist.
Sheet 4: Roadway
He said that the rest were standard detail sheets and no reviews had been received from Altus or the TRC.
He said that all lots met or exceeded the Town’s requirements.
State subdivision and a dredge and fill permits had been applied for.
Ms. Miles said that there was a great opportunity here for financial gain and she said that all dwelling should be in compliance wit the current zoning. She said that she also had an issue with the existing well being capped. Mr. Lavelle asked for a poll of the Board with regard to the existing house. Ms. Marra said that the house had been built in 1929.
Mr. Kaiser said that the existing house fit within the building envelope. There was a suggestion that a driveway for this lot be created off of the proposed road. Chief Ingalls reminded those present that the address of the house would need to be changed if this was done. There was a question as to whether or not the Town should have been notified because of the Peanut Trail. Mr. Lavelle said that the Peanut Trail would not be affected by this development.
Mr. Hull said that if the frontage for the existing lot was changed to be off of the proposed road, it would then be conforming. There was some discussion about what the address would become and where the frontage would be located. Mr. Lavelle said that the developers were undecided as to the status of the existing house. Mr. Kaiser asked if the Board was requesting sidewalks and noted that the utilities would be underground. Mr. Lavelle said that the maximum grade of the road was 3.5%. He said that the proposed culvert was 15” and was being installed to maintain the integrity of the wetlands. He added that the houses would have sprinklers.
A lady from the audience (no name provided) asked if there were setbacks or screening required where the property abutted the Peanut Trail. Mr. Lavelle said that there would be no impact on the Peanut Trail.
Motion made by Ms. Allen with a second by Ms. Finnigan to invoke jurisdiction on the Marra plan. The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Lavelle said that an engineering review had not been received yet and he requested a continuance. Mr. Hull said that there had been discussions about sidewalks in urban development versus rural with a donation equal to the cost of the same in lieu of sidewalks.
Motion made by Ms. Allen with a second by Ms. Vaillant to continue this hearing until July 11, 2006. The motion passed unanimously.
6. Rich LeClaire & Sons Builders LLC
9 Pond Street
Tax Map 10/Block 2/Lot 15
This was a public hearing in which the applicants were requesting a Conditional Use Permit for the purpose of constructing an accessory family apartment. The property is owned by Rich LeClaire and Sons Builders LLC , is located at 9 Pond Street and is referenced as Tax Map 10/Block 2/Lot 15. Both Mr. LeClaire and Ms. Miles stepped down from this hearing because Mr. LeClaire was the applicant and Ms. Miles was an abutter. Mr. Kaiser and Ms. Petz were appointed to sit in their place. Mr. LeClaire said that this was a non-conforming lot of record and everything on it currently was slated to be removed and a new single-family home with an accessory apartment will be built. He said that everything was in compliance with zoning except the lot size and he was scheduled to be on the agenda of the next Board of Appeals
meeting. Ms. Allen reminded him that both the house and the apartment must share one heating and electrical system. He said that it would.
Motion made by Ms. Allen with a second by Mr. Kaiser to approve the use of the apartment at 9 Pond Street but because the lot was of non-conforming size, the application for an apartment was denied. The motion passed unanimously.
7. Randall C. Saunders (SAU-CUP-040406)
76 Peaslee Crossing Road
Map 7-Block 3-Lot 28-17
This was a continuation of a public hearing in which the applicant was requesting a Conditional Use Permit for the purpose of establishing an accessory apartment, which is pre-existing but not approved. Mr. Saunders had been unable to produce any plans for his home. He said that he was unsure as to what information was needed.
The assessing card was printed and two residences were listed on it but some of the information was unclear. The Chairman requested that Ms. Cockerline speak with Ms. Lewy the following day to discertain the information. The original subdivision plan was printed and reviewed but it did not reveal much information about Mr. Saunders home. Mr. Kaiser asked that Mr. Saunders submit a floor plan of the house that showed the location and size of the apartment.
Motion made by Ms. Finnigan with a second by Mr. LeClaire to continue this hearing until July 11, 2006. The motion passed unanimously.
8. Janice and Robert Woodhouse (WOO-SBD-041806)
Peaslee Crossing Road
Map 13-Block 3-Lots 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, & 12
This was a continuation of a public hearing to consider the request of Janice and Robert Woodhouse for a proposed 19-lot, residential subdivision on property located on Peaslee Crossing Road, Tax Map 13, Block 3, Lots 6,7,8,10,11, & 12. Jurisdiction has been invoked on this plan. Ms. Vaillant, an abutter to this application stepped down from the board and Ms. Petz was seated in her place.
