PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
June 04, 2008
Call to Order: 6:40 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Present were: Timothy E. Moore, Chairman; Peter Bealo and Robert Gray, Selectmen Ex- Officio. Steven Ranlett, Vice-Chairman; and Barry Weymouth; Neal Morin, Alternate; and Merilyn Senter, Alternate, were excused.
Also present were Leigh G. Komornick, Planner, and P. Michael Dorman, Building Inspector/Code Enforcement Officer.
Minutes of May 21, 2008
P. Bealo moved, second by R. Gray, to approve the minutes from the May 21, 2008, meeting. There was no discussion on the motion. The vote was 2-0-1 (Gray abstaining).
Discussion with Camp Wesley Doggie Care Company re: Use of 19 Danville Road for Doggie Day Care.
Cindy Stein and Jennifer Lee, Camp Wesley Doggie Day Care, were present for the discussion.
C. Stein explained that they would like to expand their dog care facility, currently located at 7 Garden Road, to include day care, grooming and kenneling, and they were looking at the property at 19 Danville Road. She noted that since the Commercial I (CI) District did not allow for day care and didn’t specify that it only related to children she was looking for the Board’s input as to how to proceed.
T. Moore offered that all discussion regarding day care in the CI was always about children,
L. Komornick noted that there had been recent changes in the ordinances and there was now a list of requirements to obtain a special exception for an animal care facility. She added that she wanted to make sure that was the direction the Board wanted them to go before they spent thousands of dollars on engineering for site plans.
There was a discussion of the process, which was noted to include making an application to the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) for a special exception and then returning to the Planning Board for approval of a site plan.
M. Dorman offered that Ms. Stein and Ms. Lee were at this meeting to seek out the Board’s level of comfort with their intent before proceeding forward.
R. Gray asked what other uses were located around the subject property.
M. Dorman listed Asian Auto Sales, a recently-approved children’s daycare, Peabody Transportation, Interstate Used Cars II and Plaistow Cabinets.
L. Komornick noted that the criteria for animal care facility did not list a site plan.
M. Dorman suggested that meant they would not be required to submit a site plan to the ZBA; adding that they would still need to have one for the Planning Board to approve.
There was additional discussion of the review process. It was suggested that the applicant may want to just go ahead and get the site plan started and use it to make application to the ZBA. It was reiterated that they could make that application using a sketch to show how the requirements of the ordinance would be met.
The review process for the Planning Board was discussed. It was suggested that the Board needed to have workshop discussion on whether or not staff would be able to send applicants to the ZBA in certain circumstances. It was suggested that in the case where there is a specific need for a special exception under the ordinances that staff should be able to send the applicant for that relief and make a written report to the Board that they had done so. It was offered that there needed to be a balance found between making sure that the Board is kept informed as to inquiries made for future development, and making the application process timely and efficient for the applicants, as well as the Board.
Continuation of a Final Public Hearing on a Commercial Site Plan Review Application for a proposed 3-story, 3,400 square foot professional office space addition to the existing building. ~The property is Tax Map 11, Lot 5 located at 23 Atkinson Depot Road. ~This is a 1.30 +/- acres parcel with 265.62 feet of frontage located in the CI Zone, and contains an existing 2,000 square foot building. ~The owner of record is Little River Properties II, LLC.
Charlie Zilch, SEC and Associates, was present for the application. He explained that there had been some changes made based on previous discussions with the Board and comments from CLD. C. Zilch offered that he would like to go over how he felt they had addressed the remaining CLD comments.
He noted that the following CLD issues had been addressed:
- Details of the curb cut and handicap access ramp
- Sign for tractor-trailer relocated closer to driveway
- Silt fencing moved slightly out of wetlands buffer
- Copy of the NHDOT (New Hampshire Department of Transportation) retaining wall easement showing no restrictions to the use for parking
There was a brief discussion of the NHDOT wall maintenance easement
- NHDOT letter noting there was no need to acquire a new driveway permit
- Correction to the drainage report for a minor difference in the flow rate
- Details of the rip-rap were supplied
C. Zilch noted that CLD called out that the volume of water leaving the site had been increased. He added that happened anytime there was an increase in the building and pavement on a site. He said that the requirements were to show that there was no increase in the rate at which that water flows off the site. C. Zilch noted that the runoff flows in the direction of a 1200 acre contributory and that they were disturbing 3700 sq ft of a one acre parcel, which he likened to a drop in the ocean. He explained that in order to meet the proper rate of runoff the water was now being routed into a detention basin by way of a treatment swale. He offered that this was a great improvement as there was previously no treatment of any of the runoff water onsite.
