Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
July 6, 2004
Members present: Terry Silverman; Chairman, Paul Grasewicz; Vice-Chairman, Robin Haynes, Suzanne Gray, Macreay Landy and Carlotta Lilback Pini
Selectmen present: Andrew Clukey
Eleanor Vander Haegen from the Conservation Commission was also present
Chairman Silverman opened the meeting at 7:05 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
7:05 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING for Jason & Donna Hill and Lewis Dunton for a Boundary Line Adjustment of Tax Map 8; Lot 21 and Tax Map 8 Lot 24 located on Rt. 12 South and Crane Road; and a 2-lot subdivision of land is proposed by Jason & Donna Hill for property located at 35 Crane Road, Tax Map 8; Lot 24. Tax Map 8; Lot 21 is located in the General Industrial District and Tax Map 8; Lot 24 is located in the Rural District. – Chairman Silverman opened this public hearing at 7:05 p.m. and read the case title aloud. Paul Grasewicz recused himself from the Board. Additionally, Jason Hill was present.
Chairman Silverman moved that the application was complete as presented. Carlotta Lilback Pini seconded. A unanimous vote in favor of the motion was taken.
Paul provided the Board with several copies of the plans for this proposal and told the Board that Jason and Donna own 100 plus acres located just off of Rt. 12, on both sides of the Old Crane Road. They are proposing to gain some legal frontage from the Dunton lot and annex that to a piece on the southerly side of Old Crane Road which would create the proposed 7.9 acre new lot with legal frontage on Rt. 12 and access from Old Crane Road.
Mac clarified that the Old Crane Road has access from Rt. 12 and Paul said that was correct. It was noted that Rt. 12 is paved and Crane Road is a gravel road. Paul added that the proposed access to the new dwelling would be right across from Jason’s current driveway.
Chairman Silverman stated that that the town is currently not issuing building permits on private roads and it seems that the access on Rt. 12 is merely a way to get around that and if they are not using that access they would be granting a subdivision on an unbuildable lot. Also, the lot that they are proposing to get the road frontage from, Mr. Dunton’s property, Map 8; Lot 21 is located in the General Industrial District. Paul stated that they are not proposing to build in the General Industrial District and besides, the zone would follow the property line. Paul added that the proposed subdivision meets all of the zoning requirements, it has the area and it has the frontage, and Rt. 12 is limited access highway and all up and down Rt. 12 there are shared
accesses. Chairman Silverman said that a shared access is different than using a private road to subdivide a lot. Paul said that it is not and they are not using the private road for anything except access. Paul said it is a common driveway and again, they have the frontage and they have the area, and this is not a building lot on a private road, it is a building lot with a common access, shared by others. Chairman Silverman said that he disagrees and added that in practicality that may be what it is, but, he doesn’t think that it behooves them to create a lot like that out of a subdivision and noted that it is not town policy to do that; creating building lots on Class 6 or discontinued roads. Paul said that the policy is written for Class 6 roads, and the policy was written using frontage on Class 6 roads and they have frontage on a Class 1 road. Paul added that they could apply to the State for access but they haven’t because they have good access from Crane
Road. Robin stated that if it was simply a matter of shared access they would not need to do this. Paul said that was correct and added that Jason was given a building permit for this 100 acre lot with no frontage at all. Robin questioned what year that building permit was issued which was in 2000. Carlotta noted that Jason had previously told the Board that he had been told that he could locate another house on his property. Chairman Silverman said that the information he received was that Jason was told that he could look at having an in-law apartment added to the property. Mr. Hill stated that he was told that he could do something as long as the property remained in his name but this is irrelevant now.
