Wilton, NH Planning Board

TOWN OF WILTON

PLANNING BOARD MEETING

MINUTES

Approved 2/17/10

DATE:            January 20, 2010

TIME: 7:30 P.M.

PLACE:         Wilton Town Hall Courtroom

PRESENT:     Wilton Planning Board Members: Chairman Jeff Kandt, Neil Faiman, Alec MacMartin, Matt Fish, John Shepardson, Board of Selectman representative Bill Condra, NRPC representative Steve Wagner and Clerk Heather Loewy Nichols.

The agenda was amended as follows:

1.)              Minutes

-        December 16, 2009 – public hearing

-        December 16, 2009 – regular meeting

-        January 6, 2010 – public hearing

2.)              PB09-021-SA Deborah Diffley

3.)              PB09-017-SD – Roger Clapp

4.)              PB10-001-SPR – Kim and Marcia Benson

5.)              PB10-002-SPR – Kim Benson

6.)              Other Business

7.)              Adjournment

Chairman Kandt opened the meeting at 7:35 p.m.

1.      Minutes:

-         December 16, 2009 – public hearing

A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Faiman to approve the minutes for the December 16, 2009 public hearing as amended.

Voting: 6 ayes; motion carried unanimously.

-         December 16, 2009 – regular meeting

A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Fish to approve the minutes of December 16, 2009 as amended.

Voting: 6 ayes; motion carried unanimously.

-         January 6, 2010 – public hearing

The Board asked that changes be made to the January 6, 2010 minutes and that they consider them at a subsequent meeting.

Sign Application:

2.      PB09-021-SA – Deborah Diffley- An application by the owner of White Home Collections, located at 9 Greenville Road, to place a 5' by 10' wood and plastic composite sign on the existing sign post on the property.

Mr. MacMartin discussed the setbacks with the applicant and the issue of the snow banks that are currently impeding any accurate measurements.

Mr. Kandt noted that the farthest side of the sign (if the sign over extends the posts) must be 15' from the lot line.

A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Zuber to conditionally approve the application subject to the applicant establishing that the sign location meets the 15' set back off the lot line on or before May 19, 2010 and the applicant appearing at the April 21, 2010 meeting to provide documentation of the sign location; failure to do so will result in revocation of the approval and the sign must be removed.

Voting: 6 ayes; motion carried unanimously.

A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Faiman to continue the application to the April 21, 2010 meeting.

Voting: 6 ayes; motion carried unanimously.

Continuations:

3.      PB09-017-SD – Roger D. Clapp – An application to subdivide the 33.3 acre lot C-101, at 90 Goldsmith Road, into 10 single family lots all taking access from Goldsmith Road.

Chad Brennon of Meridian Land Services, appeared before the Board, and stated that there was an issue with the drill holes on the site walk.  Mr. Faiman noted that several of the internal bounds were done as drill holes and not pipes and he could not find three of the holes. Mr. Brennon noted that the bounds have been remarked.

Mr. Brennon explained that last month the cistern easement was still outstanding but since it has been submitted and reviewed by Town Counsel. Mr. Kandt reviewed the letter, with the Board, from Town Counsel noting that the only significant comment was that that there is no landscaping allowed within the easement areas and Town Counsel suggested that the Road Agent be made aware.

Mr. Brennon explained that he has prepared a response letter to the latest review by Dennis LaBombard and it has been submitted along with the revised Storm Water Management report, but just today. He further explained that Mr. LaBombard has stated that each driveway needs to slope down to 2% but Mr. Brennon explained that his design meets the regulations as the driveways slope down to the center of the ditch and still leave a platform for a vehicle to stop. He explained that following Mr. LaBombard’s recommendations will require four foot cuts and the removal of much more stone wall.

Mr. MacMartin stated that he wants to make sure that any runoff does not end up as frozen sheet flow on the road.

In response to a question from Mr. Fish, Mr. Brennon explained that all the driveways will have ditches and culverts and he is proposing that the low spot be 10 feet off the road instead of 20 feet. He noted that this issue only pertains to the two common driveways and that the proposed design meets the local regulations and the intent of keeping the runoff into the ditches and off the road.

In response to a question from Mr. MacMartin, Mr. Condra stated that it has not been determined whether the road improvements will change the configuration of the road. Mr. MacMartin noted that he was wondering if the improvements would change the elevation of the road.

Mr. Brennon noted that the design has been reviewed and approved by Road Agent Steve Elliot, including the driveways.

