Minutes

Meeting date: 
Tuesday, February 14, 2017

NEWMARKET PLANNING BOARD MEETING

 

FEBRUARY 14, 2017

 

MINUTES

 

Present:            Rose-Anne Kwaks, Diane Hardy (Town Planner), Jane Ford, Peter Nelson (Alternate), Glen Wilkinson (Alternate), Dale Pike (Town Council ex officio alternate)

 

Absent:             Eric Botterman (Chairman), Val Shelton (Vice Chairman), Janice Rosa, Amy Burns (Town Council ex officio) – all excused

 

Called to order:           7:01 p.m.

 

Adjourned:                    8:19 p.m.

 

              Diane Hardy explained, due to the absence of the Chairman and Vice Chairman, the Board members present needed to nominate a member to act as Chairman for the evening.

 

              Jane Ford nominated Rose-Anne Kwaks.  Peter Nelson seconded.  The Board members were unanimous in appointing Rose-Anne Kwaks as Chairman for the meeting.

 

Agenda Item #1 - Pledge of Allegiance

 

              After the Pledge of Allegiance, Rose-Anne Kwaks appointed Peter Nelson and Glen Wilkinson to replace absent Board members Janice Rosa and Eric Botterman for the evening.

 

Agenda Item #2 - Public Comments

 

              None.

 

Agenda Item #3 - Review & Approval of Minutes:         01/24/17      

 

              Minutes were postponed to the next meeting.

 

Agenda Item #4 - Regular Business

 

Sharon Tucker/Town of Newmarket - Public hearing for an application for Subdivision, at 27 Neal Mill Road, Tax Map R4, Lot 50, R1 Zone.  The proposal is to subdivide the property into three lots.  One lot will be conveyed to the Town for municipal water supply, another will contain the existing residence, and the third lot will remain vacant and unbuildable until such time as the owner complies with the frontage requirements of Section 3.01(B) of the Zoning Ordinance. 

 

              Rose-Anne Kwaks stated the Town Attorney, John Ratigan, was present to represent the Town and Sean Greig, the Director of the Town’s Water & Sewer Department was also present. 

 

              Attorney Ratigan recalled they had already been before the Board on a preliminary basis to discuss this application.  The Town has negotiated the acquisition of approximately twelve and a half acres to be purchased from Sharon Tucker.  The land is in the middle of the existing lot.  They are creating a lot that will have no road frontage.  They do not need frontage, because they are going to develop a municipal water supply well on the property and are exempted from the Town’s zoning regulations.   They have been before the Zoning Board of Adjustment to get a variance for the other lot that will remain in Ms. Tucker’s ownership which allowed a non-buildable lot to be created without frontage on a Class V or better road.  This remaining lot will only have access from a Class VI road.  There is a note to be placed on the plan stating that it will be an undeveloped lot until such time as it gains proper access.  Other than that, the application is very straightforward.  Diane Hardy had prepared a Planner’s memo that includes three waiver requests. They looked at the conditions of approval Diane Hardy had drafted and they are perfectly acceptable. 

 

              Diane Hardy stated the application is complete and ready for acceptance for review by the Board. There were a couple of minor things that were noted and the applicant’s engineer has addressed those or is in the process of doing so.

 

              Action

                             Motion:            Glen Wilkinson made a motion to accept the application

                             Second:            Peter Nelson

                             Vote:                 All in favor

 

              Action

Motion:            Peter Nelson made a motion to grant the three waivers on the Sharon Tucker property.  The waivers are for Section 4.10(B)(1)(b) Topography, Section 4.10(B)(2) Hydric & Poorly Drained Soils, and Section 4.10(B)(3)& (C) Utilities, Septic Systems & Setback Lines.  

Second:            Glen Wilkinson

Vote:                 All in favor

 

              Rose-Anne Kwaks referred to the staff recommendations outlined in Diane Hardy’s memo.