Robin then questioned the zoning classification of the lot if they added this new portion of Mr. Dunton’s property which is in the General Industrial District. Paul said that this portion of land would become rural as the zoning line would follow the property line and he added that they are proposing to build in the rural district. Carlotta said that she would think that if Jason went to the State and obtained an access permit for Rt. 12 through that frontage and then came back to the Board, she doesn’t see how this couldn’t be approved. Jason said that he is trying to keep from changing Rt. 12 in any way and this would be putting another driveway in and giving access to more people. Carlotta said that it would be up to the State whether or not they issued a
permit. Robin added that if the State did grant it then this would give him the required access although she doesn’t know what the wetlands in this area are like. Mac asked where Mr. Dunton’s access is and Paul said that everyone down there accesses Crane Road from Rt. 12. Paul added that he doesn’t think that they need a driveway permit for this and if they do then it should come from the Selectmen’s office. He added that there is adequate access here from the existing common shared driveway known as the discontinued Old Crane Road. Jason said that the last time they met the Board expressed concern about future development and by asking him to put another access in, it shows that there could be future development there. Robin said that there would be nothing to stop this from happening later on. Jason said that was correct and asked why, if they are concerned about this, they want him to put another road in when the access that he wants is already there. Mac said that there is nothing stopping the State from making this an approved access. Paul said that it already is and Mac clarified that this is a State approved access to which Jason said it is. Paul said that it is true that it used to be a public road, and after it was discontinued, it was not, and it is basically a shared access for the property owners that live there. Robin asked who maintains the road and Jason stated that he does. Carlotta clarified that the road reverted back to the property owners and Jason said, “to the center line”. Suzanne clarified that the town does not maintain this road at all. Jason said that was correct. Carlotta asked if there is a deeded right of way and Jason said that the way it is set up is when the town discontinues a road like that, the parties like to travel on that road to get to their property by the shortest distance available. Carlotta clarified that this refers to the parties that are already there
and Jason said, “yes”. Carlotta stated that this proposal would add another party and that is the problem. Robin asked how far through this road goes. Jason and Paul said that it used to go all the way through to Abel Road. Jason owns past the half way point of the road and he explained that anyone that lives near the Old Crane Brook has to come in the other way.
The discussion went back to how building permits were obtained in the first place and obtaining the road frontage on Rt. 12 although Jason does not intend to use this road frontage for access. Jason said that he intends to leave everything as it is except for putting a mobile home up for his mother. Carlotta noted that if this were a deeded right of way over someone else’s property or something then they may be able to look at it differently. Robin noted that they would be setting a precedent if they started letting people build on private roads. Jason said it is not on a private road because he has the frontage now and asked why he has to use the frontage when he has all of this property. Robin stated because it is a private road. Jason asked for the law that
supports his not being able to use the private road to get to his house. Chairman Silverman said that there is a policy against creating new lots on private roads. Paul said that the policy if they read it relates to Class 6 roads and this is not a Class 6 road. Selectman Clukey said that the policy pertains to private roads as well and Paul said that those properties were cases where they had frontage on private roads, as opposed to legal frontage area. Paul noted that this lot meets all of the zoning requirements and if they would look at the lot they would see that there is more than adequate access to the lot and he spoke of other common shared access driveways on Rt. 12 noting that this access is more adequate than many others. Paul then said that this is a limited access highway and the State has encouraged or mandated certain points of access. Chairman Silverman said that they are not debating the access; they are debating another building lot on a private road. Paul
said that this is not an issue and the nature of Old Crane Road has nothing to do with this application, it provides access to the lot, that’s all, it does not provide frontage as they have the frontage, and they have the area. Robin noted that they are not using the frontage for their access and Paul stated that there is nothing that requires that your driveway cross your frontage.
Carlotta referred the Board to RSA 674:41 I. regarding “street giving access to the lot upon which such building is proposed to be placed: (d) Is a private road, provided that: (1) The local governing body, after review and comment from the Planning Board, has voted to authorize the issuance of building permits for the erection of buildings on said private road or portion thereof; which she does not believe the Board of Selectmen has done, and then it discusses the waiver requirement regarding the municipality not assuming responsibility for maintenance or liability for any damages, etc. The Board spent some time reviewing this. Mac stated that he would like a legal opinion on this and he understands what Paul is saying, but he also has
concerns with a number of items; creating a precedence, creating a lot whose access is on a private road and whose frontage is on Rt. 12, and is a mixed lot (zones). Carlotta agreed. Robin asked if the Selectmen’s office has received the waiver and Selectman Clukey said not that he knew of. Jason said that he signed the waiver before he ever got his building permit. Robin noted that at the last meeting Jason said that he would sign one, to which Jason stated that he would sign one if he would stop getting letters from that office, and they must have lost the one that he did sign. Jason added that he finds it funny that all of this started when they noticed that they did not have a waiver. Mac asked Jason if he signed a waiver and Jason said that he originally signed it to get the building permit. Selectman Clukey said that he doesn’t know about that because he wasn’t here, but the last time Jason met with the Planning Board he told them that he would sign
one and the Selectmen still haven’t received it. Jason held up an envelope and said that he had it with him.
