Town of Plaistow, NH
Office of the Planning Board
145 Main Street, Plaistow, NH 03865
PLANNING BOARD
March 15, 2006
The meeting was called to order at 6:35 p.m.
Roll Call: Tim Moore, Chairman; Robert Zukas; Barry Weymouth, newly elected member and Michelle Curran (arrived 6:42 p.m.), Selectmen Ex-Officio. Steven Ranlett, Vice-Chairman was excused.
Also present: Leigh G. Komornick, Planning Coordinator and P. Michael Dorman, Building Inspector/Code Enforcement Officer
 B. Weymouth was appointed as a voting member, pending his being sworn into office.
Minutes of the March 1, 2006 meeting
 R. Zukas moved, second by B. Weymouth, to approve the minutes of the March 1, 2006, meeting. There was no discussion on the motion. The vote was 2-0-1 (Weymouth abstaining)
The Plaistow Planning Board will hold a Public Hearing to consider a Design Review Application by Dwayne Skofield for a 5,280 Square foot office and retail building containing 4 units located at 207 Main Street, Tax Map 30, Lot 57, totaling 1.31 acres and 403.10 feet of frontage in accordance with RSA 674:41, I (d)
Charlie Zilch, SEC & Associates, was present for the application. He explained the location of the property to be in the CI (Commercial I) district, abutting the MDR (Medium Density Residential) district, with frontage on both Main Street and Walton Road. Mr. Zilch noted that the property was currently being used as residential. He located the features on the property such as the well and the septic. Mr. Zilch explained the plan noting the building was proposed to be 5,280 sq ft, with 1,320 sq ft of would be devoted to office space on a mezzanine level. He added the spaces would be rented to service oriented business, such as flooring and window installers who would have a need for limited showroom space. Mr. Zilch noted other features of the plan, such as the bay doors on the rear of the building,
where the proposed new well would be.
C. Zilch explained that one of the issues that he wanted to get input from the Board was regarding the ordinance (Article VIIA §220-55.2.J) that requires when there is frontage on both a state and town road the access be from the town road “except where it can be proven that other potential access points would cause greater environmental or traffic impacts.”
M. Curran arrives at 6:42 p.m.
C. Zilch suggested there was no advantage to the Town or to the residents for there to be access from Walton Road, unless the building was to face Walton Road.
T. Moore offered that it was his opinion that it was better access off of Main Street. He noted that the Access Management chapter was adopted primarily to limit the number of curb cuts Route 125. He said he didn’t see any value to the use of the property or to traffic control to have the access on Walton Road.
C. Zilch noted that they had not yet submitted an application to the New Hampshire Department of Transportation (NHDOT) for a driveway permit yet, adding that they would prefer to keep the access on Main Street.
R. Zukas questioned whether or not there should be access from both Walton Road and Main Street.
There was an unidentified person in the gallery who expressed concern over the existing traffic on her (Walton) road.
T. Moore noted that this was a preliminary hearing, the purpose of which was to provide feedback to the applicant.
M. Dorman reminded that zoning said they must have the access on a town road or they would be required to get a variance. He also noted that this property was considered to have two fronts and two rears and that Article V, §220-34B required that they have a 100 foot set back from both frontages or a variance would be required.
Jennifer Lovett, 28 Walton Road, asked for the status of a stop sign that was supposed to be put at Shady and Walton Roads.
There was a brief discussion of the Route 125 upgrades that would include the concern expressed by Ms. Lovett.
The floor was opened to comments from abutters. The following people spoke expressing concerns over road safety, increase in traffic and the type of vehicles that would be on Walton Road, increase in noise in the neighborhood, increase in lighting. Many noted problems with the high school traffic and local car dealerships using the road for test driving vehicles. Additional concerns were expressed over how the site was currently being used, citing the number of storage trailers and the debris that was on the site. Some also expressed concern that there was burning (of potentially hazardous materials) on the site. They noted that they had tried to get Walton posted as a one-way some time ago and the Town would not allow it.
- Annemarie Pardo, 22½ Walton Road
- Maria Gilbert, 209 Main Street
- Sheila Clark, 10 Walton Road
- Donald Clark, 10 Walton Road
- Jim Convery, 7 Walton Road
D. Clark also suggested that the Board should go with the will of people and should change the use to conform to the character of the neighborhood, adding there was no commercial in the neighborhood.
