NEWTON PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF PUBLIC HEARING AND WORKSESSION
APRIL 14, 2009
1. Call to Order:
Chairperson Miles called the meeting to order at 7:01 pm. In attendance were: Chairperson Ann Miles; Vice Chairman Jim Doggett; Planning Board members Frank Gibbs, and Barbara White; Ray Thayer, BOS ex officio; and Alternate Mary Sousa. Minutes were transcribed by Administrative Assistant, Lisa Babcock.
Also in attendance: Circuit Rider Planner, David West.
Miles appointed Sousa to stand in for Pettit.
2. 125 Development Corp of Plaistow, NH requests a Public Hearing for a decision regarding appropriate setbacks for site plans at Puzzle Lane. The property is referenced as Tax Map 14, Block 1, Lots 27-3 and 27-4.
Miles opened the hearing for Puzzle Lane, Tax Map 14, Block 1, Lot 27-3 & 27-4.
David Leach of Civil Construction Management was present to represent the owner of the property, Mr. McDonough. He explained that the zoning ordinance that regulates setbacks for light industrial properties had changed in March and Mr. McDonough needed to get a decision from the Board defining the setbacks for his property so that he will know what the building envelopes will be before spending a lot of money to have plans developed.
Specifically, Mr. McDonough needs to know what building setbacks and natural buffers will be required for these two properties.
Mr. Leach showed plans that outlined the properties to the abutters present. The plans showed the location of wetlands and abutters but did not show proposed building locations or other details.
Miles asked the abutters to introduce themselves. The following individuals were present: Gordon Mancini, Craig Jackson, John Baronian, Jodi Baronian and Jameson Fitzpatrick.
Mr. Leach explained that a second entrance will also be proposed for the Puzzle Lane development. The second entrance will be near SPE Real Estate.
West said he did not expect to discuss 27-3 this evening, only 27-4. He also explained that the new zoning ordinance gave the Board the flexibility to require setbacks for light industrial properties that range in size from 50' to 1,500' and that the Board needs to give the applicant a decision that specifies the size of the setbacks so that detailed plans can be developed.
Mr. Mancini of 5 Howard Lane asked what is meant by a buffer. West said it is an area of undisturbed natural vegetation.
Mr. Mancini said trees have been cut within 50' of his property.
Property owner, Coleman McDonough arrived at 7:18 pm.
Ms. Baronian of 21 Walnut Farm Road asked if the 200' setback mentioned in the ordinance is measured from the house or the property line. West explained that the setback is measured from the property line.
Ms. Baronian said land has already been cleared. She said she can clearly see the development from her property. Lights can also be seen and it is very noisy.
Mr. Jackson of 18 Walnut Farm Road said he is concerned about future development because he has problems with the current use of the property. He said there are trucks and noise from 5:30 am to 8:00 pm.
Mr. Baronian said he can hear noise and smell diesel fuel as early as 4:00 am. He can see lights and hear people working there early in the morning. He is very concerned about what the view from his property will be after the development.
Miles noted that the noise ordinance warrant article had failed. She said the town needs to pass a noise ordinance so that things like hours of operation can be controlled.
Thayer added that there are DES and EPA regulations regarding noise and the running of diesel engines – he will get that information for the next meeting.
Mr. Fitzpatrick said he supports property rights but said that he purchased his home in September and at that time the zoning ordinance stated that the setback from light industrial to residential was 200'. He wanted to know what the compelling interests were for the developer to get that setback reduced. He said he wanted to see exactly what the project would look like before any reduction is granted.
Doggett said he didn't feel that the Planning Board could make a decision about the setbacks without seeing detailed plans.
West said that in order to develop the plans, the engineers need to know what setbacks will be allowed. Since it is very expensive to have detailed plans engineered, it could be considered a hardship for the developer to have to have plans created and then completely done over because of the setbacks.
