Minutes
NEWMARKET PLANNING BOARD MEETING
OCTOBER 8, 2013
MINUTES
Present: Eric Botterman (Chairman), Janice Rosa, Dan Wright (Town Council ex officio), Gabriel Jerome (Alternate), John Brackett, Val Shelton, Elizabeth Dudley, Ginger Smith (Alternate), Diane Hardy (Town Planner)
Absent: Rick McMenimen, Jane Ford (Alternate) excused
Called to order: 7:00 p.m.
Adjourned: 8:02 p.m.
Agenda Item #1 – Pledge of Allegiance
Agenda Item #2 – Public Comments
None.
Agenda Item #3 – Review & approval of minutes
Chairman Botterman appointed Gabriel Jerome to fill in for Rick McMenimen.
08/13/13
Action
Motion: Val Shelton made a motion to approve the Newmarket Planning Board minutes of August 13, 2013
Second: Elizabeth Dudley
Val Shelton stated, on page 12, line 34, change “county” to “count”.
Val Shelton stated, on page 15, line 22, stated she was sure the motion was worded the way Rick McMenimen made it and it should have been picked up then. She stated they had not opened a public hearing for the subdivision. The Board had only accepted the Special Use Permit application. She proposed changes and deletions within the wording of the motion.
Val Shelton stated on line 36, on the motion made by Val Shelton, she wanted to add the date specific. (Editorial note: An editorial note was added to the end of the motion stating the intended date of the continued meeting.)
Vote: All in favor
09/10/13
Action
Motion: Val Shelton made a motion to move the review and approval of the Newmarket Planning Board meeting of September 10, 2013 minutes to November 12
Second: Elizabeth Dudley
Vote: All in favor
09/07/13
Action
Motion: Val Shelton made a motion to approve the Newmarket Planning Board meeting minutes for the site walk conducted on Saturday, September 7, 2013, at the golf course location
Second: John Brackett
Vote: All who were in attendance at the site walk voted in favor
None opposed
Agenda Item #5 – Regular Business
Rockingham Country Club, Inc./Chinburg Builders, Inc. – Continuation of a public hearing for an application for Subdivision under Residential Open Space Design and for a Special Use Permit, at 200 Exeter Road, Tax Map R3, Lot 23, M4 Zone. The proposal is to construct 52 single-family homes along the north side of the golf course and to preserve the golf course as open space. The existing clubhouse will be located on an 8-acre lot.
Chairman Botterman stated the applicant has requested a continuance to the next meeting.
Diane Hardy updated the Board on the application. She stated she received a progress set of plans that updates the set that was submitted on July 29. She has not had a chance to review these, as they just arrived this afternoon. She made copies available to the Technical Review Committee (TRC) members and she will get copies to Underwood Engineers and Mark West. She is updating the checklist, as information comes in. Once they receive a letter from the Town’s Engineer, she will schedule a TRC meeting. This will probably happen in about two weeks. She contacted Mark West after the last meeting. He put together a proposal and it was forwarded to Mr. Chinburg. Mr. Chinburg agreed to finance the cost. There is a contract signed by the Town Administrator. The funding for the study was dropped off yesterday. They hope to have a report by the next meeting. They also received funding for the engineer to review the engineering details. He will provide the TRC with a report.
Chairman Botterman stated he received a letter from a woman who was opposed to the project and he received an email from a gentleman who supports the project. He did not have them with him tonight, but he will get those into the record at the next public hearing.
Val Shelton stated, regarding the yield plan, the minutes from the August meeting stated that a wetlands scientist stamp was required. She stated it was not on their copy. Diane Hardy stated she was referring to stamping the actual plan set. She stated she wanted to get copies out to the Board for comment, before she finalized it with the applicant.
Action
Motion: Val Shelton made a motion that they continue the public hearing on the Rockingham Country Club, Inc./Chinburg Builders, Inc. application for subdivision under the Residential Open Space Design and for a Special Use Permit, 200 Exeter Road, Tax Map R3, Lot 23, M4 Zone, to construct a 52 single-family homes along the north side of the golf course and preserve the golf course as open space with the existing clubhouse being located on an 8-acre lot
Second: John Brackett
Chairman Botterman stated this needed to be date and time specific.
