Town of Walpole, NH 03608
Planning Board Meeting
March 14, 2006 7:30PM
Unapproved Minutes
Members Present: Dave Edkins, V-Ch., Bob Miller, Eric Merklein, Dave DeCoste,
Henry Miller, Sheldon Sawyer; Ray Boas, alt., Fred Dill, alt., Pam Aslinger, alt.
Presiding: Jeff Miller, Ch.
Recording: Pamela Aslinger, Secretary
These minutes will be reviewed at the April 11, 2006 meeting.
REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED
Ch. Miller began with review of the L.A. Burdick Chocolate, Inc. Site Plan Review renovations to the former RN Johnson building located at 47 Main St., Walpole, NH in the Commercial District, Map 24, Lot 38. Purpose is to manufacture chocolate and related items in an existing commercial building. The Zoning Board has granted a special exception for an industrial use in a commercial zone for the new operation and requires a recommendation from the Planning Board as a condition of their granted special exception. All application materials were reviewed by the Board. Ch. Miller called for a motion to accept the application as complete, was so moved and seconded. Motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING
Ch. Miller closed the meeting and opened the Public Hearing. Cathy Watson presented the proposal stating the sight would be for production of candies, packing and shipping. The retail store and restaurant will remain downtown. Deliveries will be by UPS and Fed Ex only. One large tractor-trailer delivery will be received once per year. All deliveries will be made at the side of the building only. The hours will be from 9-5 am except for Holidays. Basic changes have occurred only to the outside façade. No work is being done on the back of the building at this time, only the 7000 sq.ft. area in the front of the building. Mr. DeCoste asked about the parking. Ms. Watson said there are 50 spaces in the back of the building allowing for 30-35 employees. Abutter Delbert Frost asked if the back will be used for deliveries, his property is directly in back of the building. Ms. Watson said only employee parking will be allowed in the back, all deliveries are to be taken on the side of the building, she pointed to the map. Ch. Miller asked about lighting. Ms. Watson said there would be a reduction of the current lighting, only 2 motion lights will be needed in order for the neighborhood to be kept dark. Mr. DeCoste asked if any retailing would be taking place there. Ms. Watson stated no, only production. Paula Schwenk asked how they would get other perishable supplies like milk. Ms. Watson stated those supplies would be delivered to the current retail location, shuttled to the production area.
Ch. Miller called for further comments, being none closed the Hearing at 7:45 and reopened the regular meeting.
Ch. Miller asked for the Board to consider the minutes of 2/14/06. A motion to approve the minutes as presented was made and seconded. Motion carried.
Ch. Miller asked if the order of the meeting could be changed to allow audience members under New Business to be taken before the Walpole Properties review. He announced the Mary McMahon application had been withdrawn.
NEW BUSINESS:
A. David Bergeron of Brickstone Masons representing James Stack Trust property located on Cemetary Rd. north of downtown and Old Drewsville Rd. in the Rural Agricultural zone. Map 10 Lot 6-1. The property is a 7.5 acre parcel currently a cornfield. Mr. Stack wishes to build a house on the larger parcel and the smaller lot is for his daughter to build on. It would be a minor 2 lot subdivision consisting of Lot 1 of 6.67 acres and Lot 2 of 1.78 acres. The Board noted he would need state subdivision approval on Lot 2, locate septic pits and contact the Road agent about locating a curb cut for Lot 2, Lot 1 has an existing curb cut. He submitted an application, 3 preliminary drawings, and abutter list. He will provide the fees to the Secretary 3/15/06 in order to have the application processed for the April 11, 2006 meeting. Ch. Miller called for a motion to schedule the Public Hearing for the April 11, 2006 meeting, made, seconded, vote taken, motion carried.
