Minutes
NEWMARKET PLANNING BOARD MEETING
OCTOBER 14, 2014
MINUTES
Present: Eric Botterman (Chairman), Val Shelton (Vice Chairman), Diane Hardy (Town Planner), Janice Rosa, Jane Ford, John Brackett, John Badger, Rose-Anne Kwaks (Alternate), Peter Nelson (Alternate), Dan Wright-arrived late due to other meeting commitment (Town Council ex officio)
Called to order: 7:00 p.m.
Adjourned: 8:55 p.m.
Agenda Item #1 – Pledge of Allegiance
Agenda Item #2 – Public Comments
None.
Agenda Item #3 – Review & approval of minutes: 09/09/14
Action
Motion: Janice Rosa made a motion to approve the minutes of September 9, 2014
Second: John Badger
Vote: Val Shelton abstained due to absence
All others in favor
Agenda Item #4 – Regular Business
Kyle Pimental, Strafford Regional Planning Commission (SRPC) - Overview on the Visioning and Future Land Use Chapters as part of the Master Plan Update.
Kyle Pimental, Senior Planner at SRPC, gave a brief overview of the work SRPC will be doing with the Town over the next six or eight months.
He stated each year SRPC puts together a scope of work for the funding of projects within the five coastal communities. They apply to the NH Department of Environmental Services through the Coastal Program. Those communities are Newmarket, Durham, Madbury, Rollinsford, and Dover. They talked to the Town of Newmarket and the Town Planner stated there is a need to update a few of the Master Plan chapters. They wrote a proposal to the Coastal Program to update the Vision Chapter and the Future Land Use Chapter. After meeting again with the Town Planner, they decided to add a third chapter for updating, which is the Housing and Demographics Chapter. The way this is scheduled, preliminarily, is to do the Housing and Demographics Chapter this fall. A lot of the data is pretty outdated. They would like to look at new Census data, housing trends, how demographics have changed, what some of those intended or unintended consequences are, and look at occupancy characteristics. So, there would be an entirely new chapter written.
He stated they would like to hold public forums for the Vision Chapter and engage the public as much as possible to see what sort of challenges the public perceives the community is experiencing. They would like to have forums, and conduct a community needs assessment whether it is through a survey or a meeting. Those details have not been ironed out. They would like to have a small steering committee to go over what is on the books to see if that is in line with what people would now like to see in the future.
The last piece would be the Future Land Use Chapter. Last year, they worked on the Existing Land Use Chapter. They will build off of that chapter and the land use sustainability build-out analysis that was completed. They could look at different options for development scenarios. That will dovetail with the work that is being done by the Economic Development Committee.
This work will take six to eight months.
Rose-Anne Kwaks stated Durham just did their Housing and Demographic Chapter. She asked if they would be able to use some of their information to keep our costs down. Kyle Pimental stated SRPC did their chapter. A lot of that data can be pulled over, but not everything. The school characteristics will be different. General patterns can be used.
Jane Ford asked what his classification was of infrastructure. Kyle Pimental stated pretty much everything in town. With community facilities, you are talking about fire, town hall, and police. When talking about land use, it is more or less what you have on the ground. This would be the existing infrastructure. They will take stock of what is there now and then lead into what is needed for the future. This would be water, sewer, roads, and utilities.
Jane Ford stated she was wondering about Broadband for the area. Kyle Pimental stated he would put that under infrastructure need. They had done a considerable analysis, as far as Broadband is considered. She did not know if that was addressed in the current Master Plan. In talking about Broadband, they are talking about high speed internet. Jane Ford stated this would attract businesses to town. She also would include the electrical grid in this, as well. Diane Hardy stated that would be touched on as part of the visioning. The Economic Development Chapter does recognize the importance of Broadband to attract new industry.
