Category Archives: PLANNING BOARD
Presiding Members: Jeffrey Miller (Chair), Robert Miller (Vice-Chair), James Aldrich, (Secretary), Dennis Marcom, Jason Perron, Jeff White, Cheryl Mayberry (Selectboard Representative). Alternate: Edward Potter. Absent: Joanna Andros.
Recording: Marilou Blaine. These minutes are unapproved and will be reviewed at the March 2018 meeting for corrections, additions and/or omissions.
Meeting Opened: Mr. J. Miller called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Roll Call: All the board members were present so no alternate was needed to fill in.
Minutes: Mr. Marcom made a motion to approve the January minutes as presented. Mr. Aldrich seconded the motion and the motion carried.
Public Hearing No. 1 Public Hearing: Subdivision: Sam MacNeil Talmadge, 211 North Road, Map 10 Lot 24, rural/ag. One lot into two. Lot 1: 18.9 acres. Lot 2: 7 acres.
Mr. Joe DiBernardo, land surveyor, represented Mr. Talmadge. His house is located at the end of High St. and North Road. Both lots conform to the zoning regulations for rural/ag – 40,000 square-foot lots and more than 762.99 feet frontage for Lot 1 and 292.22 feet for Lot 2.
Lot 2 has a “Do Not Build Zone” as well as a 50-foot right-of-way that exists to the south that goes over the Brookhurst property. Mr. J. Miller asked if there was access. Mr. DiBernardo said “yes” that there is a field area.
Someone in the audience asked about the “no build zone.” Mr. DiBernardo and Mr. Miller assumed it was a deed restriction and Mr. DiBernardo said that means that no one can build on the site of the designated area. Mr. DiBernardo also said that Mr. Talmadge also has a deed restriction that no one can build a structure within sight of his house.
Someone in the audience asked what a “no build zone” was. Mr. DiBernardo said it meant no one can build a house on that part of the property and it applies to structures of any kind. She asked how can that be. Mr. J. Miller said it is a deed restriction that when it was registered at the County Registry of Deeds, this provision was in the deed and it follows the ownership of the person or persons owning the land.
There being no further questions, the Public Hearing was closed.
Public Hearing No. 2
Public Hearing: Subdivision: Greg Macri, 10 Macri Lane off of Old Keene Rd. Residential A, Map 7, Lot 20. One lot into two. Lot 1: 9.89 acres, frontage 485.91. Lot 2: 3 acres, frontage 289.89.
Mr. J. Miller pointed out to the audience that he was an abutter. Mr. DiBernardo represented Mr. Macri. 1.
Mr. DiBernardo said the lot comes off of Old Keene Road and then uses the center line of the brook as the property line. It’s less than five (5) acres so it has to get state approval. That is in the works and there should be state approval in a few weeks, Mr. DiBernardo said.
The remainder of the lot is 9.89 acres and that’s where Mr. Macri’s house and garage and other structures are. There is a private drive and there is a right-of-way for other homeowners on the road.
Mr. DiBernardo handed out new maps revised because of a right-of-way on Macri Lane that is not on the other map. Lot 1 has a “little tip” and touches one of the properties to the southwest.
Ms. Eleanor Shaw asked who owns the land. Mr. J. Miller guessed it was at one time the Kupec property and then MacAulliffe owned it.
There being no more questions, Mr. J. Miller closed the hearing.
Votes on the subdivisions:
Talmadge: Mr. Perron made a motion to approve the subdivision as presented. It was seconded by Mr. R. Miller and the motion carried unanimously.
Macri: Mr. R. Miller made a motion to accept the subdivision as presented. The motion was seconded by Mr. Aldrich and the motion carried.
New Business: Mr. William Carmody owns a lot within the area of Ames Plaza. It is 6 Ames Lane and the lot in question is next to to a company that sells sports equipment on line. The lot is also near the exit to Upper Walpole Road.
Mr. Carmody explained that there is some confusion about which district he is in. The Ames Plaza property was subdivided in 1990. Mr. Carmody purchased the property from Randy Daniels in 2005 and it was zoned commercial then, but in 2007 somehow it was changed.
The tax card says the zoning is commercial but the land is residential, Mr. Carmody said.
Mr. J. Miller said that there is no record in his memory of this being changed.
The confusion may be because in March 2007, there was a zone change to Dearborn Circle and Burrows Lane from commercial to residential B. The rear of Mr. Carmody’s property backs up to Dearborn Circle and a buffer of trees between the Dearborn Circle road and Mr. Carmody’s lot has grown up.
The Board agreed with Mr. Carmody that the land should be zoned commercial. It was eventually decided that Mr. J. Miller and Mr. Carmody would attend the Selectboard’s meeting on Thursday and straighten it out with them. Mr. J. Miller said he considered it a clerical error.