T. Moore reminded there was a commercial property next door (All Tune and Lube)
J. Convery questioned the buffers from the loading area in the back of the building.
C. Zilch estimated that the building would be set back approximately 90 feet from the property line once the buffer and the parking were considered.
R. Zukas added that it looked to be about 120 feet from building to building (proposed to Mr. Convery’s dwelling).
There was discussion about set backs and buffers that the project would be bound by.
M. Gilbert suggested there should be a full set of lights at the intersection of Walton Road and Main Street, noting a number of accidents that she had witnessed there.
L. Komornick offered that Board had the discretion to require a traffic study of the proposed project.
M. Curran asked if the storage containers would remain in the property.
C. Zilch replied that they were being used by the residential tenant and where not proposed on the site plan.
J. Convery noted the property at current looked like a junk yard and he asked what was being done to enforce a clean-up.
M. Dorman replied that his office was working through with the owner and the tenant within the zoning ordinances to get it cleaned up.
A. Pardo offered that the All Tune & Lube that is currently next door was supposed to only be for storage and is now a working garage. She asked what assurances they would have that this project wouldn’t turn into something else.
T. Moore replied that it would have to come before the Planning Board for public hearing at which time the abutters would be notified.
There was discussion about the clean up of the current residential use.
A. Pardo offered that she thought they (the owners) would be doing more to appease the neighborhood.
R. Zukas offered information regarding the landscaping ordinance to address some of the concerns of the abutters regarding the conditions that would have to be maintained on the property. He added that they would have to maintain compliance with the site plan that the Board approved.
J. Convery asked if the current situation was being brought to the courts.
M. Dorman suggested that the owner was in the site plan approval process and once approved would be bound by it. He added that it would be a poor way to spend the Town’s money for temporary relief.
J. Convery replied that they didn’t have to live next door to it.
M. Dorman said that he would have a difficult time getting the Board of Selectmen to approve the expense under these conditions.
There was continued discussion regarding the current conditions on the residentially used site.
T. Liszewski, 16 Walton Road, said that he didn’t understand how there could be so much stuff accumulated on the property in just the six (6) months since it had been bought.
D. Clark asked how they could be assured there would be no reduction in property values.
T. Moore said that he would be hard pressed to find one place in Plaistow where the values had not gone up.
D. Clark offered that he felt the Board should be taking the best interests of the neighborhood into account.
T. Moore replied that the zoning allows for certain uses. He noted that the issues and concerns raised by the neighbors at this meeting were largely existing concerns and were not related to this project.
Jeff Gilbert, 209 Main Street, suggested that each member of the Board should ask themselves if they would like this to be next door to their house.
R. Zukas noted that he lived on Sweet Hill Road and he was faced with a similar situation as a church was being built in his back yard. He offered that part of his own property was zoned to be either commercial or residential, adding that it was common to have a “not in my back yard” attitude. Bob continued that as a Board member he had to look at all the guidelines and if a plan meets the requirements he can’t just say no, adding that is why zoning exists.
J. Gilbert reiterated that nothing on Walton Road is commercially used.
R. Zukas replied that regardless of what is around it, the property itself is zoned for commercial use and if the parameters are met then they have to allow it. He added that as a Board they do try to mitigate as much as possible the impact to the neighborhood.
D. Clark reminded that the property was currently being used residentially and that use would fit in better with the character of the neighborhood so it didn’t matter what the zoning was.
A. Pardo said that she understood the zoning and all but asked if the building had to be as big as they were proposing.
C. Zilch offered that although the building seems large the intended use does not generate a lot of traffic.
A. Pardo reiterated that All Tune & Lube was just supposed to be used for storage so who knows what will happen to this site plan tomorrow.
R. Zukas reminded that they will be bound by a site plan
M. Curran said that she would like to see a traffic study. She added that it would give some guidance on things like potential connection to All Tune & Lube, whether there should be a driveway on Main Street or Walton Road.
L. Komornick offered that the chances of NHDOT denying the application for a driveway on Main Street were slim.
C. Zilch suggested that they make an application to NHDOT for the driveway on Main Street and if it is not granted they would do a traffic study.
