Newton Planning Board
Minutes of WORKSESSION and public hearing
june 24, 2008
Page 1 of 7
Planning Board Minutes of June 24, 2008 Work Session
All minutes are in draft form until approved by the Planning Board. Please check subsequent minutes for approval of and/or amendments to these minutes.
1. Call to Order / Attendance: Chairperson, Ann Miles called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. In attendance were: Chairperson Ann Miles; Vice Chairman, Jim Doggett; Planning Board Members, Barbara White and Frank Gibbs; Alternates Mary Sousa and Fred Gundersen; and Administrative Assistant, Lisa Babcock. Minutes were transcribed and typed by Lisa Babcock.
Also in attendance: Selectman, Trisha McCarthy.
Miles appointed Gundersen and Sousa to stand in for Pettit and Vaillant.
1. Maplevale Builders of East Kingston, NH request for a Public Hearing for a Conditional Use Permit for an accessory apartment located at 18 Walnut Farm Road. The property is referenced as Tax Map 13, Block 3, Lot 8-13. Contractor Brian Edney, Realtor Trisha McCarthy, and homeowners Craig and Nicole Jackson were in attendance.
Miles opened the public hearing for Maplevale Builders' Accessory Apartment at 18 Walnut Farm Road.
Mr. Edney displayed a floor plan of the house and stated that the apartment consists of a kitchen, dining area, 1 bedroom and 1 bathroom and is on the 1st floor. He stated that the areas are as follows: common area = 260.5 sf; accessory apartment = 760.2 sf; total area of home = 3,381 sf; and total area of 1st floor = 1316.3 sf.
The Board then asked Mr. Edney several questions which are listed below with his responses:
1) Does the building inspector have a copy of these plans? Yes.
2) Is there one set of utilities? Yes, one meter, one boiler, one well, one septic, one hot water heater, etc.
3) Is there adequate parking for 4 vehicles? Yes, 3 car garage and area in driveway.
4) Is there a separate entrance as well as direct access to the main house? Yes.
Doggett pointed out that the accessory apartment could easily be made into a separate, two bedroom apartment using the common area. McCarthy stated that the study in the common area does not have a closet and therefore would not be considered a bedroom.
Miles stated that if the assessor were to find that the accessory apartment had been changed into a two bedroom apartment, the occupancy permit could be revoked as expressly stated in the Accessory Apartment Ordinance.
Doggett moved to grant approval for the accessory apartment as described at 18 Walnut Farm Road, Tax Map 13, Block 3, Lot 8-13. Second by Sousa. Motion carried unanimously.
Miles closed the public hearing for an accessory apartment at 18 Walnut Farm Road.
2. Maplevale Builders/Walnut Farm Road – Bond reduction request: The Board considered a bond reduction request for the Walnut Farm Subdivision. Miles referred the Board to a letter from KV Partners dated 6/19/08 stating that all work indicated on the bond reduction worksheet (from SEC Associated dated 6/16/08) had been completed.
Doggett moved to approve a bond reduction in the amount of $90,200.00 leaving a balance of $177,075.56 for Maplevale Builders' Walnut Farm Road Subdivision. Second by Gibbs. Motion carried unanimously.
3. E. Estey – requested discussion with Board. Mr. Estey was not in attendance.
4. Zoning Ordinances and Regulations: Dennis Quintal, PE was invited to address the board concerning deficiencies in the current ordinances and regulations. Miles stated that Mr. Quintal is an established engineer who has done a great deal of work in Newton and the surrounding towns.
Mr. Quintal identified a number of areas that, in his opinion, need improvement:
1) The procedures for application review are unclear. He recommended that the board create a checklist of procedures and a procedures manual.
2) There is duplication within the regulations which can create problems when one section is updated, but other sections are not.
3) There is duplication in that some of the ordinances and regulations mirror state regulations. This is problematic when the ordinances fail to keep up with changes made by the state, creating two sets of rules for engineers to consider. He recommended defaulting to state rules whenever possible.
4) Some of the town's regulations and ordinances are more stringent than the state's regulations, without justification. This creates situations in which land owners are restricted from developing their property.
5) The set back requirements force larger lots and bigger houses, but the town must now begin to consider work force housing (aka inclusionary housing).
6) There are older homes in town that are falling apart but the owners cannot afford to fix them. Allowing multi-family homes could alleviate the financial burden so that historic homes could be preserved.
