PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
November 3, 2010
Call to Order: 6:35 P.M.
ROLL CALL: Present – Chairman; Tim Moore, Vice Chairman; Peter Bealo, Charles Lanza, Steve Ranlett and Selectman Ex- Officio; Robert Gray.
Also present- Town Planner; Leigh Komornick and Chief Building Inspector; Michael Dorman
Item One:
Minutes for October 20, 2010
Motion made by P. Bealo to accept minutes of 10/20/10 as written, second by R. Gray. No discussion on the motion. The vote was 3-0-2 with T. Moore and S. Ranlett abstaining as they were excused for the 10/20/10 meeting.
Item Two:
Presentation by Steven Lewis, of Steven Lewis INC., on Low-Impact Development techniques utilized in his Salem Project.
S. Lewis, Steven Lewis INC., was present to give the presentation. He told the Board that there are three categories to Low-Impact Development; Storm Water Run-Off, Potential Pollution and Environmental Inventories. He explained that the acronym they use for Low-Impact Development is LID and told them they could have the written explanation he brought. S. Lewis noted that there are interesting parts to the plan that differ from normal site plans; Buyer Intentionaries, Mulching Berms, Zero Scaping and Use of Indigenous Plants and Materials. He mentioned T.F. Moran, saying that they have championed the science of LID Engineering Technologies and added that their building in Bedford, MA has a green roof. He explained that together (T.F. Moran and Steven Lewis INC), in the last five years, they have cut the edge on
it (LID) and have learned from each other. S. Lewis added that T.F. Moran has gone to Washington and they have both worked with the EPA and HUD. He explained that LID is a Federal Partnership Program called PATH (Partnership for Advancing Technologies in Housing), adding that the partnership was between the EPA, HUD and the Association of Home Builders, with the Urban Land Institute being involved from an engineering standpoint. He explained that he brought this up to the Board because they are paying for it and told them he had a pamphlet to explain PATH and would also give them the contact information. S. Lewis brought a site plan to present to the Board from the most recent LID project he has participated in, and added that this was the only federally funded senior project in NH this year and some of the reason it got funded was because of LID. He explained how he would deal with water management and parking lots on the site plan, saying that their
philosophy is not zero change. He added that the Town may look at a plan and see Storm water Detention Basin.
L. Komornick stated that they are trying to get away from the detention basin, and use underground drainage.
S. Lewis explained that detention basins have a negative environmental impact because the water sits in it creating an artificial swamp and also heats the temperature of the water up and doesn’t clean the water. He added that it is not exotic, and that he will not participate in complex, exotic, and difficult to maintain devises. He said that this site plan up in Salem is the Northeastern example of an LID project in the U.S. and suggested the Board members go and look at it. S. Lewis explained that for this example, they looked at the roof run off first and made sure the roof pitches were steep, at the base of the building there is a stone drainage system with mini catch basins that collect through drain pipes that empty into the buyer retention basin. He showed an Infiltrator Trench to the Board saying that
they are not complicated or expensive.
S. Ranlett stated that he can see the trench is low maintenance now, but what will the trench look like in five years.
S. Lewis noted that the pictures he is presenting are 17 years old. He explained that you design the roads so there is room to push (the snow) and the rocks in the trench are large enough that the leaves blow right out with the wind, and you plant the surrounding area with indigenous plants that look natural. He explained that buyer retention ponds are designed to fill up during a storm and then to dry out within 72 hours, using 2 ½ feet of very course sand and he added that they are designed with plants that can tolerate very wet conditions. He stated that in 20 years they have had no failures, and that this is a cheaper system from a taxpayer’s standpoint. He showed a conventional road drainage system and a LID road drainage system to the Board explaining that in New England the run off freezes on the
roads but with the LID the road is designed with an accentuated slope, no curb structures, and huge gutters. He added that NH has designed a lot of their State Roads this way and that Canada has used this system for years because it is a much better system for cold climates. He went on to show the Board more examples of LID site plans, stating that the philosophy is to look at the land first, not the zoning, and see how the zoning can fit. Then they do a natural resources assessment; wet lands, plant life and where is it steep or not; then try to develop a land use plan that minimizes impact, and he added that your zoning needs to allow you to cluster on the better areas.
