Town of Fitzwilliam, NH - Planning Board Minutes 07/18/06

Members present: Terry Silverman, Chairman, Suzanne Gray, Robin Haynes, Mac Landy, Carlotta Pini, Diane Schott, and Tom Parker, Selectmen’s representative.

Minutes: The Board reviewed minutes of the June 20, 2006 meeting. Two corrections were noted. Haynes moved, Landy seconded and the Board approved the minutes as corrected.

Wetlands Hearing: PSNH proposes to install five poles on Number 4 Road to correct an electrical neutral problem, affecting Map 12, Lots 8,9,10,11,11-1 and Map 11, Lot 63.

Silverman said the Board was concerned about the type of preservative in the proposed utility poles. Jeff Blecharezek, State Wetlands Bureau, was contacted and reported that the Wetlands Bureau does not have guidelines or regulate utility poles; the utility regulates them. However, he assured us that materials used in today’s poles do not have high levels of toxins and they are not considered hazardous by the Wetlands Bureau.

Given that information, Pini moved, Landy seconded and the Board approved a motion to apply Land Use Ordinance 127-16.1 D. (7)(a) of the wetlands application allowing PSNH to install five poles on Number 4 Road to correct an electrical neutral problem, affecting Map 12, Lots 8, 9, 10, 11, 11-1 and Map 11, Lot 63.

Preliminary consultation: Terry Wechsler to discuss opening an office in Crossroads to consult on health and nutritional alternatives (non-medical), sell nutritional products.

Ms. Wechsler and Mr. Rettig presented her plans. Ms. Wechsler said she consults with clients who want to incorporate alternative nutrition methods or change their eating habits. She also does eye chemistry testing and muscle kinesthesiology to diagnose nutritional needs. She said she does sell nutritional supplements, but not for a profit. If clients want supplements she has them available or refers clients to other sources. She plans to work part time, perhaps only a day or a day and a half.

Her office is located near the Sunflower’s Café and clients will use the front entrance. No additional signage is necessary; she will have a sign near her door and her business will be represented on Crossroads signage.

Mr. Rettig noted that Ms. Wechsler’s business is complementary to other businesses in the complex. The business is named “The Healing Tree” and brochures are available at the Crossroads front desk.

Pini noted the business is an allowed use in the General Business District under “personal Services.” Silverman welcomed Ms. Wechsler to Crossroads.

Public hearing: Richard Rettig proposes a three-lot subdivision of property located on East Lake Road and Howeville Road, Map 21, Lot 36, Rural District.

Mr. Rettig and Paul Grasewicz, engineer for the project, presented revised plans, which are essentially the same as the last plans the Board reviewed. Grasewicz added information about Laurel Lake and the Comprehensive Shoreline Protection Act with notes on the plan. All soils on site are Sunapee, fine, sandy loam that is moderately well drained according to the state soil map.

The Board did a site walk on the property with members of the Conservation Commission. Eleanor Vander Haegen, representing the Commission tonight, stated they found there would be no negative impact on wetlands as the subdivision is currently configured. Pini asked if there were any concerns about drainage coming from the site toward East Lake Road and the lots beyond. Ms. Vander Haegen said the Commission did not have input on that issue.

Pini asked if the access for the lot with frontage on East Lake would be from East Lake Road. Grasewicz replied it is, however, the property does have a right-of-way via a road that runs along the north-east boundary line. He noted that the lines of sight are good from the existing driveway off East Lake Road. The slope of the driveway exceeds 15% at one point, but he said it was OK as is, as long as any changes to it allow for erosion control. Grasewicz said subdivision slope regulations for driveways to not apply to parts of a subdivision that are already developed. Landy added that if the driveway is changed it will need to conform to current regulations.

Gray asked if there was any other information from the site walk, since she was not able to attend. Silverman said there was a lot of open land with small isolated pockets of wetlands that appear to be seasonal or vegetative in nature. His concerns are about buffers for the neighbors on the north and that the lot is accessed from its frontage on East Lake Road rather than from the right-of-way, in keeping with the subdivision regulations. If changed, the location of the driveway on East Lake Drive needs to be discussed with the road agent, and a plan for erosion control and materials used is needed, which is usually part of the building permit process.