James Lavelle of Lavelle Associates provided the presentation. He said that comments had been received from Altus Engineering; 66 in all and that numbers 1-28 had been addressed at this point in time. He said that other comments had been discussed between Sublime and Altus. He said that a meeting was planned for all three parties before the July 11th Planning Board meeting.
He said that the driveway permit had been received from NHDOT.
He said that a parcel of 4.93 acres would be donated to the town connecting to the Trolley Way for walking paths. He said that the requirements for sidewalks or trials would be fulfilled. He said that some of the Conservation Commission members supported this. He said that the property line at the existing house would not be changed and it would continue to have frontage on Peaslee Crossing Road but the driveway would be located off of the proposed road. There had been a previous suggestion that the applicant meet with various departments such as Fire, Police and the school district. Mr. Woodhouse had met with these departments and received input. Mr. Hull said that there had been a threshold discussion about a future right-of-way or extension at the end of the cul-de-sac. He said that he hoped that
the applicant received a written report of the TRC meetings. Mr. Woodhouse said that from the end of the cul-de-sac to the next property (Owens) was almost 400’ and a future design here would be of no benefit. He added that he had received no response from Ms. Owen with regards to any future potential subdivision on her property. Ms. Miles said that there were two distinct issues at hand: there were excessively long driveways and an excessively long road. She said that it would be in the best interest of the town to show a future right-of-way. She advised Mr. Woodhouse to hear the Board carefully in what they were saying.
Ms. Pettit suggested that a traffic study be done as a result of discussions at the June 5th TRC meeting. There was considerable discussion about a traffic study. Mr. Woodhouse read from his letter dated May 4, 2006. He stated in this letter that he would be willing to donate $1,500.00 to the town towards the improvements at Peaslee Crossing Road and Smith Corner Road. Ms. Finnigan said that she questioned this and that a full-blown study might not be needed and could be very expensive.
She added that $1,500 did not buy a lot of infrastructure. Mr. Lavelle suggested asking Mr. Weinreib if a traffic study was needed and if so, what the scope should be. Mr. Weinreib said that there should be a traffic study done and there could be some good number’s from NHDOT because Peaslee Crossing Road and Route 108 were State roads. Mr. Kaiser said that any impact should be noted. Mr. Gibbs said that there were issues at the Peaslee Crossing Road and Route 108 intersection and the State would have fixed them three or four years ago except for a landowner who did not cooperate. Mr. Woodhouse reminded the Board about the donation of the 4.93 acres saying that this was larger than any of the proposed lots and there had been a considerable cost to change the plans. Ms. Pettit said that while the donation
of the land to the town was appreciated it would not be a trade-off for a traffic study.
Motion made by Ms. Allen with a second by Ms. Miles to require a traffic study; either a new one or a revised Pernaw for the Peaslee Crossing Road and Smith Corner Road intersection and Peaslee Crossing Road and Route 108 intersection. The motion passed with a vote of 6-1.
Mr. Hull said that the future connection must be shown or a waiver to that requirement must be submitted. That requirement is found in Appendix B, Section 2.8, and last paragraph:
All dead end roads shall have provisions for future extension to a through road.~ This requirement may be waived where the developer can demonstrate that this extension is not feasible
Mr. Lavelle said that with regards to sidewalks, in lieu of the land donation the Town was not ready for sidewalks; they were maintenance problems, not wanted and they would request a waiver is this is a requirement.
David Bickum said that he lived next to the trail and he wondered about a connection. He said that he would request that the trail be “non-motorized” and he was hoping for a vegetated buffer at the end of his property.
Motion made by Ms. Miles with a second by Ms. Allen to continue this hearing until July 11, 2006. The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Weinreib said that he was looking for guidance for the following issues:
Ø Lighting, upon entering the site
Ø Sheet flow on left for dispersing flow to wetlands. He offered that there could be detention ponds.
Ø Requirement for a Homeowner’s Association to deal with the issues.
9. Donald Richards (RIC-SBD-041806)
47 Peaslee Crossing Road
Map 13-Block 2-Lot 12
This was a continuation of a public hearing for a two-lot subdivision. The property is located at 47 Peaslee Crossing Road and is owned by Donald Richards. Dennis Quintal of Civil Construction provided the presentation. All previous comments from departments and the Town Engineer were addressed.
Motion made by Ms. Allen with a second by Ms. Miles to approve the Richards Subdivision plan as submitted. The motion passed unanimously.