Peter Nelson stated he was more interested in the final result of the process. The planning process is ongoing for the town. He asked how you make it easier, less expensive and how do you engage people, so the visioning process stays fresh over time. Kyle Pimental stated the end of the Future Land Use and Housing sections will have certain goals and implementation strategies that encourage the community to move forward. Part of the visioning session will be to learn about what people want and how they see the town now and in the future and what changes they would like to see. Throughout these chapters, if there is a recurring theme on something people would like to see, they can identify ways for the community to reach that goal and incorporate those ideas into the recommendations. They will check in with the Planning Board from time to time to get their input. When they hold these forums, they will try to make it an easy and enjoyable venue, perhaps by offering food from a local business, advertising, and making it a short and not an extremely long meeting. Diane Hardy stated the visioning process is a legal prerequisite for the Master Plan in the State of NH and they will come up with a strategy for this, pursuant to RSA 674: 2(a). She stated Kyle Pimental will be working with the subcommittee on this. The subcommittee will discuss the different options and work out the details of what form that will take.
Diane Hardy asked Kyle Pimental to speak about the “talking box” concept. Kyle Pimental stated they printed out simple comment cards with three or four questions. They placed boxes at certain locations throughout the community. People would come in, fill out the cards and place them in the boxes. They would move the boxes to new locations from time to time. That was one way they were able to get a variety of information from different demographic sectors of the community.
Val Shelton asked what the process was they used in Durham. Kyle Pimental stated Durham’s committee was very much engaged. For their visioning, forums, and questionnaires, they partnered with the UNH Cooperative Extension through a community facilitation process. They did that process before the Planning Commission got involved in the Master Plan update. SRPC was given the results. From what he heard, they had a couple of hundred people between the forum and the survey. It was fairly successful. They did have UNH Cooperative Extension doing a big piece of the visioning work.
Diane Hardy stated it is premature to talk about specifics in this process as they have not evaluated the options yet. She stated they hope to work with the Economic Development committee on the visioning piece. They will be doing something similar in looking for public input on some zoning proposals. They hope to be able to mesh these two activities and reach a larger number of people.
Rose-Anne Kwaks stated the Planning Board and Town Council has been very proactive with the Master Plan and refer to it and utilize it quite often.
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.
Chairman Botterman stated the applicant has requested a continuance to the November 18, 2014 meeting.
Action
Motion: Val Shelton made a motion to continue the public hearing 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.), to November 18, 2014
Second: John Brackett
Vote: All in favor
Hayden Family Revocable Trust/Mark L. & Karen S. Hayden, Trustees/Chinburg Builders, Inc. – Continuation of a public hearing for an application for Subdivision related to a ten (10) lot Residential Open Space Design Development at 74 Bald Hill Road, Tax Map R7, Lot 24, R-1 Zone. The proposed development involves the construction of single family homes on a small cul-de-sac, and the preservation of 21.09 acres as open space on a parcel of approximately 36 acres.
Chairman Botterman stated the applicant has requested a continuance. Diane Hardy stated they are working on the open space and conservation maintenance plan. They are in negotiations with the Southeast Land Trust.
Action
Motion: Val Shelton made a motion to continue the application of Hayden Family Revocable Trust/Mark L. & Karen S. Hayden, Trustees/Chinburg Builders, Inc. for Subdivision related to a ten (10) lot Residential Open Space Design Development at 74 Bald Hill Road, Tax Map R7, Lot 24, R-1 Zone to November 18, 2014
Second: John Brackett
Vote: All in favor
Newmarket Housing Authority/Newmarket Town Solar LLC - Public hearing for an application for minor site plan review, at 34 Gordon Avenue, Tax Map U4, Lot 8, M-3 Zone. The proposal is to allow for a community solar array to be built on the grounds of the Newmarket Housing Authority to provide discounted electricity to the tenants in the complex. The system is a low-profile project that will have no safety or health concerns and provides no view, smell or sound concerns for the surrounding community.
Diane Hardy stated she had a question regarding the signature on the application. She asked if it was signed by the owner. They need the Housing Authority’s signature. Other than that she stated the application is complete.
Action
Motion: John Badger made a motion to accept the application
Second: John Brackett
Vote: All in favor
Chairman Botterman stated this is a proposed solar array on the Newmarket Housing Authority property, near the Newmarket Recreation Center, and across the driveway from the baseball field. Ernest Clark, Newmarket Housing Authority, clarified it is between Maple Street and the Recreation Center.
Rose-Anne Kwaks asked how many panels would be installed and how big an area is involved. Chairman Botterman stated they show it will be 7,250 sq. ft. They do not show how many panels.
Mr. Clark stated the parcel is level. The array will be angled to maximize the sun. There is no plan to do any grading.
