January 17, 2007 Planning Board Mintues
Chairman Ouellet opened the meeting shortly after 7 pm. Board members present were Irene Bean, Kevin McKinnon, Edward Carrier, selectman Benoit Lamontagne and alternate Sandra Riendeau.
Others present were Donna & Charlie Jordan, Larry Rappaport, Claire Lynch, Monda Anderson, Sharon Pearson, Cindy & David Hicks, Terry Hurlbert, John Jolles, Paul & Simmone Corriveau, Frank Dumaine, Sandy and Amanda Woodard, Greg Placy, Ann Woodard, Tom Laskowski, Phil and Melissa Shaw, Brett Brooks, Don MacNeil, John Schmitz, Ken Linseman, Ginger Jannenga, Raymond Gorman, Palmer & Ruth Lewis, Wayne Frizzell and Sheila Beauchemin.
Site Plan Review Public Hearing (continued):
Newland Development Associates, LLC – Chairman Ouellet explained that this was a continuation of the public hearing to work on specifics for the site plan proposed by Newland Development. Public comment had been received at the original meeting last week; however, due to the size of the audience, it was decided to take a few minutes for comments supporting or opposing the project.
Eugene Reid stated that he thought the project was a great idea; however, he was against what had been presented. He felt, rather than tearing down the current building, the developer should incorporate some of them into the new structure. He hoped the Board would look at keeping the old charm and feeling of New England, paying close attention to signs, lighting and traffic.
Terry Hurlbert also spoke in support of the project; however, she also would like to see a more New England look to the building. She suggested using the façade from the NAPA building. She asked that the developers take into consideration that this project would be the gateway to Colby Street, a beautiful residential street. Landscaping she felt was an important issue.
Ginger Jannenga stated that she also agreed with Eugene Reid. It was great to have a large store; however, it should fit in with what already exists in town.
Tom Laskowski explained that he had purchased a historical home on Colby Street recently and has been renovating it, trying to maintain the integrity. He felt the Town of Colebrook has integrity and would like to see the old charm remain. He suggested the signs be made of wood with a spot light on them. Since he can see the site from his porch, he was also concerned regarding screening and lighting issues.
At this point, Chairman Ouellet remarked that the Planning Board cannot impose their opinions or ideas. The Town of Colebrook has a set of regulations that have to be followed. The plan proposed by the developer follows that regulations. The Planning Board cannot deny a site plan on taste; health, safety or significant devaluation of abutting properties are the only reasons. He reminded everyone present that this project is very much in the preliminary stage.
Cindy Hicks stated she hoped the developers would listen and try to establish what the community wants. She asked if it was correct, if the developers were unwilling to build to the community’s wishes, the Board could not stop the project. With the answer in the affirmative, she continued that the place to speak would be at the School meeting. David Hicks continued that he hears from customers in his store that this is a quaint little town and that is our draw.
Elaine Gray stated that the townspeople shouldn’t assume the developers won’t work with the town. She felt we had to make them understand that we do not want what was presented last week. Amanda Woodard stated she supported the project as it might draw other businesses to town so that college students would have something to come back to.
Sharon Pearson, director of Colebrook Downtown Development Association (CDDA), stated she had asked her members their perspective. She continued that the bottom line for everyone seemed to be that they were not against the project; however, their biggest concern was the basic appearance of the building. She expressed a hope that the developers would recognize the community’s charm and help enhance the surrounding buildings. She asked that they pay attention to the lighting and public safety, including the crosswalk traffic. Sharon continued that, even though the Planning Board has no specific rules on the type of building, CDDA has been following a program and does have guidelines they hoped the developers would take into consideration.
Larry Rappaport stated he was neither for or against the project. He had heard a lot of people state they did not like the design. He produced a picture of the Rite Aid in Lincoln, New Hampshire, for consideration. He felt a change to the front of the store should be considered. Larry also stated the zoning ordinance for the Town of Colebrook restricts the size of a sign to 36 square feet; therefore, the proposed 100 square foot sign would need to go before the Zoning Board of Adjustment. He related he opposed such a large sign and warned that an exception to the size had not been granted in the past.
Mike Ouellet asked Ken Linseman if he, as the developer, had any control over the façade. He responded that the façade offered is the “new world” façade developed by Rite Aid and that he did not have any authority to change it. He was willing to work with the architect and, perhaps, add gables or whatever to make it look more New England. He admitted that he had suspected this concern would surface and he was very willing to go back to Rite Aid with the feedback.
