Planning Board

Minutes

January 22, 2009

Official as of March 26, 2009

Chair Nikki Roy calls the public hearing to order at 7:02 p.m. 

PRESENT: Chair Nikki Roy, Vice Chair Peter Jones, Selectmen Representative Ken Curley, Roger LeClerc, Alternate Victoria Parmele, Town Planner Elaine Planchet, and Board Administrator Linda Smith.

VOTING DESIGNATION: Nikki Roy, Pete Jones, Ken Curley, Roger LeClerc, and Alternate Victoria Parmele.

ABSENT: Herb Johnson, Scott Campbell, Robert Fletcher, and Alternate Eric Reitter.

NEW CASES:
CASE 09-01: Eliza and Stephen Farrar, Jr., 97 Ridge Rd. Map 221, Lot 10. Applicants seek site plan review for proposed home daycare.

Ms. Roy recuses herself as she is an abutter to the property.

Ms. Planchet recommends that the board enter into a non-public session regarding this application, per RSA 91-A:3IIc. Ken Curley makes a motion, second by Roger LeClerc, to enter into a non-public session under RSA 91-A:3IIc. 
Roll Call Vote:
Ms. Parmele – yes
Mr. Jones – yes
Mr. Curley – yes
Mr. LeClerc – yes
Motion passes unanimously; 4/0.

Ken Curley makes a motion, second by Victoria Parmele, to come out of nonpublic session.
Roll Call Vote:
Ms. Parmele – yes
Mr. Jones – yes
Mr. Curley – yes
Mr. LeClerc – yes
Motion passes unanimously; 4/0.

Pete Jones makes a motion, second by Ken Curley, to seal the minutes of the non-public session. Motion passes unanimously; 4/0.

Pete Jones makes a motion, second by Ken Curley, to grant the waiver request for application fees due to hardship. Motion and second are withdrawn.

A discussion is held regarding the completeness of the application. Ms. Planchet recommends that based on the information provided and the multiple waiver requests, the application is complete. 

Mr. Curley makes a motion, second by Mr. LeClerc, to accept the application as complete. Motion passes unanimously; 4/0. Mr. Jones opens the public hearing and reads the abutters list. Abutter present is Nikki Roy. Also received is a letter from abutter John Difeo, which Mr. Jones reads into record.

Ms. Planchet notes that the sight distance has been noted. She states that the lighting has been addressed and the hours of operation have been provided. Ms. Planchet mentions the parking area and possible safety concerns with cars and pedestrians. She adds that the state licensing must be done, which also involves inspections by the health and fire department.

Ms. Roy notes that there may be an additional requirement for additional water testing.  She adds that in the past the planning board has required additional water testing for day care centers beyond the state requirements. She also notes that with a farm nearby there may be additional tests necessary. Ms. Farrar replies that they did have an extensive water test completed prior to the purchase of the home since there was a gas station near by as well and there were no issues. Ms. Roy adds that the tests would need to be an ongoing requirement.

Discussion ensues regarding the contamination plume at the Ridge store location.

Ken Curley makes a motion, second by Roger LeClerc, to grant the waiver request for application fees due to hardship. Motion passes unanimously; 4/0.

Ms. Parmele asks if there was a site walk scheduled. Ms. Planchet replies no.

General discussions are held as the board reviews the waiver requests. Mr. Jones reviews the planner’s comments pertaining to the waivers. Ms. Planchet states that a scale has been provided as requested. Mr. Jones makes a motion, second by Mr. Curley, to grant a waiver for section VII-B(2)(d). Motion passes; 4/0.
Additional discussion is held regarding IX-C3d all season safe sight distance of 250’ in each direction. Comments are received from Ms. Farrar and read by Mr. Jones relative to the 25 MPH speed limit. Ms. Planchet states that there appears to be adequate sight distance. She recommends that the board request a design layout for parking of the proposed three to four vehicles to address safety issues.

Pete Jones makes a motion, second by Ken Curley, to grant all waivers requested not previously addressed by the board as listed in two page document headed “Waivers Requested.” Motion passes unanimously; 4/0.

Waivers granted as listed in the document are for sections V-B 6, 8, 13b & C and VII(B)(4), (5)(e)&(n), IX-C(3)(d), IX-D, E(1&3), IX-F, IX-K(3)(a), IX-L(5) and IX-Q. 