Chairman Silverman moved to continue this public hearing until after the Planning Board obtains legal advice. Macreay Landy seconded. Chairman Silverman asked if there was any further discussion to which there was none. A unanimous vote in favor of the motion was taken. This public hearing was closed at 7:30 p.m.
Preliminary Consultations
7:45 p.m. Preliminary Consultation with Steve & Lucy Humphrey to discuss subdividing one building lot off of their property located at 69 Rockwood Pond Road, Tax Map 17; Lot 10 in the Rural District. – Steve Humphrey was present. Chairman Silverman asked Mr. Humphrey to explain what he would like to do. Mr. Humphrey provided the Board with a sketch of his property showing where they would like to create one new building lot to help out a friend. A two bedroom cottage on the west side is proposed. Mr. Humphrey stated that they have had a surveyor come out and look at the property; this surveyor said that he didn’t see any problems and advised him to meet with the Planning Board. Chairman Silverman asked if there were any wetlands and Mr. Humphrey said that the only wet
place is in one back corner of the property and he estimates that it is less than 5% of the new proposed lot. The total lot size is 18 acres and they are proposing to create one new lot at just over 3 acres. Mr. Humphrey said that the land is currently in Current Use. The Board questioned the location of this property and Mr. Humphrey said that their house is the first house on the left hand side of Rockwood Pond Road.
Carlotta asked about the land; if it is sloping or level, etc. Mr. Humphrey said that it is sloped, but not steep, and there is no truly flat land. Paul told Mr. Humphrey that if he meets all of the lot and frontage requirements he would suggest that they locate the driveway on the same lot. Mr. Humphrey said that he would as he heard a lot of the previous conversation. This property is located on the section of Rockwood Pond Road before it gets bad. Mr. Humphrey added that it is across from the land that Steve Filipi subdivided. Chairman Silverman noted that there were some wetlands issues on the Filipi property and Mr. Humphrey said that there is some sort of drainage along his property but not wetlands. Mr. Humphrey told the Board that the surveyor asked him
to ask the Board about the wetland plan map and if this had to be done for the entire 18 acres or for the lot to be subdivided. Chairman Silverman said just the new lot had to be done to which Paul agreed and the remainder of the Board did as well. Chairman Silverman added that they should note on the plan that they still have a requisite amount of upland on the main lot, but it does not have to be surveyed. Mr. Humphrey asked when someone could go in and do a test pit and Chairman Silverman told him that they could do this anytime and they should show the location of this on the plans. Paul explained to Mr. Humphrey that he would have to do that for the State also as they will have to approve the subdivision due to the size of the new lot. Mr. Humphrey asked about cutting trees and Chairman Silverman told him that you are always legally allowed to cut trees on your property, but asked him to take into account the setback from the sideline and leave those trees in place. Chairman
Silverman explained buffers and views and noted that the main thing they ran into with Steve’s subdivision was the buffer zone was cut and there was a house right next door. Eleanor Vander Haegen of the Conservation Commission was present and clarified that this property was not on Rockwood Pond itself, which it is not. Mr. Humphrey thanked the Board for their time.
Administrative Work
Ø Review and approve meeting minutes from June 15, 2004 and the Non-Public Meeting Minutes from June 15, 2004 – Robin Haynes moved to accept the minutes of June 15, 2004 as written. Suzanne Gray seconded. A unanimous vote in favor of the motion was taken.