L. Komornick stated that this fits in with the Plaistow First Committee meeting they had, were they are looking at Town owned land and making recommendations on what to do use them for. She added that they have a lot of land in different areas that, due to rezoning, need to be planned out with buffers.
S. Lewis reiterated that this plan has those types of things, showing and explaining more examples to the Board. He added that he would never do a project that didn’t have a delineated 15 foot wide walking trail that was surveyed and designated to the Town. He explained a disclosure he had the buyers of one of his projects sign, stating that they understood that there would be a walking trail, construction, blasting, ect…, as part of the new LID plan which will helps prove that the developer gave disclosure to the buyers.
L. Komornick noted that if the public cannot walk on these trails then they are not good.
S. Lewis explained that many builders do not want to do this because of liability without the land being transferred to a common entity, and added that it really needs to be delineated and separated. He showed the Board another site plan of a buyer retention area and explained what indigenous plants were used and why.
L. Komornick asked S. Lewis to explain his over sight of the land vs. a developer who does not use LID.
S. Lewis responded that if you hire a contractor that gets it, the directions are easy, and added that if you hire a third party reviewer they will make sure the directions are easy. He noted that he rejected all exotic things, employing open drainage, no curbing or catch basins, and buyer retentions. He showed and explained to the Board more examples including a rain garden from Kingston, NH, used as a buyer retention area and left some pamphlets about Green Building.
L. Komornick asked if the Town of Salem’s Ordinances are more flexible of Plaistow.
S. Lewis replied yes, that Salem allowed density increases, and gave tradeoffs. He again used the example of Braemoor Woods, in Salem NH, noting that many people do not even know that it is there, and that is a compliment to him. He added that the more of a buffer they did the bigger density they got, noting that it is 140 acres with 260 units but if it were not LID the density would be about 80 units. Some of the trade offs were walking trails, buffers and affordable housing and Salem allowed them to do multi-family. He added that it was called Incentive Zoning and explained it in more detail to the Board.
L. Komornick asked if the Town wanted a developer to use LID, would they be able to hire a firm.
S. Lewis replied yes, that HUD and EPA have held training courses and that some engineers have realized that this is the way to go. He added that T.F. Moran is a big firm in Bedford MA that used LID, noting that he can give the Board a list of firms and that there are other resources and those incentives are there.
L. Komornick said that this is why they wanted him to come in, that under the MS4 storm water permit the Town has from the EPA, they have pledged to update the regulations and ordinances to be more storm water management oriented and that this LID technology will get them there.
S. Lewis explained that this site plan differs very little from the usual site plans except there are no catch basins and no big pipes to rush the water off to someplace else. He passed around pictures of a buyer retention area in Salem that was completed a few weeks ago to the Board members and showed a few more pictures to them, adding that Leigh can copy all the stuff he has brought in.
T. Moore thanked S. Lewis for coming in. He said that they have been discussing LID for a few years now, and that this year, with the MS4 development, it may be a good time.
S. Lewis said that he had contacted the owner of T.F. Moran and he would be willing to come in and explain the more technical stuff to the Board if they call him.
T. Moore stated that they may do that when it comes time to write the regulations.
Item Three:
Discussion on Appeal to ZBA by Ron Brown
C. Lanza stepped down for this discussion at 7:24
T. Moore references the letter from Attn. MacMillan stating they have applied for a variance (appeal to ZBA) based on the Planning Board’s administrative decision that they have adequate Work Force Housing stock and do not need a Work Force Housing Ordinance.
P. Bealo noted that they have not given any reasons.
T. Moore responded that he spoke with L. Komornick and they thought The Board should write a letter to the ZBA outlining the reasoning for the their decision as well as attending the ZBA meeting in case they have any questions.
R. Gray stated that it took a whole meeting with the RPC, Cliff (Sinnott), to explain how these got calculated and what it was (Work Force Housing Ordinance). How will the ZBA understand what this is to make an appropriate decision without a presentation to explain what it is.
S. Ranlett asked P. Bealo if he can put it together so the average person can understand it.
P. Bealo replied that he would be happy to put it together and run it by this Board to make sure everyone thought it was appropriate at the next meeting, December 2ND.