Land next to vet hospital: Dr. Chuck Shaw wanted to ask questions about the land next to his veterinary practice. He has talked to the gentleman who has purchased the property and the new owner intends to put a gas station there and a mini mart. Dr. Shaw told him that he was going to have a rough time to get a gas station in a rural/ag zoned land. The new owner already has two similar businesses, one in Keene and one on Route 9 in Chesterfield, and they are called The Big Deal, Dr. Shaw’s question was one of process.
Mr. J. Miller explained that the process is that he is in rural/ag and to put it a gas station in he needs a Special Exception. The Special Exception is channeled through the Zoning Board. The Planning Board participates in that it gives a non-binding recommendation to approve or not approve the Special Exception. The Zoning Board has criteria that they analyze and if they feel it meets that criteria, the Board can grant a Special Exception. Part of the criteria is that they have to have a recommendation from the Planning Board. So that’s where the Planning Board come in on the process. If the Special Exception is granted, then the next step is that the owner has to come to the Planning Board for a site plan review.
Dr. Shaw asked if the Planning Board can overrule the Zoning Board. The answer is “no” but there is an appeal process and abutters can appeal the Zoning Board decision and ask for reconsideration. The big issue is with the Zoning Board, Mr. J. Miller said.
What is the track record of the Zoning Board as to decisions that they have arrived at in the past, Dr. Shaw asked. Is there a precedent about what has been done in the past when rural/ag has been changed to commercial? Does it have a history?
There has been one and it regards Chamberlain Machine, Mr. J. Miller said. The land on the west side of Route 12 is commercial but up to 250 feet back and then it become rural/ag again. Chamberlain owned the commercial part of the land on Route 12 where it is located. They also wanted the adjacent land in the back that was rural/ag. Since a lot of that land was commercial anyway, it seemed logical to grant the Special Exception.
Some of criteria is is there other commercial land. Another is a look at the Master Plan and how it sees the importance of rural/ag land in the town. Currently, on the west side of Route 12, there is the 250 rule. On the east side, commercial land goes to the bank.
Article No. 3 about the minor changes.
Mr. J. Miller said after we went through everything regarding the warrant Article #3 about minor changes, the Selectboard sent the warrant articles to the town attorney for review and he had some concerns about Article #3. The Selectboard then said that they were pulling Article #3 from the warrant. But since Article #3 had gone through due process and there was a Public Hearing on the article, it couldn’t be pulled. The original issue was about minor changes such as a street name that didn’t match the 911 name. An attorney at the NH Municipal Association was consulted and he advised the Board to use the Article #3. The attorney said that was how the town of Merrimack resolved the issue.
Mr. J. Miller said his first reaction was we don’t need this article because the Selectboard already has the power to make these minor changes. He consulted with the town attorney and he agreed. The town attorney suggested that the Selectboard make the street name change and then explain at the bottom of the ordinance what the ordinance originally was and why it was changed.
Everybody agreed that that was the way to go, Mr. J. Miller said. So on the advice of town counsel, there will be a note on Article 3 that it is no longer needed and that both the Selectboard and Planning Board approve of this. So we’re advising the public to vote “no” on Article #3, Mr. J. Miller said.
Complete Streets walkway from School to fire station: Mr. J. Miller talked with Mike Rau, head of the highway department, about the walkway. Mr. Rau said about 7 or 8 years ago they had looked into it and it would cost about $250,000. At the time the town was looking into putting a sidewalk there. It would possibly mean taking some land from Hubbard and RN Johnson or whoever owns it now and the cost of drainage and embankments.
The key thing is to get some seed money to rough out a plan and Mr. J. Miller said he has a call into Planner Mari Brunner of Southwest Regional Planning Commission about that.
Ms. Mayberry said if the town goes ahead with it they can get 20/80 funding for the project with the town coming up with 20 percent of the cost. Mr. J. Miller even a wide shoulder would be safer than it is now and it would be marked for pedestrians only.
The Tavern: Mr. Aldrich mentioned that there was work going on at The Tavern and asked if it had a building permit. After it was discussed it was noted that a commercial business can do interior work without a permit or site plan. There is no change of use or change of footprint to the building.
Discussion: How to make Complete Streets part of the Site Plan Review and/or checklist. Postponed until the March meeting.
Rack it up – Bike Racks – some private business have received and installed them but at the time the town received the bikes they went to the highway department and since the road crew was tied up with cleaning up after a major storm the bike racks were never installed on town properties. Ms. Mayberry will check with Mr. Rau about a timeline for getting the racks placed and it will probably be in the spring.