Discussion ensues regarding the parking. Ms. Farrar states that the driveway is crushed stone and she would probably only have two cars in the driveway at one time. She only has one vehicle of her own that would be in the driveway. Ms. Planchet states that there is one space required for each 250 sq. ft. of gross floor area plus one space for employees. Ms. Farrar states that the house is 1200 sq. ft. Ms. Planchet suggests the actual parking spaces be drawn onto the proposed plan.

Based on the abutter’s letter, a discussion is held regarding a fence. Ms. Farrar states that there are two fences. She has one on her property and the abutter with the animals has a fence as well. Ms. Smith asks about the pond in the rear of the property. Ms. Farrar states that there is a fence with no opening to the pond and she believes that the fence is 4 ft. high.

Ms. Farrar explains the lighting. She states that there are three doors on the house and each has a light; there is a flood light.

Ms. Farrar states that the hours of operation are proposed to be for 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Ms. Smith states that this is different than what is on the application. Ms. Farrar states that she will change the application to note 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. and initial it.

Mr. Jones states that further information is necessary relative to the description and dimensions of the fence and sign if applicable.

Mr. Jones requests that the lettering on the application that was eliminated by copying be re-added. Mr. Jones makes a motion to continue case 09-01 to February 26, 2009. Mr. Curley seconds and the motion passes unanimously; 4/0.

The site walk process is explained and a site walk is scheduled for February 21, at 9:00 a.m.
Ms. Parmele leaves at 8:20 p.m. Ms. Roy returns as chair.
CASE 08-11: David Docko-Millstone Realty Trust, 1090 First NH Turnpike. Map 217; Lot 35. Applicant seeks site plan amendment to add retails sales of materials (mulch, stone, etc.) on site. Property owned by Millstone Realty Trust, Jacqueline Docko. Application accepted as complete on 10/23/08; 65- day 12/27/08. Continued from 11/20/08 and continued from 12/18.
VOTING DESIGNATION:  Nikki Roy, Pete Jones, Ken Curley, and Roger LeClerc.

Dave Docko is present along with Mark DeGrace and Bill Rossignal from Holden Engineering. 

Ms. Planchet states that the applicants are here because of her request as they had wanted to request a continuance. She states that the board has not had a chance to discuss comments from Underwood Engineering’s review.

Holden Engineers representatives provide written comments to the Underwood review and revised plans.

Mr. DeGrace addresses the site plan comments and the proposed phasing. He explains that the intent is to have the grading on site as one operation. Ms. Roy states that there is a significant elevation difference in what exists and what is proposed. The building proposed is shown at a finished elevation of 28’ lower than what it is currently. Mr. Docko replies that is not correct and explains that there must be some confusion. Ms. Roy notes that there is a lot of grading going on and there are other issues: retail, lighting, and traffic issues.

Additional discussion is held regarding the phasing plans. Ms. Roy states that the board’s intent is to make sure we can keep members of the public safe during the different phasing and that there is safe access on to the site while the grading continues.

Mr. DeGrace continues and addresses the volume of excavation and impact. Ms. Roy states that it appears that the previous gravel operation approval from 2007 may be impacted. Ms. Planchet states that the 2007 approval was for the building only. Mr. Docko states that the leveling of the hill area is completed and the driveway has been relocated. He continues to explain the area. He adds that the grading in the front will be sheet grading. Ms. Roy asks what the total disturbed area is. Mr. Docko states that they have applied for the site specific permit as this exceeds 10,000 sq. ft. of disturbed area. Ms. Roy requests that Underwood Engineering provide more details relative to the comment for “gravel operation approval.”

Discussion ensues regarding the site drainage. Comments from Underwood Engineering are read by Mr. DeGrace. He explains a proposed catch basin and the details are reviewed.

As far as site access, the driveway entrance is 6.7% slope. Ms. Roy asks what the grade will be and Mr. DeGrace replies that it is to be 3% or flatter. Ms. Roy asks if the original driveway permit showed the 6.7% rate. Mr. DeGrace replies that he is not sure. He adds that a revised plan was submitted to NHDOT based on the response to the traffic report.

Mr. Jones asks if the building is portable. Mr. Docko states that the locations of dirt piles are always moving and it is hard to designate a specific area for the building; it must be moveable.

Mr. DeGrace states that note #7 has been revised.

