TOWN OF WILTON PLANNING BOARD

Work Session Meeting Minutes

Final Draft Approved 3/07/07

DATE: January 31, 2007

TIME: 7:30 P.M.

PLACE: Wilton Town Hall Courtroom

PRESENT: Co-Chairman Brian Sullivan, Co-Chairman Andrew Fairbanks, Neil Faiman, Jeff Kandt, Alec MacMartin, Alternate William Condra and NRPC Rep. Steve Wagner

ABSENT: Matt Fish, Board of Selectmen’s Representative Dan Donovan and Alternate David Holder

Co-Chairman Brian Sullivan called the meeting to order at 7:40 PM

1. Discussed Sign Application - Pike Industries – placement of an off-premises sign at the corner of Isaac Frye Highway and Forest Road on Lot B–147, 462 Forest Road.
   Alec MacMartin voiced concerns about the proposed location of the sign being close enough to the intersection that it would impair sightlines and create a safety hazard.
   Board discussed the intentions of the ZBA in determining the size and distance from the road in their decision. Board members felt that ultimately, the planning board can determine if the location is safe.
   Mr. MacMartin stated that he would prefer the sign 15 feet further back from the road (42 feet from centerline instead of 13 feet from white line).
   Tom Staiti mentioned that moving sign closer to intersection may actually increase visibility.
   
   A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Andrew Fairbank that the Planning Board ask for the location of the support post nearest the road on the proposed sign be set at a minimum of 42 feet from the centerline of NH Route 31.
   Voting: 4 ayes, Neil Faiman abstained. Motion passes.
   
   Vice-Chair Sullivan put Alternate Condra on the board to fill Mr. Fish’s seat.
   
   

PUBLIC HEARING of PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE CHANGES

2. FIRST HEARING of proposed zoning ordinance amendments relating to protection of historic and significant stone walls.
   Mr. MacMartin suggested changing “wall” to “walls” in section 4.10-h of the proposed amendment.
   Dawn Tuomala stated that she supports the preservation of stone walls when they make up lot boundaries and in recognized historical areas. Ms. Tuomala questions the feasibility of ascertaining the age and significance of stone walls. She is worried that the proposed amendment would eliminate the ability of landowners to make use of stones on their property and that the process of gaining permission to modify existing walls would be too costly.
   Mr. Faiman wondered if the proposed amendment creates a prohibition on certain activities without any penalty provisions. Mr. MacMartin stated that the general penalty provisions of the zoning ordinance may be sufficient.
   Ms. Tuomala voiced concern that the amendment requires filing a full site plan for any changes to stone walls in a subdivision application. Several board members stated that they feel the spirit of the amendment is not to require a formal site plan but instead a less formal drawing of the proposed changes.
   Mr. Faiman questioned the readiness of the proposed amendment.
   
   A MOTION was made by Mr. Faiman and seconded by Mr. MacMartin to decline to submit the proposed amendment for inclusion in the warrant.
   Voting: Unanimous, 6 ayes. Motion passes.
   
   
3. SECOND HEARING of proposed zoning ordinance amendments relating to the determination of zoning boundaries by description and maps.
   Mr. Faiman suggested moving the single item in Article 4, relating to Section 3.1.32 into Article 2 and moving the second item in Article 2, relating to Section 7.1 to Article 4 for reasons of consistency.
   
   A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Faiman to submit Article 2, as amended above and relating to Section 2.0 and Section 3.1.32, for inclusion in the warrant.
   Voting: Unanimous, 6 ayes. Motion passes
   
   
4. SECOND HEARING of proposed zoning ordinance amendments relating to non-conforming structures and uses.
   
   A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Faiman to submit Article 3, relating to amendments to Section 3.1.22 and Section 17.1 and deleting Section 3.1.23, for inclusion in the warrant.
   Voting: Unanimous, 6 ayes. Motion passes
   
   
5. SECOND HEARING of proposed zoning ordinance amendments relating to permitted uses in the Commercial District.
   Jeff Kandt noted a typographic error in Article 4 where it refers to a passage in parens when the passage is in quotes.
   Neil noted lack of clarity in the Article 4 abstract and suggested revised text:
   “AMEND section 7.1 Permitted Uses (Commercial District); to clarify that the density requirement for certain uses in the Commercial District shall be the same as that in the General Residence and Agriculture District.”
   