 

              Diane Hardy stated the application meets zoning and subdivision regulations with exceptions.  A variance was granted in December to allow one of the lots as a non-buildable lot.  This lot will become the site of the new Town well.  A town is exempt from zoning regulations, as long as it is performing a governmental function.  Her recommendation is to approve the application, as presented, subject to conditions.  One condition is the parcels would be approved by the Town Assessor to assure it meets with the Town’s protocol for tax map numbering.  The second condition was to grant the waivers, which has already was done.  The third is Lots 50-1 and 50-2 would be subject to any NH approvals as applicable.  The fourth is regarding the easements pertaining to the lot.  There is an easement for right of way and access and another for utilities that will cross what will remain as the Tucker parcel as well as a boundary line agreement, copies of which shall be provided to the Planning Board for their records.

 

              Rose-Anne Kwaks opened the public hearing.

 

              There were no comments.

 

              Rose-Anne Kwaks closed the public hearing.

 

              Dale Pike asked what the diameter looked like for test wells to make sure there is no impact on private wells in the area.  Sean Greig stated that would be part of the plan they will submit to the State.  They have not figured out the details of that plan yet.  The well, itself, has been approved to pump water, but they cannot get the permit until they actually own the property.  Once they purchase the property, they will go through a whole process of getting the permit and all of the other requirements.  That permit will designate what they will need to do to monitor the municipal well for impacts on local wells. 

 

              Action

Motion:            Glen Wilkinson made a motion to approve the application for the subdivision at 27 Neal Mill Road, Tax Map R4, Lot 50, R1 Zone, as proposed, dividing the property into three lots with the conditions that the parcel numbers are to approved by the Town’s Assessor office, with the attached waivers, and Lots 50-1 and 50-2 shall be subject to NH approval, and with copies of easements, right of way documents and boundary line agreement for the Town’s records

                            Second:            Dale Pike

 

              Attorney Ratigan asked if they could add “as applicable” to being subject to NH approval, as they may not need any approval from them.

 

Glen Wilkinson amended his motion to add “as applicable” to being subject to NH approval

                                                          Dale Pike seconded the amendment

 

                             Vote:                 All in favor

 

Real Estate Advisors, Inc - Public hearing for an application for Design Review, at 1R Grape Street, Tax Map U2, Lot 206, R3 Zone.  The proposal is for a four unit residential condominium development.

 

              Gregory Worth, an attorney from Dover, represented the applicant, D. R. Lemieux Builders.  Christian Smith, Engineer from Beal Associates, Inc., and David Lemiuex, of D. R. Lemieux Builders, were also present.

 

              Attorney Worth stated the current owner of the property is Real Estate Advisors.  Based on comments obtained over the last seven to nine months from the Town Planner, abutters, and the proceedings before the Board, a new site plan was prepared, which has attempted to address all of the outstanding issues of which they are aware.  One of the issues addresses the staggering of the units.  The site plan has been changed to alter the building footprint.  The façade is brick on the two protruding units, as was suggested by the Technical Review Committee.  They have added brick walkways and a landscape buffer.  They have attempted to address the comments received from the abutters and this Board.

 

              Christian Smith, the engineer from Beals & Associates, stated this gives the Board a better handle on the layout of these units vs. what was previously proposed.  Mr. Lemieux worked with an architect and they came up with a new design, footprint and layout.  They tried to address all of the concerns with the previous application.

 

              They tried to keep the pavement, grading, and drainage pond as close to what it was under the previous plan.  All of the plantings remain and some were added. 

 

              The lot grading will not change much, but the building with the staggered units and the façade treatment (with brick being proposed on the two units that are in the forefront) is greatly improved.

 

              Dale Pike asked if there was any brick on the back and sides of the building.  Christian Smith stated there was none at this time.  It was just on the front.  That was pretty much the charge that was brought up and what the attorney was able to tell from going through the minutes.  The balance of the non-brick siding is proposed as vinyl siding. 

 

              Glen Wilkinson stated the placement of the dumpster was pretty far in for a truck to get in and out easily.  He acknowledged it was problematic with the truck having to safely back out of such a tight area and having the neighbors to have to deal with a backup alarm.  He suggested they look at another system with portable recycling containers with wheels, (which can be stored and screened in the parking area) that can be easily pulled out to the curb on trash collection day and returned to the recycling storage stalls for the rest of the week.   Mr. Smith stated they would look at that.