T. Moore stated that they need to get the letter to the ZBA a week ahead of the meeting. He stated that he was sure cliff (Sinnott) or someone at the RPC would be willing to write a letter of support stating that they agree with the calculations, if they do, and that would give them (ZBA) a letter from The PB and an outside source.
L. Komornick asked if T. Moore wanted to write the letter first, and then see if they (RPC) wanted to come down.
T. Moore answered that they should write a letter first, then ask the RPC if they would review and confirm the letter as accurate and then ask if they would be willing to write a letter to the ZBA to support it.
R. Gray stated that in this case, because they didn’t know R. Brown would appeal to the ZBA, there was probably never anything generated from this Board explaining their decision for denial.
M. Dorman said to at least write a letter or have someone there to testify.
R. Gray responded that they needed all these actions; a letter, someone attending (the ZBA meeting) and someone from RPC to come and explain it.
P. Bealo asked L. Komornick to have the Assessing Office e-mail him an excel spread sheet with the matrix of all the residences in town and their values.
L. Komornick replied yes.
T. Moore added that it should say whether they are multi or single family.
There was no more discussion and C. Lanza returned at 7:30.
Mixed Use Discussion
L. Komornick stated that this item had been on the agenda previously as a suggestion for amendment. She added that when they were approving Dr. Holiman’s plan this issue came up, and when she spoke with Dr. Holiman she said it could be dealt with by either making an Amendment or by him getting a variance. She said that when The Board had the discussion on the issue of the amendment, they did not have the opportunity to be there and explain why they feel it is a viable alternative. L. Komornick stated that in both businesses, these people have vested their lives, both businesses and homes, in Plaistow. She noted that when the Board spoke about it, it seemed to come down to fear of degradation of property, and she added that when you have a business and you are there every day, you are going to see the
house your renting and not let it fall into disrepair.
S. Ranlett stated that he remembers when they changed it, but he does not remember why, adding that they (business owners) needed to live there to have their business there.
L. Komornick replied that it was for the Village Center Overlay District.
R. Gray asked what the reasons were.
T. Moore responded when they had initially discussed this, most properties the owner did live there, so they approved a mix use where you could live in your house and have a business. He added that a year or so after allowing the mixed use, an owner moved out of his house and the intent was to be owner occupied so it was changed to be owner occupied and that carried over from Route 108 to the village Center District. T. Moore stated that he did not recall in any discussion where they talked about the business owner be on site every day vs. an owner being out of town and not on site every day or having a business that is not run by the owner.
L. Komornick noted a similar situation in Town at Amici Hair (Salon) that has not been an issue of falling into disrepair.
R. Gray stated his concerns, saying that the days of taking individual issues are gone and that they need to look at it as a whole. He mentioned that the BOS just heard a presentation on traffic on Main Street about round abouts and slowing traffic down, but it was also said that if the Town wants to create a true Village District they should increase the density of the properties to allow business to be stacked up on top of each other creating an Exeter (NH) like feel. He noted that he would hate to make all these recommended changes and have people buying properties along Main Street and having tenants living on top of stores, and added that this is not his vision for this Town. R. Gray stated that it is not an issue for him to have people renting out space in buildings where people have their businesses, but he does not
want to take these issues one at a time but would rather know the whole plan and then make changes to what they think this Town should be.
Present for the discussion was Mutsi Holiman, Main Street. She stated that they had decided to keep their business there for their children who may someday want join the business and maybe live there. She wanted The Board to clarify that she understood; she is seeing inconsistent situations in the Town Village and with the master plan of the Village in mind, to see a long term strategic plan.
R. Gray replied that it is not inconsistent because the regulations spell out exactly what is and is not allowed for each business, but added that he does not want to tackle one small issue in the Village Overlay District and not combine it with all the other issues going on, noting that he’d rather come to a consensus of what they want for the Village Overlay District and propose it all at the same time so it can be implemented at the same time.
M. Holiman replied that they are talking about the same thing. She added that if the Town said they will allow a situation where the owner is not living or coming to the business very day, or they decide to rent out their home, she questioned if the Town would need to handle their situation separately.