Chairman Botterman opened the public hearing.
Sandy Bixby, 28 Maple Street, stated Maple Street goes to a cul de sac that abuts that land. Her concern is there is a path the kids in the neighborhood take to go to the High School. It is how kids walk to school and how people go to the recreation fields to watch their kids play. She wanted to make sure the path was still available to walk through. Mr. Clark stated there was quite a bit of space behind the array and it would not interfere with the path.
Mark Bixby, 28 Maple Street, stated the open space will be filled with solar panels and he was wondering about the area of rocks shown on the plan for drainage. That rock area does not exist now. He was wondering if rocks will be placed there. Chairman Botterman stated the plan shows an existing stone infiltration trench. Mr. Clark stated the rocks on the plan are actually underground. It is a storm drain line that runs into Moonlight Brook underground. On the property, you will see a manhole, and all of that rock is presently under the ground. There will be no additional rocks placed there. Diane Hardy stated that was a project done by the Housing Authority in the 1980s, in response to some issues with stormwater. It was done to address drainage related to their property. Mr. Clark explained when the houses were built on Maple Street, it was well after the Housing Authority had been constructed. There was a line that ran from Great Hill Terrace into a property on Maple Street. No one knew where the line terminated until that piece of property was developed. When developing it, the pipe was turned at a 45 degree angle. The pipe eventually wore out and water came spurting up through the person’s yard. To alleviate that, they cut the line off and ran it behind the apartments. It was an involved process meeting the State Department of Environmental Services (NHDES) standards.
Mark Bixby stated he was concerned, because this would be like putting in a paved parking lot. There is a hard surface and it will pool quickly in the rain. He asked where all the water would go.
Chairman Botterman asked what the spacing was between the panels. Mr. Clark did not have that information, but stated they were all pitched. He was told it would compare to the ones installed at Exeter High School and those are 10’-15’ apart at an approximate 45 degree angle. He stated they are about 10’ off the ground to the top end.
Mark Bixby stated he went on the website of the company installing these. On the site, it talks about the people in the community getting one cent back per kilowatt hour. He was wondering if the Housing Authority was getting a lease out of this. Mr. Clark stated there is a twenty year lease. The Housing Authority will get an annual fee of $1300 a year for the use of the space. Their residents will get about $50 per year as a stipend. It is a PSNH incentive. The conditions of the lease are if, at the end of twenty years or anytime it needs to be maintained or removed, it is the company’s responsibility to do that.
Mark Bixby asked if there would be a fence around it. The area is accessible to kids going through. Mr. Clark stated having a fence was one of their conditions to move forward with the company. He mentioned he was told it takes a considerable amount of force to damage the solar array.
Mark Bixby stated his neighbor from 29 Maple Street is concerned about the fence. She has a fence there, but she would like it replaced. He was not sure who owned the fence. Kimkon Hongmany stated her parents live at 29 Maple Street. Their fence is right on the line. She stated it is her parents’ fence.
Jane Ford asked for what type of repair was the company responsible. Mr. Clark stated it was for any repair.
Rose-Anne Kwaks asked about bonding. Diane Hardy stated she had asked the applicant about it. She did not know if that was in order for this application. Chairman Botterman stated this would be between the Housing Authority and the solar array company.
Rose-Anne Kwaks asked how the solar panels were cleaned. Mr. Clark did not know for sure, but stated it was probably something similar to what they use on their outside lamps. He did not think it was anything hazardous.
John Brackett asked what the make and model of the panels were. Mr. Clark stated he was not involved in that part of it and would get the information for him. Diane Hardy gave John Brackett the company’s information.
Val Shelton asked if this was a mixed use development. Diane Hardy stated she viewed it as a use that is incidental to the primary use, which is a housing development, and they are providing utility installation for service to the residents. She stated the Planning Board would have to discuss this and make a determination. Val Shelton stating they are leasing the land. She believes this is a mixed-use development, which is allowed in that zone. The owner is not doing this strictly to benefit the Housing Authority, they are leasing the land to someone else, who will financially benefit through the sale of electricity to the power grid. The housing authority tenants are not the only beneficiaries.