Re: groundwater recharge: 

Ms. Roy asks what the surface of the area will be. Mr. Docko states that it is fractured layered gravel. Ms. Roy states that she would value Underwood’s comments on this section. She notes that in addressing areas with ledge, the area would be considered an impervious area. Mr. Rossignal from Holden Engineering explains that if the ledge surface was exposed, once blasted, the surface would be 100% impervious. Ms. Roy defers to Underwood and adds that the groundwater regulation should be considered as it is a long process. Mr. Jones states that wherever the water lands, it will stay. He adds that if it is a ledged area already; what are the alternatives. He adds that there will be new circumstances created. Mr. Docko states that there will be aggregate piles on site. Mr. Docko states that there is only about 50% ledge. Ms. Roy requests that the issue be considered and not discounted.

Additional discussion is held regarding the Underwood report 1/6/09 for traffic. Letters from TEPP and from Robert Talon are reviewed. A letter of comments and replies are provided based on the TEPP letter statements. Mr. Rossignol states that the TEPP letter mentions many items of fact; however, one item for discussion is the left turn lane analysis. This item has been prepared and is provided in packets.

The report explains that the left turn volumes going into the site are very small and they believe that there is no warrant for a left turn lane. However, this lane will be done and a deceleration area for vehicles travelling westerly to pull out before turning into the site will be provided. Mr. DeGrace suggests that the town’s engineer review the report and response letter. Ms. Roy states that the proposal seems reasonable and may not be warranted by the numbers; however, the board is not just talking about residential cars in this location either and feels that given the setting it is necessary. She appreciates their efforts in this issue.

A request for continuance will be faxed for the February 26, 2009, meeting. Nikki Roy makes a motion, second by Ken Curley, to continue Case 08-11 to February 26. Motion passes unanimously; 4/0. 

CASE 09-02: Edward S. Gleason, Range Road, Map 218, Lot 36. Applicant seeks subdivision approval of 22 acres into two lots, one lot will be 8.9 acres, the other will be 13.1 acres.

Tim Bernier of TF Bernier is present. He explains the area of land and notes that there is an application for a minimum impact expedited application for the driveway crossing. He adds that the intent was for four lots to be subdivided; however, the topography of the land did not allow that proposal to work. 

Ms. Planchet states that the application is complete and adds that applicable fees have been provided. She notes that there is only one waiver requested. In addition, there was an issue noting the actual ownership of the land. Ms. Planchet explains that the town administrator has provided a letter stating that the back taxes on the property have been paid.

Ms. Smith states that she disagrees with the town administrator’s statement  and recommends that the board cease any further discussion on this property as the Town of Northwood is the owner of the property. She states that until the deed is conveyed, Mr. Gleason does not own the property and no further discussion can be held unless the selectmen voted and agreed to this.

Ms. Roy reads the letter from Town Administrator Paul Martel, into the record. Mr. Curley states that there was an incorrect address as to where the tax bills were being sent. Further discussion ensues regarding the process and Nikki Roy makes a motion, second by Pete Jones, to not accept the application as complete due to the fact that the owner of record is not the applicant. Motion passes; 3/0/1. Ken Curley abstains. Ms. Smith states that the board must notify the applicant as to why the application was not accepted.

 Masten Development
Ms. Smith states that the sidewalks located at the Masten Development are noted on the plan; however, is not noted in the conditional of approval. The notice of decision was completed and the plan has been signed by the planning board. The plan was then forwarded to the selectmen regarding road construction.

Ms. Smith explains that the board cannot hold a compliance hearing on the conditions due to the fact that this point has passed and the sidewalks are not in the conditions. Ms. Smith states that the sidewalks are a part of the approved plan; therefore, the planning board will need to amend the plan. She states that a request must be brought forward in order for the item to be addressed. Ms. Roy states that typically once something is in the construction phase, it is out of the planning board’s hands. Ms. Smith states that in this case, a request needs to come from the applicant or the selectmen. Mr. Curley states that the selectmen will request Underwood to send a letter to the planning board.

Resignation Letter
Ms. Roy reads her letter of resignation into the record explaining that she just does not have the time to give to the board and the issues at this time. Ken Curley makes a motion to accept Ms. Roy’s resignation with regret. Second by Pete Jones. Motion passes; 3/0/1. Ms. Roy abstains.

Adjournment
Ken Curley makes a motion to adjourn, second by Pete Jones. Motion passes unanimously at 9:42.

Respectfully submitted,
Lisa Fellows-Weaver
Board Secretary