- Parking contingency plan and waivers were added
C. Zilch noted there had been a “glitch” in the septic approval relating to the well and the radius being within the detention basin. He related discussions with NHDES (New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services), which resulted in the proposal to keep the existing well and locate a second well, the radius of which would not be in the detention basin. He offered that he anticipated approval of the septic to be eminent. C. Zilch noted that all the changes would still meet the proper septic loading requirements for the number of employees proposed for the site.
T. Moore asked if there were any further questions from the Board. There were none. He asked if there were any abutters wishing to question or comment. There were none.
T. Moore questioned if there had been a response from CLD on the answers provided by SEC and Associates.
L. Komornick said that she had been waiting for C. Zilch to get a positive response back from the State regarding the septic before submitting the responses to CLD. She noted that she also wanted to include a letter from the Board regarding their decision not to require a plug test as suggested by CLD. L. Komornick noted that this had been a lengthy process for the applicant and they had already been required to do a number of revisions.
C. Zilch offered that he knew that it would be somewhat of a process as this was a unique site. He said that he was rather surprised at the State’s response to the proposed single well.
T. Moore noted that it seemed the requirements were changing on a near daily basis.
It was noted that this plan had previously been accepted as complete and that all waiver requests had been approved.
P. Bealo moved, second by R. Gray, to approve the commercial site plan for 23 Atkinson Depot Road, as posted, with the following conditions:
- Approval of NHDES Septic Permit
- Favorable final review from CLD
There was no further discussion on the motion. The vote was 3-0-0 U/A.
Public Hearing on the following amendments to the regulations and fee schedule:
An amendment to the fee schedule for the Town of Plaistow Public Safety Impact Fee Ordinance. A report documenting the basis of assessment for the updated fee schedule is available at the Planning Office.
T. Moore read the legal notice for the removal of fee dollar amounts from the regulations and placement of them all in a single fee schedule. It was noted that some fees in the ordinances were removed in March to be put into a fee schedule and this would do the same for the regulations. It was also noted that this would make it easier when there was a need to adjust a fee and provide clarity and consistency in the fee schedule.
P. Bealo asked that it be clarified that no specific fees were changed at this time.
L. Komornick confirmed that there were not, this was to centralize all fees.
P. Bealo moved, second by R. Gray, to approve the removal of fees from the regulations and placement into a single fee schedule. There was no discussion on the motion. The vote was 3-0-0 U/A.
The second item for public hearing was delayed to allow for other matters to be discussed first.
Presentation/Discussion with Theresa Walker of the Rockingham Planning Commission concerning the Brownsfield Program
T. Moore noted that Theresa Walker had to postpone this discussion with the Board.
Request by Jack McSheehy re: paving request at the Vic Geary Center
Jack McSheehy was present for the discussion.
T. Moore read a letter from J. McSheehy explaining the need for additional pavement to be installed.
There was a drawing provided and reviewed of the area intended to be paved.
J. McSheehy added that it would improve the fire exit for the basement area of the building, reminding that the lower level had recently been rented to a church. He noted that there was never a true site plan approved for this site and that the center had recently suffered some financial setbacks due to budgeting cutbacks in some of the towns they service. Mr. McSheehy noted that the area they were seeking to pave was already graveled. He added that they did not have the money to be able to have a site plan drawn up at this time and that the paving would be donated to the center.
L. Komornick noted that there needed to be assurances that there would be no runoff related to the new paving that would affect abutting properties.
J. McSheehy explained that all the surrounding property belonged to the site.
L. Komornick suggested if there was some “great vision” of a proposal to severely change the site then it might be a good idea to ask for a site plan. She added that the Vic Geary center may want to consider putting away money for the future need for a site plan.
There was consensus of the Board that the Vic Geary Center could go forward with the paving as discussed.
Review of status of construction projects and final conditions and letters including bond/escrow account releases from the property owner concerning plans for completion including the following:
Status of Rockingham Athletic Club (RAC)
Stephen Drelick was present for the discussion.
M. Dorman noted that the deadline imposed by the Planning Board for final paving has passed.
S. Drelick explained that the NHDOT was still working on the section of Route 125 in front of his property and they were still tearing up the road. He added that he had been in contact with people from the State regarding when they will be finishing this portion of the roadwork as well as reconstruction of the drainage culvert. Mr. Drelick noted that he was told they would be done in June. He added that he had been in negotiations with Continental Paving to do the work as soon as the State is done their work.
