NEWTON PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF PUBLIC MEETING
OCTOBER 12, 2010
1. Call to Order: Chairman Jim Doggett called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
In attendance were: Chairman Jim Doggett; Vice Chairperson Barbara White; Planning Board members Ann Miles and Frank Gibbs; and Alternate Mary Allen. Minutes were transcribed by Interim Administrative Assistant Rick Milner.
Doggett appointed Allen to stand in for Pettit for the evening.
Circuit Rider Planner Brian Groth not able to attend meeting due to illness.
2. Personnel procedure. Doggett presented the formal resignation letter of the previous Administrative Assistant Karen Conti to the Board.
Gibbs moved to accept the resignation of the Administrative Assistant. Second by White. Motion carried unanimously.
3. Charles and Kathleen Marden of Groveland, FL continuation of a public hearing for an 8 lot subdivision on Heath Street. The property is referenced as Tax Map 4, Block 6, Lot 3.
Dennis Quintal was in attendance to represent the applicant. Mr. Marden was not present. Mr. Quintal presented a revised plan for the Marden Meadows Phase II residential development.
Mr. Quintal explained the changes to the plans based on discussions from previous meeting and the board's denial of some waiver requests. Changes to the plans presented by Mr. Quintal are as follows:
a. Due to board's denial of well radius waiver, lot lines reconfigured to ensure well radius protective zone is completely within lot,
b. Due to well radii being moved on two lots, the addition of small wetland crossings were required. These additional wetland crossings will be added to the state application for approval,
c. Due to board's concern over narrow width of common driveways, minimum width of driveway over wetland crossing was enlarged to 16 feet,
d. Guardrails added at points where driveway culverts cross wetlands,
e. Sheet LS-2 added, giving details of remaining property not being developed at this time, wetlands, soils, and topography.
In response to a previous board request, Mr. Quintal also presented a document that detailed typical driveway easement language. The language included details concerning names of owners, rights of access and maintenance responsibilities. Mr. Quintal explained that the exact wording may change slightly upon actual execution of the agreement.
Mr. Quintal asked the board for clarification regarding the driveway waivers the board approved at the previous meeting. He wanted to be sure that the waivers covered all three sections of the town regulations affected by the plan. If the board was satisfied with the plan and status of the waivers, he needed to proceed with test pits for septic systems, state approval for wetlands and subdivision, and set bounds for subdivision.
Doggett asked Mr. Quintal if he wanted to address the concerns of Planner Brian Groth regarding the septic areas. Mr. Quintal stated that he did not believe that the state regulations required a particular configuration such as a square geometric shape. All that was required was a 4000 square foot area.
Miles requested that Mr. Quintal add details to the plan regarding the frontage of the development along Heath Street.
Gibbs moved for the Planning Board to take jurisdiction of the Marden Meadows project. Second by Allen.
Discussion of motion- Allen wanted clarification of driveway waivers voted on at previous meeting. Quintal noted the three sections of the regulations involved in the waivers were 8.3.1.A, 8.2.4, and 8.2.4.A.2e.ii. Doggett stated that the minutes reflect that all three sections were covered in one motion passed at the previous meeting.
Motion carried unanimously.
Miles stated that she wanted a complete understanding of how many units will be built. The regulation language is vague concerning number of houses and number of units. She does not want this vague language to allow a situation where the buildings on this project could become triple deckers with several units.
Mr. Quintal responded that the plan has 6 duplex lots and 1 single lot. Under his interpretation of the zoning regulations, the number of units/families could range between 7 and 13. With regards to driveway access, there are 3 common driveways. The regulations state that a common driveway serves 4 or more houses. At a previous meeting, the board and Mr. Quintal came to an agreement to interpret that 4 houses was equivalent to 4 units.
Miles stated that the board should think about making a stipulation that only two units should be built on the duplex lots (i.e. no additional accessory or in-law apartments) and add specific language to any future deeds or documents.
Allen added that the board should think about changing the regulations or ordinances in the future to prohibit additional units being added to duplex buildings.
Allen moved to continue the public hearing to the November 9 public hearing. Second by White. Motion carried unanimously.
4. 125 Development NH Corp. of Plaistow, NH continuation of a public hearing for a major non-residential site plan at Puzzle Lane. The property is referenced as Tax Map 14, Block 1, Lot 27-4.