7) He said that having the regulations online is beneficial and also encouraged the continued use of the Technical Review Committee to help bring thoroughly prepared applications before the board.
8) He provided copies of checklists and a procedures manual from Seabrook.
9) He recommended clearly defining the roles of the Town's Engineer and RPC Planner to avoid duplication of effort which is costly to the developer.
10) Subdivision 8.2.10 requires the well radius to be entirely within the boundaries of the lot but the state allows the well radius to extend beyond the lot line if it extends into an area already precluded from development (such as wetlands).
11) The lot shape requirements are too restrictive and don't allow for oddly shaped lots that could be used to avoid wetlands and other natural features.
12) The cluster ordinance has been on the books for a long time but is rarely used. This is an indication that it should be reviewed.
Miles asked Mr. Quintal what he thought about the town developing a municipal water district. Mr. Quintal felt that the town is too small to warrant it. A water utility may be helpful in the higher density and commercial areas in town but is not necessary for more remote areas.
Mr. Quintal said he would provide some more detailed information concerning the regulations and ordinances especially areas of duplication. Miles thanked him for taking the time to address the board.
5. Correspondence
a. Letter from BOS to Hebb dated 5/5/08 re: Twombly Drive: The Board reviewed the letter informing Mr. Hebb that the Town will work with RCCD to finalize Twombly Drive so that it can be accepted as a Town road.
Gibbs stated that the Town's current engineering firm, KV Partners should work on the project not RCCD as the Town had been dissatisfied with some work done by that firm on a different project.
Miles asked if the Town should accept roads in developments in which not all of the homes have been built. Gibbs said that he did not see a problem with the town accepting such roads; however, contractors should be responsible for paying for any repairs if they damage Town roads.
Doggett moved to send a memo to the Board of Selectmen recommending that they use the Town engineer, KV Partners, not RCCD for the Twombly Drive project. Second by White. Motion carried unanimously.
b. Letter from Board of Selectmen re: Smith Corner Road & Peaslee Crossing Road Off-site Improvements dated 6/16/08: The Board reviewed the letter and discussed some of the work left to be done. The Board believed that there are plans to remove some of the pavement on the shoulder of Smith Corner Road. Miles said that the Town engineer should be involved in the project.
Doggett moved to send a memo to the Board of Selectmen enthusiastically encouraging the Town to employ KV Partners to oversee any considered alterations to the intersection, not to remove any pavement from the shoulder of Smith Corner Road and to pave the area where the telephone pole was removed. Second by Gibbs. Motion carried unanimously.
6. Haverhill Boys and Girls Club – Camp Tasker Sign: The Board reviewed a drawing of the proposed signs for Camp Tasker to be placed on Country Pond Road. The drawing from The Sign Center is dated 6/17/08.
The Board did not have any problems with the appearance of the proposed signs but would like more information regarding the placement of the signs.
7. Marley Builders/Katherine Drive – discussion re: final approval: No one was in attendance representing Marley Builders. The secretary explained that the item was placed on the agenda because Steve Ciambelli of Marley Builders had requested a pre-construction meeting and had stated that he was working on the conditions of approval, however nothing had been submitted as of the meeting date.
Miles felt that the developer needed some direction and was willing to meet with him and the Town Engineer to find out where they were at in the process and put together a construction checklist. The Board agreed.
McCarthy stated that the Conservation Commission wanted the 30-foot no cut buffer zone along the Peanut Trail listed as a note on page one of the plans and included in the property deeds. She also stated that Conservation has requested a site walk when the no cut buffer is delineated.
8. Discussion re: Regulations:
Waivers: The Board reviewed Section X of the subdivision and site plan regulations on waivers and some suggested revisions submitted by Atty. Ratigan via e-mail. The proposed revisions are as follows:
Strike section D from the existing Section 10.1 and replace with:
The Board may grant a waiver from any portion of these regulations when, in the opinion of a majority of the members of the Board present and voting, find that:
a) strict conformity would pose an unnecessary hardship to the applicant; and
b) the grant of the waiver would not be contrary to the spirit and intent of the ordinance.
Factors to be considered in whether strict conformity with the regulations would pose an unnecessary hardship may include:
1. Topography.
2. Site features.
3. Geographic location of the property.
4. The Board's familiarity with the property, and whether the additional information or will or will not significantly assist the Board in its review.
5. Size/magnitude of the project being considered.
6. The unreasonable expense of complying with the requirement.
7. The Board's practice of granting such a waiver to similarly situated applicants does not constitute precedence for future similar waivers.