Mr. Clark stated they had considered doing the arrays on the buildings, but the engineering was too costly. They had also done some research showing that the rooftop arrays were not having as great of success. Val Shelton asked if this would be permitted if a private property owner leased space for this. Mr. Clark stated this would feed the grid through their existing meters. Diane Hardy asked if this was for profit. The answer was affirmative. Diane Hardy stated it had been explained to her that this was to only benefit the people living at the Housing Authority. She stated, since others are financially benefiting from this then that moves the use into a commercial use category, or a mixed-development, as Ms. Shelton had suggested.
Mr. Clark stated the power presently going to the Community Center, which is leased to the Town from the Housing Authority, comes in from the school side of the property. They do not have power beyond Gordon Avenue. Part of the return for the Housing Authority is a power line will be installed at the rear of the property in exchange for three years of the contract where, instead of receiving a cash benefit, they will be paying back for the installation of a power line they could access for the possible construction of additional housing in the future to which they would otherwise not have power. There are fifty households currently in the Housing Authority apartments.
John Badger stated this is a commercial enterprise. Someone is making money from this. John Brackett stated that, at the same time, it helps the Housing Authority. Val Shelton stated mixed use is allowed in the zone, but it should be clear that what they are making a decision about is whether a property owner in a mixed use zone would be able to lease out a portion of their property for commercial use. Chairman Botterman stated someone could build a building in a mixed use zone and lease out the first floor for a commercial enterprise and doesn’t see how this is different. Val Shelton stated that person could lease out the roof for solar arrays to another company.
Rose-Anne Kwaks asked if the residents get anything other than the $50 a year. She asked if their electric rates would be lower. Mr. Clark stated none of their power comes directly to the Housing Authority. The reimbursement to the tenants is not in lower rates. This arrangement would be for $50 a year, which would be more helpful to folks in December than getting a small return on their electric bill.
Mr. Clark stated they feel it is the right thing to do and they are trying to set an example to other housing authorities. This program has come through State legislation. It is not offered to just anybody. That is why they came to them as a housing authority, because they fit the definition of that particular law. This is one of the first to take advantage of this law. He stated everything has to be in place by December 31st. Rose-Anne Kwaks stated, if this is not running by December 31st, the company will not get the subsidies from the government to pay for them. Mr. Clark stated that would mean this would not happen.
Chairman Botterman stated he supports the project. The site plan submitted is from a survey done in 1998. He also heard some abutters’ concerns about drainage. If this was anyone else coming in, they would be asked for more information with some sort of existing conditions plan and some discussion or plan of where the drainage was going to go. Solar panels are up high enough that most jurisdictions say they are not impervious. It does change the drainage path. He would like to see more information. He would also like have details such as the height of the panels. Other board members stated they would like fencing details.
Janice Rosa stated she agreed they should know what they use to clean the panels. If this is draining into Moonlight Brook, it is a concern.
Chairman Botterman stated the general consensus is the Board would like to see more information. Peter Nelson stated he would like more information about the catchment area and site runoff. Another question that came up was about the path. Mr. Clark stated he was not the expert about drainage, but they have done considerable work there to ensure that whatever goes into Moonlight Brook is filtered over about 125-150 yard stretch of underground natural filtering.
Mr. Clark clarified that the path that goes from Maple Street to the Community Center will not be blocked. It is Housing Authority property and they do allow people to cut through. He will not argue the issue as to whether or not people should be cutting through the property. They are welcome to come through. As far as the fencing, it is their agreement that the area will be enclosed with a fence. He stated, as far as an abutter’s personal fence, he could not pay for that. When the folks put up the wooden fence, he did not blame them, but the Housing Authority cannot be part of replacing the fence.
Andrew Kellar arrived at the meeting at approximately 8:02 p.m. He is the founder of New Hampshire Solar Garden. They are the developer working with the owner to bring this project forward. He stated, by the National Electric Code, this system does not require a fence from a safety perspective. However, it makes sense to put one in here. They would also have security cameras. The technology they utilize monitors the equipment through an internet connection. They would get a notification if something is broken. It is a low voltage system. As far as drainage, they have no plans to disturb the existing surface or pull back the soil. They have two strategies in place and they have not gone through the full engineering on the geotechnical reports that are required to say whether they can pile drive an I-beam into the ground or set a concrete block on the existing surface with crushed stone under it. The intent is to keep the surface the way it is. They will have to do a little bit of underground conduit work. They do not anticipate increasing runoff.