 

              Peter Nelson asked if the existing garage was going to be renovated.  Attorney Worth did not know to what extent it would be renovated.  Something will be done with it.  The applicant would like to use it as storage space for the tenants.

             

David Lemieux stated he currently had the property under agreement.  The size of the building did not change, just the staggering. 

 

              Rose-Anne Kwaks asked about room for snow storage.  Christian Smith showed where the snow storage would be.  The area would drain into the swale to the bioretention pond. 

 

              Rose-Anne Kwaks asked about the space between the arborvitae in back.  Attorney Worth stated they could contemplate that for their design.

 

              Jane Ford asked about parking.  Christian Smith stated they provide eight spaces, which is what zoning requires.  The chances this will get inundated are slim.  Some of the people who could move in could be single. 

 

              Rose-Anne Kwaks asked what would happen if there were extra people.  Attorney Worth stated he did not think they would park on Grape Street.  They would have to work with their neighbors.  He indicated on the plan where additional parking could occur.  They can look into on-street parking.

 

              Rose-Anne Kwaks asked if the units will have basements.  Mr. Lemieux stated he is contemplating that.  At the moment they are slab on grade. 

 

Rose-Anne Kwaks stated if the garage openings were too small for today’s cars and the building wasn’t in good shape, they could consider knocking the garage down and put four extra parking spaces there. 

 

Dale Pike stated it seemed like the appearance is an improvement and more in keeping with the neighborhood than what they saw before. 

 

Rose-Anne Kwaks opened the public hearing.

 

Janice Lamontagne, 3 Grape Street, stated the parking was an issue.  Grape Street is narrow and people park on the street.  It is very congested.  To put eight cars in the back will be difficult.  She lives on the corner and will be by the parking area.  She did rent one of the garage spaces in the past.  She has a Toyota Corolla and she had a hard time backing out of that.  She did not know about those being able to be used for garages.  She did not think the abutters really wanted the garages taken down.

 

Bob Medea, owner of 7-9 Grape Street, stated he appreciated the work that went into the rendition.  He stated it looked fabulous.  He had a concern about the setback from the property line of the two units on Grape Street.  Mr. Smith showed the setback line on the plan.  He said it is close, but it does meet the setback.  It is probably a foot or more.  The overhang meets the setback.

 

Mr. Madea stated they always had concerns about water runoff.  He asked if there had been any change to the composition of the asphalt parking lot.  He asked if it was a semi-permeable surface.  Mr. Smith stated it was not.  Mr. Madea stated it would help alleviate some of the water directed toward Grape Street.

 

Mr. Madea stated the abutters were concerned about the garage. It has historical value in the neighborhood.  It sits within the setbacks.  If it were to come down, it would have to be moved.  Any changes to that garage would not be favored by the abutters.

 

Mr. Madea stated their concern has been the drainage toward Grape Street.  They worked with previous plans to get berms built and get it directed to the rear settling basin and down the side of the road on the way in.  He still has concerns about snow storage.  If it gets excessive, it would have to be trucked away.  Christian Smith stated that was a note that was added to the previous plans and they would certainly do that again.  If the site got inundated with snow, they would take it off-site.  Mr. Madea asked what inundated was.  He stated it was not quantifiable.  Mr. Smith stated inundated means the snow storage area is no longer available to adequately store snow and it starts encroaching onto the pavement and parking area. 

 

Peter Meneghin stated his wife owns 20 Beech Street.  In the preliminary information with the brick on one side, he thought the abutters would be gratified if brick was on more sides than just one.  He stated he is familiar with the garage and units are narrow and small.  He stated there was a concern about adequate parking for visitors.  The Board could consider altering the interior walls, so you end up with four units that were wider and designate those as supplemental parking for the units.  If something could be done to improve the parking situation, it ought to be done.  He appreciates that some of the abutters like the building.  It affords privacy for them. 

 

Janice Lamontagne asked how many bedrooms were in each unit.  Mr. Lemieux stated they were two bedroom units, with 1,290 sq. ft. units.  That is both floors included. 