R. Gray responded that he thinks they will need to be handled separately, noting that it is not allowed to be rented out right now, and if they wanted to do that they would need to seek relief from the ZBA at this point, unless regulation gets changed.
S. Ranlett stated that his opinion differs in that this could take four or five years. He thinks they changed the regulations due to a loop hole in the zoning from an issue years before with a business on Route 108
M. Dorman clarified that the original issue on Route 108 was that the Town thought the owner of the property had left and rented both, but he had in fact stayed with the business.
S. Ranlett stated that they could look into something where you can’t rent out the business and the house; you need to be there to maintain the property.
R. Gray stated that if you change the regulation now to allow people to rent out space and in five years implement traffic safety on Main street, change the density of properties with people expanding properties and true store fronts along Main Street because it has been allowed, and people are renting rooms above the store fronts with four and five tenants, that, he added, is not what he sees for Main Street.
S. Ranlett responded that he feels they should look at the Ordinance, discuss it, and craft it in a way that they are not renting out a room, but the whole house, adding that they should look at it because it is affecting these people (Dr. Vitale and Dr. Holiman) instead of waiting because that can take too long.
M. Holiman said that she just wanted to see the discussion get started because things change. She added that some of the definitions in the Ordinance are not clearly defined. She stated that she appreciates all the work the Board does in starting a process and to help them understand and come up with (a solution) they can all be happy with.
T. Moore replied that they can put a proposal together, but that that is all they can promise at this time. If it is satisfactory to the Board then it will be on the warrant for the Town Meeting.
Also present for the discussion was Jim Vitale, Main Street. He reiterated that they have been in Town for a while and The Board should look at how businesses evolve, especially a home business. He noted that as they are getting older they are looking at changes to make in how or where they live, and thinks the Board should look at that.
L. Komornick stated that what if they wanted to sell their property.
J. Vitale said what if we want to sell our practice, which he added at some point he may want to give his practice to somebody and he may not want to live there.
S. Ranlett stated that they may not be able to subdivide the property so they will need to find a buyer to buy the property.
R. Gray commented that they could still sell the practice, but you would still own the property and the person would rent from you.
L. Komornick added that she would not want them to get into a situation where they sold the whole building and the new owner cannot run a business.
J. Vitale agreed that that would be a hardship for that person. He added that he would like The Board to clarify these issues before they come to pass.
T. Moore stated that any of the changes they propose will have several public hearings on them; the public is free to comment. He added that they do not have a lot of time as the deadlines for the Public Hearings are coming up and The Board is backed up. He also noted that they cannot introduce new things at the second Public hearing as things are a follow through of the first Public Hearing, so they need to pay careful attention to the dates as they move forward.
Item Four:
Pro Bark Site Plan Issues
T. Moore stated that there had been complaints of smoke which resulted from spontaneous combustion.
R. Gray added that this was brought up at a BOS meeting when it was mentioned that they could smell the smoke after the meeting. He said it could be smelled all over Town.
S. Ranlett mentioned that a friend of his on Crane Crossing Road brought this issue to his attention, saying it smelled like rotten eggs. He asked if they have mitigated it yet.
L. Komornick replied that the reason she put it on the agenda is so it got to the Board as it is a site plan issue, and they have pulled out the site plan.
R. Gray continued that on Monday’s BOS meeting it was brought up to him by the person who had gone on the site walk with M. Dorman, that there was piles of mulch encroaching into the wetlands area as well as a pile of stumps that appeared to have been there for a long period of time and those were his issues.
L. Komornick said that what they wanted to do was to look at what they had approved on the site plan and everything that is out there, with the exception of the encroachment into the wetland which is being addressed.
M. Dorman clarified that it is a wetland buffer.
L. Komornick continued that all the piles are where they should be. She added that there has been no violation of the site plan, and that this issue involves a different level to the use that after looking into it, it would be good for the Board to look at the use as the circumstances are related to what they are doing out there and was not anticipated when approved. She stated that she looked into other Towns to see if there were any state of the art regulations they were missing out on and there are not. She contacted a Washington State firm that does this use and there are not site plan regulations that go along with it as far as citing things. L. Komornick told The Board that she had some links she provided them with regarding this issue, and it comes down to a management of materials issue. She stated that
the owners of Pro Bark were there to discuss what they are doing to handle these issues and they can discuss what The Board can do, maybe a site plan amendment or a hearing, to let the abutters know how it is being addressed.