Andrew Kellar stated there are conventional solar panels and there are other types of panels. A lot of times they are stacked up. By the time you stack a 3’x5’ panel, you could be up ten or twelve feet high. The way this particular system has been designed, there will only be one panel layer. They like to be roughly 2-2½ feet off the ground to the base of the panel. The panel sits at a 28 degree angle, south facing or as close as they can get it. They might be up in the 4-6 foot height range, depending on the topographical aspect of the land. From a view shed perspective, it is low profile. The company took a traditional rooftop design and put it on the ground. The benefit is they need less space to produce more energy. You need about 40% less space to produce 10-15% more energy. This helps with land conservation. They don’t need to eat up large pieces of land. This system is compact. There is a panel on the front, a reflector on the back and about a 9” gap. That allows for snow and water to flow. There will be roughly 162 panels on a system of this size.
Andrew Kellar showed pictures of different types of systems and ways to attach them to the earth. He stated it is basically a glorified fence post. This system is roughly 66 kilowatts and will produce about 90,000 kilowatt hours of energy, which is the equivalent of about ten homes.
Andrew Kellar stated unless this was an area that was close to a dirt road or an area with a lot of seagulls, there is not a lot of soiling of the panels. In the spring, there may be pollen, but the next rainstorm it washes off. Cleaning of the panels is not a concern unless it was in an area where they get unusually dirty. This can come from things like pine and birds perching. Most panels do not require manual cleaning. If they do, it is on his company to do so, as they have to keep them working as best they can. They are not going to be out there with any kinds of chemicals to clean them. A concern they had was how to maintain beneath the panels. They really cannot mow under them. They had to look at the best solution to maintain the vegetation under them. Chemicals are not an option. There are remote control commercial lawn mowers and they have looked into that. They would mow a few times a year.
Action
Motion: Jane Ford made a motion that they request an updated site plan that is reflective of the fencing and the needed details associated with that, for the Newmarket Housing Authority/Newmarket Town Solar LLC for Map U4, Lot 8, M3 Zone, for the next meeting
Chairman Botterman stated he was not comfortable with the age of the site plan submitted. The topography may not be accurate. Diane Hardy stated they would like to see a statement on how the drainage would be handled. She would like to see designation of the path on the plan. Chairman Botterman asked what type of fencing would be there. Andrew Keller stated it would be chain link to match up to what is there.
Chairman Botterman stated the consensus was the Board supports the project. There are just some details that need more information and the abutters concerns should be addressed.
Diane Hardy asked when the stormwater project the Housing Authority did was done. She asked if it was before or after the date on the site plan submitted with this application was done. That work had changed the grading and drainage on the site. Mr. Clark did not know off the top of his head. It was done more recently than the plan. Nothing has happened to that property where the array is in 30 years other than that underground drain being put in. It is fairly level.
Chairman Botterman stated they needed an updated site plan, they would like details on the fencing, and the plans do not show the height and spacing of the arrays.
Jane Ford withdrew her motion.
Action
Motion: Val Shelton made a motion to continue the public hearing for the Newmarket Housing Authority/Newmarket Town Solar LLC for building the community solar array on Tax Map U4, Lot 8, M-2 Zone to November 18, 2014
Second: Dan Wright
Vote: All in favor
Agenda Item #5 – New/Old Business
Chairman’s Report
Acadia Engineers & Constructors Inc. - Status of Notice of Site Plan Violations at 13 Water Street Tax Map U3, Lot 4, M2 Zone, request of Mr. Tim Nichols to appear before the Board.
Janice Rosa and Peter Nelson recused themselves.
Chairman Botterman stated, at the last meeting, the Board voted to inform Mr. Nichols that they wanted to see the site developed in accordance with the approved site plans. Since that time, there has been some information exchanged. He acknowledged Mr. Nichols and asked for an update.
Tim Nichols stated he was not at the meeting last month when the decision was made. He stated this is private property, not a public way. There is a Town easement on the property, which is the Riverwalk. The former owners agreed with the Town, as part of the approval process years ago, that the Town would maintain access through their site for emergency vehicles. There is no formal easement or requirement for them to do that.