T. Moore questioned what the scope of the traffic study would be.
C. Zilch asked what would happen if the traffic study came back recommending the drive on Walton Road.
J. Gilbert questioned what would be done about trucks on Walton Road.
R. Zukas replied if they are through trucking they would be in violation and the residents should report them.
A. Pardo asked if the plan would show the site to be inaccessible from Walton Road.
C. Zilch answered that the plan would show a vegetated buffer on the Walton Street side if they were permitted access from Main Street.
D. Walton asked if they could be required to put up an eight (8) foot high perimeter fence.
T. Moore offered there were many things the Board could require to mitigate things for abutters.
D. Clark suggested there were problems at other locations with noise, noting that trash was being picked up at a local commercial site earlier than 7:00 a.m. or later than 7:00 p.m.
M. Curran noted that those hours (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) were restricting construction, not business activity.
T. Moore added that the Board has restricted hours of operation and pick-up times in the past.
There was continued discussion about the size and aesthetics of the building.
J. Gilbert asked if there was any thought to widening Walton Road.
M. Curran offered there wouldn’t be a reason to go down Walton Road if the entrance is on Main Street.
J. Convery asked where the proposed septic was.
C. Zilch located it for him.
T. Moore asked if anything was being pursued sharing the All Tune & Lube driveway.
R. Zukas said that it would resolve the issue of being too close to the intersection, but he wasn’t sure how it would look.
T. Moore agreed that an adjustment would have to be made, adding the All Tune & Lube may not want to do it.
C. Zilch noted that All Tune & Lube had half their parking on that side of the property and asking for a shared driveway might cause an issue with that, but he would look into it.
T. Moore asked if trips per day information could be provided.
L. Komornick offered that a traffic study could provide additional information that would help in determining if a light would make sense at the intersection of Main Street and Walton Road.
C. Zilch summarized that he would pursue a driveway permit on the Main Street side of the property and a full traffic study would be up to Alan Garland (NHDOT), noting that if he is able to secure that permit they wouldn’t need an entrance on Walton Road. He added that he would still talk to All Tune & Lube about the possibility of a shared driveway.
L. Komornick cautioned that they would be forgoing an opportunity for input on changes to the intersection if they do not get a traffic study.
R. Zukas suggested that they do a traffic study and pass the information along with the driveway permit application.
T. Moore reminded that they would also have to meet the two frontage set backs on Main Street and Walton Road.
C. Zilch asked if he could continue the preliminary hearing to come back with a traffic study and a reconfiguration in consideration of the two frontages.
There was discussion regarding how to proceed with the application.
There was also discussion as to whether or not a variance would be required to not have a driveway on Walton Road. It was noted that the section of the ordinance gives some discretion to the Board if it can be shown to be a better situation.
L. Komornick suggested that the Board could research the question and if they needed to go to the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) they could be sent from the continued preliminary hearing.
D. Clark asked if Walton Road would be included in the traffic study.
M. Curran replied that it would be.
T. Moore announced the hearing would be continued to April 19, 2006.
Discussion with Bonnie Kissel regarding a “Doggie Daycare” on Main Street
Bonnie Kissel, 37 Main Street, explained her plan to have a dog daycare at her home. She noted there would be no noxious uses of the property and that it would not be a kennel situation. Ms. Kissel added that her lot was well buffered from the neighbors.
M. Dorman added that Dr. Wallace’s property was on the north side of the lot and it was residential on the south side.
There was discussion about the details of the plan such as hours of operation, number of dogs and whether or not it would be better to rent another location.
M. Dorman offered that he had asked Ms. Kissel to come to the Board to determine whether or not she would need to do a site plan as this was not a strict application of a home occupation, since there would be two principal uses on the one site. He noted the dog daycare on Garden Road was operating without any issues.
R. Zukas said that he didn’t see a big difference between this plan and a home owner with a lot of dogs.
There was discussion regarding how the dogs would be controlled. Ms. Kissel reassured there would be no “pajama parties” except in an extreme situation where an owner couldn’t get there for weather conditions.
M. Dorman noted the Ms. Kissel would be going before the ZBA for a home occupation and a variance to conduct the business in an accessory building.
