Minutes
NEWMARKET PLANNING BOARD MEETING
MARCH 18, 2014
MINUTES
Present: Val Shelton, Janice Rosa, John Brackett, Ginger Smith (Alternate), Diane Hardy (Town Planner)
Absent: Eric Botterman (excused), Dan Wright (Town Council ex officio) (excused), Jane Ford (excused), Rick McMenimen (Vice Chairman) (excused), Gabriel Jerome (unexcused)
Called to order: 7:07 p.m.
Adjourned: 7:47 p.m.
Agenda Item #1 – Pledge of Allegiance
Val Shelton, who sat in as Chairman for this meeting, appointed Ginger Smith to replace Rick McMenimen.
Agenda Item #2 – Public Comments
None.
Agenda Item #3 – Review & approval of minutes: 02/11/14
These were postponed to the April 8, 2014 meeting.
Action
Motion: Janice Rosa made a motion to postpone the approval of minutes to April 8, 2014
Second: John Brackett
Vote: All in favor
Agenda Item #4 – Regular Business
Election of Officers
Action
Motion: Janice Rosa made a motion to waive the administrative rules for the election of officers and committee appointments from March 18 to the April 8 meeting
Second: Ginger Smith
Vote: All in favor
NIP Lot 6 LLC/Shearwater Investment Corp. – Continuation of a public hearing for an application for Major Site Plan review, at 2 Forbes Road (NIP Lot 6 LLC), Tax Map R3, Lot 9-6, and 181 Exeter Road (Shearwater Investment Corp.), Tax Map R3, Lot 8, both in the B2 Zone. The proposal is for a 24,000 square foot expansion of the existing industrial building located at 2 Forbes Road, with associated parking, drainage, and landscaping improvements. Pending site plan approval, the lots will be merged to make one lot. (this item will be continued to the April 8, 2014 meeting)
Val Shelton stated they received a request, from the applicant, for a continuance to April 8, 2014.
Action
Motion: Janice Rosa made a motion to continue Shearwater to the next meeting which will be April 8, 2014, for the proposed building expansion of 2 Forbes Road and 181 Exeter Road in Newmarket, NH
Second: John Brackett
Vote: All in favor
Hayden Family Revocable Trust-Mark & Karen Hayden Trustees/Chinburg Properties, Inc. - Design Review Phase discussion, pursuant to RSA 676:4 (II) (b) with the Newmarket Planning Board concerning a residential open space subdivision, at 74 Bald Hill Road, Tax Map R7, Lot 24. Proposal is to subdivide 35.97 acres into 10-lots leaving 20.69 acres of open space.
Val Shelton read the regulations regarding a Design Review and stated this is a non-binding discussion.
Matt Assia, Chinburg Properties, presented the application. Scott Cole, from Beals & Associates, their Civil Engineer, and Mark Hayden were present.
Mr. Assia stated Chinburg Properties had purchased the land from the Hayden family. They were there to receive feedback on the plan. They will be seeking a Special Use Permit for the residential open space subdivision and also for a subdivision approval. Since they submitted the request to be on this agenda, they have done some field survey work. The total acreage of the parcel is 41 acres. He showed the plan. The Hayden homestead would be preserved on 11.41 acres. They would conserve 21 acres of open space, which are wooded uplands. They would develop approximately 9 acres. There would be 11 lots, one of which is being retained by the Hayden family. The lots are generally ¾ of an acre. This is the R-1 Zoning District. This will be an open space subdivision. The property is adjacent to 63 acres owned by the NH Fish & Game Department across the road. As you cross into Newfields, further down the road, there is the Piscassic Greenway, which is over 300 acres of conserved land. They anticipate seeking waivers for a topographic survey for the uplands that would be conserved. They would also seek a road width reduction. This property would probably have open drainage. It is not served by public water and sewer. They intend to provide public access to the open space with a trailhead. They would also seek a conservation easement with an entity like the Southeast Land Trust to protect the open space. The Nature Conservancy has an easement over the NH Fish & Game property. Southeast Land Trust controls the Piscassic Greenway.
John Brackett asked if there would be a sign showing the public access. Mr. Assia stated they would do that.
Mr. Assia was asked to explain the location of Bald Hill Road and the subdivision.
Val Shelton asked if they would be seeking variances from the steep slope protection district relative to the lot acreages. Mr. Assia stated the project’s intent is to avoid work in the steep slope area. Val Shelton stated 5.05(B) (2) states no greater than 25% of the lot may be encumbered by steep slopes. She was referring more to the yield plan than the site plan. As she looks at the chart, the conventional zoning is 2 acres. It would seem they would need 1.5 acres of developable area on each of those lots. The chart shows four lots that will not meet that requirement. The applicant might need to look at that again. She asked if they would need a variance from 5.05(B) (1) and (2). She asked if the Public Works Department would even entertain the idea that a variance should be granted on the roadway. That would be almost a 300 foot crossing. Mr. Gove stated it could be built and would be confirmed by test pits. These are very high grade sandy gravelly soils.
