NEWTON PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF WORK SESSION AND PUBLIC MEETING
MARCH 22, 2011
1. Call to Order: Administrative Assistant Rick Milner called the meeting to order at 7:01 pm. In attendance were: Chairman Jim Doggett; Vice Chair Barbara White; Planning Board members Frank Gibbs, Ann Miles, Kim Vaillant, and Robert Miller; BOS ex-officio Trisha McCarthy; and Circuit Rider Planner Brian Groth. Minutes were transcribed by Administrative Assistant Rick Milner.
2. Town of Newton, NH Planning Board reorganization.
Vaillant moved to nominate James Doggett as Chairman of the Planning Board and Barbara White as Vice Chairperson of the Planning Board. Second by Gibbs.
Discussion of motion – Miles commented that she had serious problems nominating Doggett as chairman based upon the letter that he sent regarding the multiple businesses located at Sarah's Way. She believes that Doggett has overstepped the bounds of the chairman's duties. He did not have the approval of the board to send such a letter. He has overstepped his mandate as a chairman on other occasions as well. Miles stated that, in the past, she has requested that certain issues be placed on the board's agenda. These issues were not placed on the agenda.
Doggett responded that the items addressed in the letter were all discussed in an open, public meeting of the board. The person to whom the letter was addressed requested information from the board regarding procedures and interpretation of language. The board came to a consensus without objection to provide the information requested by the prospective applicant in a letter. The information, as requested by the prospective applicant, was provided in the letter.
Gibbs asked to see a copy of the complaint regarding Sarah's Way. Since the complaint was not signed, Gibbs stated that the board should not be discussing the matter.
Vaillant stated that other anonymous complaints have come before the board in the past.
McCarthy stated that the Board of Selectmen has revised the complaint procedure. In the future, all complaints will need to be signed.
Miles asked McCarthy if she would have sent such a letter.
McCarthy stated that, after watching a replay of the previous meeting, it appears that the letter was responding to the prospective applicant's request for answers regarding procedures and interpretations.
McCarthy further noted that the Board of Selectmen is trying to enforce the conflict of interest policies. The mere appearance or inference of a conflict of interest of a board member could result in major legal issues. McCarthy stated that she believes that Miles would be doing herself and the prospective applicant justice if she stepped down from the board during discussions on the Sarah's Way issue.
Miles stated that she intended to step down from the board during the discussions regarding Sarah's Way.
Motion passed 6-0-1 with Miles abstaining.
Doggett introduced new board member Robert Miller of Philip Way.
Doggett asked Miles if she would like to step down from the board before discussion of the next agenda item.
Miles stepped down from the board.
3. Town of Newton, NH preliminary consultation and pre-application review of proposed changes in land use.
- Michele Shepherd – 8 Sarah's Way, multiple home-based businesses.
Doggett stated that Ms. Shepherd requested that discussions be continued to this meeting. He then presented a letter from legal counsel representing Ms. Shepherd that requested the planning board stay its proceedings regarding this matter. Ms. Shepherd was not present.
Doggett asked the board if it wished to continue the proceedings regarding Sarah's Way or delay the proceedings until further developments occur.
Vaillant asked if the letter was advisory in nature. The board could make its own determination whether to proceed or not proceed.
Doggett confirmed that the letter was a request, not a demand.
Gibbs noted that Ms. Shepherd's intention to approach the Board of Appeals, as stated in her counsel's letter, may require a denial from the Planning Board.
McCarthy and Milner noted that a denial may not be required for the Board of Appeals to hear the matter. Doggett asked an audience member, former Board of Appeals member Charles Melvin, for guidance regarding the Board of Appeals procedures.
Mr. Melvin replied that, if the Board of Appeals procedures were followed, the Board of Appeals would not hear the matter without a denial from the Planning Board.
Milner noted that, even if the Planning Board chooses to proceed, the board is not in a position to issue a denial. There is no official application before the board. The board is only offering guidance to the prospective applicant and various town departments regarding the board's procedures and interpretation of ordinances/regulations.
Vaillant moved to discontinue the board's proceedings regarding 8 Sarah's Way. White second. Motion passed 5-1 with Gibbs opposed.
Doggett asked Miles if she wanted to rejoin the board.
Miles rejoined the board.
3. Town of Newton, NH review of Planning Board policies and procedures regarding schedule of fees.
- 125 Development NH Corp., Puzzle Lane
Scott Frankiewicz was in attendance to represent the applicant. Mr. McDonough was not present. Mr. Frankiewicz explained that the application fee for the proposed 100,000 square foot building to be built in the second phase of Lot 27-4 at Puzzle Lane increases significantly above fees for smaller buildings. He presented to the board a report showing that the Town of Newton Planning Board application fee for a 100,000 square foot building is substantially larger than the fee in other surrounding towns. The application fee should be used only to cover the expenses of the application process. Other expenses, such as engineering review, are covered by other funds (i.e. NPREA). The applicant believes that the application fee for a larger building is excessive.
Doggett asked for comments from board members.
Vaillant explained that considerable time, effort, and study was spent to develop a fee schedule that would protect the Town of Newton from incurring increased administrative expenses that larger projects generate.
Milner noted the reasoning supporting the application fee schedule was clearly stated in the policies and procedures manual.
Groth explained that many of the additional costs used to support the higher application fee can be recouped by other avenues (i.e. NPREA and performance bonds). When reviewing the application fee schedule, the board must be sure that the town is not making money off of the application fee. The application fee should only cover the expenses attributed directly to the application process. Based on his experience and review of the fees charged by surrounding towns, the board's fee structure is above and beyond what should be required of the applicant.