Spring Planning and Zoning Conference – April 28
Next regular meeting Tuesday, March 13, 2018 – No Workshop in February
Walpole Planning Board
December 12, 2017
Present: Chair Jeff Miller, James Aldrich secretary, Jason Perron, Dennis Marcom, Cheryl Mayberry, Selectboard Representative. Alternate: Joanna Andros. Absent: co-chair Robert Miller, Jeff White, alternate Ed Potter.
Recording: Marilou Blaine. These minutes are unapproved and will be reviewed at the January 2018 meeting for corrections, additions and/or omissions.
Roll Call: Mr. J. Miller called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. There were four board members present so alternate Joanna Miller was asked to fill in for Jeff White.
Minutes: Mr. Marcom made a motion to accept the minutes of the regular November meeting as written. Mr. Aldrich seconded the motion and it was and approved by the Board.
Public Hearing: No 1. Liberty Utilities. Cutting on scenic road, Farnum Road. Jeff Carney spokesperson. Because of the snow storm and because Mr. Carney had a long way to travel, he could not make the meeting. A motion was made, seconded and approved by the Board to continue the Public Hearing until the January 2018 meeting.
Public Hearing No. 2. Emicor LLC/Bensonwood Woodworking Co., Inc. – Site plan for a 389 square-foot shed to be added to the timber-frame building and also amend the site plan. Mr. Tom Olsen represented Bensonwood. Mr. Marcom recused himself from voting because he is an employee of Bensonwood.
The 389-square-foot shed would go onto the southeast corner of the timber-frame building and will house a new joinery machine for heavy timber components. It is similar to a heavy milling machine the company has had in place. The new machine is called Robot.
Because of the way the buildings are splayed, because the shed is low (about 12 feet off the ground) and because of the landscaping, the new shed is minimally visible from Blackjack Crossing, Mr. Olsen said. The shed is 389 square feet and the timber-frame shop, which includes most the building, and is about 15,000 square feet. So the shed is 2.6 percent of the larger building.
Mr. Olsen asked if there were any questions. Mr. Miller did the same. Being none, the hearing was closed. Mr. Aldrich made a motion to accept the site plan as presented. Ms. Mayberry seconded the motion and the board voted in the affirmative.
An article regarding minor changes to zoning ordinance was discussed. Mr. Miller said that the Selectboard had a discussion about street names. The topic came up because the Zoning Board wants to be able to change street names that are in the zoning ordinance to the reflect the designated names given during the 911 update. Mr. Miller said he felt it was an administrative function and the Selectboard could already do that. The selectmen already have the responsibility for naming new streets and the names must conform to the 911 system.
So Selectman Steve Dalessio emailed the New Hampshire Municipal Association and Mr. Stephen M. Buckley, Legal Services Counsel for the NHMA, emailed back his thoughts. Mr. Buckley said in a November 29, 2017 email to Mr. Dalessio “ Going strictly by the language of the statute governing the adoption and amendment of a zoning ordinance, RS 675.3 any amendment must get full zoning amendment treatment with a planning board hearing and placement on the official ballot for adoption by the town meeting. That being said, what you might want to do is adopt a provision that permits the planning board to make non-substantive changes, such as changing section or paragraph numbers or substituting street name changes.” Mr. Bucklely added that the recommendation is to take this opportunity to pass a provision that is similar to one that Merrimack did. This following is the Merrimack article.
So the recommendation is:
“13.02 – Authority to assign section numbers
“The Planning Board has the authority to assign such section numbers to the Zoning ordiance and Building Code as it my deem appropriate provided that no substantive change to the ordinance shall occur as a result of this renumbering.”
Mr. Miller said the Town doesn’t have a Building Code so the ordinance would eliminate those two words. The Walpole ordinance would be:
“Proposed Zoning Amendment:
“Article IV General Provisions
“Add section N
“Authority to assign section numbers: The Planning Board has the authority to assign such section numbers to the Zoning Ordinance as it my deem appropriate provided that no substantive change to the ordinance shall occur as a result of this numbering.”
Basically, this means that the Planning Board can make corrections without going to the Town for a vote each time it needs to make a correction to the ordinance.
Ms. Mayberry said this came about because a road was referenced to be changed in the Zoning ordinance because it was changed due to 911.
Mr. Miller said, “If you had a road that was referenced in the zoning ordinance that was named something else, I would think the Selectboard could do this.”
According to Chair of the Zoning Board, Myra Mansouri, the purpose of the article was to change small things and not change the intent of the ordinance. For example, Ms. Mansouri referenced the name Hitchcock Road in Drewsville, which was changed to Alstead Center Road when road names were changed and tied into 911. Hitchcock Road is still the name in the zoning ordinances and she would like to see it corrected.