Val Shelton stated they have two issues. They have waivers from subdivision regulations and variances from the ordinance. It gets into the design concept of minimizing the roads through steep slope relative to maximizing the development potential of the 40 acres. It would be up to the Zoning Administrator to determine whether or not the plan meets the intent of this ordinance. The point being, with the yield plan, they want to be sure it is justifiable and not questionable. Mr. Assia stated many subdivisions have the need for waivers and often the Board is interested in granting such waivers. Diane Hardy stated, as part of their review of the yield plan, the Planning Board will identify areas where there might be a need for a waivers or variances. The Board would then have to evaluate whether those waivers and variances would be granted. Val Shelton stated the number of lots to be permitted under the open space development option is relative to how realistic the yield plan is, not just from a permitting perspective, but also on whether it is fiscally feasible to develop it. It would be important for the applicant to be prepared to defend the yield plan along those lines.
Val Shelton stated she thought they were trying to combine these two applications (one for the Open Space Development and one for a two lot subdivision). They ran into problems with that on the last application for the Rockingham Country Club. She would rather see two separate applications that would allow the Board to vote on the subdivision of the farmhouse lot on one application, then the Open Space Development under another application. It would be easier administratively, if the project was done as two (2) applications.
Diane Hardy asked if any test pits had been done and whether they had talked with NH Department of Environmental Services (NH DES). Typically, they require about an acre of land for an individual lot with both a septic system and well on it. She asked if there would be any common or shared facilities. Mr. Assia stated they have done test pits. The material is sand, which is an ideal substrate for on-site systems. They would like each house to have its own septic system. Based on NH DES criteria, the required square footage of the lot is lower the better soil you have.
Val Shelton opened up the public comments.
John Button, 90 Bald Hill Road, Newfields, stated he also has Newmarket property and asked about the yield plan. Val Shelton explained what a yield plan was. He stated he lives “sort of” across the street and this cluster was not in keeping with the area. All of the property on Bald Hill Road is two acres plus in size. His property is five acres. This would put ten houses on the same size lot he has. It does not fit the area. They are not in favor of a cluster development here. He would rather see a conventional subdivision. He does not want to hold Mr. Hayden back from developing his land as he wishes, but a cluster would not be in keeping with the area.
Kate Moore, 87 Bald Hill Road, Newfields, which abuts this property, stated she wanted to reinforce what Mr. Button just said, as they feel the same way. It is not in keeping with the area.
Sherry Puta, 49 Sanborn Drive, Newfields, agrees with Mr. Button. They own 3¼ acres. Four houses would come in behind her house. They have a stone wall abutting this property. She asked if this would impact their septic system. Mr. Button stated there is quite a grade and there is runoff toward his home. There are wetlands in back of his home. Ms. Puta stated she was also concerned about some really large trees. She asked if they were building there, would it loosen the roots, so the trees might fall on her home. Mr. Button asked how many homes would abut his land. Mr. Assia stated there is a buffer there along the back of the lots. A buffer is required for the open space subdivisions. Mr. Assia showed him the plan. Ms. Puta stated she is also concerned if this would bring their property values down if these homes were built.
Robert Mitchell, 44 Bald Hill Road, Newmarket, asked what the open space definition is. Val Shelton stated it is very well defined under Section 6.00 of the Zoning Ordinance. There are various components relative to open space and what would be defined as open space depending on the lot, and also the objective of what is trying to be achieved. Robert Mitchell asked if the open space would be developed in the future. Val Shelton stated open space land is deed restricted from any further development. It can be held by the Homeowners Association, it can be under a conservation easement, it can be held by a conservation entity or other organization. It cannot be further developed.
Val Shelton closed the public comments.
Val Shelton stated the applicant should feel free to work with the Town Planner on the yield plan, interpretation questions and any other issues.
There were no further questions or comments.
Agenda Item #6 – Old/New Business
Planners Report
Diane Hardy stated the Office of Energy & Planning Workshop is coming up. It is on Saturday, May 3. These are beneficial workshops, especially for new members.
Planning Board Appointments
This will be addressed in April.
Other Business
Janice Rosa stated, now that the school vote is over, she is being asked by many about how the growth could be controlled in town, so the growth does not burden the school system and why a moratorium could not be put into place. Diane Hardy stated there are very specific instances where you can justify a building moratorium. Given the level of growth this town has experienced in the last 5-10 years, she did not think it would be legally justifiable for the town to impose such a moratorium on growth. The best way to deal with growth, as the Town has been, is through the Zoning Ordinance, the Master Plan, and the work the Planning Board does in reviewing applications. Val Shelton stated the Town would not legally qualify to institute a building moratorium.
Val Shelton stated there is funding for updating an additional chapter for the Master Plan, for the Future Land Use chapter and part of that should be an update to the housing and out of that would come any changes to the zoning. The zoning is the zoning. If someone meets the regulations, the Town has no rights to say that someone cannot develop their property.
Agenda Item #7 – Adjourn
Action
Motion: Janice Rosa made a motion to adjourn at 7:47 p.m.
Second: Ginger Smith
Vote: All in favor