Motion: Val Shelton made a motion to amend the original motion to include November 12, 2013
Second: John Brackett
Vote: All in favor
Acadia Engineers & Constructors LLC – Request for a waiver of impact fees pursuant to Newmarket Ordinance 2001-0, Impact Fees for Public Capital Facilities, subsection 6.11.6, at 13 Water Street, Tax Map U3, Lot 4, M2 Zone.
Chairman Botterman stated the applicant requested a continuance. This is not a public hearing. This will be on the agenda for the November 12, 2013 meeting.
Agenda Item #5 – New/Old Business
Landscape Regulations
Chairman Botterman asked what the Board would like to do to move ahead with these. He suggested a public hearing at 6:00 p.m. before the next meeting, if everyone can make it. Elizabeth Dudley asked if the Board could present written comments prior to the meeting, so they could be addressed that night. She asked if the public could submit comments ahead of time. Chairman Botterman stated anyone could submit comments at any time. Elizabeth Dudley asked if that would save having a hearing at 6:00 and potentially having no one show up when the Board had made an effort to be there. Chairman Botterman stated he would leave it up to the Board to decide whether they want to submit comments in advance. Diane Hardy stated they already went through a process where they solicited comments. It could be put online. She and Chairman Botterman both stated there should be a public hearing. Val Shelton stated there is nothing else on the agenda remaining tonight. She felt the Board should be discussing this now and then decide whether to move forward with public comment.
Elizabeth Dudley asked if it was common practice to have a public hearing for any changes to regulations along the way. There have been lots of opportunities for the public to be involved. Diane Hardy explained the State statutes say any time there is an amendment to the zoning, subdivision or site plan review regulations, there has to be a public hearing, so the public has the opportunity to present comments. She stated it is helpful to the Board to hear from the public.
Chairman Botterman stated the Board members who are ready to comment could do so this evening. Dan Wright stated he had no comment on changing anything that had been written so far.
Val Shelton stated, regarding the general comments and review, she is in agreement with most of the issues that were raised, with the exception of the recommendation of the outline of particular species. The better approach would be to reference some source, whether it is the Cooperative Extension or an entity within the State that has references for planting in areas such as a shoreline. Elizabeth Dudley stated the listing of some potential species was put in at the request of a member of the subcommittee who has recently passed away. To honor that request, she thought it would be good to have an easy reference as a starting place. An exhaustive list is not the point of these regulations. Val Shelton stated she would like to see no lists within the regulations. Elizabeth Dudley stated she thought it was a good idea to have the lists, because it gave guidance to a no-nonsense approach. She did not see how it could hurt. Val Shelton asked if there was a reference someone could use that would give recommended plant species. Elizabeth Dudley stated she could verify it. She stated she is a landscape architect. Generally, a landscape architect designs for a site specific planting. These plants were listed as an example of plants that are largely salt tolerant, drought tolerant, and do not need to be divided and pruned every six months. They are an example. Having this list indicates that the community takes the plants that are referenced seriously and there are expectations of these plants. She stated you can buy manuals of recommended trees, but those would be country-wide. Val Shelton asked if there was something produced by UNH or the State. Elizabeth Dudley stated this was not designed for an amateur to select the plants. It was designed for a professional. These plants are listed for Planning Board members more than for a landscape architect. It is a reference for a Planning Board member who does not know about plants. It is an introduction to plants that might be suitable for new Planning Board members who don’t understand what planting requirements might be. She stated you could refer to the Cooperative Extension, but she is not sure that is the point. Val Shelton stated her comment was that she agrees with the general comments section, with the exception of the comments that pertain to the specific recommendation of plants. She would like to eliminate that and recommend a source instead. Elizabeth Dudley stated the section was titled “Some Recommended Plants”. It is not meant to be an exhaustive list. If you want to refer to a manual, that is the Planning Board’s decision. Val Shelton stated the regulations should be consistent. When they talk about lighting regulations, they are not referencing specific lighting. They are referencing manuals. The same for stormwater management. They reference Best Management Practices. Elizabeth Dudley stated maybe there could be an appendix or footnote.