Ms. Mansouri proposed another possible ordinance. “To see if the Town of Walpole will authorize the Zoning Board of Adjustments to revise the Walpole Town Ordinances to reflect the 911 list of streets and roads as needed.
“The purpose of this article is to allow the Zoning Board to correct curent ordinances to acurately eflect street names when E911 went into effect without coming to the voters to approve small corrections when there is no change to the intent of the ordinance.”
Mr. Aldrich said Alstead Center Road starts at the Drewsville Common and goes to the Alstead town line. Ms. Mansouri said that is correct. But in our ordinance it says the road name is Hitchcock Road. Mr. Aldrich said, “Just scratch that name off there and put in Alstead Center Road.”
“That’s what I want to do,” Ms Mansouri said, “but I can’t because any changes have to be approved by the Town.”
“But this isn’t a change,” Aldrich said, “it’s a correction.”
Ms. Mansouri said, “That’s what I wanted to do, but I was told I couldn’t do it.”
Mr. Aldrich said, “I don’t think we need to bring it to the voters of the Town.” Mr. Aldrich didn’t think that the zoning amendment that Ms. Mansouri presented was necessary but Ms. Mansouri said that’s what was needed a few years ago when there was a change from a portion of Prospect Hill to Watkins Hill Road.
Mr. Miller read an email from Mr. Dalessio to Mr. Buckley. “It was discovered in a review of our Zoning Ordinance that several street names were never updated as a result of the 911 upgrade made several years ago. We would like to update the document with the correct information. This is just an administrative change and no change to zones or requirements. Do we need to place this on the March ballot following standard RSA’s for zoning changes or can we treat this as a minor correction and just update the zoning ordinance the same way as a misspelled word?”
Selectboard chair Peggy Pschirrer wrote back to Mr. Dalessio that “the DRA (Department of Revenue Adminstration) tells us that we have to have a special meeting to adopt a provision allowing the SB (Selectboard) to use CRF (Capital Reserve Fund) emergencies. They have no record at DRA that (the) Town every voted (the) Selectboard that authority when CRF were established and so far we haven’t found it in past minutes either.”
Mr. Buckley’s point was, Mr. Miller said, that in order for the zoning board to do these administrative changes in the zoning ordinance, there has to be a provision in the zoning ordinance to allow this to happen.
Mr. Perron wanted to know what the section numbers had to do with street names or anything else.
Mr. Miller said that the ordinance would go under General Provisions and there are already items under that heading from A to M. The N would just be the next or new item under General Provisions. So if we have to change a street name, under this item we could just do it and make a copy and not have to go to the Town to ask for the change.
The whole point of this, Mr. Marcom said, is to get in sync with 911.
Also, it means if there are any non-substantive changes, we can do that, Mr. Miller said. He also said we have to have a Public Hearing.
He asked the Board if they were in favor of a Public Hearing. A board member said so moved, that was seconded and all those present said “aye.”
Complete Streets grant. SWRPC has received an anonymous $100,000 to support one or more Complete Streets projects in communities that have adopted a Complete Streets policy. Walpole did just that at a Public hearing in November. The Planning Board spent a good deal of workshop time this year discussing Complete Streets and came up with several recommendations.
Mr. Miller suggested if selectmen are considering applying for a grant Mr. Miller said he would be glad to act as a liaison if they want our advice.
A few Board members began talking about the sidewalk around Jake’s as a project. Mr. Aldrich mentioned there was an accident there recently with a pedestrian. If there were a sidewalk, it’d be raised a little and maybe make a person more aware.
But Mr. Miller recommended making a safe walking pathway from Maplewood or the fire statton to the school. The shoulder should be widened and repaired. More people would be able to walk down by the Mill Pond, said a Board member. Mr. Perron said it would tie in with Healthy Monadnock.
The crosswalk at the library was menitoned. Mr. Aldrich said that crosswalk starts by Walpole Grocery and goes all the way across to the library. You’ve got that bullhorn or circle there and cars parked, he said. Drivers are coming from Westminster Street and turning right as well as drivers coming from the north on Main Street. And the drivers are going too fast, added Ms. Mansouri.
So it was agreed that recommendation No. 1 to the Selectboard would be to make a safe pathway from the fire station to the school and No. 2 would be paint a yield or figure in the road by the library crosswalk or add more signage near the crosswalk to make it safer.
Then Ms. Mayberry recommended that in order to make the public more aware of the items on Complete Streets that it become part of the site plan. It might go on the checklist or be referred to or attached to the application.
Mr. Aldrich thought that was a good idea. Mr. Miller did as well. He suggested it become the topic of the Board’s first workshop in 2018 of how to make the public more aware of cars, pedestrians, cyclists.