Scott Frankiewicz was in attendance to represent the applicant. Mr. McDonough was not present. Mr. Frankiewicz stated that he was present to give an update on the project's progress. Progress to date:
a. Work continuing to complete issues raised in Town Engineer Mike Vignale's review of the project,
b. State review of alteration of terrain application will start this week,
c. Request discussion with board regarding Planner Brian Groth's concerns with non-disturbed buffer zone not complying with regulations,
d. Met with condominium association at 6 Puzzle Lane to begin discussions on resolving differences concerning parking lot hardtop.
Doggett asked Mr. Frankiewicz if he wanted to address Mr. Groth's concern that the regulations require a 50 foot undisturbed natural buffer setback from the lot line and the site plan shows only a 25 foot undisturbed buffer on the lot line between Lot 27-4 and Lot 27 (location of F.X. Schmid puzzle factory at 1 Puzzle Lane).
Mr. Frankiewicz explained that he interpreted the regulation as meaning a 50 foot structure setback, not an undisturbed setback. He believes that the 50 foot undisturbed setback requirement concerns residential property abutting commercial property, not commercial property abutting commercial property. If board decides that a 50 foot undisturbed buffer is required, then Mr. Frankiewicz will petition the ZBA for a variance. He needs the variance because a 50 foot undisturbed buffer will not allow room for a road to access the back end of the property.
Miles asked if it is possible to make a 50 foot undisturbed buffer.
Mr. Frankiewicz stated that it is possible. However, the entire concept for the parcel would have to change.
Miles asked where the gas line easement is located in relation to Lot 27-4.
Mr. Frankiewicz stated that the gas line easement ran in a straight line along the lot line and crossed 10 feet into the property. He stated that there was no intention to disturb any area within the gas line easement.
Doggett stated that, in his opinion, this requirement cannot be waived by the board. The board can make the buffer larger than 50 feet, but cannot decide to make the buffer narrower than 50 feet. The applicant has to petition the ZBA for a variance.
Mr. Frankiewicz asked the board if it interpreted the regulations to mean a 50 foot undisturbed natural buffer, not a 50 foot structural setback.
Doggett replied in the affirmative. The regulations required a 50 foot undisturbed natural setback.
Miles and White stated they have no problem with a buffer smaller than 50 feet between two commercial properties.
Abutter Jim Fitzpatrick addressed the board. Mr. Fitzpatrick expressed his concern that, due to vague language, the ZBA changed a previous planning board decision regarding the buffer between the residential and commercial zones abutting on this plan. He stated that the buffer was reduced by the ZBA. He asked the board how he can be sure that the ZBA will not change future planning board decisions.
Miles responded that, at this time, the board is making a clear distinction in its language between residential to commercial abutters and commercial to commercial abutters. Going forward, the board will endeavor to communicate clearly with the developer to resolve issues and protect privacy buffers for the Walnut Farm development without the need for ZBA involvement.
Miles moved that, with regards to this particular situation only and this particular boundary line between two commercial properties (lot line between Lot 27-4 and Lot 27 Puzzle factory) only, the board will accept a smaller buffer zone. No Second.
Discussion of motion- Miles, Gibbs, and Doggett discussed with Mr. Frankiewicz the exact location along the lot line covered by the motion. Due to the board's inability to get exact measurements from Mr. Frankiewicz at this time, Doggett suggested that such an important motion should be tabled until more accurate measurements could be obtained.
White moved to table the previous motion. Second by Allen. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Frankiewicz next reviewed the issue of the driveway access behind the buildings of Phase I crossing the property line between Lot 27-4 and Lot 27-3. He explained that a 40 foot right of way easement for the entire road exists that allows the property owners of Lot 27-3 to access their property from lot 27-4. He stated that he will be asking the members of the condominium association that owns Lot 27-3 for an easement to access the driveway behind the buildings from Lot 27-3.
Abutter Arthur Mitchell, president of condominium association, addressed the board. He asked if Mr. Frankiewicz had to talk to the association to get an easement. Mr. Frankiewicz replied in the affirmative.
Allen asked if Mr. Mitchell was opposed to the easement.
Mr. Mitchell replied that personally he cannot make a judgment. All members of the condominium association own equal shares of the property. All members have to vote to approve an easement or receive compensation for land. His research has found no record of an easement.