Retain section 10.2 as is and revise section 10.3 to read: "A petition for any such waiver shall be submitted in writing by the applicant with the Request for Waiver of Subdivision/Site-Plan Requirements" form.
Noise: The Board reviewed Site Plan Regulation 7.2.18 which makes an unclear reference to Section XIII of the Zoning Ordinance. The suggested amendment is to strike the words "Section XIII" from the regulation, thus it will read: "In accordance with the Town of Newton Zoning Ordinance, the following …"
PDFs: The Board reviewed a sample regulation requiring the submittal of plans in PDF format as part of the final plan requirements for site-plans and subdivisions. The proposed additions are as follows:
Section (TBD) Final Plan Requirements
A. Submission Requirements
In order to facilitate the on-going development and maintenance of the Town's files, these regulations require applicants to submit, in addition to a recordable mylar, a digital format of the final plan including but not limited to, subdivision plan, lot line relocation plan or lot line verification plan, that conforms to the Town specifications.
1. Waiver of the requirement to submit a plan in a digital format may be granted by a two-thirds vote of the full membership present and voting of the Planning Board.
B. Specifications
Electronic data: acceptance of the digital version of the final plan shall be based on the following:
1. Data format shall include digital parcel lines parcel areas, public easements, wetlands delineations, aquifer boundaries, utility easements and when building outlines are surveyed these shall be included as well.
2. Data shall be submitted on a compact disk CD or digital versatile disk DVD. Media shall be in a .PDF format.
3. Files shall be referenced by Newton Tax Map #, Block # and Lot #.
4. All submitted disks shall be labeled with the following information:
a. Project Name
b. Applicant Name(s)
c. Data File Names
d. Property Owner Name
e. Tax Map, Block and Lot #s
f. Date (month, day and year)
5. If additional plan review should be required; the applicant shall complete outstanding requirements and provide the Town with updated plans.
9. Discussion re: Ordinances:
Water District: The Board reviewed the Water District Ordinance that had appeared on the 2005 Warrant but had failed to gain the necessary 2/3 vote.
Miles asked McCarthy if the Board of Selectmen intend to pursue this Ordinance. McCarthy said yes.
Miles asked the secretary to forward a memo to the Board of Selectmen stating that the Planning Board understands that the BOS will handle the water district ordinance and request a reply from the BOS.
HBB signs: The Board reviewed information regarding sign size for Home Based Businesses. Gibbs suggested allowing up to 2' x 2', double sided signs.
Dogs/Kennels: The Board discussed regulations concerning dogs and kennels. In the towns researched by the secretary, kennels were restricted to certain districts or zones but not otherwise regulated.
Doggett said the Board needed more information to make a decision on an ordinance. Miles suggested contacting the SPCA and checking state guidelines.
10. Acceptance of Minutes
Doggett moved to accept the minutes of 6/10/08. Second by White. Motion carried unanimously.
11. BOS requests meeting with Planning Board re: Policy and Procedures for accepting Town roads:
The Board felt that the policy for accepting town roads was clear-cut and that a joint meeting was not necessary. Miles asked the secretary to send a memo to the Board of Selectmen outlining the procedure as follows:
1) The Town Engineer inspects the road during and after construction and if the road has been constructed per plan provides a Clean Letter to the Planning Board recommending that the town accept the road.
2) The Planning Board reviews the Engineer's letter and after a vote, recommends the road for acceptance in writing to the Board of Selectmen.
3) The Board of Selectmen grants final approval and accepts the road as a town road.
Miles did state however that the Road Agent (as well as Police and Fire Departments) should regularly attend Technical Review meetings to be informed about new projects in town.
12. Installation of external drive: The secretary asked for the Board's permission to have Ms. Maddock hook up the USB drive and back up the Planning Board PC. The Board agreed to the work but said that it should not require 2 hours.
13. Puzzle Lane Update: Miles updated the Board regarding Puzzle Lane, Lot 27-1. She said Mr. McDonough was working on installing a guard rail, putting up a stop sign and striping the parking lot. He was also asked to provide a letter indemnifying the Town of any liability regarding the retaining wall he installed. Mr. McDonough was also informed that there is an outstanding NPREA balance that must be paid before occupancy permits can be signed.
14. Miles moved to adjourn at 10:00 pm. Second by Doggett. Motion carried unanimously.
Respectfully Submitted,
Lisa Babcock
Administrative Assistant
Newton Planning Board
| 
