|
Work Session Minutes Members
Present: Barbara Annis, Paul Violette, Rick Davies, Ed
Mical, Dan Watts, and Hank Duhamel Members
Arriving Late: David Hartman Members Excused:
None Members Absent:
None Alternates Present:
Peter Wyman Alternates Excused:
None Alternates Absent:
Harold French Presiding:
Barbara Annis Recording:
Tracey Hallenborg OPEN MEETING Barbara Annis opened the meeting at 1. MINIMUM Barbara Annis opened the discussion on Allan Brown’s Minimum Road
Standards handout. Barbara Annis explained there was some discussion
from the last meeting regarding exactly what Allan Brown wanted
contained in the handout. After the Planning Board secretary met with
Allan Brown a sample handout was drafted with a statement added to the
bottom of the page to refer to the Subdivision Regulations for further
details and specifications. A letter from Allan Brown was given to each
Board member. In the letter from Allan Brown he stated his intention is
to have a short simple handout for anyone requesting information on
updating/creating a road. Barbara Annis stated Allan Brown requested the
handout be available in the Selectman’s Office, his office and at the
Planning Board Office. Paul Violette said he agreed with Allan Brown wanting a single sheet
handout and was comfortable with adding a statement at the end of the
handout referencing the Subdivision Regulations. Rick Davies pointed out the Road Surface Width needed to be updated
to read Minimum of 24’ travel surface with 3’ shoulders to conform
to the Subdivision Regulations. He also suggested replacing the current
cross section diagram on the back with the updated Typical Section of
Improvement All Roads diagram. David Hartman asked why the Planning Board was responsible for
accepting the handout. He asked what would be the prevailing document
the handout or the Subdivision Regulations. Barbara Annis stated the
Subdivision Regulations would be the prevailing document. Barbara Annis
stated the Planning Board was helping Allan Brown with the handout to be
sure it corresponds with the Subdivision Regulations. After a short discussion the Board agreed to rename the document to Road
Standards Overview and to change the statement on the bottom to
read: For Full Details and Specification Requirements refer to Sections VI and
2. PARTS OF SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS & CHECKLIST DISCUSSION A. SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS: A brief discussion was held regarding Section C 1-b regarding adding
eleven (11) copies 11X17 showing lot size, etc, for the Board to have in
their packets to review before the meeting. Paul Violette suggested
rewording the sentence to read: The
applicant shall provide a large rough sketch of the land and eleven (11)
copies 11X17 showing lot size…….. The Board was in agreement. A lengthy discussion was held regarding using the word “shall” as
compared to “may”. The Board agreed to replace the word “shall”
with “may” in Section C-5-e. It was also agreed to remove Central
New Hampshire Regional Planning Commission as the reviewing agent. The
new wording agreed upon is: Any
major subdivision may be required to be reviewed by the Planning
Board’s designated agent….. Section V-A-2 was discussed and the Board agreed to update the
verbiage by deleting “drafting film” and leave Mylar. Dan Watts
suggested adding a new paragraph 2a ---- making the current 2 into 2b.
Ed Mical suggested moving V-C-4 paragraph starting with The
Final Plat shall contain the following statement: ……. into
V-A-2b. A brief discussion was held regarding the design phase, final phase
and Public Hearings. David Hartman questioned the abutter input during
the design review phase. Ed Mical read RSA 676:4 II (b) that reads: Design
review phase. The board or its designee may engage in nonbinding
discussions with
the applicant beyond conceptual and general discussions which involve
more specific design and engineering details; provided, however, that
the design review phase may proceed only after identification of and
notice to abutters, holders of conservation, preservation, or
agricultural preservation restrictions, and the general public as
required by subparagraph I(d). The board may establish reasonable rules
of procedure relating to the design review process, including submission
requirements. At a public meeting, the board may determine that the
design review process of an application has ended and shall inform the
applicant in writing within 10 days of such determination. Statements
made by planning board members shall not be the basis for disqualifying
said members or invalidating any action taken. The Board agreed it is a good idea to have the abutters comment
during the design review phase. David Hartman suggested changing the
verbiage in Section Dan Watts is going to check into getting an updated Traffic Impact
Assessment to update the tables in the Subdivision Regulations. B. MONUMENTS: A discussion was held regarding the different types of Monuments
(rocks, steel rods, concrete, granite etc.) and which type will be
required. Rick Davies suggested adding (or reinforced concrete) to
sentence: Such bounds to be stone
(or reinforced concrete) 4’ x 4’ x 36’ long. He also suggested
taking out iron pipes since
they decay from two sides. Rick Davies wanted to add: Other
proposed monuments may be considered and accepted by the Planning Board
when conditions warrant. Monuments shall be installed before the final
plat is signed by the Planning Board.
The Board agreed to the changes. Ed Mical suggested adding a new sentence stating: Concrete monuments shall be reinforced with steel rods. A plus, brass plate or pin shall serve as a point of reference and a magnetic rod or other suitable metal device shall be placed adjacent to the monument to allow for recovery. The Board was in agreement. C. SUBDIVISION CHECKLIST: The Board reviewed the Subdivision checklist. After a lengthy
discussion the Board agreed to make the necessary changes for the
checklist to coincide with the changes made to the Subdivision
Regulations. 3. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS Paul Violette stated all surveys were sent out to local business
owners and there have been quite a few responses. The results will be
available for the Paul Violette stated the Town of 4. COMMUNICATIONS Barbara Annis handed out information to the Board Members on the 17th
Annual Spring Planning & Zoning Conference on David Hartman congratulated the Board on a successful voting of
changes made to the Town of A discussion was held regarding the many positive comments from the
public in regards to the addition of the “Reasoning” on this
year’s Warrant Articles. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS Barbara Annis opened the meeting for public comments. There were no
public comments. 6. ADJOURN A MOTION was made to Adjourn.
The Motion was seconded. All were in favor. The meeting adjourned at
|