At this point, the Planning Board began their review of the plans with engineer, John Schmitz. Mr. Schmitz stated that, since the last meeting, the plan had been changed to remove the five parking spaces in the rear, along the proposed emergency exit for the school. The developer would like the option to put the parking spaces back in some time in the future, but for now, they would be landscaped. It was also noted that the vegetation to be planted along this same boundary would be extended closer to Colby Street. The three light poles originally placed along Shaw’s property line have been removed. The light remaining near the propane tanks would shine towards the building, along with one light in the front of the building. In response to an earlier comment, he related that the current building
are non-conforming and do not meet the twenty-foot setback required for structures; therefore, it would be difficult to use any of the buildings in the new proposal.
Sheet SU-101:
This sheet shows the existing site. Because of questions at the last meeting, the maple tree now shows. Mr. Schmitz explained it was the developer’s intent to keep the tree but it might have to be limbed for fire trucks to get by. The final decision would be the School Board’s with a transfer of land.
Sheet C-101 -- Updated Building:
Mr. Schmitz pointed out that the five parking spaces in the back had been removed, but they would like to reserve the option for future use. Mike Ouellet stated he felt a written waiver request would be needed due to the fact that, with the removal of the parking spaces, the plan now does not meet site plan regulations. Mr. Schmitz pointed out the waiver request for a buffer on the school side is on the plan.
Mr. Schmitz indicated the 12’ x 34’ dumpster enclosure (picture on sheet C-206) to be placed near the property line. He stated the outside would be done so as to match the building. The chain link gate would include vinyl slats. Chairman Ouellet asked for photos and noted that a zoning board of adjustment variance request would be needed for the location.
In regards to the propane tanks, Mr. Schmitz stated there would be a chain link fence enclosing them. When asked if vinyl slates would be there, he remarked they could be put in the plan. The current plan shows two tanks, however, there might be only one. Mike Ouellet remarked that the enclosure for the tanks shows as closer than ten feet from the boundary line; therefore, a variance request would be necessary. Mr. Schmitz responded that the position could be shifted closer to Colby Street; however, they would rather have them as far as possible from Colby Street.
It was pointed out there would be a six-foot high stockade type fence on the southern end of the school property from the dumpster to about the front of the building. Curbing only will separate the school property from the Rite Aid parking lot on the Main Street side. Mr. Schmidt suggested extending the fence. Mike Ouellet remarked a fence could limit the line of sight; however, he was concerned that with nothing more there than a curbing, children would be walking through the entrance lane and into the parking lot. Mr. Schmitz suggested landscaping, such as a low-height shrub, no higher than a car window.
Granite curbing is planned for the right-of-ways and along the streets. All will depend on bids received. The area along the emergency lane will be a green area – an eighteen foot wide road with a five foot grass strip. Mr. Schmitz continued that the existing fence goes back to the school property screening wall. Part of the screening wall would come down to allow for the emergency lane. The plan currently calls for no planting near Colby Street. Edward Carrier asked if they could extend the arborvitae nearer to Colby Street. Mr. Schmitz responded that it was possible, however, it should be understood that it would be on school property. Mike Ouellet questioned if eighteen feet was wide enough for fire trucks. It was noted that a return is indicated on the plan. Phil Shaw
asked if the existing fence could be improved or that tall hedges, at least six feet, be planted at the onset of the project. Mike Ouellet questioned if the fence would need to be removed during the construction phase. Mr. Linseman did suggest that the arborvitae could be staggered when planted which would give a thicker cover and it could be extended all the way to Colby Street. It was understood that Rite Aid would take care of the shrubs. Edward Carrier remarked that the plan indicates the arborvitae is 30 feet back from the sidewalk and he understood that the Shaw’s would like it to be at least 15 feet closer to the sidewalk. Melissa Shaw agreed.
Mike Ouellet questioned if the curb would hold water back. Mr. Schmitz explained that the proposed six-inch curbing is higher than the current pavement; therefore, any rain would be caught and put back into the drain. It is necessary to match the grades on the property line.
In answer to Sandra Riendeau’s question, there is no plan for a sidewalk on the side of the curb. Kevin McKinnon stated he felt a sidewalk should be placed on the emergency lane to encourage foot traffic to use it. Ken Linseman remarked that a sidewalk creates a plowing and shoveling issue. Mike Ouellet remarked, if foot traffic is allowed on the emergency lane, he felt cars will be turning in to drop children off, especially since the gate is forty feet in on the lane. Melissa Shaw expressed concern with a sidewalk abutting their property. She would rather see one, if necessary, on the Rite Aid side of the emergency lane and further thought the whole issue was a school board concern. Mike Ouellet remarked that the school board has considered that kids will be allowed to use the lane in the
morning and afternoon. It will also be designated as an evacuation route. Brett Brooks remarked that the emergency lane would not be used by fire personnel until all children were gone from the scene. He felt the lane would be used later during an emergency, perhaps by mutual aide firefighters, who could hook up to the new hydrant. Edward Carrier suggested that signs be posted on the emergency lane to the effect that it is not open for thru traffic or pedestrian traffic, thereby eliminating the need for a sidewalk. It was asked if the gate could perhaps be placed closer to the street if the emergency lane was going to be used for secondary fire personnel. Mike Ouellet responded that the school hadn’t wanted the gate at the end of the lane due to plowing issues.