Mr. Aldrich made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Marcom seconded the motion and it was approved by the entire Board.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all!
Next regular meeting Tuesday, January 9, 2017
Walpole Planning Board
November 14, 2017
Present: Chair Jeff Miller, Co-chair Robert Miller, James Aldrich Secretary, Jason Perron, Dennis Marcom, Jeff White, Cheryl Mayberry, Selectboard Representative. Alternates: Joanna Andros, Ed Potter,
Recording: Marilou Blaine. These minutes are unapproved and will be reviewed at the December 2017 meeting for corrections, additions and/or omissions.
Roll Call: Mr. J. Miller called the meeting to order at 7:05 pm. There were five board members present so no one was needed to fill in.
Minutes: There were two corrections to the regular minutes. The first was a motion by Dennis Marcom regarding the Public Hearing for Complete Streets. The motion should say, “At its workshop session on September 26, Board members who were present okayed several recommendations for Complete Streets as well as the policy presented after July. The recommendations and policy should be given to the Selectboard.” Mr. Marcom made a motion to do just that and it was seconded by Mr. R. Miller. The Selectboard will have a Public Hearing in November for the public to weigh in on these recommendations and policy. Also, Jeff White’s name was not listed as being present for the October 2017 meeting.
Mr. Marcom made a motion to accept the minutes as amended. Mr. Perron seconded the motion and the motion passed with a unanimous vote by the Board.
Public Hearing No. 1: Jeff Carney, Program Manager Vegetation and Inspections for Liberty Utilities, will prune trees on Farnum Road, a designated scenic road. Request by letter, Statute 231-158.
Mr. Carney, sent a letter to the Planning Board outlining what his team was going to do on Farnum Road, which is a designated scenic road. The scheduled maintenance follows PUC: 307.10 Pruning Standards and “with the landowner’s consent, utilities shall prune trees adjacent to all distribution circuits to the following minimum clearances on more than a five-year cycle.”
Mr. Carney was not at the meeting.
Public Hearing No. 2; Amended DADU (Detached Accessory Dwelling Units) The DADU is a zoning ordinance that passed in March 2017. On the advice of the town’s attorney, Jeremy Hockensmith, it has been amended to clarify the new zoning ordinance. Mr. J. Miller sat down with Zoning Board chair, Myra Mansouri, and these are the amendments that were added to the ordinance.
The first is a definition of DADU:
“DADU – As defined as a residential living unit that is with the same single-family lot and provides independent living facilities for one or more persons, including provisions for sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation on the same parcel of land as the principal unit it accompanies.
“1-F No conversions to condominiums and must remain in common ownership.
“2- D Only one DADU per lot.
“E. Must comply with town ordinances and regulations.”
Everything else remains the same. Mr. J. Miller asked if there were any questions or comments. Mr. Marcom said that it all made sense to him. The Public Hearing was closed.
Mr. Perron recommended passage of the amendments to the DADU. Mr. R. Miller seconded the motion and the motion passed in a unanimous vote.
New Business: Bensonwood request for a Public Hearing in December for a small addition of a shed to one of the buildings at 6 Blackjack Crossing.
Mr. Tom Olsen represented Bensonwood. He asked for a Public Hearing for an addition to a timber frame shop that Bensonwood would like to build. He explained that the addition would be to the building on the right of the parking lot. The addition is called the Robot Shed addition because the shed will house a new timber milling machine that the manufacturers of the machine call a Robot.
This addition is 389 square feet and it will be attached to the 14,500 square-foot timber frame building. That does not include the offices, which are attached on the east side of building. It’s a single-story addition, with a shed roof and a concrete foundation.
He submitted a corrected site plan. Mr. Olsen said the previous plan was part of a parking study that shows parking spaces that don’t exit. He didn’t’ want there to be the impression the company was parking 120 cars because that’s not happening.
Mr. Olsen said there will be no increase in employment because it’s an automated machine. And currently the construction of the wall, roof and floor panels have been moved to a facility in Keene. So about 30 people who were previously working at 6 Blackjack Crossing are now working in Keene.
Mr. Marcom, a Bensonwood employee, added that there is a woodworking facility that’s on Pratt Road in Alstead and the 10 to 12 employees from that facility will now be working at 6 Blackjack Crossing.
Mr. J. Miller asked about the waivers on the checklist and if some were not applicable. Mr. Olsen said he provided some information on the document of the waived items.
Mr. J. Miller recommended that the meeting next month will be about two matters: the site plan for the Robot shed as well as for an amended site plan. These two matters will be incorporated into one Public Hearing. The minutes will reflect this request.