   A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Faiman to submit Article 4, as amended, relating to amendments to Section 7.1, for inclusion in the warrant.
   Voting: Unanimous, 6 ayes. Motion passes
   
   
6. SECOND HEARING of proposed zoning ordinance amendments to the Aquifer Protection District and the Wellhead Protection Area
   Jeff Kandt suggested reversing the order of the Article 5 items for clarity.
   
   A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Faiman to submit Article 4, as amended, relating to amendments to Section 12.2, Section 12.4. Section 12.5 and Section 9b.6, for inclusion in the warrant.
   Voting: Unanimous, 6 ayes. Motion passes
   
   
7. SECOND HEARING of proposed zoning ordinance amendments relating to allowed activities in the setback in the Watershed District
   
   A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Faiman to submit Article 6, relating to amendments to Section 14.3.5, for inclusion in the warrant.
   Ms. Tuomala displayed a color-keyed map that illustrated the areas affected by the proposed changes to allowed activities in the setback in the Watershed District. She stated that the proposed changes will make large areas of land uncuttable even though the state flowage easement allows landowners to cut timber.
   Mr. MacMartin explained that the purpose is to protect area of significant water resources from contamination should the town ever need to find alternative sources for the public water supply.
   Mr. Faiman wondered if the restriction on activities in the very large area the flowage easement encompasses would result in an additional encumbrance on landowners, above and beyond the 15 acre minimum lot size in that district.
   Ms. Toumala stated that the flowage easement area is much too large to severely limit cutting activities, especially because most of it is dry land the majority of the time.
   Mr. MacMartin stated that the proposed amendment will not prohibit cutting, that it limits cutting to 50% of the basal area over a 20 year span. He noted that this is aligned with what is considered best-practice logging techniques.
   
   Voting: 5 ayes, 1 no (Mr. Faiman). Motion passes.
   
   
8. SECOND HEARING of proposed zoning ordinance amendments relating to Floodplain Conservation District.
   
   A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Faiman to submit Article 7, relating to amendments to Chapter 10, for inclusion in the warrant.
   Voting: Unanimous, 6 ayes. Motion passes

A MOTION was made by Mr. MacMartin and SECONDED by Mr. Faiman to close the public hearing of proposed zoning ordinance amendments.
Voting: Unanimous, 6 ayes. Motion passes

9. Discussion of issues related to approved Erosion Control Plan for Barbara Pinet on Lot A-064, Burton Highway
   Mr. MacMartin brought two concerns to the attention of the board:
   - There is an excavator-type vehicle parked near the entrance to the site that appears to be leaking large amounts of hydraulic fluid. The area is close by Mill Brook and in the Watershed Protection District. The machine appears to be chained to a telephone pole.
   - The intersection of the Class V town road next to the bridge and Burton Highway is of concern to the Town Road Agent, Steve Elliot. He feels the profile of the intersection is not to standard and that sightlines are poor.
   It appears the Board of Selectmen feels that remedying the situation is the responsibility of the landowner. Several planning board members felt that, because the road section in question is a Class V town road, the town is responsible for its maintenance. There were questions as to why the town didn’t build the road to spec when the bridge work was done and the road was paved.
   
   Mr. Sullivan will contact Ms. Pinet and alert her to the excavator issue.
   Mr. Sullivan will contact a selectman to find out more about the position of the Board of Selectmen.
   
   

A MOTION was made by Mr. Faiman and SECONDED by Mr. MacMartin to adjourn.
Voting: Unanimous, 6 ayes. Motion passes

Meeting adjourned at 9:30 PM

<Back to Planning Board Home Page>