Sheet C-102 – Drainage:
Mr. Schmitz stated a drainage design does not currently exist on the site. Drainage is by sheet flow and, for the most part, water drains towards Colby Street with some going towards Shaw’s property. Newland Development proposes to place catch basins along the perimeter of the site with a Votex drainage system (tanks) at the rear of the building. It is believed the run-off, once development is completed, will be no more than it is today. The Votex system will reduce what is going through the storm system now, with the sediment removed. Statsistically, 80 percent of the sand in run-off is removed. The system will need to be cleaned once a year; however, will be checked every three months the first year. Pumping is usually completed in April, and at the same time, the catch basins will be
pumped. Mike Ouellet questioned if it might be possible to notify the Public Works Director whenever pumping occurs. Mr. Schmitz remarked the manager keeps a log book. Kevin McKinnon stated he had reviewed the plan and feels the amount of the water going into the storm drain will be less than currently occurs. It was noted the drainage ends up in the ditch by Lewis Ford.
Sheet C-103 – Utilities:
Mr. Schmitz noted there are no changes to the utilities other than the addition of a fire hydrant. He noted water usage would be the same as a domestic service, utilizing water coolers, bathrooms (including a public restroom) and fire sprinklers. Kevin McKinnon noted the plan currently calls for a six-inch line; however, Colby Street is set up with an eight-inch line. Kevin remarked he did not feel a six-inch line would give enough water to feed the fire hydrant. He also asked if the hydrant would be placed to the left of the propane tanks. Mr. Schmitz responded it would be up to the Fire Chief to decide the placement, but there was flexibility. Kevin remarked that, if the hydrant was placed before the sprinkler line, it might possibly set off the alarm.
Kevin McKinnon asked the developer to provide information regarding the water demand and sewer flow. He remarked that the existing Rite Aid generates 450 gallons of water a day. The current businesses on this site produce 900 gallons with half the flow going to the Main Street line and half going to the Colby Street line. Terry Hurlbert remarked there are major problems currently with the Colby Street line to the drain ditch. Kevin explained the proposed system will have less water going into the system than currently goes into it.
Sheet C-104 – Erosion Control During Demolition:
Mr. Schmitz stated the developer would be creating a demolition plan and will get a copy to the Town. The site will be fenced off during construction with mesh. Debris being hauled off site will be via Main Street with the destination determined by the contractor. Because exact elevations are not known, it is not sure whether material will need to be brought in. The lot appears to be pretty level, with the highest point being on the school side. In answer to whether test bores were being done, Mr. Schmitz stated the soil is tested constantly and the bores have been clean. He did relate it is proposed to put a temporary pit for stormwater at the low point until the site is stabilized. During construction, a fence will be put on the school property which will be replaced with a stockade one on Rite
Aid property afterwards. Mike Ouellet remarked the Board might wish to consider using a clerk of works to help keep communication open during the construction period.
Sheet C-105 – Lighting:
Mr. Schmitz stated the lights would all be tilted somewhat with cut-offs to stop spillage over to other property. Currently, two spotlights are proposed which should be shut off when the store was not open. The parking lot lights would also be off during non-store hours. It was questioned whether it should be put on the plan that the lights would be off during non-operation hours. Mr. Schmitz remarked there were no plans for a change in hour of operation for the new development so far as known.
In response to Mike Ouellet’s question regarding snow removal, Mr. Schmitz stated the plan was to utilize the green spaces and landscaped area. Kevin McKinnon remarked this could create a problem along the corner as it might block the line of sight. Kevin asked the developer to provide a maintenance plan of where the snow would be stored.
Terry Hurlbert remarked she felt low level lighting would be necessary for asthetics, safety and vadalism. She also expressed concern regarding refuse accumulating on site such as has happened at the current Rite Aid.
Larry Rappaport remarked he felt the Board should leave discretion for security lighting in case the police felt it was necessary, perhaps in the form of a motion sensor.