Mr. MacMartin suggested relaying to Mr. Labombard that the Board wants to preserve the look of the road and ask him if the proposed plan will handle the drainage without letting water go onto the road. He also suggested that a copy of the minutes be sent to Mr. LaBombard and that he be directed to contact the Chairman if he has questions.

Mr. Brennon explained that Mr. Labombard raises the issue of the turn arounds not being large enough to turn a fire truck in, but Chief Dick considered the common drives as single driveways because they are short and therefore he did not have any need for a turn around.

In response to a question from Mr. Fish regarding Note 13, Mr. Brennon explained that the state does not want developers to use wetlands as detention ponds. He explained that this site has two watersheds; one heading towards Route 101 that almost the entire site drains to so there was not a need for a detention pond in that area. However the other watershed does require mitigation because it is discharging quicker and onto Goldsmith Road. He explained that he is proposing a metering structure at the inlet that will result in lower peak rates as it enters into the Goldsmith Road drainage ditches.

In response to a question from Mr. Kandt, Mr. Brennon agreed that the letter from the Road Agent does not mention driveways or a turn around.

A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Faiman that the Board enter a finding that in reviewing the common driveway access points the Board sees competing goals in stone wall preservation and rural preservation, with regard to abutters, and the drainage to Goldsmith Road, and therefore authorize the Chairman to communicate with the Town Engineer to find a balanced solution.

Voting: 6 ayes; motion carried unanimously.

A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Zuber to enter a finding that the Planning Board has traditionally not treated wetlands as detention basins and to authorize the Chairman to discuss this issue with the Town Engineer.

Voting: 6 ayes; motion carried unanimously.

In response to a question from Mr. Fish, Mr. Brennon explained that his proposal puts the low point of the road at 10 feet off the road and holds the grade at 1%. He explained that he could change the grade to 2% grade but that Mr. LaBombard’s letter suggests changing the low point to 20' off the road.

In response to a question from Mr. Kandt, Mr. Brennon explained that following Mr. LaBombard’s suggestion would require removal of 5 to 10 feet more stone wall. He also noted that there is a ditch line on Goldsmith Road and that if the low point were changed to 20 feet back they would have to grade differently because the proposed ditch has to be transitioned into the existing ditch line. He further explained that the entrance will look big and out of place within the rural setting of the site. He stated that if the plan is changed per Mr. LaBombard’s suggestion, it will not stop the building of the lots but Mr.Brennon feels that his plan is better as it meets the intention of the regulation.

After discussion, the Board decided it is satisfactory for the Mr. Brennon to communicate with Chief Dick as long as his response includes a plan revision date and specifically references the suggested hammer head turn arounds.

A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Faiman to continue the application to February 17, 2010. Voting: 6 ayes; motion carried unanimously.

New Applications:

4.      PB10- 001-SPR – Kim and Marcia Benson – An application to allow a barbershop to be run as a home occupation at Lot F-140, at 160 Intervale Road. This applicant was granted a Special Exception from the ZBA on November 10, 2009, Case # 11/10/09-1.

Ms. Benson appeared before the Board.

Mr. Kandt read the application noting that the applicant is asking to change a bedroom at Lot F-140 into a barber shop. The Board noted that the lot is zoned residential. 

The Board reviewed the application with Ms. Benson. Mr. MacMartin noted that the Board needs the lot shown on the site plan with parking and driveways shown. The Board noted that a signature block is required along with any outside lighting and the location of the sign.

A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Faiman to continue the application to February 17, 2010.

Voting: 6 ayes; motion carried unanimously.

5.      PB10-002-SA – Kim Benson – An application by the owner of Teddy’s Barbershop to place a 2' by 4' sign on Lot F-140, 160 Intervale Road.

The Board reviewed the application and explained that they need a description of the sign, including its dimensions, and a picture or depiction of the sign.

Mr. MacMartin noted that the only location restrictions are safety considerations as the sign may not create problems for offsite or onsite traffic.

A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Faiman to continue the application to February 17, 2010.

Voting: 6 ayes; motion carried unanimously.

6.      Other Business

-         Discuss NRPC questions about zone descriptions   

After discussion the Board decided to strike the word “between” in the last sentence of the proposed amendment to 7.0.1 (e).

The Board reviewed the proposed the warrant article language.

7.      Adjournment

A MOTION was made by Mr. Condra and SECONDED by Mr. Faiman to adjourn the meeting.

Voting: 6 ayes; motion carried unanimously.

Chairman Kandt declared the meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,

Heather Loewy Nichols

Click HERE for PDF