Mr. Nichols stated the approved site plan is approximately 60% complete. There is a lot of site work left to complete. That includes the driveway work that is in question. The alternative pavement of crushed shells was never proposed as a final solution. It was always pending Town approval. Those discussions started last spring. On June 6th they requested a Planning Board site walk to discuss if this could be done as an alternative. There are no engineering standards for crushed shells. They are not used on public ways and NHDOT does not use them. He stated the gentleman from UNH had said that he felt they were an acceptable use for a private driveway, not in a public way.
Mr. Nichols went over the October 7 letter he provided to the Town in response to the Notice of Violation that was sent.
He stated the first point is that he understands the Town will not accept crushed seashells as an alternative surfacing material. They will place bituminous concrete, as depicted on the original site plan. The base leveling course will be placed this year within the next 2-4 weeks. There is site work that has to be completed before they can pave. They propose doing the base course this fall with the final to be done in the spring of 2015.
The second point was in response to the site inspection report by Emanuel Engineering of August 5th. They have since submitted responses to each of their points.
The third point was something requested by the Town Planner. They should submit a formal modified site plan to the Planning Board. If they pave the site, there will be no substantial changes from what was approved, so they would propose, in lieu of doing a formal modified site plan for review and approval, they submit a final as-built plan.
The fourth point requests they defer any of the sanctions that were proposed by the Town in the letter until next spring, when they have time to complete the site work that was part of the approved site plan.
Mr. Nichols stated he hopes the Town appreciates that the planning and construction of this unique urban site has been extremely challenging in every regard. They initiated the planning process over three years ago with the intent of creating a responsible urban development, where they could establish their place of business, demonstrate green and sustainable building technologies, which they have done, and positively impact the community of Newmarket. Successful completion of this project has required balancing the expectations of the Town, the abutters, the Public Utility Commission (PUC), the NH Division of Historic Resources, and the U.S. National Park Service, all within a very sensitive financial plan. They have come a long way and look forward to completing this innovative development and historic building preservation project, with the Town’s continued support.
Chairman Botterman asked for and Mr. Nichols provided an update on the status of the blacksmith building. Mr. Nichols, stated regarding paving impacts, there is still a fire sprinkler main that needs to be tied into the building. That water main runs down the middle of the driveway. There are two geothermal wells for the two unsold townhomes. They require commissioning; they do not want to pave over those until they are tested. The wells have been drilled.
Rose-Anne Kwaks asked if there would be a catch basin with smart sponges. Chairman Botterman stated there were drainage structures on the original plan with underground storage, which was a cistern with a catchbasin. Mr. Nichols stated there are two catchbasin inlets with infiltration or cistern storage. Rose-Anne Kwaks asked what happened when those fill up. Val Shelton stated they haven’t made any changes to the approved site plan’s drainage. Chairman Botterman stated all of the drainage will be installed per the approved plans.
Diane Hardy stated one of the cistern (for the roof top run-off) is above ground right now, but Mr. Nichols has indicated, that will eventually go under the ground. They will still be two catch basins with the infiltration for treatment purposes.
Chairman Botterman stated he was fine with the first item that Mr. Nichols read. You don’t put the final pavement down until the job is done. The Board agreed.
For the second item, the report will be addressed. Diane Hardy stated Mr. Nichols provided the Board with a letter today that addresses each of the points. They would take that up as part of the revised plan. At that hearing, it would be appropriate to go over his responses.
Chairman Botterman stated for the fourth item regarding the stop work order, his opinion was as long as the project is moving forward and the intention is to build it per the approved plan, he is okay with deferring any sanctions. The Board agreed.
Val Shelton asked about Certificates of Occupancy being issued prior to the project being completed. Tim Nichols stated they are Temporary Occupancy permits.
Chairman Botterman appointed Rose-Anne Kwaks to replace Janice Rosa, who stepped down. He mentioned that Dan Wright was also now present at the meeting at approximately 8:36 p.m., as he had a commitment to attend another meeting upstairs.