Peter Brown and Jeff Brown, Pro Bark, were present for the meeting.
P. Bealo asked how come this was a new issue. He stated that when Timberlane extension went in during the winter time, he and his family saw a snow pile with trees and leaves under it from construction that had smoke coming out of it. After calling the fire department, they were told that this happens all the time. He added that (Pro Bark) may be more condensed but this happens all the time.
L. Komornick stated that the articles she received describe spontaneous combustion fully, and what they feel are contributing factors they may want to address at this particular site.
J. Brown states that there is no exact science to it.
S. Ranlett asked J. Brown to explain what is causing this.
L. Komornick replied that it is spontaneous combustion.
J. Brown explained that it is a heat build-up that is either sparked from wind, moisture, metal in the product, or not enough compaction. He goes on to explain how they compact it and stated that do to the economy, they are sitting on more material than they usually do. He feels they are doing a great job of managing the piles, they have been in Plaistow for eight years and the Town does not hear of any fires. He explained that he checks the piles seven days a week and he squashes them before they are a problem. He added that a lack of moisture was a big problem in this case, and that he strongly believes that a piece of metal was the cause, as they found five or six pieces of metal in this pile. He explained the screening process and that a piece of hot metal can get through and into the pile, sitting there
burning a hole in a month’s time until the wind grabs it and it sparks. On this Sunday (of the fire) because of the high winds that day, he could not control it, adding that at 4:00 p.m. he called the Fire Department.
There is more discussion on the fire that day and what caused it.
J. Brown stated that they had a dozer come in to push off the pile and that is where the wetland encroachment came in. He explained that they are a Sediment Control Specialist Company, they install filter sock and he is not going to fill in the wetlands. He explained that they solved the problem, roads have been reestablished, new sock has been put in and mulch has been put on top of any disturbed soil so that issue has been 100% addressed.
L. Komornick mentioned that they did contact DES Resources Division, Allen Molten, and he said it is a local issue, they don’t regulate odor.
R. Gray replied that it is a prohibited use of fumes and noxious odors.
L. Komornick responded that if they cannot learn how to contain the piles. She added that in eight years they have not had an issue.
J. Brown said that they work very hard at pile maintenance and he feels it is harsh to judge them based on the last eight days. He noted that they have 2000 yards left to grind and then it is done.
S. Ranlett stated that he is not judging them and asks who is judging them.
L. Komornick replied that there has been a lot of concern that there is something wrong going on there.
S. Ranlett said they have an issue and they are fixing it.
R. Gray wanted to state for the record that he abuts Pro Bark and he has never filed a complaint against anything they have done there. He added that he does have concerns of noises; grinders being run before 7:00 a.m.
J. Brown replied that it is very rarely, and they have every start time documented.
R. Gray continued on that the noise is a concern of the residents but that this issue does seem like a onetime issue.
L. Komornick read their (Pro Barks) vision statement, “to be the mulch supplier of choice for major green industry retailers. Pro Bark will also be a major green waste recycler”.
J. Brown stated that during the 2008 ice storm Pro Bark made the decision to grind for a lot of municipalities free of charge as well as opening the yard to residents. He added that he got a lot of thank you letters from other Towns, but not from Plaistow.
S. Ranlett responded that he had an excellent point and apologized, noting that he does not speak for the Town. He stated that they (Pro Bark) are here to discuss the issue and it seems they have it under control.
J. Brown stated that they pile of stumps has been put on the back burner because they did all that grinding, adding that they are a wood mulch recycling company and they need fiber for their products. He explained that they just got into soil in the last year and they will see the stump pile disappear, but added that that is their business. J. Brown also stated that the stump pile is where it should be on the site plan.
L. Komornick asked if they want to rezone the area and not allow industrial use. She added that they are a permitted industrial use with a site plan.
S. Ranlett added that even if they rezoned it, they would be grandfathered in.
L. Komornick noted that you cannot find industrial land in southern NH and when you can the developers do not want to buy it. She asked how the Town can support them.