Mr. Aldrich made a motion to hold a Public Hearing for the addition of the Robot shed and also for the amended site plan. Mr. Marcom seconded the motion and it was approved by the Board.
William Callahan – Land Donation
Mr. Miller said that there is a gentleman in town that has 3.6 landlocked acres and he wants to donate the land to the town. It abuts the Fanny Mason Forest, which has a conservation easement on the property. The procedure is to generate a letter of recommendation. That’s the process, Mr. J. Miller said.
Since Mr. Aldrich knew the background of the parcel, he explained the history of the property and why Mr. Callahan wanted to donate the land. Looking at a map, Aldrich pointed out Route 12, and a parcel of land now owned by Mr. William Callahan. Aldrich said years ago Raymond Fletcher owned the land and had a handshake deal to allow the person owning the property, now belonging to Callahan, to drive across the property, now owned by Sean Hannan. The right of way went from Old Keene Road to get to where Callahan’s property now is. Since that property is now owned by someone else, that owner did not agree to the right of way so it leaves the acreage landlocked. So Mr. Callahan wants to give it to the town as a gift. The property will become part of the Fanny Mason Forest.
Mr. Marcom asked what was the Planning Board’s duty.
Mr. J. Miller said the Planning Board has to send a recommendation to the Selectboard to allow the Selectboard to accept the land on behalf of the town. The Conservation Committee also has to send a recommendation.
Mr. Perron made a motion to recommend to the Selectboard the acceptance of the Callahan property for the town. Mr. Marcom seconded the motion and the Board unanimously passed the motion. The secretary will send a letter to the Selectboard.
Complete Streets – Board members received copies of the minutes of the Public Hearing on Complete Streets recommendations and policy that the Selectmen held earlier this month. Each of the Planning Board’s recommendations was taken up and commented on by people attending the meeting.
Liberty Utilities – Mr. Miller suggested keeping open the Public Hearing on pruning on a scenic road. No abutters attended the hearing and the spokesperson, Jeff Carney did not come, so the Planning Board will keep the hearing open and will continue the Public Hearing at the December meeting.
DCR – Greg Gay property in North Walpole. Selectman Mayberry said she received a new document that afternoon stating that the judge threw out the motion to reconsider their decision, which was favorable to Mr. Gay.
Mr. Aldrich made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded and passed by the entire Board.
Next regular meeting Tuesday, December 12, 2017
WALPOLE PLANNING BOARD AGENDA
Tuesday, November 14, 2017
Roll Call – Appointment of alternates if needed.
Minutes – Review minutes of the October meeting and workshop.
Correction to regular minutes: Motion by Dennis Marcom to the Public Hearing on Complete Streets should say, “At its workshop session on September 26, Board members who were present okayed several recommendations for Complete Streets as well as the policy presented after July. The recommendations should be given to the Selectboard. Mr. Marcom made a motion and it was seconded by Mr. R. Miller. There will be a Public Hearing in November for the public to weigh in on these recommendations.”
Public Hearing: No 1. Liberty Utilities. Cutting on scenic road. Farnum Road. Jeff Carney spokesperson.
Public Hearing No. 2. Public Hearing on amendments to Detached Accessory Dwelling Units to be put on march 2018 warrant. Recommended or not recommended.
New Business: Request for a Public Hearing. Bensonwood – small addition to a building.
No workshops in November or December.
Next regular meeting Tuesday, December 12, 2017
Walpole Planning Board
October 24, 2017
Present: Jeff Miller, chair, Robert Miller, vice chair, James Aldrich, secretary, Dennis Marcom, Jason Perron, Jeff White, Joanna Andros, Cheryl Mayberry, Selectboard representative.
Participants at the monthly workshop discussed possible questions Board members should ask the town attorney, Jeremy Hockensmith, if and when he meets with the Planning Board. No specific date has been set.
Mr. J. Miller said he intends to ask about the Planning Board’s jurisdiction. He said Board members are elected to be responsive to butters and residents’ concerns. This includes matters of the environment, and things that would affect residents’ quality of life such as noise and lighting. Mr. Miller said, “We (the Planning Board) should be able to have some sort of impact even though there are state regulations.”
Mr. R. Miller said it has been stated that the town has no authority when it comes to the expansion and change of use of a waste facility that gets a permit from the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services and complies with DES regulations. In a letter sent to the Planning Board from Cordell Johnston, Government Affairs Counsel for the NH Municipal Association, Mr. Johnston wrote that he “strongly disagreed” with this view.
Mr. R. Miller also said that an RSA requires DES to hold a public hearing on matters of interest to townspeople such as taking in MSW, household waste, at a facility in Walpole. He was wondering where and when it was posted because no one on the Planning Board seemed to know anything about the hearing.