 

Peggy Small-Porter, 26-28 Beech Street, asked how someone who does not currently own the property can put forth an application.  She also stated she will see the brick in the front, but the other people won’t see it.  She would like to see the middle part brick.  Diane Hardy stated it was not uncommon for a developer to come forward to present a proposal and be an option holder on the property.  There is a provision on the application where the owner has to authorize that person to appear before the Boards on their behalf.  She clarified that this is a Design Review, which is a legally non-binding session.  The discussion is really so the Board can gain a better understanding of the abutters’ concerns and the Board may have questions.  It also gives the applicant an idea of what is acceptable and what they might be getting themselves into.

 

Robert MacDonald, 1 Grape Street, asked what the elevation was from the back parking to Grape Street.  Mr. Smith stated 43.2 down to 41.4.  Mr. MacDonald asked how much water would come down onto Grape Street.  Mr. Smith stated they have not revised the analysis for this, but essentially because of working through with Underwood Engineers in the previous iteration and the abutters they were able to berm and there is a bioretention swale along the side of the driveway.  It is basically the same filtration media that exists in the pond itself.  As the water travels over that, it has the opportunity to infiltrate and be treated.  It is all guided to the single catch basin.  The previous iteration showed a reduction in the existing amount of run-off.  Mr. MacDonald stated he would like to see a stormwater study done in a normal rainfall conditions.  Diane Hardy stated the Town requires as part of Site Review application that a drainage analysis be done.  Mr. MacDonald stated there is a good puddle that appears at the catch basin, especially when the ground is frozen.  Even during normal rain conditions, there is water that collects.  The other thing item that is not shown on the plan is his easement.  He would like that noted on the plan.  Attorney Worth stated, if an easement exists, it will be noted.  Mr. MacDonald stated it does exist.  He asked if the owners also get a storage unit.  Mr. Lemieux stated he is pretty sure it will work where there will be garage space with each unit, but they haven’t decided that fully yet.  Mr. MacDonald asked when that will be decided.  Attorney Worth stated it would come in with a formal application. 

 

 Attorney Worth clarified his law firm does not represent Mr. Cheney.  They are here on behalf of Mr. Lemieux only.

 

Kathy MacDonald, 1 Grape Street, asked if a fire truck could get in back of the building and if there was enough turning radius for a ladder truck to turn around there.  She also asked about trash pickup and asked if they were going to back in to the site to empty the dumpsters.  Christian Smith stated they had met with the Fire Department about this.  There is a fire hydrant on Grape Street.  They will not be pulling a truck into there, they will be pulling up to the fire hydrant and running hose.  Regarding the trash truck, typically the way these vehicles come in is they have the forks on the front of the truck and they will come in, tip the dumpster and back out.  Ms. MacDonald stated that was her concern.  That neighborhood is filled with little children.  Having a dump truck pulling in and backing out is troublesome.

Janice Lamontagne asked where the fire hydrant was on Grape Street.  She stated she had never seen one.  Christian Smith stated it is actually located on Cedar Street at the end of Grape Street.

 

Ms. Lamontagne asked what a swale was.  Christian Smith stated it was a depression between the abutting property and the pavement.  He showed where it was on the plan.  It is a low point and it terminates at the catchbasin.  He indicated where the water would flow.  Ms. Lamontagne showed where she lived on the plan.  She was concerned about it impacting her space.  Mr. Smith stated there would be no water on her property whatsoever.  They are making a slight berm, which is an elevation higher than her property, and that will keep the water on the parcel.

 

Robert MacDonald asked where they go from here.  Diane Hardy stated this was a Design Review, which is nonbinding, these are just discussions.  The applicant will go back and consider the information presented and make a decision whether to move forward with an application, maybe make some design modifications in response to what was heard this evening.  Once they submit an application, then it is scheduled for a public hearing and abutters are notified.  A lot of design and planning went into the earlier iteration of the plan.  They were 99% through the process and the plan was denied on the basis of the façade treatment.  It is her hope and expectation that they do not have to start all over from square one and go back through that.  It was a six or seven month process.  They had the Town Engineer review it.  Some of the things that Mr. Smith mentioned this evening were design features that were added specifically in response to concerns raised by the abutters at the first hearings.  Her hope is they do not have to reinvent the wheel here and start all over, because it is really not necessary.