Chairman Botterman stated there were some issues that would, inadvertently, make development very difficult, especially in the commercial area where most of the lots that are left are small. There are some requirements that would require the Town maintenance forces to spend additional resources maintaining landscaping within rights of way. He was not so sure the Town Council or Town Administrator or the people would agree to those. He stated one portion said, if you disturb a stone wall, you have to replace it. This is going a little too far. That is not really a landscaping issue. That is a preservation issue. Also, the regulations stated W-beam guardrails would be prohibited in the M2 and B1 Zones. As an engineer, he knows those are the only things that are crash tested and approved by the Federal Government. Val Shelton stated those guardrails are what went in on the mill property.
Elizabeth Dudley stated the language about preservation is more careful than what was just mentioned. She read, “Efforts shall be made to preserve stone walls that are on site. The applicant is required to replace and/or relocate any stone walls that are removed.” Chairman Botterman stated that says they have to replace it, so if you remove 30’ of stone wall to put a driveway in, you have to put it back elsewhere on the site. Elizabeth Dudley stated stone walls are a historic artifact of New Hampshire. She did not think people would want to be so flip to throw that out. Chairman Botterman stated that was just his opinion.
Elizabeth Dudley stated New Hampshire stone walls can be seen from the moon. Chairman Botterman stated he did not have a problem with people trying to preserve them. He takes issue with telling people they have to preserve them. Val Shelton asked they think of the practicality of it. If you take out 12 feet to put your driveway through, then you just end up with a 12 foot stone wall somewhere within your landscaping. Elizabeth Dudley stated she was not asking them to put it on their front porch. Val Shelton stated she was saying somewhere else on the site. Elizabeth Dudley stated the point is to maintain the historical legacy of stone walls for the town. She felt the landscaping “Purpose” section is spot on. She did not think anyone would argue with that language. She said what they are discussing at this point is the practicality of some of these items relative to being able to accomplish them on a site. Elizabeth Dudley asked if it was really so space demanding to relocate 12 feet of a stone wall on a one acre property. Val Shelton asked where on the property it would be relocated. Just put 12 feet somewhere? Elizabeth Dudley stated figure it out.
Janice Rosa stated stone walls have been destroyed in New Hampshire. She felt some sort of flexible regulation could be in there. Val Shelton suggested some of the stones could be moved to another part of the wall. Elizabeth Dudley stated it says “relocate”. Val Shelton asked if that was for the stones or the wall. Elizabeth Dudley stated the wall.
Diane Hardy clarified these regulations would be included in site plan review. This does not include all development, it just includes new multi-family or commercial or industrial sites. It would also be in subdivision regulations. She stated these are regulations of the Planning Board. Any regulation can be waived by the Board, as appropriate. Val Shelton stated she attended a land use seminar that Donahue & Tucker put on. One of the issues they brought forward was requiring the applicants and Planning Boards to be conscientious about granting waivers. The Board has to go by what the State statute requires to grant a waiver, as well as their own regulations. She stated there needs to be a finding of fact and she felt the Board, herself included, had not been doing that. It is not a case where you make regulations and, if you want to grant a waiver, you do so. Diane Hardy stated there are specific guidelines within the Board’s own regulations for how to treat each request. They do ask the applicant to provide justification.
John Brackett stated he loves stone walls, but they are difficult to properly maintain. He shares a certain passion for them, but he was not looking to preserve them all. You have to work with what you’ve got.
Chairman Botterman stated he had no issue in saying to try to save the stone walls. He felt it was going too far to tell people they have to relocate them on site.