Doggett asked the board how it wanted to proceed regarding review of the application fee.
Miles suggested that the board review the application fee schedule at the next work session.
McCarthy asked for input from Chief Building Official Ron LeMere.
LeMere stated that, when dealing with larger projects, the town needed to account for the added time spent communicating between various departments to resolve problems that inevitably occur. A mechanism needs to be developed that takes into account the many variables of a larger project.
Gibbs inquired about the cost of a building permit for a 100,000 square foot building.
LeMere estimated that the total of fees paid to the building department for a 100,000 square foot building would be approximately $11,000 to $12,000.
Doggett suggested that copies of the minutes pertaining to the board's previous discussions regarding application fees be made available to board members for discussion at the next work session.
Doggett further suggested that LeMere and the Board of Selectmen provide a letter to the Planning Board with any information or opinions that they may want the Planning Board to consider in its deliberations regarding application fees.
Doggett asked if the application fee covered all of the expenses required to bring an application to completion, such as administrative assistant research for waivers associated with an application.
Groth agreed that these expenses should be included when considering the appropriate fee structure.
Doggett stated that review of the application fee schedule will be placed on the April 26 work session agenda.
Mr. Frankiewicz asked LeMere if other inspection fees (i.e. electrical and plumbing) are included in the building permit fee.
LeMere replied that fees for those inspections are not included. Those fees would be an additional charge.
Mr. Frankiewicz stated that the charge for electrical and plumbing inspections on other buildings amounted to an additional $6,000.
Miles noted that a previous issue regarding proper fire suppression methods at other buildings took a long time to resolve. There was no billing of extra fees to account for the added time to resolve the problems.
LeMere explained that there is no process to charge for extra time spent on a project.
Doggett presented the issue regarding the start date for work when a conditional approval for a project is in place.
LeMere asked the board at what point in the conditional approval process can his department issue permits. He inquired if all of the conditions in a conditional approval needed to be met before his department can issue permits.
Groth noted that all of the conditions must be met before any work can start.
White suggested that, when all the conditions of a conditional approval are met, the board send a letter to all relevant parties indicating that all conditions have been met. She also suggested adding this process to the board's procedures manual.
a. Review of removal bond for cell tower.
Doggett explained that the bond covering removal of the cell tower located in Newton required Planning Board review every three years. The review was required to ensure that the bond amount was adequate to cover the costs of the tower removal, if necessary. Milner noted that the Town Engineer was currently researching the issue. However, the Town Engineer's preliminary opinion was that the bond amount was too low to cover the costs of the tower removal.
b. Review of board alternate member positions.
Doggett explained that two alternate members, Chuck Whitman and Mary Sousa, have not attended a board meeting in nearly a year. He asked if the board would entertain a motion to suspend their appointments.
Gibbs moved to request that the Board of Selectmen suspend the appointments of alternate members Chuck Whitman and Mary Sousa. Second by White. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Miles abstaining.
Doggett presented a letter from Sandra Estabrook requesting to be appointed as an alternate member to the Planning Board.
Miles suggested that available alternate member positions be advertised.
Vaillant moved to request that the Board of Selectmen appoint Sandra Estabrook as an alternate member to the Planning Board. Second by McCarthy. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Miles abstaining.
Charles Melvin presented a letter to the board requesting to be appointed as an alternate member to the Planning Board.
Vaillant moved to request that the Board of Selectmen appoint Charles Melvin as an alternate member to the Planning Board. Second by Miller. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Miles abstaining.
Doggett indicated that he would create a statement announcing the available alternate member position for publication in the Carriage Towne News.
McCarthy noted that she would remain as the BOS ex-officio member of the Planning Board for the coming year. Ray Thayer would be present in her absence.
c. Manifests.
Doggett presented the NPREA manifest to the board. The invoice reflected payment to KV Partners for site plan review of Puzzle Lane Lot 27-4 Phase I plan.
Gibbs moved to pay the NPREA manifest amount of $624.00. Second by Miles. Motion carried 5-0-1 with Miller abstaining.
Doggett presented the operating budget manifest to the board. The invoice reflected payment of telephone bill and Regional Planning Commission membership dues.
Gibbs moved to pay the operating budget manifest amount of $4,323.96. Second by Miles.
Discussion of motion – Miller asked for an accounting of the RPC dues. Groth explained that the funds are mainly used to help secure grants for area towns.
Motion carried unanimously.
d. New business.
Miles requested that the board review the status of grandfathered businesses and requirements for these businesses regarding allowed uses. She believes that there is a feeling among owners of grandfathered businesses that they do not need to follow certain regulations or are excluded from certain regulations. The Planning Board needs to address at a work session the parameters of what is and is not allowed at these locations.
Doggett stated that violations regarding regulations are best handled by code enforcement.
LeMere added that if someone chooses not to come to the appropriate town department for approval of changes and moves ahead with these changes, then the jurisdiction falls to code enforcement.
Miles also mentioned the board should explore the opportunity to apply for grants with groups that would provide information on how public and historically significant buildings in the town could receive energy cost savings.
Doggett stated that the appropriate venue to explore this opportunity would be with the Board of Selectmen. McCarthy noted that the Board of Selectmen has had two energy audits conducted.
4. Adjourn: The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
Rick Milner
Administrative Assistant
Newton Planning Board
| 