B. Lawrence Associates representing Grace and William Therrien proposed 3 lot subdivision located on Stevens Lane and County Rd. Map 5, Lot 44 in the Rural Agricultural zone. The Planning Board conceptually reviewed this proposal at a prior meeting, recommending they seek a variance from the Zoning Board because the proposal would leave Lot 1, with the existing house, without frontage on a Town road. The Therrien’s have been granted a variance from the Zoning Board, allowing Lot 1 to be without the required road frontage as defined in the zoning ordinance. Lawrence Associates representative stated Lot 2 and 3 would have a shared driveway off of County Rd. She said the State application for the driveway permit has been filed and the State met with them on site. Lawrence Associates submitted an application, fees, maps and abutter list. A motion was made to schedule the Public Hearing for the April 11, 2006 meeting, seconded, vote taken, motion carried.
ACTION ON APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED:
L. A. Burdick Chocolates Inc./Walpole Chocolates LLC - A motion was made to approve the Site Plan Review as presented and to give the Zoning Board a favorable recommendation in regards to granting the special exception to allow an industrial use in a commercial zone. Seconded. Vote taken, motion carried. The Board asked Ms. Watson to contact the Selectmen at next Thursday’s meeting. Sheldon Sawyer mentioned that this is the second time Burdick’s has began construction on a project without the required permits and approvals of the land use boards. He asked Ms. Watson to inform Mr. Burdick it should not happen a third time. Plans were signed.
OLD BUSINESS:
Walpole Properties LLC, Site Plan Review Development located on Rte. 12 and Upper Walpole Rd. in the Commercial Zone, Map 12, Lot 56. Purpose is to build a 70,087 sq. ft. building, including common halls and loading areas.
Ch. Miller and Dave Edkins reminded all that the Public Hearing for Walpole Properties was recessed on 2/14/06 until tonights meeting, allowing continued discussion and input from the Public as new materials are added. Planning Board members were given copies of the South West Regional Planning Commissions report at the meeting, copies had been provided earlier to the applicant, their Counsel and Engineers. Ch. Miller introduced Kevin Russell from SWRPC and asked him to discuss the result of their review. Mr. Russell reviewed and commented on each item. (A copy of the report is filed with these minutes.)
Questions and comments from the Board and Public follow: (no comments or questions were made up to Section VIII)
- Section VIII Site Plan Submittal Requirement A-1: Mr. Boas asked if the applicant’s standard for drainage was high or low for normal developments of this type. Mr. Russell said it varies from development to development.
- Submittal Requirement D: Mr. Boas asked if the trip generation figures were hourly or daily.
Answer was hourly. Engineer for the applicant said the study was based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers trip generation handbook. He said the ITE book does distinguish between December and typical seasons, however the study did not use the Holiday figures. Mr. Russell said not knowing the actual uses (tenants) of the proposal may be a problem.
- Submittal Requirement E: Members were concerned about pedestrians crossing the parking lot from the “restaurant” to the “grocery store”, noting that in initial review the Board preferred to have walking access to North Meadow Plaza and within the new site.
- #4 - Ch. Miller reminded that the Conservation Commission needs to comment on this item and asked that Gary Speed be given a copy of the report and documents.
Chairman Miller concluded, saying he felt the Board needed to assimilate the information and comment at the next meeting. Attorney Tom Hanna representing Walpole Properties said he had items to submit to the Board and they were prepared to comment on some of the items in the report. Ch. Miller agreed it would be appropriate to address their comments and submissions at tonight’s meeting.
Mr. Hanna submitted the following:
1. A revised elevation plan for the main building, in color.
2. An elevation plan for the out building omitted from the original submission.
3. An elevation plan for the sign in accordance with the zoning requirements.
Mr. Hanna commented on the Aquafir/Well Source Protection Area saying as part of the process it was the duty of the Planning Board to deny or approve the Well Source Protection Plan. He suggested a copy be given to the Conservation Commission. (Mr. Speed, Ch. of Conservation Comm. was in attendance later in the meeting, a copy was given to him for his review.)
Jennifer Rzepka, Project Engineer with Wagner Engineering Associates presented comments on the following items of the SW Reg. Planning Commissions Report:
- Site Plan Submittal Requirement 6 - Please correct building height from 48 ft. to 35 feet for the larger building and 30 feet for the smaller building, the elevation plans reflect the corrected heights.