Diane Hardy stated, back in March, they sent the draft regulations out to the NH Chapter of the Society of Landscape Architects. One of the Planners from Nashua, who is a Landscape Architect, had told her she would be happy to distribute these to her Board and coworkers. She took her up on that and it was very helpful. They were also submitted to the engineers with whom the Town has worked and also the developers and surveyors. They also sent them to people working in conservation and wildlife and the Newmarket Conservation Commission. Eleven (11) sets of comments were received from different people. Most of the comments came back from landscape architects. A couple of the comments were from engineers and a couple from developers and there were comments from a wildlife specialist. She summarized their comments and had distributed the summary to the Board. She stated Mike Hoffman, the Building Official, had also commented. Some comments were incorporated into the draft regulations. Some were more general and she hoped the Board would comment on those also.
Chairman Botterman stated the Board could go on a long time about this, but he felt people were not quite prepared to add a lot of comment to this tonight. Elizabeth Dudley asked if there were ways to integrate comments or did the Board have to vote on every single change. Chairman Botterman stated there are three pages of general comments and he did not want to go ahead and make changes, if people do not agree. Some were substantial. He did not think everyone was prepared tonight to do this. He asked everyone to go through the general comments and see what they agree or disagree with and the Board can then go point by point through the document and make changes. Then the ordinance can be put forward or the Board may decide they do not want to support it. He suggested having the public hearing at 6:00 p.m. Val Shelton stated she thought the Board should work on this further before going to public hearing. Diane Hardy suggested having a work session night for this purpose. It might take a couple of weeks to assimilate the information. Then work it to a point where everyone is comfortable and have the public hearing. This may not be until the December meeting. Chairman Botterman suggested a special workshop night. There was discussion of when to hold a workshop.
The Board decided to meet on Tuesday, October 29 at 7:00 p.m. in the Auditorium for a workshop on this item. Chairman Botterman asked the Board to come prepared.
Conservation Commission
Janice Rosa stated the Conservation Commission had suggested, when construction begins at the railroad depot project, the owner could put up a fence that would still allow passage to the trailhead.
Val Shelton stated the there has been a change in the State RSAs regarding prime wetlands. She asked who spearheads that. Diane Hardy stated, in the past, the Conservation Commission had asked the Town to make a prime wetland ordinance and the Town did do that. Val Shelton stated the Conservation Commission may want to review the change in RSA. Diane Hardy stated she would look up the RSA and talk to the Conservation Commission.
CIP Committee
Diane Hardy stated the CIP Committee has completed its work for the year. The process was streamlined this year. There were three meetings and the committee consolidated the department meetings into one day.
Planners Report
Diane Hardy stated everyone should have received an updated zoning map, which includes the new M2-A District.
Diane Hardy stated there was a meeting with Gary Decker, the developer interested in property behind the old Mill Agent’s house on the corner of Main and Elm Street. He is gearing up to come forward with an application for 11 or 12 residential units on that site along the river. He feels they can make a viable project under the new regulations.
General
Janice Rosa stated she sent a concern to Adam Schroadter, the Town’s State Representative, about the drawing down of the dam and what may have to be done with it. She asked if the dam is going to stay in place and it is going to cost a certain amount of money and there are other local towns that will be impacted by keeping the dam, which they want, could legislation be passed to have these other towns help pay for the cost of repairing the dam. She wanted to pass the information along to Dan Wright, to see if the Town Council might consider approaching those other towns. There are homeowners in other towns which are going to be impacted, if the dam is taken out, and she did not think they wanted that. She stated they should share the cost of helping to repair the dam. Dan Wright stated he would bring it up to the Town Council at the next meeting.
Diane Hardy mentioned there is a meeting, on October 22, with the Town of Durham’s Town Administrator, Town Engineer, Public Works Director and Town Planner. Newmarket’s Consulting engineer will also be present. This is an opportunity to share information and address some of the recommendations that recently came from the Town Council.
Agenda Item #6 - Adjourn
Action
Motion: Janice Rosa made a motion to adjourn at 8:02 p.m.
Second: Val Shelton
Vote: All in favor