Mike Ouellet remarked he had concerns regarding refrigeration products in the store requiring refrigerated truck delivery. He did not want to see trucks left running during the night. Larry Rappaport remarked there is a state law against that and Mr. Schmitz remarked there is currently no deliverys at night. Larry stated that “no overnight truck parking” could be placed on the plan. Eugene Reid questioned if compressors within the building would be loud enough to affect the Shaws. Mr. Schmitz stated he would get a decibel level report for the Board.
Sheet C-201 – Sediment Traps:
No comments.
Sheet C-202 – Sewer & Manholes:
Kevin McKinnon remarked that the town follows state standards in regards to sewer and manhole regulations. He also agreed to get the specifications for water and sewer piping to Mr. Schmitz.
Sheet C-204 – Catch Basisn & Storm Water Treatment:
No comments.
Sheet C-205 – Detailed Loading Dock and Grading:
Mr. Schmitz noted the loading dock was completely level with no plans for a roof. It was noted the drive-thru does have a canopy over it. Mr. Schmitz was asked to provide the decibel rating for the speaker system.
Sheet C-206 – Detail Sheet:
Mr. Schmitz pointed out the dumpster with a cement wall behind it, along with the propane tank storage unit with chain link fence. Mike Ouellet asked if it would be possible to obtain details of where the service area to the tanks would be located. It was noted the propane tanks are visible from Colby Street. Edward Carrier questioned if it might not be possible to put a wooden fence or greenery in front of them. Ken Linseman remarked that a chain link fence stands up better. Eugune Reid questioned if the tanks could be placed underground.
Before reviewing the proposed signs and placement, Chairman Ouellet read the Town of Colebrook sign regulations. The proposed signs are all in excess of the town’s regulations. Larry Rappaport suggested the Board put on the site plan that the signs were not approved. Sandra Riendeau stated she did not feel large signs were necessary. Mike Ouellet commented he had looked at the Rite Aid in Lancaster and found only one small sign, printed on both sides, so it could be seen from both directions. Ken Linseman remarked it might be feasible to place just one sign at the Main Street/Colby Street corner of the lot. Two signs had been suggested for safety issues. Sharon Pearson asked if the LED had motion and the answer was in the negative. It was noted that the letters to be placed on the
exterior walls were flourescent with a neon ballast to light the letters. Mike Ouellet reminded Mr. Schmitz that the use of neon goes against Colebrook’s regulations. Mike Ouellet reminded the developers that the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Adjustment for Colebrook have been very stringent in regards to the sign regulations. Edward Carrier commented that he would like to see Rite Aid conform to Colebrook’s regulations, putting one sign in the corner of the lot with perhaps a planter for flowers.
Sandra Riendeau pointed out she believed the crosswalk would not be thirty feet from the entrance/exit located on Main Street. It was noted that Greg Placy would need to approve the access and would take into consideration the distance from the crosswalk. It was noted that the yellow flashing light would be removed during construction and would need to be put back after the construction is completed. In answer to a question about the Colby Street crosswalk, Kevin McKinnon remarked the town defines the location. If it remains where it is, it is approximately five feet from the fire lane; therefore, it will need to be looked at.
Mike Ouellet remarked he felt there would be increased traffic on Colby Street due to this project, with the possibility of the 1,290 trips today down Route 3 moving to Colby Street. Mr. Schmitz stated that the developers had used data from the Department of Transportation which indicated 16,000 vehicles per day on Main Street. Kevin McKinnon wondered if that was an older studies figure. David Hicks remarked that all the traffic from Route 26 and the Red Apple makes Main Street a nightmare. Mike Ouellet wondered if it would be adviseable to have no parking allowed from Monadnock Street to Main Street on both sides of Colby Street. It was remarked that at 8 am in the morning and from 2:30 to 5:30 pm in the afternoon, a street light might be helpful.
Sheet L-101 – General Landscaping:
Mr. Schmitz related there would be plantings along the edge of Colby Street and the maple tree at Shaw’s will remain if possible. If the sign on Main Street is moved from by the entrance to the corner, that location would receive more landscaping. The plan calls for extending the arborvitae further towards Colby Street along the emergency lane, keeping in mind the line of sight. Landscaping in the back of the building will be such that anyone would need to extend an effort to get through it. Mr. Linseman stated the sale of the school property is not a necessity for the project to go forward.
Chairman Ouellet stated, once ready, any approval given for the site plan would have to be conditional until the school issue is completed. The plan the Board would sign would need to be completely finalized. He remarked he hoped the developer had listened to the rather vehement gallery that the project be Colebrook friendly, in particular the façade and signs.
The developers agreed to work on issues put forth at this meeting and return with a revised plan at the next scheduled Planning Board meeting on February 5, 2007.
The meeting was adjourned at 10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sheila M. Beauchemin
| 