- Site Plan Submittal Requirement 7 - Specifically on the cross connection issue, James Keough stated they were aware of the importance stressed by the Board at prior meetings. He stated they were in negotiations and would have more information at the next meeting as to the possibility of internal traffic movement by a cross connection. He said the issue will be addressed.
Ch. Miller commented about the viability of the project without the inter connection. He said he has concerns with traffic flow and safety, the current Plaza entrance is hazardous, made more difficult during inclement weather. He stated this proposal will create a dramatic increase in traffic. Already several accidents have occurred with the present situation. Without the inter connection the proposal is unacceptable. He said the Traffic Study agreed to on the present Plaza was ok. but is not ok in terms of living it. He feels any greater expansion will compound the problem. He is concerned about an additional curb cut causing further clustering of traffic. He said he is expecting a report from the Police Department regarding the number of accidents occurring in specifically that area.
Mr. Edkins asked if the Traffic Study compared the inter connection concept versus the plan as shown without it. Mr. Nick Sanders of VHB said the original traffic study does not provide that information, but he had made an assessment based on the ITE handbook. He said 100-140 trips would be saved by using the inter connection.
Mr. DeCoste asked if the Walpole Savings Bank had been contacted since it appeared the inter connection would be feasible close to or on part of their property holdings.
Mr. Don Tisdale, President of the Walpole Savings Bank was in the audience. He offered no comment.
Mr. Hanna said this was a somewhat sensitive subject between property owners, that they have done what they can up to this point.
Mr. Keogh said there are still other agreements to negotiate, some with even more restrictions.
Ch. Miller said the details of the applicant’s negotiations is not a Board matter, only the results and how it effects the safety issues.
Mr. Hanna asked to clarify that the new proposal is not an expansion of the North Meadow Plaza.
Mr. Miller disagreed and stressed, in his opinion, the two centers are connected, it is an expansion of an existing retail center with regional impacts.
Mr. Hanna stated the Walpole Properties is an independently owned property. Further when the Dept. of Transportation (DOT) looks at this project, they will look at it independently. He said it could be considered an expansion of commercialism, but DOT will be using criteria to mitigate the traffic flow and rates as an independent property. He objected to Mr. Miller’s idea to make the inter connection a condition of approval of the proposal.
Mr. Miller stated in his own personal opinion, not speaking for the Board, he still views the proposal as connected to the North Meadow Plaza. Even though they may be separate entities by ownership, the existing Plaza entrance/exit is not good. He stated everyone living in Walpole and using the Plaza has a personal history of problems getting in and out, siting lack of visibility, steep incline, inclement weather, speeding traffic, excess traffic at certain times of the day, weekends and Holidays. He feels the Ocean State Job Lots has maxed out what the intersection can handle, despite traffic studies and DOT approvals. He reiterated it’s the residents and users having to deal with the lack of safety and existing poor design to be considered.
Mr. Hanna said his clients would pursue what the developer wants and what the DOT recommends/requires and work to satisfy the safety issues.
Ms. Rzepka continued:
Site Plan Submittal Requirement #10 - Mr. Sanders said typically the NHDOT issues the permits in unison with the Site Plan Review Process, but not generally before the Site Plan Review has ended, taking 30-50 weeks to issue the permits. The driveway permits are still pending and are likely to remain pending.
Mr. Edkins agreed, and asked how changes affect the permitting process. Mr. Sanders said they would submit corrected designs, looking for acceptance based on final outcome. Mr. Miller asked if Town’s had a right to make comments on the permits before the NHDOT. Answer was, yes. He suggested the Town contact the NHDOT and comment on the safety issues.
Site Plan Submittal Requirement #14 - Signage plan has been submitted. The sign will be lit internally, not lit by ground or overhead floods.
Site Plan Submittal Requirement #3 - Still awaiting approval for the Alteration of Terrain Permit.
Site Plan Submittal Requirement #5 - Ms. Rzepka said they had changed the hydrants, the location of shut offs and access according to the Fire Dept. recommendations. She clarified an oversight in SWRPC’s report stating the Fire Department suggested a traffic signal, they did not recommend a traffic signal.