There was a discussion regarding when the State would be completing their project, as well as starting the intersection of Route 125 and Danville Road, and what an appropriate extension of the Mr. Drelick’s paving deadline would be.
L. Komornick offered that it had not been fully realized the overlap the extensive State project would have on this site.
R. Gray moved to extend the deadline for final paving at the Rockingham Athletic Center, 175 Plaistow Road, to July 15, 2008.
M. Dorman noted that the State would only initially be doing the binder coat on Route 125, saving the final coat until other Route 125 projects were completed.
S. Drelick added that he couldn’t guarantee that he would be able to schedule the paving to be within two weeks of the State’s completion.
L. Komornick asked if the area of the parking lot, where there was a pipe located, had been fixed.
S. Drelick offered there was no issue with a pipe but there was a pot hole that had been filled.
R. Gray amended his motion, second by P. Bealo, to extend the deadline for final paving at the Rockingham Athletic Center, 175 Plaistow Road, to August 1, 2008. There was no discussion on the motion. The vote was 3-0-0 U/A.
There was a brief discussion about proposed concerts at the RAC. Mr. Drelick noted that he didn’t see the concerts going forward at this time.
M. Dorman noted that Mr. Drelick as well as the promoter of the concerts understood that they would have to come to the Planning Board for approval before they could have the concerts on the site.
Continued from earlier in the evening
Public Hearing on the following amendments to the regulations and fee schedule:
An amendment to the fee schedule for the Town of Plaistow Public Safety Impact Fee Ordinance. A report documenting the basis of assessment for the updated fee schedule is available at the Planning Office.
Police Chief Stephen Savage joined the discussion.
There was a discussion of a report from Bruce Mayberry regarding the Public Safety Impact Fee (PSIF). There was a discussion on the old fees versus the new fees and how they are split between the police and fire department expansion needs.
The fee summary suggested an increase in the residential PSIF from $795.79 per dwelling unit to $1405.00 and an increase of the non-residential PSIF from $.65 per square foot to $1.01. It was noted that the details of the study were outlined in the study, which was available for review in the Planning Office.
S. Savage offered that he had read the report from B. Mayberry as well as attended some of the meetings with him. He added that he found the study to be comprehensive and felt that it was properly done, using calls for service as a major factor, and that he was impressed with the product. Chief Savage noted that there may be a need for re-review in the future with the anticipated rise in construction costs but that he would defer to B. Mayberry’s judgment.
R. Gray noting the report called out 43% growth related to residential and 55% attributed to commercial, calling it significant.
T. Moore added that since there is now a specific calculation for the PSIF it should be easier to plug in numbers in the future if it was deemed that review and change was needed.
There was a discussion of the increase in the use of impact fees in many cities and towns in New Hampshire, once a resisted source of revenue. There was also discussion of the actions of the Legislature and how it then forced many communities to seek alternative sources of revenue.
S. Savage reminded that all impact fees must be able to be clearly related to growth of a community.
P. Bealo asked for the time to further review the report before voting to adopt it.
L. Komornick asked if it would make P. Bealo feel more comfortable to know that it had been thoroughly reviewed by a committee.
P. Bealo offered that as an elected official he felt it was his duty to read and analyze reports for himself, noting that he had every expectation that he would be able to vote for the change.
L. Komornick noted that the board members had been given a copy of the study two (2) weeks previously.
P. Bealo apologized for missing it in his last meeting’s packet and retracted his request to delay the vote.
R. Gray moved, second by P. Bealo, to approve the PSIF report provided by Bruce Mayberry and adopted the fees as suggested in that report. There was no discussion on the motion. The vote was 3-0-0 U/A.
Continuation of Request from Police Chief Regarding Use of Public Safety Impact Fees for Record Storage
Police Chief Stephen Savage was present for the discussion. He explained that he had met with Town Manager, Jason Hoch, and T. Moore and had sent a memo to both outlining a request to use PSIF to fund the portion of a records management system that could be related to growth. Chief Savage reminded that the voters had approved more hours for the records clerk and they were seeking additional ways to better manage records. He outlined a proposed three (3) year process to implement a new system. Chief Savage offered that the first year of that plan could be related to growth and other subsequent years would most likely appear as budget items and/or requests in the Capitol Improvement Plan (CIP). He detailed the three (3) phases for the implementation and how it related to community growth.