T. Moore stated that it is good to raise an issue as that is what the Board is here for. He feels they (Pro Bark) are doing the right things. He added that he would be surprised to not see stumps given their business. He stated that they do not see any more issues, and added that the Board may want to see if there is improved technology to share with them, but it seems they are already on top of it.
L. Komornick said that North East Resource Recovery Association was very helpful, they were familiar with Pro Bark, and they would be willing to help. She added that spontaneous combustion is a big part of managing the business according to the firm she contacted in Washington, and that they said someone needs to be there managing it and making sure because as soon as someone smells it, something needs to be done.
J. Brown added that at that point, you don’t just find it; it takes a day or so.
S. Ranlett asked if they probed it (the piles).
J. Brown responded no, stating that they do not need to record their temperatures and he can check it just as well visibly by walking it.
L. Komornick stated that if Pro Bark would be willing to work with the Town on solutions to the problem, such as smaller piles.
J. Brown interrupted, stating that the problem is that to get the color mulch that people want, they almost need to have a controlled burn; it needs to heat up and cook and you cannot get that with a fifteen foot pile. He explained the process further.
S. Ranlett reiterated that it sounds like they are doing everything right, but unfortunately they had a fire. He compared them to Pine Wood, Brentwood NH, stating that they are doing the same things.
J. Brown stated that this is the year for fires. With extra product, dry weather and now moist weather coming in.
L. Komornick stated that there are people who abut the property who are unhappy with the odors, she stated that it was a permitted use and as they don’t have a definition of the odor and cannot say they are in violation of the nuisance. She said they did a study on the noise when they moved in there.
J. Brown again stated that they try not to run over hours, adding that if they had grinded over night this problem would have gone away but neighbors would have questioned it, but he added that the other complaints would have gone away. They do not want the neighbors mad at them, they do try hard.
There is a little more discussion on the grinders and the noise and the discussion come to a close.
P. Bealo asked to be excuse for the remainder of the meeting at 8:23 p.m.
Item Five:
Discussion on Status of Poker Facility at Sawyers Banquet Hall
L. Komornick stated that they will go month to month, and that there have been no issues with them.
R. Gray noted that there is a sign issue.
L. Komornick replied that that is an issue related to the circumstances.
T. Moore added that if they continue to give temporary things (permits) then there is no incentive to fix the sign because they may not grant the next temporary extension. He said to approve them for full time and they will correct it through the normal sign ordinance.
M. Dorman stated that the only problem he has with them is the signage issue, their parking has been good and no complaints from the police.
L. Komornick stated that they are getting letters of violation just like great clips.
R. Gray said that they should not be getting letters of violation, but the person who owns Sawyers Banquet Hall should, and added that he is just renting.
M. Dorman clarified that the tenant gets the letter of violation and the owner just receives a copy stating that the tenant is in violation.
There is more discussion on the violation letter.
S. Ranlett stated that the reason they rent is because of the liquor license.
L. Komornick stated that they send a letter saying they need to come in and get an occupancy permit.
S. Ranlett asked when the last time they had a wedding there was.
M. Dorman replied that there would be a couple of weddings.
L. Komornick stated that they may not be around after a month.
R. Gray stated that they can make that determination but at least The Board has given then the option.
L. Komornick asked what The Board wanted to do.
T. Moore stated that he can either get occupancy permit or not, if he does, then he and Leblanc need to come to an agreement about the sign. He added that if he does not want to get the occupancy permit than he can find another place to be.
There is more discussion on the occupancy permit.
C. Lanza asked if they can still hold functions if the poker place has the occupancy permit.
S. Ranlett replied that he believes they cannot have two liquor licenses on the same building at the same time, and that is why the poker place is renting because the banquet hall has the liquor license so they can hold weddings. He added that that is why Granite State Poker goes month to month and does not want an occupancy permit. He said to tell them to take their sign down, everybody knows they are there, and to come in and get an occupancy permit.
Item Six:
Continued Review/Discussion on Zoning Amendments.