 

Mr. MacDonald hoped the applicant was privy to the previous discussions that the abutters felt that a four unit development on that footprint was absurd.  More likely a single or double unit would be better.  Diane Hardy stated this discussion has been heard by the NH Superior Court on two cases.  Mr. MacDonald stated what they were saying was some of their concerns are about trying to squeeze ten pounds into a five pound bag.  They hope it gets realized.  A lot of abutters would be very pleased to see this four unit cut down to a smaller footprint.  It would accommodate their concerns about parking, trash trucks, and safety of inhabitants on the street. 

 

Mr. MacDonald came up to the microphone and asked if the Cheney Companies own the property.  He was late arriving and he said the question may have already been asked.  Diane Hardy stated they still own the property and the applicant has a purchase and sale agreement.  Mr. MacDonald thought the owner should be at the meeting.  Diane Hardy stated he has authorized the applicant to proceed here.  The abutter asked if there was a letter on file.  Diane Hardy stated there was a signature on the application.  The abutter asked for a copy.  He asked for a larger copy of the plan.  Diane Hardy told him he could come and see her and she would get one for him.

 

Christian Smith stated Mr. Lemiuex has a purchase and sale agreement on this property contingent on site plan approval.  If he is successful in gaining site plan approval, he will close on the property and purchase it from Walter Cheney.  There is no need for Walter Cheney to be at the meeting, because he has no input on this whatsoever.  This is now the proposal of D. R. Lemieux Builders. 

 

Rose-Anne Kwaks stated Mr. Smith if there would be any engineering changes, as far as runoff.  Mr. Smith stated not as far stormwater.  It will be very unsubstantive.  The roofline runs the same.  As Mr. Lemieux said, his square footage is the same, so the amount of impervious area doesn’t change.  All of the data from the previous design including the nitrogen calculations are all still valid.  They will present the amended drainage evaluation, which will go out to Underwood Engineers for review.

 

Peter Nelson stated there seem to be three points of concern.  The first is the architectural brick façade, which has been in discussion many times in the past.  The Board has heard from the abutters that the more brick, the better.  The general feeling was the brick enhances the historic character of the neighborhood.  The other issue is parking.  Four units with parking and guests who may have to park somewhere else is a concern.  The third item is runoff from the property.

 

Jane Ford stated they talked about snow removal, parking, clapboard as opposed to vinyl siding, drainage concerns, the dumpster truck and the number of units.  She wanted to note the developer did hear the previous concerns and has stepped up. 

 

Rose-Anne Kwaks stated, as far as the concerns, the parking requirement is two parking spaces per unit.  The Board does not have the ability to require anything more.  They can discuss alternatives.  As for the brick, she liked the revised front of the building.  It has the brick and it looks like they added on afterward.  That is what has been done in that area.  The have the main brick building, then they add on and it is clapboard.  She would like to see the back part with the brick, too.  It would fit into the neighborhood.  A lot of abutters face that side.  As far as four units, that has gone through the courts twice and it will be four units.  In light of that, if they could brick the front and back, that would be a great improvement and put clapboards on sides of the building.

 

Peggy Small-Porter stated a lot of the buildings in the area have the middle section larger than the ends.  That could make it more in keeping.  That is the way the other four-plexes are.

 

Glen Wilkinson stated, as far as the trash collection, there is only one way he would put his trucks in there and that would be if there were smaller carts at the end of the road and you would have to back in.  He would not put a front loader in there, because it is exceptionally dangerous backing out into the road.  He would stay away from a dumpster and do totes, preferably four of those, one for each unit and some recycling.  Mr. Smith stated they could have ninety gallon totes and the unit owners would wheel them to the end of the street.  Glen Wilkinson stated they could have a corral for those at the end.  The collectors would get them out of the corral and they would not have to back out of the driveway.  If there is a dumpster, you create a situation where someone would want to come in and frontload.  If you do the carts, it is a back in with a rear load.  Mr. Smith thought that was a fantastic idea and thanked him for it.