Carlotta Lilback Pini moved to approve the non-public meeting minutes of June 15, 2004 as written. Chairman Silverman added that the minutes are to remain non-public as they pertain to potential litigation. Paul Grasewicz seconded the motion. A unanimous vote in favor of the motion was taken.
Ø Determine capital projects for 2005-2010 to be submitted to the CIP Committee by July 19, 2004 – The Board is in receipt of a memo from Carlotta Lilback Pini, Chairman of the CIP Committee. The committee has asked that all departments submit their requirements for the next six years by July 19, 2004. The only item that the Planning Board has discussed at this time is a complete update to the Master Plan. Last year when the Board began updating sections of the Master Plan it was discussed that the next update would be complete overhaul. The estimated cost for this is around $30,000.00. The Board agreed to put $6,000.00 away per year beginning in 2005 with
the remaining amount to be raised the year of the complete update which is planned for 2008. Carlotta told the Board that the CIP will committee will review all requests and determine what would work best for each particular year, and then make their recommendations.
Macreay Landy moved to recommend that $6,000.00 be put away each year for three years beginning in 2005 and the remaining amount to completely update the Master Plan be raised in the fourth year, the year of the complete update which is scheduled for 2008. Robin Haynes seconded. A unanimous vote in favor of the motion was taken.
Carlotta then spoke about GIS noting that it would be nice to have and that it offers a lot to the town. She said that the Town of Rindge contracted with TF Moran for this and she spoke of scanning in tax maps and the ability to show where buildings are located, etc. There are a lot of different programs that do different things; roads, potential areas for development, etc. This could be a valuable tool. Mrs. Vander Haegen said that the Conservation Commission has been discussing doing something with GIS through the Southwest Region Planning Commission and suggested that perhaps the two Boards could work together and come up with a common list of what they would like and get a database containing this information. The Conservation Commission is looking at
things like prime wetlands, aquifer overlays, land usage and topography. Carlotta suggested that they start talking about this. Chairman Silverman questioned how this would be administered in their office noting that Margo has a heavy workload with her Boards now. Mac said that maintenance of the tax maps is done by the Selectmen’s office and questioned how this would be handled to which Carlotta said that it would be connected with assessment information. The Board asked about the cost for something like this. There are different costs for different programs, initially it is around $5,000.00 and then the extra dimensions added to it have additional costs. Paul noted that the Southwest Region Planning Commission has our information. Carlotta noted some other features including the ability to print maps. She explained that a fee schedule could be established for the different services they could provide and noted that people want this information including surveyors, etc. We
could offer paper maps, digital files and even availability on the web. It was mentioned that perhaps the cost of this could be shared among the departments that would use this and benefit from it. Carlotta thought that the Board should consider this and have data for the next Master Plan update. Also, briefly discussed was the possibility of having a company come in and do a presentation about GIS and the different services and inviting the Selectmen’s Office and Conservation Commission to attend.
Correspondence
Ø Notice of Public Hearing from the Town of Winchendon – Reviewed
Ø Notice of Withdrawal (Variance) from the Town of Winchendon – Reviewed
Ø Memo from Carlotta Lilback Pini, Chairman, CIP Committee – Reviewed
Ø Invitation from the Fire Department to set up a table at the Annual Fun Fair in August – Reviewed
Chairman Silverman told the Board that the Conservation Commission is looking at creating a Conservation Overlay District which would deal mostly with land in Current Use and some conservation land, and he asked Mrs. Vander Haegen if someone from the Commission would be coming in to see them at their next meeting to present their plan. Mrs. Vander Haegen was not sure if someone would attend the next meeting and Chairman Silverman explained that they should come in as early in the process as possible. Mrs. Vander Haegen did explain to the Board that the purpose of this is for lands within that district and there would be certain restrictions that would not deal with just buildings, but with a little different usage in mostly sensitive areas in different parts of the town.
Robin Haynes moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:10 p.m. Carlotta Lilback Pini seconded. A unanimous vote in favor of the motion was taken.
Respectfully submitted,
Margo M. Best
Administrative Assistant
Land Use Boards
| 