Other Business – Steve Smith, 39 Old County Road
Steve Smith, 39 Old County Road, requested to be heard by the Board regarding the issue of his well and the contamination from the capped town landfill.
M. Curran reported to Mr. Smith that the issue had been dealt with at the Board of Selectmen meeting the previous Monday and arrangements were being made in conjunction with the well for the new recreation field that would cure his problem. She added that there should be a solution in short order. Michelle added that Mr. Smith was told to come to the Board of Selectmen and the matter would be dealt with there.
Mr. Smith was allowed to address his issues to the Board. Threats were made to get attorney and newspaper involvement if the situation is not remedied or if any of Mr. Smith’s children were to fall ill and the illness could be attributed to the water problem.
There was discussion about the progress of the recreation fields and the ownership of the property, which prevented an earlier solution for Mr. Smith. It was noted that Mr. Smith’s water is being treated as a temporary remedy until the new well could be drilled.
M. Curran reiterated that the Board of Selectmen had discussed the remedy and it would be happening in the very near future.
T. Moore offered sympathy on behalf of the Board for Mr. Smith’s predicament, adding that there was nothing this board could offer for relief as it was not in the Board’s jurisdiction.
S. Smith left the meeting promising to continue to come to all board meetings until his problem is resolved.
Reorganization/Annual Election of Officers
 M. Curran moved, second by B. Weymouth, to re-elect T. Moore as chairman and elect R. Zukas as vice-chairman.
B. Weymouth said the he had concern for holding this vote without all members of the Board present.
It was suggested that each office be voted on separately.
 M. Curran rescinded her motion; B. Weymouth rescinded his second.
 M. Curran moved, second by B. Weymouth, to re-elect T. Moore as chairman. There was no discussion on the motion. The vote was 4-0-0 U/A.
 M. Curran moved, second by B. Weymouth, to elect R. Zukas as vice-chairman.
L. Komornick noted the S. Ranlett had been made aware of the meeting and that elections would be held.
B. Weymouth offered that his hesitation meant no disrespect to R. Zukas or S. Ranlett he was just struggling with the decision.
There was no further discussion on the motion. The vote was 3-0-1 (Zukas abstaining).
Other Business – Letter from residents at 138 Newton Road, Unit 12
T. Moore read a letter from Ericka K. Noonan and Justin M. Kryskow, regarding issues at the Valleyfield Condominiums, 138 Newton Road.
L. Komornick offered that she had consulted with the Board’s legal counsel regarding the approval of the plan cited in the letter and she was awaiting a reply. She added that she was hoping to meet with Terry Trudel (SEC & Associates, Unit 33) regarding the matter.
M. Dorman expressed concern that this would turn into another venting situation.
M. Curran replied that residents had every right to come before the Board.
M. Dorman added that his concern was that this would end up in court as a civil matter and what was said at a meeting could matter at the time.
T. Moore noted that L. Komornick had informed the residents that it was a civil matter.
Other Business – Education
L. Komornick requested permission to go to a particular educational training on the legal aspects of condominium developments and home owner associations. She noted that it was an expensive training and that was why she wanted to ask the Board.
M. Curran asked if there was enough money in the budget to cover the expense.
L. Komornick replied that there was but it wouldn’t leave much for other training.
M. Curran questioned if Leigh would be willing to give up other training and seminars to attend this one.
R. Zukas asked if the training about be important for Planning Board business.
M. Curran reminded that the idea was not to over spend the bottom line of the total budget.
L. Komornick offered that she was looking into alternatives.
There was discussion on other ways to fund the training including a 50% reimbursement should Leigh decide to take the course on her own.
T. Moore suggested the decision be left up to Leigh.
Other Business – General Updates
The following issues were also discussed:
- Status of the Ron Brown site – Still awaiting a new plan and action from New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services
- Real Estate Signs – Violation notices to be sent
- Status of the Stateline Pet/Dano’s driveway – No action to relocation, was noted to be as depicted on the approved site plan
 R. Zukas moved, second by B. Weymouth, to adjourn the meeting at 9:56 p.m. There was no discussion on the motion. The vote was 4-0-0 U/A.
Respectfully Submitted,
Dee Voss
Recording Secretary
| 
