Planning Board Meeting
Planning Board
May 1, 2018
Final
Approved May 15, 2018
Members Present: Bruce Healey, Chair; Michael Beaton, Vice Chair; Regina Cockerill, Howard Maurer, Bill Weiler, Richard Wright, Members; Russell Smith, Ex-officio Member, Ken McWilliams, Advisor.
Mr. Healey called the meeting to order at 6:59 p.m.
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS:
Regulations for Earth Excavation:
Mr. Healey distributed copies of the adopted regulations to be reviewed.
Ms. Cockerill discussed a conference she attended over the weekend and some of the things that she learned. She had several proposed changes to the earth excavation regulations. She suggested striking the word ‘commercial’. Mr. Healey said that he feels that the word ‘commercial’ should remain. Mr. Weiler gave an example in which the Schroeders were trying to get rid of a mound of excavation. The question that arose was whether the Schroeders were selling the mound or giving it away. Mr. Healey said that it wouldn’t be considered commercial until it hits 250 cubic yards or 15 dump truck loads. Mr. Wright said that if someone wants to build a house they will need to remove fill from one place and put it in another place. He also said that it shouldn’t be too complicated of a process because of the terrain in the area. Mr. Weiler said that if someone takes out 15 dump truck loads and does not paid for it he doesn’t understand why it would be considered ‘commercial’. He asked if someone is giving it away, should it be considered commercial. Discussion ensued. Mr. Smith asked if another paragraph should be included for the homeowner. Mr. Maurer asked how often someone can take 250 yards out. Mr. Healey said they can take a total of 250 cubic yards total. Mr. Weiler read the definition of a commercial excavation.
Mr. Healey said that he would like to keep the word ‘commercial’ in the entire document. Mr. Smith and Mr. Wright agreed. Mr. Weiler said that we are only amplifying what the state says.
Ms. Cockerill thought we should put in the definition of an abutter in the regulations. Mr. Beaton explained that it is important to not put it in too many places in case there are future changes to a definition. Mr. Weiler agreed and said that there needs to be consistency. It was decided to keep the definition out of the document with the referral in the Newbury Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Mauer would like to propose to take out 5.1.3 because there are no granite quarries in Newbury. Mr. Weiler and Ms. Cockerill were in favor of removing 5.1.3. Mr. Healey said that he will strike this from the document.
Ms. Cockerill asked if the Code Enforcement Officer should be checking these sites to determine whether they can excavate or not. Mr. Healey said ‘no’ it is the Planning Board’s job to monitor these sites.
Ms. Cockerill asked if there is a standard time for a permit and Mr. Weiler explained that it can differ from site to site.
Mr. Beaton had a question regarding 6.5.4. He wants to know if 20 days is an appropriate amount of time to render a decision by the Planning Board. It was decided that 20 days is a sufficient amount of time.
Mr. Mauer asked about how the Board will arrive at an expiration date for these permits. The Board discussed what the permit expiration should be. Mr. Wright proposed that the permit should say the permit would be for no more than five years. Mr. Weiler said another thing to consider is that there will be an irrevocable letter of credit is going to have a termination date that should coincide with the expiration of the permit. Mr. Weiler thinks the Board should stick with negotiation rather than have an expiration date. Mr. Beaton thinks a date is needed. Mr. Maurer agreed with Mr. Beaton. Mr. Weiler said we should be asking them how long it should take to do the excavating. Mr. Weiler said they should get their answers at their hearing. Mr. Healey suggested to put that the expiration will expire in five years or less as determined by the planning board. Mr. Wright said permit expiration should be by negotiation not to exceed five years. Mr. Healey asked where this belongs. Ms. Cockerill thinks it should be under 6.6.1.
Mr. Wright said he had an issue with the 7.1.15 regarding the blasting. He wants to know why we are restricting the blasting. Mr. Healey thought that if someone opened up a pit with a lot of ledge, he was concerned about the abutters. Mr. Wright said that hammering can go on for weeks vs. blasting which will be a lot quicker. Mr. Healey suggested striking 7.1.15 completely. Mr. Mauer thinks we should keep it and replace the word ‘blasting’ with ‘hammering’. Mr. Healey suggested replacing ‘blasting’ with ‘hydraulic hammering’. This was approved.
Mr. Healey went over Article 8 – Application Requirements. Mr. Healey explained that there would be two classifications of potential land owners asking for permits. One – a small operator and the second would be a bigger commercial operation. He said we should create two parameters for these two classifications.
Mr. Beaton thinks that there should only be one set of parameters. Mr. Wright agreed. Mr. Weiler said it would be very expensive for these small operators to hire engineers, consultants, etc. Everyone agreed with Mr. Beaton as to having only one set of requirements for all commercial excavation sites. Mr. Healey said that he will get rid of 8.4 through 8.9. Mr. Healey will reword 8.9 and it will now be 8.4.
Mr. Beaton asked about reclamation. He is wondering if the 12 months is enough time for growth to be established. Mr. Healey said he copies these from the state regulations.
Ms. Cockerill asked what happens when a gravel pit owner has a permit for five years but sells the property, does the new owner need a new permit. Mr. Weiler said yes, it is already outlined in 6.6.3.
Mr. McWilliams distributed some suggestions that he thinks should be added to the Permit for Earth Excavation Form. Mr. Healey said that he has already added all of Mr. McWilliams’s suggestions in the document.
Mr. Healey said that he will create a new draft and resend it out to the Board members. Mr. McWilliams said they will now have to have a public hearing after the Board approves the document. Mr. Healey said that he would like to work on this document, send it to the Board members and then would put in on the agenda for the May 15 meeting to see where we are, and then schedule a public hearing in June. There won’t be a lot of time on May 15. Mr. Beaton asked if we can go over it first. Mr. Healey said they will take a quick look and if it looks like it might take a while, they will table it until the June meeting.
Mr. Smith made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Maurer seconded the motion. All in favor.
The meeting adjourned at 8:48 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Donna S. Long
Recording Secretary