Site Plan Submittal Requirement #6 - Fire Dept. will be final approval on this.
Section VIII
Site Plan Submittal Requirement A1 - A contractor will be hired to maintain and monitor the storm water runoff and sedimentation systems. Walpole Properties will provide the name and monitoring schedule of the contractor. The system will be monitored weekly and after rainfall. Repairs to the system will be done immediately.
Site Plan Submittal Requirement A2 - A landscape inspection will be required after one year to determine what may need replacing. The materials will be guaranteed for one year by the contractor and will be replaced if they fail.
Site Plan Submittal Requirement C1 - The note referred to on the plan was unclear. The loading area that was included for green space goes to the edge of the curb on the internal perimeter. Even without the loading area the percentage of green space is 15%.
Mr. Edkins stated he wanted to insure the Town has the highest percentage possible.
Site Plan Submittal Requirement C2 - Ms. Rzepka stated the landscape materials are mostly dogwood and spire. She said they could change it to evergreen. Mr. Edkins asked if larger evergreen trees were planned for the perimeter? Answer was “not as planned” but these could be changed as long as site lines weren’t impaired. Mr. Merklein asked if the maintenance of items A1 and A2 was budgeted by the developer, rather than the Town. Answer was yes, including the landscaping and Sediment and Erosion control, all are private expenditures.
Site Plan Submittal Requirement D - Mr. Sanders noted a misunderstanding in the minutes of the last meeting. He submitted a written explanation attached to these minutes.
Site Plan Submittal Requirement E - Mr. Keogh explained it would not be feasible or safe to have a sidewalk from the restaurant to the larger store. Instead he proposes a designated cross walk. Mr. Russell asked if they had seen the sidewalk through the parking lot of the new Target store in Keene.
Site Plan Submittal Requirement F4 - Ms. Rzepka said during construction a temporary monitoring would occur including a log book kept by the contractor with weekly inspections and after every rainfall. Once the project is in place a permanent monitoring would take place by a licensed contractor keeping the same log book and inspecting monthly and after every rainfall. This would be the Stormwater Management Plan maintained in working order and overseen by the property owners.
Site Plan Submittal Requirement H - Ms. Rzepka stated the lighting would be not be dimmed at night, will use same lighting as in the current Plaza with improved lamps that are flat lense lights. The light source will not be seen since they are angled at 90 degrees, there will be no glare or light pollution off site.
Mr. Merklein asked to go back to the Stormwater Management issue, asking if the system was under the parking lot. Ms. Rzepka showed on the plans where the system is located under the parking lot. She described how the system works ie; how the water is collected and treated, noting the system is a completely closed system. With catch basins and sumps, large debris would be easily trapped. She said the life span of this system is 20-30 years properly maintained.
Continuing on H, Ms. Rzepka said the signage will be internally lit only.
Site Plan Submittal Requirement M - Refer to Wagner Engineering letter addressing Well Source Protection area, (copy attached). All Board members have received a copy for review. Mr. Hanna stated the Well Source Protection ordinance is a conditional use permit without an application process at this time but coincides with the Site Plan Review process.
Mr. Edkins said the Board has not had an opportunity to establish a detailed procedure, however by applying the Site Plan Review process it would seem the Board could grant or deny the use. Mr. Speed of the Walpole Conservation Commission spoke asking the Board to have the Plan reviewed by an independent consulting firm to insure the proposal would not affect the aquafir it is in close proximity to. Mr. Hanna provided Mr. Speed a copy of the drainage study done by Walpole Properties to review.
Additional Comments Page 5
1) - Hours of operation shall be similar to the hours at the North Meadow Plaza.
2) - Mr. Keough stated the Ballfield would be relocated. The current season could be continued for now. He had no other details. Mr. Miller asked if they had contacted Jimmy Neil, spokesperson for the ball teams in Walpole. Mr. Hannah said they had spoken with Steve Corey.
3) and 4) Both items relate to previously discussed options above.