Silverman opened the discussion to the public. Mr. Dwinell, abutter, stated that the driveway on East Lake Road is in good condition because it is never used in the winter. He added he has a shallow water well and is concerned that if the driveway is paved drainage will filter into his well. Pini noted there is an existing culvert under the driveway and Grasewicz said there are actually two. Parker said with a driveway slope like that, steps are taken to divert water into a ditch so it didn’t run across the road, especially in winter, when it would create a safety hazard. He added that drainage from that hill ends up in Laurel Lake anyway.

Barbara Green asked if that road was a ‘no salt’ area. Parker said it is as far as the town is concerned, but there is no regulation on private driveways.

David Brooks, abutter, asked if the existing cabin was considered a dwelling. He said that in 1996 when a boundary line adjustment effectively merged the cabin lot with another lot that had a home on it, the grandfathered status of the cabin was lost. Silverman said that the cabin is not a legal dwelling now, but when the lot is subdivided, it will become a legal dwelling. Mr. Brooks then questioned the Board about the Land Use Ordinance regarding location of dwellings on hammerhead lots. He suggested that if the Board created a hammerhead lot, then the ordinance should control location of the dwelling.

Parker noted that the Board of Selectmen would not issue an occupancy permit for a second dwelling on a lot. That if a dwelling is built on the building square as it appears on the plat, the cabin must be demolished. He added that historically the town has not enforced the building square regulation, but that by locating a building square on a lot it indicates that the lot is buildable. Silverman noted the Planning Board does not have any mechanism to enforce siting of dwellings and the building square is not created by the Planning Board but by the developer.

Pini and Haynes both suggested that the Board get a legal opinion on the town’s hammerhead regulation regarding siting of dwellings.

Parker suggested the cabin is an existing dwelling that can be improved, adding he can’t envision moving the building back on the lot so it fits into the building square. He noted that the cabin could be expanded providing it has an approved septic plan. Grasewicz said the leach field could be located further back on the lot using a pump system.

Mr. Dwinell asked if the property had deeded beach rights. Mr. Rettig said it doesn’t, but for years an abutting owner allowed a small dock and use of the breach front. Parker noted that the property had not been assessed as having beach frontage.

Mrs. May said she consulted an attorney and will proceed with their case against using the right-of-way as a driveway access. Silverman reminded her that the Board already said East Lake Road frontage must be used as access, not the right-of-way.

Mr. May asked if the cabin could be demolished and a dwelling constructed on the same spot. Silverman reiterated that it’s feasible if there is a building permit issued and there is a valid septic plan. There cannot be two dwellings on one lot once it is subdivided. The cabin is currently an existing non-conforming use and can continue. They can’t be forced to take it down at this point. Parker noted that many of the lakefront properties are non-conforming.

Mr. Brooks repeated his point about hammerhead lots and the need to adhere to the regulations. Haynes feels the Board needs a legal opinion on whether the Board can even create a hammerhead lot with an existing house on the front of the property, since the hammerhead regulation was envisioned as a way to develop back land. Pini asked if it is within the Planning Board’s authority to dictate where a building is located.

Silverman wondered if the Board had the right to deny this particular hammerhead under 127-19 D. (2), which states that “any building erected on the lot shall be located within the building location square,” because it seems to present some problems complying with this regulation.

Pini moved, Landy seconded and the Board approved a motion to continue the public hearing to August 1, 2006 at 8:15 PM. Silverman reminded the abutters that they will not be re-noticed about this hearing.

Silverman remarked that in many ways expanding the cabin would have the least impact on the land. Mr. May said that would be circumventing the hammerhead regulation.

Public hearing: Site Plan Review for Nick’s Used Cars planned construction of new building and concrete pad for salvage and recycling on property located on NH Route 12 S, Map 8, Lot 20, General Industrial District.

Randall Russell, manager of Nick’s Used Cars, presented the plans. He said they had run into an impasse, can’t get a plan of the building from the manufacturer without having a permit from the town allowing it to be built, and they can’t get a permit without the building plans.

Parker said that the state issues permits for any recycling operation that takes place within 1000 feet of a primary highway, and Route 12 is such a highway. The town doesn’t issue permits within that area. He added that the state inspects this kind of operation.

They plan to improve the recycling function of the business and will become a state certified ‘green yard’ once the improvements are made. Crushed cars go to Claremont for disposal now and that will continue. Tires go to Bob’s Tire and all fluids are properly recycled and disposed of. They’ll continue to use a portable crusher that comes in periodically for cars that have been prepared. Cars will be processed for recycling in the proposed new building and the crushing will occur on the proposed new concrete pad. Currently all recycling of cars is done in the three bay garage on the property.