He said the Board could reasonably assume that the new buildings will be 35' high (since that is the maximum allowed by the ordinances) and that they will look like the existing buildings.
Mr. McDonough said that the 200' setback is much more stringent that other area towns. He also said the building will sit about 35' below the Walnut Farm subdivision so the residents won't really see it. The abutters strongly disagreed with this assumption. Several said they would have a clear view of the new development.
Mr. Mancini asked if the development would be residential. Mr. McDonough said no, the area is zoned for commercial/light industrial buildings only.
Mr. Jackson wanted to know what the hours of operation will be.
Ms. Baronian said she wanted to know what side of the building would face Walnut Farm. If the back of the building is to face the subdivision, would there be a loading dock. She also wanted to know where the new access road would be, where will most of the traffic and activity be?
Mr. McDonough said he would try to address all of the abutters' concerns.
Ms. Baronian wanted to know if the abutters will be included in the process as plans move forward for the development. Mr. McDonough explained that abutters will be notified again when the detailed plans come before the Planning Board.
Miles polled the Board members for their opinions regarding the setbacks for the lot 27-4.
Gibbs said the setbacks should be: 200' from the Walnut Farm subdivision and 50' from all other lot lines. West agreed, Sousa agreed, Thayer agreed, White agreed and Doggett agreed.
Miles said the lighting issue must also be addressed. The abutters are still complaining about lights and nothing has been done about it.
Doggett said natural vegetative screening is needed to help shield the lights. West added that the lights need to have hoods.
Mr. Leach asked if 100' of vegetative buffer is adequate. West said the regulations only require 50'.
Mr. Jackson asked why the lights need to be on at night.
Mr. McDonough said the lights can be put on timers or motion detectors or shaded, but that the building department requires lighting for safety reasons. Mr. McDonough also said low energy lighting can be used.
Miles said the lighting issue needs to be addressed right away.
The Board proceeded to discuss lot 27-3. Mr. McDonough said the proposed use for that lot is a refrigerated building – 80' x 80'. He also said this lot would include a road and cul-de-sac.
West noted that a large portion of this lot is wetlands.
Doggett suggested the same setbacks – 200' on any side abutting residential properties and 50' on other sides.
Mr. Jackson asked how conditions such as lighting requirements are enforced. West said they can be included as conditions of approval and the building department and code enforcement officer make sure they are done.
Doggett moved to require the following setbacks for lot 27-4: 200' with a 50' undisturbed natural buffer on any side that abuts residential property and 50' on sides that abut light industrial and commercial properties.
White amended the motion as follows: the setbacks required for lot 14-1-27-4 are:
On the northerly side – 50' from the residential A zone line within lot 27-4.
200' on the easterly side where the property abuts the Walnut Farm subdivision.
50' on the westerly side.
50' on the southerly side.
50' undisturbed natural vegetative buffer on all sides.
Motion second by Gibbs. Motion carried unanimously.
Doggett moved to require the following setbacks for lot 14-1-27-3:
50' from where the property abuts light industrial zones.
200' from where the property abuts residential zones.
50' undisturbed natural vegetative buffer on all sides.
Second by Thayer. Motion carried unanimously.
Miles closed the hearing for Puzzle Lane, Tax Map 14, Block 1, Lot 27-3 & 27-4.
3. Release Bond held by Danversbank for Steven Ciambelli for Katherine Drive:
Miles explained that the Katherine Drive subdivision off Whittier Street had been sold to Maplevale Builders. Maplevale posted a bond for the subdivision.
Motion by Doggett to release the Letter of Credit held by Danversbank for the Katherine Drive subdivision. Second by Thayer. Motion carried unanimously.
4. Volunteers for open positions: Rick Milner of 8 Philip Way addressed the Board. He said that he was interested in working with the Board and becoming more involved in the town.
Doggett moved to appoint Rick Milner to a 3 year alternate position. Second by White. Motion carried unanimously.
Doggett stated that Mary Allen wants to continue as the RPC Commissioner.