L. Komornick stated that they are done.
S. Ranlett asked when people can make a citizens petition.
R. Gray replied November 8th through December 8th.
T. Moore stated that they are having Norman Deau Associates look at all the storm water stuff.
L. Komornick stated that they have it written up for the Crane Crossing Road, the storm water, and now this one tonight.
T. Moore said they needed to have a draft language for review.
L. Komornick replied that they spoke about November 17th for the draft.
T. Moore stated they have the dates of November 15th, December 1st, and December 15th.
Item seven:
Other Business/Project Updates – Stormwater Task Force
L. Komornick stated that they are working to get the report into the EPA in response to their administrative order requirement. She added that Rich Masters is providing guidance and they should have the draft by Tuesday.
Route 125 Widening Project Update
L. Komornick stated that they had a timeline in their packets she received from the pre-construction meeting.
R. Gray asked if they had started today and L. Komornick replied yes.
T. Moore reviewed what is on the Timeline for the people watching at home, and noted that it will be busy and congested on Route 125.
Plaistow First Committee
L. Komornick stated that the subcommittees are all plugging along with their tasks nicely.
R. Gray added that the BOS approved Dan Johnson.
L. Komornick said they have a new member of the committee, Dan Johnson. She added that they have a meeting on November 10th and Charles Marino will speak about the Forest Management Plan and his experiences in Raymond with the Town owned land there. The meeting is November 10th at 3:30 p.m. and is open to the public.
Rail Project Update
T. Moore stated that the Town did not get the Tiger II Grant for $19 million. He added that there are other funds available and things to do. He said that the CMAQ presentation is scheduled for December, and they will find out about those funds in late December or early 2011.
Rite Aid Construction
M. Dorman said that it is doing well, they will be doing the driveways this Friday or Monday, they will put the top coat on the site next week. He added that the site will be done before the plants close down but the building will not be. The site work should be done before snowfall. He stated that the Westville Road widening started today and should take about a week.
R. Gray asked if the site should be blocked off, or if you can drive through.
M. Dorman replied that they need to let the condo people in so they cannot close it down.
C. Lanza asked if they would put rocks were Westville and Pine roads meet.
M. Dorman responded no.
Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
M. Dorman stated that the committee met at the first of the week and he need to get some things together for them. He added that they meet again on December 3rd and said that R. Gray had volunteered to join the committee to represent the BOS and PB. He said it is moving along fine and after a few more meeting they hope to have something for the BOS in a few months.
Other Business: Misc. Notices, Letters, and other correspondence from Dept. of Building Safety, Planning Department and ZBA
T. Moore mentioned the RPC Legislators Forum on Wednesday, November 10th at the Unitil Headquarters from 6 to 9pm. He added that the guest speaker will be Thomas Burack and other legislators.
T. Moore reads a notice of decision from the ZBA regarding the Terri Russell Appeal for frontage which stated that the variance was granted. He added that based on how the request is written, they are not sure if they granted a variance on a lot line adjustment or the frontage issue. He stated that they will look back at the minutes and see what they say, and he added that if they granted it on the lot line adjustment then it will be appropriate to appeal, but if on frontage it will be fine. He said they have 30 days to appeal.
S. Ranlett asked if they will appeal it as the PB to their decision.
T. Moore replied that it is what they were thinking if the minutes show the variance was granted on the lot line adjustment.
S. Ranlett asked if they did not have enough frontage.
L. Komornick replied that they needed to get a variance on frontage for Nicholas Road and looking at the draft minutes it appears it was granted for the lot line adjustment.
There was more discussion on the minutes of the ZBA meeting and L. Komornick stated that they cannot grant a variance for a lot line adjustment and that they would appeal.
Any Other Business
R. Gray asked about the Plaistow Wal-Mart’s new extended hours. He asked if the new hours were permanent.
L. Komornick responded no, just for the Holiday season.
R. Gray asked if the Board needed to make a motion for that.
S. Ranlett replied no, that it was almost like a tent sale.
L. Komornick added that they had asked Wal-Mart to let them know every year, then she lets the Police Chief know and he okayed it.
Adjournment
There is no other business before the Planning Board; the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 P.M.
Respectfully submitted as recorded by Laurie Pagnottaro.
Approved by the Planning Board on ______________________________________
_______________________________________
Timothy E. Moore, Chairman
| 