Doggett stated that the board cannot approve the plan without an easement.
Doggett noted that the tight corner of the driveway going behind the building will limit the size of the truck that can gain access.
Mr. Frankiewicz replied that larger trucks will back in and turn around further down the road on Lot 27-3.
Gibbs and Doggett stated that this situation will lead to excessive traffic near the homes of the Lot 27-3 condominium owners.
Mr. Frankiewicz replied that Town Engineer Mike Vignale suggested some adjustments to the driveway configuration. He will review those adjustments to find a possible correction for the driveway plan.
Allen stated that the board needs to see plans connecting the remaining areas of Lot 27-3 with Lot 27-4 to understand traffic implications of the plan.
Allen moved to continue the public hearing to the November 9 public hearing. Second by Gibbs. Motion carried unanimously.
Abutter Bruce Sarro addressed the board. Mr. Sarro explained that the condominium association is presently in discussions with Coleman McDonough to have the final coat of hardtop applied to the parking lot on the condominium property. Documents will be prepared that will detail time guidelines and scope of finances needed for completion.
5. Other Board Business:
a. Allen moved to accept the minutes of October 7 special meeting. Second by Miles. Motion carried unanimously.
b. Lewis Builders-Sargent Woods – Discussion regarding occupancy permits and change of driveway configuration. Joshua Manning was in attendance to represent the applicant.
Doggett read email from Town Engineer Mike Vignale stating that he saw no reason to deny occupancy permit for units 1,2,3, and 4 at Sargent Woods project. Doggett stated he would sign the occupancy permits at the end of the meeting.
Mr. Manning asked if the normal process to obtain an occupancy permit always required approval from the town engineer.
Doggett explained that this was a best practice to ensure all required details are in place.
Doggett asked Mr. Manning to review the driveway change for Lot 8-3-11-23.
Mr. Manning explained that the driveway for this lot was originally planned as a shared driveway with Lot 8-3-11-22 with access from Hickory Road. The reconfigured driveway would now access the lot from Bootland Farm Road. This change was mandated by the placement of the septic systems on the lots.
Mr. Manning asked if Mr. Vignale approved of the new driveway plan.
Doggett read email from Mr. Vignale stating that he saw no problems with the proposed driveway location from an engineering perspective.
Miles expressed concern that changes in footprint area on new plans were different than previous developer's original plans approved by the State Attorney General.
Mr. Manning explained that Lewis Builders, as new developer of the project, was required to obtain its own approval from the State Attorney General. They presented floor plans of the units and referenced the approved site plan to obtain AG approval.
Miles asked if the floor plans exceeded the required 1800 square foot limit.
Mr. Manning stated that the floor plans were all under 1800 square feet.
Mr. Manning stated that the driveway change required a change in address. He explained that the building department wanted the board's approval of an address change to facilitate the process.
Doggett explained that the board can only approve the driveway change, not an address change. The applicant needed to apply to the Town Assessor for an address change. The board had no problems with an address change.
Miles moved to approve the change in the driveway configuration of Lot 8-3-11-23. Second by White. Motion carried unanimously.
c. 2011 Proposed Budget – Doggett suggested that the board use the 2010 budget figures for 2011 budget with no changes.
Miles stated that the board cut funds in 2010. Those funds may be needed for anticipated events in 2011. The board should consider adding those funds into the 2011 budget.
Gibbs and Doggett stated that adding funds during unfavorable economic times may not be the best action to take. Gibbs suggested waiting another year before considering additional funds.
Miles responded that there are some large projects coming up in 2011 that may require funds for legal fees, engineering review, and other board duties. The board does not want to be in a position where it cannot take action due to lack of funds.
Doggett stated that he believed submitting a level funded budget was fiscally responsible.
Allen moved for the Planning Board to submit a level funded 2011 Proposed Fiscal Budget to the Board of Selectmen for approval. Second by White. Motion carried unanimously.
d. Bond release – Joseph Ferrandi of Integrity Homes has requested that the Town of Newton release the remainder of the road bond for Patriot Drive.
Allen moved to send a memo to the Board of Selectmen recommending the release of the remainder of Patriot Drive road bond to Mr. Ferrandi. Second by Miles. Motion carried unanimously.
6. Adjourn: The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
Rick Milner
Interim Administrative Assistant
Newton Planning Board
| 