Diane Hardy explained the stop work order. Mr. Nichols was given fifteen days to respond. They have some recommendations from legal counsel. The Town’s attorney stated there was no reason not to lift the stop work order provided that Mr. Nichols and the Town can reach an agreement on how outstanding issues will be addressed. He recommended that a performance guarantee be provided to the Board for the work remaining to be done and milestones be written into an agreement that would provide measure to the Town on whether the project is progressing in timely fashion and in full compliance. The performance guarantee would be reduced at various points along the way. She clarified that any further Certificates of Occupancy can be issued upon him posting that bond, if that is what he chooses to do. She understood Mr. Nichols wanted to do the work before coming forward with any further requests for occupancy. Legal counsel stated once the Town issues the last Certificate of Occupancy, the Town would not have any leverage to ensure compliance. He went on to say if there were any additional engineering or legal fees incurred those should be worked out in the agreement with Mr. Nichols and be part of any conditions for lifting the Notice of Violation.
Val Shelton asked what the Board’s role was at this point. Diane Hardy stated this was really a Code Enforcement matter and the Board’s role is advisory to the Code Enforcement Officer.
Jane Ford asked who determines the dollar amount of the bond. Diane Hardy stated the Town Engineer reviews the plans and identifies the items needing to be addressed. They attribute a dollar value based on standard engineering practice and cost estimating protocols.
Action
Motion: Rose-Anne Kwaks made a motion that the Board defer the issuance of a Stop Work order and the accrual of fines or penalties and defer the restriction to issue temporary occupancy permits for the two unsold townhouse units in the blacksmith shop pending completion and approval of interior work for Acadia Engineering & Constructors, Inc. regarding site plan violations for 13 Water Street, Tax Map U2, Lot 4, in the M2 Zone
Val Shelton asked if the motion was to recommend to the Code Enforcement Officer. Chairman Botterman stated that was correct, he would defer the order.
Second: Val Shelton
Vote: All in favor
Roger Desrosiers, 15D Water Street, stated he wanted to ask if nothing would be done until a site plan is presented to the Board. Chairman Botterman stated that was not correct. Mr. Nichols can do what is on the approved site plan any time he wants to do it. Diane Hardy explained what is being “stayed” is the Notice of Violation. They are going to put together an agreement with Mr. Nichols. Chairman Botterman stated he will be in front of the Board at the November 18 meeting with a plan of how he wants to finish and any changes he wants to make. Chairman Botterman stated, if Mr. Desrosiers had any questions or issues going forward, he can call the Town Planner or Code Enforcement Officer any time.
Jennifer Desrosiers, 15D Water Street, wanted to take an opportunity to say they are new residents in town and love being here and living on the waterfront. She would like to see an open dialogue between the residents at her development, Rivermoor Landing and the Town on how to handle the Riverwalk. There is a lot of activity that happens at the intersection, which is twenty feet in front of their house, they witness every day. There is opportunity to improve that interaction that she did not think anyone was talking about right now.
Dan Wright asked how a performance bond works. Chairman Botterman explained the bonding process. Diane Hardy stated, for many projects, they have letters of credit from a financial institution that serves the same purpose and there is a letter of agreement between the Town and the bank.
Committee Reports
Dan Wright stated the Joint Town/School Committee stated there is a lot of information to gather. The consultant team is very good. The public can ask questions at the start of their meetings.
Rose-Anne Kwaks stated CIP is just about done and they are going to meet with the School Superintendent for more information on their funding.
Rose-Anne Kwaks stated she spoke to the Building Official about a junk yard ordinance. She gave him a lot of information about the former proposed junk yard ordinance.
Val Shelton stated the Economic Development Committee met the previous week. The Town Administrator will be taking the information about the consultant they would like to hire to the Town Council for approval of the funding.
Other Business
Janice Rosa stated she visits Schanda Park a lot and the parking lot is partly used for car parking and part is used trailer parking associated with the boat launch. This is the area, where cars end up in the brook once in a while. She stated she was talking to the Building Official and he had a good idea. You can get approval from the State to put culverts in, then you fill on top of it, then you have extra space you can use for parking or for the public to enjoy. That area is very heavily used. She did not know where to present this. Chairman Botterman stated that should go to the Town Administrator and Public Works Director. Janice Rosa stated the Public Works Department is always pulling out couches and trash from there.
Agenda Item #6 – Adjourn
Action
Motion: Janice Rosa made a motion to adjourn at 8:55 p.m.
Second: John Badger
Vote: All in favor