Silverman asked about fluid spills. Mr. Russell said the floor in the building will be tapered to contain spills. DES requires that containment capacity be 110 % of largest volume that could be spilled. He added this plan will be an improvement on the current situation. The lot now has about 300 cars on it, down from nearly a thousand. He said the new building will be bare bones – no water or septic, but may be heated. Parker noted that Nick’s had received a clean bill of health from DES.

Haynes asked if the building proposed was larger than 1000 feet. Mr. Randal said no, but he can’t get the plan to show the Board until he has the permit.

Silverman asked if there were any other changes to the business. Mr. Russell said no, the used car business will remain the same. Used cars are kept outside the fence and cars to be recycled are kept inside the fenced area.

Wetlands Hearing continued: John Lawless proposes construction of home and additions located at 12 Pine Road, Woodbrook, Map 42, Lot 1-72, Rural District.

Mr. Lawless submitted revised plans from Carl Hagstrom that meet the conditions requested by the Planning Board at the last meeting. They show where the dry wells are to be installed and how runoff and overflow are to be managed. A 110 gallon containment vessel will be set in crushed stone, allowing a natural percolation rate, with a PVC pipe leading out to defect overflow. Gutters will be installed.

Pini moved, Schott seconded and the Board approved the wetlands application, saying that due to changes in the drainage patterns, the plan for construction now falls under Land Use Ordinance 127-16.1 D (7) and is exempt from the WPOD regulation.

Public hearing: Connie Austin four-lot subdivision of a 36 acre property located on Collins Pond Road and Webber Lane, Map 11, Lot 30, Rural District.

Grasewicz presented the plans, which incorporates lot line changes suggested during the preliminary consultation. Silverman moved, Haynes seconded and the Board accepted the application as complete.

Grasewicz pointed out the zoning district line that places part of the land in the residential district and part in the rural district. All lots are larger than 5 acres, and the subdivision leaves Ms. Austin with nearly 20 acres as she requested. He noted that slopes were generally mild until the land near Collins Pond, which is steeper. He will request a waiver

of subdivision regulation 221-24 requiring 40,000 square feet of contiguous non-wetland area with slopes of less than 15%. He said that while he could configure the three lots to meet that requirement, they would be oddly shaped. He expected that wherever the building square was located on the lot overlooking Collins Pond, the home site would probably be on the hill overlooking the pond anyway.

Collins Pond is listed as a 30 acre pond and therefore is within the Shoreline Protection Act jurisdiction. Grasewicz says the pond is more like 10 acres but has shown the setbacks for shoreline protection on the plat, noting that the law restricts certain activities like cutting within 250 feet of the shoreline. He added that there is certainly room on this lot to build within all the town and state setbacks.

Silverman asked when the Board wanted to do a site walk. It was scheduled for Monday, July 24, 2006 at 5 PM. The Board will meet at the end of Webber Lane. They invited the Conservation Commission to join them.

Preliminary consultation: Lee Holombo to discuss possible subdivision of property located off Route 12 S, Map 8, Lot 8, Rural District.

Grasewicz presented a draft of Mr. Holombo’s plan. It affects Lots 7-2, 7-4, 7-5, 7-6 and 8 on Map 8, and creates 26 lots, including on lot that has a dwelling on it. The subdivision also depends on acquiring the land and easements necessary to the development. The proposed road will cross a stream and several proposed lots are partially within the 100 year flood zone.

The proposal incorporates use of an existing roadbed used by Holman gravel pit trucks. An easement will be needed for other parts of the road. Each lot has frontage on a new road to be constructed to town standards, which the developer would expect to be taken over by the town. Parker noted that even if the Planning Board approves the subdivision no occupancy permits will be issued until the town approves the road. He added that this subdivision is a long way from town center and he’s concerned about fire and police protection.

Silverman expressed concern about putting that much additional traffic on Route 12. Gray said that research indicates that each new house generates 9 trips per day, and for a subdivision this large, there would be a large impact. Grasewicz said the state will want a full blown traffic study, but the lines of sight at this point on Route 12 are excellent.

Grasewicz said he hadn’t walked all of the property, but the stream is perennial and its banks are steep but do not have wetlands bordering. Once you are on the flat land it gets swampy.

Silverman said this subdivision will create a remote community, which is contrary to the master plan and to maintaining the rural character of the town. He is not in favor of the town taking over the road. Grasewicz said the area is zoned rural and the lots meet the requirements.