5. RFP for digital mapping: West requested that this item be moved to the next work session. Miles asked West to get additional copies of the overlay maps the Board has been working on.
6. Plan NH: Miles asked the Board members to think about individuals and people from the business community who may be interested in working on the Plan NH charrette for discussion at the work session.
7. Acceptance of Minutes:
Doggett moved to accept the minutes of March 24, 2009 as written. Second by White. Motion carried unanimously.
Gibbs asked about unit #7 at Puzzle Lane. He stated that in the minutes it says there are 2 businesses in unit #7 (Act Glass and CPM Construction), but only one employee.
8. Manifests:
Doggett moved to authorize the chair to sign the NPREA manifest dated 4/14/09 in the amount $3,947.10. Second by Gibbs. Motion carried unanimously.
Doggett moved to authorize the chair to sign the Operating Budget manifest dated 4/14/09 in the amount $4,398.41. Second by White. Motion carried unanimously.
9. Copier contract:
White moved to authorize the chair to sign the copier contract for Century Copier Specialists in the amount $485.00. Second by Doggett. Motion carried unanimously.
10. Release NPREA funds to Leo LaRochelle: George's Way and the Brenner Drive extension had both been accepted as town roads and passed their 2 year holding periods and received final acceptance by the Board of Selectmen. There was money remaining in the NPREA account for the development.
Doggett moved to release the remaining NPREA balance for George's Way 6-lot subdivision to Leo LaRochelle in the amount $3,312.10. Second by Thayer. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Gibbs abstaining.
11. Intent to Excavate by SPE Real Estate:
Gibbs said he felt the town engineer should review the site before excavation. Thayer said the Conservation Commission and Code Enforcement Officer had reviewed the site in November 2008 and did not have any issues with the site.
Gibbs moved to have the Town Engineer review the site at 185 South Main Street. Second by White. Motion carried unanimously.
12. Accessory Apartment at 9 Pond Street:
The secretary explained that the assessor wanted to know if the apartment had ever been approved by the Board. Doggett said the size was denied by the Board of Appeals (due to lack of jurisdiction over conditional use permits) and the developer had never gone back to the Planning Board after getting a denial, therefore the apartment had never been approved.
The Board asked that the owner of the property be asked to come to a meeting.
13. Robert White – access to land-locked property:
Mr. White was present and addressed the Board. He asked the Planning Board to give a recommendation to the Board of Selectmen as to which access he would be able to use to get to his property.
Thayer said the selectmen had briefly discussed this issue and were considering recommending that Mr. White access his property via Town Hall Road although an official vote had not been taken. Thayer suggested that Mr. White request to get on a Selectmen's meeting agenda.
Thayer said the Board of Selectmen does not want to grant access via the Peanut Trail or from behind the library as these pose safety issues.
White stated that since his zoning ordinance article had passed, he had already been granted access but Thayer pointed out that the article presented to the selectmen had failed.
14. Sargent Woods:
The secretary informed the Board that the Board of Selectmen were reviewing the engineer's report on Sargent Woods and were in the process of signing paperwork to call in some of the bond money.
Miles said bond money should only be used to stabilize the site.
15. Victory Fuel:
The Board reviewed the mylars for the Victory Fuel site plan to add propane tanks. The Board determined that the conditions of approval had been met and the mylars were signed.
16. Other Business:
White said that the Board must make sure that all conditions imposed on the Puzzle Lane development must be met. She was concerned that the lighting issue had not yet been addressed. Gibbs stated that there should be no construction going on on lot 27-3 or 27-4 at this time. Plans have not yet been approved.
Doggett said he was not happy with the commercial business forms presented at the previous meeting.
Miles said that code enforcement needs to review the site. A memo will be sent to the Board of Selectmen notifying them of that.
17. Adjourn: Miles adjourned the meeting at 8:50 pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
Lisa Babcock
Administrative Assistant
Newton Planning Board
| 