Mr. Hanna asked if the Board was considering having the Drainage plan studied independently, to move forward with that process as soon as possible to avoid delays. He said they would prepare a written response to the SWRPC report and send it to the Secretary for distribution among the members.
Mr. Speed noted the importance of Aquafir protection siting in the Commission’s survey done in January 2006 revealing 90% of the respondents listed Aquafir protection as their #1 priority.
PUBLIC HEARING RECESSED UNTIL 4/11/06 MEETING.
Ch. Miller said the Public Hearing would be recessed at the April 11, 2006 meeting.
Continued Board review of the Walpole Properties proposal followed.
Mr. Edkins asked if the Board was going to have the Drainage plan independently reviewed. Sheldon Sawyer made a motion to have the Drainage Plan for the Walpole Properties proposal reviewed by an independent engineer to be chosen by the Planning Board. Seconded, motion carried. A list of potential engineers will be collected. A suggestion was made to contact the New England Rural Water Association and Jennifer Palmietto will be contacted.
Ch. Miller recognized Chuck Bingaman from the audience. Mr. Bingaman asked if the Board had considered the effect of the added shopping center on the Police Dept. workload. He said the Police department has seen a rise in paperwork from bad checks and small crime investigations. Ch. Miller said he would ask the Police about it when he speaks to them regarding the accident reports.
Mr. Hanna asked Mr. Miller to provide any and all reports to him, so he may have responses prepared in a timely manner. He said his clients will also provide any emerging information to the Board as well. He reminded the Board of the time restraints for action by the Board. Mr. Miller agreed noting the Board may need to ask for an extension beyond the 65 day requirement. Ms. Aslinger added as of tonight’s meeting the Board was at day 29, and at the April 11 meeting, day 57.
Mr. Merklein asked how a local citizen might approach the developer if they are interested in renting, investing or ownership. Mr. Keogh said he was the contact person.
Discussion closed, a 10 minute break was taken to allow the hall to clear.
Ms. Aslinger mentioned copies of letters from Mr. Bingaman and Mr. Hansel had been handed out at the beginning of the meeting for Board review.
Ms. Aslinger noted upcoming workshops for Planning and Zoning.
Ms. Aslinger asked if the Board would authorize an expenditure of $75.00 to obtain 15 copies of the new Office of Energy and Planning’s new Planning Board Handbook. The Board moved to allow the expenditure for 12 copies or $60.00, seconded, carried.
Ms. Aslinger asked for clarification of how to adopt the Capital Improvements Plan, members all agreed the procedure is to hold a public hearing and then vote to adopt the plan. The Board decided to hold off on the Plan until the May meeting.
Other
A. Mr. Boas asked if the Board would consider adding a work session for the 4th Tuesday in March to review the Walpole Properties proposal, feeling the Board could use the time to discuss issues among the members. Members were concerned that we had already recessed the review and hearing to the April 11 meeting, that we would have to re-notify, re-publish and re-post. Most members felt the need to have extra review time but not this month. Board discussed the need to ask for an extension on final action by the Board. A suggestion was made to hold a work session after the April 11 meeting. The Board discussed procedures and some issues pertaining to the Walpole Properties proposal. The Fire Chief, when leaving earlier during the break, mentioned the reason he and the Police Chief had not recommended a traffic light was that it would cause traffic to back up on Rte. 12, imagine a line of trucks for 2 miles in either direction. It is better to keep the traffic moving. Mr. Fletcher asked if the Board remembered Berkshire’s promise to fix up the North Meadow Plaza. Mr. Miller shed some light on the very complicated ownership and history of ownership of the existing plaza. Ms. Aslinger will be contacting Jen Palmietto regarding the independent study and will report back to the Board.
B. Mr. Edkins, Mr. Sawyer and Ch. Miller cautioned all members to be mindful of conflict of interest regarding published letters or circulated political media. It is important to remain impartial on proposals or other Board matters, in order to participate in an official capacity.
Meeting was closed at 9:43 PM
Cc: All PB Members, ZBA Ch., Select’s Office, Fire Dept., Police Dept.
Posted: Town Hall, Burdick’s Market, Town Website