Mr. Marcom suggested the Board ask Mr. Hockensmith if the Board missed anything and what could it have done better.
Mr. Perron wondered if the ordinance on the warrant that passed in March 2016 about disposal of waste would be scraped. And he wondered what would happen now.
Very truly yours,
Walpole Planning Board
September 26, 2017
Present: Chair Jeff Miller, Co-chair Robert Miller, James Aldrich secretary, Jason Perron, Dennis Marcom, Cheryl Mayberry Selectboard Representative, Alternates Joanna Andros, Ed Potter, Selectboard member Steve Dalessio, Guest Ray Boas.
Suggestions to the Selectboard – Complete Streets The following Complete Street recommendations were discussed and it was decided that they would be sent to the Selectboard and the Board would let the Planning Board know which recommendations they considered feasible now and why and which might be good ideas for the future. The people at the workshop also voted to accept the Walpole Complete Streets Planning and Design Guidelines, drafted in July 2017, as their policy. Both the recommendations and policy will become part of the Master Plan.
The recommendations came from monthly meetings beginning in January and ending in August.
The following recommendations were selected to send to the Selectboard for their implementation.
Walpole, NH Complete Streets Recommendations
The Planning Board is making recommendations to the Selectboard for implementation now are in the future. They are being made after nine months of meetings and input with Planner Mari Brunner and other representatives of Southwest Regional Planning Commission and Walpole Police Mike Paquette.
Speeds: The speed limit, which is 25 mph, should be clearly marked and enforced in the Village. Consider installing a speed limit sign on South Street as drivers enter the village and another sign on Main Street near Costume Ladies or before Edward Jones.
Walkway/sidewalk near Jakes and Mascoma Bank: The painted walkway on the northwest corner of the Westminster St/Main St. intersections should be restored to a sidewalk. When the gas station and convenience store changes hands in the near future might be a good time to do this.
Shared Bicycle Lane Markings (i.e. “sharrows): Consider adding sharrows to Main Street and other roads in the village to indicate that motorists should share the road with bicyclists. For roads with parallel parking, sharrows should be placed outside the “door zone” of parked cars. For roads with diagonal parking, sharrows should be placed in the middle of the travel lane (closer to the yellow line) to direct bicyclists away from cars backing out of angle parking spaces.
Fountain on Westminster St.: Consider continuing adding roadway markings and signage to clarify how motorists should navigate around the fountain in the intersection of Westminster St. and Main St.
Main St. connection from school to Walpole Village: Consider traffic calming by adding sharrows and/or a bike lane for students who bicycle to school, and education to raise awareness among students and drivers about how to safely share the road and decrease incidents of students walking in the travel lane. Keep overhanging brush cut.
Main St. connection from school to Mill Pond: Consider widening and improving the surface condition of the shoulders along this stretch of road where space allows. In addition consider placing signage that says “Pedestrian Crossing Ahead” to alert motorists to likely pedestrian crossing location. While this may be a large expense, consider in the future making a sidewalk from the school up to where the neighborhoods are.
Library Crosswalk: Add yield signs on the pavement before the crosswalk on both sides of the road.
NORTH WALPOLE VILLAGE
Crosswalk on Killeen St./Route 12: Consider working with the New Hampshire Department of Transportation (NHDOT) to install a pedestrian crosswalk near Stateline Grocery where the sidewalk ends on one side of the road and continues on the other side of the road.
Informal pedestrian railroad crossing from Church St to Center St.: According to Chief Paquette, some students cross the railroad tracks to get from the bus stop on Church St. to Center St. as a shortcut to get home. Consider working with School Bus company to change the location of the bus stop, improve the fence to block children from crossing at this location, or working with the police dept. to identify other strategies to address the situation.
Check with state to keep a 35 mph speed consistent from the cemetery through the village.
Amended DADU: On the advice of the town’s attorney, Jeremy Hockensmith, the following amendments were approved at the meeting. At it’s next regular meeting, the Board will discuss whether or not it wants to hold a Public Hearing in November or December to place it on the ballot for the voters to approve.
Here is the document. The additions are in bold.
Are you in favor of the following changes to the Town’s Zoning Ordinance?
Add under Article IV General Provisions Section O Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit as
permitted under RSA 674:73 (Effective June 1, 2017)
DADU – As defined as a residential living unit that is with the same single-family lot and provides independent living facilities for one or more person, including provisions for sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation on the same parcel of land as the principal unit it accompanies.