10. Raymond & Jane LaBelle (LAB-SBD-041806)
38 North Main Street
Map 10-Block 3 Lot 4
This was a public hearing for a two-lot subdivision. The property is located at 38 North Main Street, is owned by Raymond and Jane LaBelle. Dennis Quintal of Civil Construction provided the presentation. All previous comments from departments and the Town Engineer were addressed. Mr. Quintal said that State Subdivision Approval had been received and a copy was provided to the Board. He said that a foundation drain was an option depending on the septic. He said that the septic design had not yet been approved but was available. He said that there was an easement for non-conforming wells that abutted. Mr. Hull said that per Mr. Weinreib, easements should be in place. Mr. Quintal said that they could be replaced in a better location and that wells used to be placed anywhere. Mr. Weinreib
said that he thought this was an opportunity to deal with non-conformity and agreed with Mr. Quintal. He said that although it was a good idea it was not required. Mr. Quintal said that trees would only be cut for clearing the driveway and for sight distance.
Motion made by Ms. Allen with a second by Ms. Miles to approve the LaBelle Subdivision plan as submitted. The motion passed unanimously.
11. Request of Coleman McDonough for the Board to review proposed tenants for Lot 27-3.
Mr. McDonough was accompanied by his attorney Gregory Michaels. Attorney Michaels recapped the issues at hand:
o Tenants
o Stop work orders from the Building Department
o Site issues raised by Altus’ inspection
Attorney Michaels said that they hoped to resolve the issues and move forward with the project. There was some discussion about the Commercial Business Form. Ms. Pettit said that the form had been sent to all departments but no feedback had been received as of this meeting. There was discussion that the form should be adopted and used.
Mr. Hull suggested that this could be an Interim form with a six month time frame. Mr. Kaiser said that the business owner should not be put through this twice and that the form could be revised later. Mr. Weinreib suggested that MSDS sheets be submitted. This is included on the form.
Ms. Allen said that the form could be approved now and the review it at a later date.
Motion made by Ms. Allen with a second by Ms. Miles to adopt the Commercial Business Form in its current configuration. The motion passed with a vote of 6-0-1, with Mr. LeClaire abstaining.
Motion made by Ms. Vaillant with a second by Ms. Allen to review the form at the next work session. The motion passed with a vote of 4-2-1, with Ms. Miles abstaining.
Robert Donovan complained about the fees as listed on the form. Ms. Pettit said that the fee structure could be amended by the Selectmen.
The following businesses were reviewed based on letters that had been submitted.
C.P. McDonough Construction Corp.
Units 7,8, & 9
6 Puzzle Lane
Motion made by Ms. Pettit with a second by Mr. LeClaire to approve the applicant’s request for tenancy at the above listed address as an approved use in a commercial/light industrial zone with the following stipulations:
1. There will be twelve employees.
2. Hours of Operation: 7-3:30 PM
3.420 square feet to be used as office space with the remaining 3,780 square feet to be used for storage for the company’s supplies as outlined in the attached letter received by the Board.
4. Twelve parking spaces are to be allotted for this business.
5. Commercial Business Form to be completed and submitted.
The motion passed unanimously.
Richard’s Steel and Iron, Inc.
Units 1-4
6 Puzzle Lane
Motion by Ms. Pettit with a second by Ms. Miles to approve the applicant’s request for tenancy at the above listed address as an approved use in a commercial/light industrial zone with the following stipulations:
1. There will be 6 full time shop and road personnel and 4-6 part time and subcontracted employees.
2. Hours of Operation: 7- 5 PM, Monday – Friday and 8-12 (Noon) on Saturdays.
3. Approximately 5,000 square feet will be used for turning steel stock into Steel pan stairs, Spiral stairways, handrails and miscellaneous fabrication of brackets and such per the attached letter received by the Board.
4. 6-10 parking spaces are to be allotted for this business.
5. Commercial Business Form to be completed and submitted.
The motion passed unanimously.
Precision Custom Surfaces, LLC
Units 5-6
6 Puzzle Lane
Motion made by Ms. Pettit with a second by Mr. LeClaire to approve the applicant’s request for tenancy at the above listed address as an approved use in a commercial/light industrial zone with the following stipulations:
1. There will be 6 full time employees.
2. Hours of Operation: 7- 6 PM, Monday – Friday.
3.Approximately 2,450 square feet will be used for kitchen countertop fabrication and light cabinetry production per the attached letter received by the Board.
4. 6 parking spaces are to be allotted for this business.
5. Commercial Business Form to be completed and submitted.
The motion passed unanimously.
Home Energy, Inc.
Unit 12
6 Puzzle Lane
Motion made by Ms. Pettit with a second by Mr. LeClaire to approve the applicant’s request for tenancy at the above listed address as an approved use in a commercial/light industrial zone with the following stipulations:
1. There will be 6 full time employees.
2..Will be used for storage of lumber, staging and related building equipment as well as a small woodworking shop to prepare some interior cabinet units per the attached letter received by the Board.