L. Komornick reminded that a copy of the Chief’s memo had been given to the members at the previous meeting. She added that B. Mayberry had been asked to comment on the proposal.
T. Moore offered a paraphrase of the comment from B. Mayberry who suggested that it might not be the best idea. The caution was noted that it should be confirmed that it’s not just for the replacement of an existing system and that the need could be directly related to growth. T. Moore noted that there was additional caution that spending the PSIF monies on these types of projects decreased the monies that would be available for the actual expansion of the Public Safety Complex.
S. Savage suggested that it could be argued that phases II and III are not growth related but that Phase I is. He referenced a review done by King Services (King) regarding changes in records retention philosophy.
T. Moore noted that the review done by King was done town-wide and there would be changes made through the Town’s record keeping system.
R. Gray moved, second by P. Bealo, to approve the use of PSIF funds for a records retention system for the Police Department as presented.
R. Gray offered that he was still on the fence. He noted that he could understand the arguments for and against using PSIF monies in this way. R. Gray expressed concern that there wouldn’t be funds available when the time came for engineering costs related to the expansion of the Safety Complex, but he also knew that monies would have to be paid back if they were not expended within the six (6) year timeframe of the RSAs. He expressed concern about whether or not this expenditure could be challenged.
T. Moore noted that someone would have to challenge the entire impact fee ordinance which he felt was unlikely.
S. Savage offered that there did need to be an awareness of the six (6) year window for using the monies to avoid having to refund them. He added that he felt this proposal could successfully be defended as relating to growth.
T. Moore added that if records management system would be brought forward into the new or expanded facility. He noted that if there were considerations for records management considered now there would have to be a lot of thought put into it in the next 4-5 years.
P. Bealo suggested that if the new system is intended to take up less space it may mean that the safety complex could be used longer.
S. Savage added that it could reduce the need for so much records storage space in a new or expanded facility.
L. Komornick offered that as was with the trailer it’s avoiding getting into the fifth year and looking at the PSIF funds collected and how to expend them to not have to refund them, particularly if there is not the vote of the community to fund the expansion of the project.
S. Savage added that it was not reality that enough funds would be collected as a result of this impact fee to fund construction of the building and that there is going to have to be a bond to fund construction.
There was no further discussion on the motion. The vote was 3-0-0 U/A.
L. Komornick suggested that there be a report back to the Board after Phase I.
R. Gray added that if they want to use any monies for Phase II they would have to come back to the Board for the discussion.
There was additional discussion of Phases II and III and where funding would come from. Chief Savage offered that they probably could not be shown to be growth related and would have to be included in the CIP or the budget. It was noted that records management is currently included in the CIP and has been for some time.
Continued from earlier:
Review of status of construction projects and final conditions and letters including bond/escrow account releases from the property owner concerning plans for completion including the following:
Request by Duane Skofield for Bond and Escrow account releases for site plan construction work at 207 Main Street
T. Moore read a letter from Duane Skofield requesting refund of monies being held related to the construction of the project at 207 Main Street.
M. Dorman offered that he and L. Komornick had visited the site the previous day. He noted there were a few issues, steel being stored on the site that will be picked up by Kidder Wrecking in a few days, and wood piles, which are to be removed, but other than those the site is in good shape.
L. Komornick noted that there had not been any complaints from the abutters since the site went into use.
R. Gray moved, second by P. Bealo, to refund the construction bond and escrow monies being held for the site at 207 Main Street. There was no discussion on the motion. The vote was 3-0-0 U/A.
Request for water line impact fee waiver from Dana Post for Stateline Pet Store
L. Komornick offered that this was tied into the status of the completion of the site. She noted that he too had a May 31 deadline for paving and the reason that the paving had not yet been completed was due to decision-making about the fire suppression line.
T. Moore read a letter from Dana Post requesting refund of the waterline impact fee in exchange for putting the infrastructure to connect into the Town’s fire suppression line. There was also a memo from John McArdle, Fire Chief, in support of the proposal.
T. Moore asked if fire suppression water was available at this site.
M. Dorman replied that it was and there was a fire hydrant right at the driveway (Main Street side). He added that they would need time to install the line to sprinkle the building and then pave the driveway and parking area. He suggested a deadline similar to that given to the RAC earlier.