1. One Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit (DADU) shall be allowed in all zoning districts that permit single-family dwellings. The following requirements apply: No change in frontage or setbacks shall be required for a DADU, however, the minimum lot size for any given Zoning District shall be the following:
- Residential District Type A minimum lot area shall be 80,000 square feet
- Residential District Type B minimum lot area shall be 50,000 square feet
- Rural/Agricultural minimum lot area shall be 80,000 square feet
- 4.Timberland not permitted
- The maximum area for a Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit shall be 900 square feet of living space. A larger living space may be permitted by a variance granted by the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
- No more than Three (3) bedrooms may be permitted in a Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit.
- Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit must be within 150 feet of the principal dwelling unit.
- Occupancy of the accessory or principal unit is limited to family members related by blood, marriage, adoption, foster children or, if unrelated, not more than two (2) unrelated individuals. (See 3C for maximum occupancy.)
- No conversions to condominiums and must remain in common ownership.
- The Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit may be within separate detached building on the property (such as a garage or barn).
- Unless otherwise provided for herein, all existing regulations applicable to single family dwellings shall also apply to the combination of a principal dwelling unit and detached accessory dwelling unit, including the following:.
- the state building code
- applicable sections of the state fire code
- the standards for maximum occupancy per bedroom consistent with policy adopted by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
- only one DADU per lot
- Must comply with town ordinances and regulations.
- Adequate provisions for water supply and sewage disposal for the detached accessory dwelling unit in accordance with RSA 485-A:38 shall be demonstrated by the applicant. Separate systems, including but not limited to plumbing, heating, electrical and sanitary disposal systems, are not required for the principal and detached accessory dwelling unit provided that occupants of both units have access to the electrical panel and circuit breakers serving their respective units.
- All applications to create a detached accessory dwelling unit shall demonstrate to the Zoning Board of Adjustment that the property has ample parking for both the principal unit and DADU.
- When the creation of an DADU requires an addition to or modification of the exterior of the existing detached structure, or the creation of a new detached structure, the design and details to be used shall be aesthetically compatible with and maintain an aesthetic continuity with the principal dwelling unit as a single-family dwelling.
- An addition to or exterior modification of an existing detached structure shall be designed to match within reason the architectural style, detail, and materials of the existing structure.
- When constructing a new detached structure to accommodate an DADU, the exterior design may either reflect the architectural style, detail, and materials of the existing single family structure, or it may reflect the architectural style, details and materials that are commonly found in detached accessory structures associated with a single family dwelling, such as a barn, or a garage with apartment over.
- The owner of the property shall occupy either the principal dwelling unit or the detached accessory dwelling unit as their “Principal Place of Residence.” Whichever dwelling unit is not the property owner’s principal place of residence may be rented to a person(s) unrelated to the property owner
- The owner shall demonstrate to the Select Board that one of the units is his or her “Principal Place of Residence” prior to issuance of a Building Permit by the Select Board for the accessory dwelling unit.
- The term “Principal Place of Residence” for purposes of determining owner occupancy shall mean the location where the property owner is domiciled and has a place of abode, and the location where the property owner has, through all of his or her actions, demonstrated a current intent to designate said residence as his or her principal place of physical presence.
Such an intent on the part of the property owner is evidenced by, among other things, his or her voter’s registration, vehicle registration, driver’s license, or the placement of his or her children in local public schools.
Any temporary lapse of owner occupancy in the primary residence caused by the death of a property owner shall be permitted for a period not to exceed 1 year.
- The property owner shall submit to the Select Board a signed and notarized “memorandum of adequate notice”, to be recorded at the registry of deeds at the applicant’s expense.
- The notice shall identify the property on which the detached accessory dwelling unit is located by source deed, and serve as a notice to successor owners that the accessory dwelling unit is subject to the provisions of this section of the zoning ordinance, and that owner occupancy of one of the two units is required by this subsection. This notice shall be recorded upon issuance of a Building Permit.
- If the owner of the property is a trust, the term “property owner” shall mean the creator or beneficiary of the trust. If the owner of the property is a corporation, the term “property owner” shall mean the principal stockholder.
Under Section XVII, P. Add after “A one or two family dwelling will share the same foundation per lot.”
Effective June 1, 2017 Attached Dwelling Units are to comply with RSA 674:71 – RSA 674:72
Legal education – the Board decide that the Ruggiero decision brought up many questions about what Planning and Zoning Boards could and couldn’t do. But since the Ruggiero case is still under appeal, it cannot specifically be discussed by the Board. But there are some general questions that can be. The group expressed the desire to have Mr. Jeremy Hockensmith, the town’s attorney, come to a workshop with the Boards and answer some questions the Planning Board will prepare about gray areas. This questions to be discussed will be decided at the regular meeting. Mr. Hockensmith will hold the workshop at a regular Planning Board workshop time.
Respectfully submitted, Marilou Blaine