3. 6 parking spaces are to be allotted for this business.
4. Commercial Business Form to be completed and submitted.
The motion passed unanimously.
Brausa International Granite Imports
Units 13, 14, 15
6 Puzzle Lane
Motion made by Ms. Pettit with a second by Mr. LeClaire to approve the applicant’s request for tenancy at the above listed address as an approved use in a commercial/light industrial zone with the following stipulations:
1. There will be 5 full time employees.
2. Hours of operation: 8-5, Monday - Friday
3..Will be used for warehouse and distribution of granite and marble products with possible future fabrication per the attached letter received by the Board.
4. 6 parking spaces are to be allotted for this business.
5. Commercial Business Form to be completed and submitted.
6. No after hours deliveries is permitted at this time.
7. No showroom use at this time.
The motion passed unanimously.
Site Update – Puzzle Lane
Mr. Weinreib said that he was on-site this morning and he did not have a written report as yet but it would be forthcoming. He said that the site looked significantly different and that significant strides and efforts had been made. High points of the site walk are listed below:
v He said that four overhead doors had been approved but seven existed
v Parking will be different than shown on the approved plan
v No dumpster
v No turn-arounds
v Handicapped ramp moved
v Sidewalk layout is different
v No canopy
v Swale around the access drive not constructed properly
v Landscaped islands missing – all pavement
v Driveway for lot 27-4 installed but no drainage, no crown, no guard rails, cracks on edge of roadway
v North side swale not installed
v Lot 27-4 stabilized, loamed, seeded
v Stockpiled stumps
v Drainage different from approval
v Leaching pond – not constructed per the approved plan
v Roof drains in rear need stone drip edge – doesn’t drain in the proper direction
v Swales not deep enough, not per plan
v Community water supply required for 24+ persons – need to review
v Loamed, seeded, lighted, buffer re-vegetated with native species but these are dying
Mr. Weinreib said that he was not prepared to respond to the letter but some things had been addressed. He said that he would recommend the continuation of improvements.
Ms. Miles asked Mr. McDonough if he could fix the detention pond. Mr. McDonough explained the “as-built” changes. He said that the dumpster would be relocated, the canopies would be installed and all issues would be addressed. Ms. Miles asked about the landscaped island. Mr. McDonough said that the trees and shrubs had been overly planted and he thought it looked nice and it was more conducive to the use. He invited the board members to drive by and look at what’s been done. He disagreed with the plantings in the center of the cul-de-sac saying that it was a safety issue. Mr. Gibbs said that he preferred a landscaped island. Mr. Weinreib said that he had no preference. Ms. Miles suggested a “short list” of acceptable “as built” changes and
assurance that the detention pond would be corrected and that the road quality is what it should be.
Ms. Pettit asked if the Board was in a position to move forward on this. Mr. Nichols said that the planting was specific to the Certificate of Occupancy and now the plantings were dying. He said that the line of sight issues were solved and now there were problems.
Motion made by Ms. Vaillant with a second by Mr. LeClaire that the Planning Board was going to advise the Building Department that they can resume all site activities for lot 27-3 but no Certificates of Occupancy can be issued until the site is in compliance. The Planning Board feels that the project is moving towards substantial compliance. This recommendation is only applicable for the activities to the approved site plan. The motion passed unanimously.
12. Request of Dennis Fitzgerald for the Board to grant an extension to his conditional approval and to increase the number of units at Fitz Estates from 44 to 48.
Ms. Pettit said that the Board had received a request from Dennis Fitzgerald to increase the number of units at Fitz Estates from 44 to 48 if they had been made available and for a six-month extension to his conditional approval. Mr. Fitzgerald was unable to attend this meeting.
Motion made by Ms. Allen with a second by Ms. Vaillant to approve 48 units for Fitz Estates and a six-month extension for the conditional approval for the same. The motion passed unanimously.
13. 71 Pond Street
Mr. Shaun Perry came before the Board to discuss the drainage issues in front of his property at 71 Pond Street. He said that it had not been constructed correctly and that Todd Fitzgerald had offered at his expense to add a culvert. Ms. Allen said that she had lived on Pond Street for more than 30 years and it had always been wet. Ms. Miles advised that the Board take this matter under advisement and Ms. Cockerline would seek out further information about what had been approved for this development.
Motion made by Ms. Miles with a second by Ms. Finnigan to adjourn at 11:15 PM. The motion passed unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Sally E. Cockerline
A.A.
Newton Planning Board
| 