L. Komornick noted that there was still a construction bond being held for this site.
M. Dorman offered that they would not be sprinkling the storage building yet since it wasn’t heated, but there would be a line provided to it for the future.
There was discussion as to what would be the options available to the Board if they granted the waiver refunding the waterline impact fees and then Mr. Post does not install the line and complete the paving.
L. Komornick reminded that waivers had been granted in the past before a project was approved. She added that there had to be the assumption that the developer is going to keep their word or the Board would have to decide when/if to use the bond to complete the work.
R. Gray moved, second by P. Bealo, to grant the request from Dana Post to waive and refund the waterline impact fees being held for the project at 137 Plaistow Road (Stateline Pet) with the understanding that Mr. Post has agreed to install a wet fire suppression system in the retail store and stub to the storage building. All work is to be completed by July 31, 2008, or the Town will keep the construction bond and the business will lose its occupancy permit because the agreed upon fire suppression system is not installed. There was no discussion on the motion. The vote was 3-0-0 U/A.
R. Gray moved, second by P. Bealo, to extend the deadline for final paving to be completed at 137 Plaistow Road until August 1, 2008, to allow for the installation of a fire suppression system. There was no discussion on the motion. The vote was 3-0-0 U/A.
Status 202 Main Street Site Plan Construction
M. Dorman reported that the approved site plan for the site showed the building outback, variances were obtained for the setbacks, but since then questions have been raised about the paving. He offered that since the regulations call for all parking to be paved and it was called out as parking on the plan he thought that meant it should be paved and he asked for it to be paved. M. Dorman explained that he was in touch with the property owner and the engineer to request recalculation of the lot coverage. He noted that it was approved with a lot coverage of only 44% and that he was confident that the small amount of pavement that was added would not cause them to exceed the maximum of 75%.
L. Komornick asked if the storage building was being rented.
M. Dorman answered that it was being rented for the storage of antique cars.
L. Komornick added that there were no restrictions on the approved plan to prohibit that use.
R. Gray asked if there was anything on the plan that said the storage could only be used by the owner. It was confirmed that there was not.
L. Komornick noted that the owner knew that if there was to be anything other than storage in the building he would have to come back to the Board.
M. Dorman offered that he would report back on the lot coverage number.
T. Moore said he would only need to report back if the lot coverage exceeds 75%.
Request for Payment of Invoice from Route 125 Impact Fee Account
T. Moore noted that some years ago the Town approved a Route 125 Impact Fee, for improvements to the Route 125 Corridor. He continued that since that time it was discovered that the State of New Hampshire was funding the improvements to Route 125 and there was a danger that the funds collected by the town would have to be refunded and the ordinance has been repealed by a Town vote. T. Moore noted that the balance of the monies that had been collected was now being spent to widen Haseltine Street in connection with the improvements to Route 125.
R. Gray moved, second by P. Bealo, to signify as appropriate the use of Route 125 Impact Fees for the payment of legal fees, in the amount of $69.75, related to the expansion of Haseltine Street. There was no discussion on the motion. The vote was 3-0-0 U/A.
Other Business – Legal Notice from Kingston, NH re: Galloway site
L. Komornick noted that she and M. Dorman would be going to the Kingston Planning Office to look at the plan and would report back to the Board on any impact to Plaistow.
Other Business – SB342 – Workforce Housing
A copy of the bill passed in the New Hampshire Legislature and waiting the Governor’s signature was in the member’s packet.
There was a discussion regarding how the Town should react to the legislation. It was suggested that any considerations would have to be soon in order to be included in the 2008 zoning review season. It was suggested that RPC (Rockingham Planning Commission) be asked to participate in a discussion regarding the impact to the region and make suggestions for zoning changes. Another suggestion was to do nothing and wait for a legal challenge.
Other Business – Heads Up on Agenda Items Scheduled for June 18th Meeting (re: 144 Main Street)
L. Komornick explained that based on previous discussions regarding this site and the potential for a number of attorneys attending for the applicant she thought it would be best to ask the Board’s counsel to be at the meeting, so she had already scheduled him to be at the meeting.
There was a brief discussion of what the application was for and some of the issues that the Board may be faced with deciding that night.
T. Moore asked if they were filing for a preliminary hearing or a final.
L. Komornick noted they had filed for a final hearing.
R. Gray moved, second by P. Bealo, to adjourn the meeting at 9:03 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted as recorded by Dee Voss.
Approved by the Planning Board on _________________________
________________________
Timothy Moore, Chairman
| 