 

Glen Wilkinson asked if the existing garage was more of a glorified screen for the abutters or does it have real historic value.  When he looks at it, he thinks they should knock it down and give the units basements and put up a nice fence. 

 

Ms. Small-Porter stated she has spoken to the abutters and when they talked about the garage coming down, they were not in favor of that at all.  That offers a buffer and they would not have to see the new building.  Glen Wilkinson stated then the garage is not the issue, but the buffer and screening the garage provides.  Ms. Small-Porter stated that was correct and it is a historical 1903 building.  It is an eyesore, but does provide a nice buffer.  It would have to be a ten foot fence to provide the same coverage.  Rose-Anne Kwaks asked what the height of the garage was.  Mr. Smith did not know, but it is a single story.  Mr. Smith thought twelve feet was about right. 

 

Rose-Anne Kwaks asked if Mr. Smith got enough information.  He stated he had.

 

Agenda Item #5 - New/Old Business

 

              Update report from Zoning Committee: Status of Zoning Changes

              Rose-Anne Kwaks stated the changes from the last meeting will be going to Town Council tomorrow night for first reading.  Diane Hardy stated they hoped it would be scheduled for a  public hearing for March 1, which is the night of the joint meeting with Planning Board and Town Council.

             

Discussion of agenda for Joint Meeting with the Town Council on March 1, 2017.

Diane Hardy stated, for the agenda for the joint meeting, it was important that the Planning Board give an overview of the Future Land Use chapter of the Master Plan and talk about the future zoning proposals, which includes accessory dwelling units and grandfathered nonconforming status of areas.  They should also talk about what the zoning committee has worked on regarding signage and recommendations of the EDC.  The subcommittee hopes to meet before March 1.  Val Shelton put together a matrix of examples of CCRCs that they have looked at.  There are eight or nine.  They can compare the alternatives and discuss pros and cons.  Rose-Anne Kwaks said that was a lot of work and she did a great job.  Diane Hardy will get copies to the Board. 

 

Diane Hardy heard from Scott Gove and Joe Falzone and they are interested in the prospect of a retirement community on Route 152.   They are interested in having an “over 55” component cause that would carry the proposal.  They are monitoring our progress.

Diane Hardy stated they talked about doing field trips to various facilities and to talk with developers who have actually developed these types of project.

 

Rose-Anne Kwaks stated the demand was high for Riverwoods with a long waiting list.  They have used up all of their available land. 

 

Committee Reports

 

Town Council

 

Dale Pike stated the Town Council was still working on the shared services facilities person.  They are making progress.  They have a job description, but wanted more details.  Some of the language needs to be cleaned up for the final document for the position. 

 

Planner's Report

 

Diane Hardy mentioned there is one vacancy on the Planning Board, due to Ezra Temko’s resignation.  The person who will be appointed will fill the position until March 2018.  Ezra’s  resignation came after the ballots were put together and printed, so we were too late to have this put on the ballot for the upcoming Town Meeting in March. So the term will carry to next year.  She has talked to a couple of people, who have expressed interest.  They would have to apply and be voted in by the Planning Board to fill out the term to March 2018.  Rose-Anne Kwaks stated they could go with a veteran Planning Board Alternate.  Peter Nelson stated he was interested.

 

Diane Hardy stated Peter Nelson’s term is about to expire on the Strafford Regional Planning Committee (SRPC).  She asked if he was still interested in serving in that capacity as well.  Appointments will be taken up at the March 21, 2017 meeting of the Planning Board.

 

Diane Hardy stated there is a Planning Board workshop coming up from the Office of Energy and Planning.  It is on April 29, 2017 and the newer members may want to participate.  It will be in Concord at the Grappone Conference Center.

 

Agenda Item #6 - Adjourn

 

            Action

                        Motion:          Peter Nelson made a motion to adjourn at 8:19 p.m.

                        Second:           Jane Ford

                        Vote:               All in favor