Greenfield Zoning Board of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
November 7, 2006
Board convenes at 7:30 pm with Chairman Gryval, members Phelps, O’Connell, Dineen, and Pettigrew present.
John opens case 06-6 re-hearing at 8:00 pm
John explains the Landmark appeal of the Planning boards decision, and that we’re here tonight to answer questions pertaining to dwelling count in the Open Space ordinance.
John asks if public notification was done, Kevin replies yes.
John states we’ll give an invoice to Landmark for the hearing as the final costs are figured in, and he’s sure the applicant will be paying the invoice when they receive it.
John asks Attorney Parent to present her case.
Attorney Parent asks if she can record the hearing, John says yes, but would like a copy of the recording.
Attorney Parent agrees.
Attorney Parent introduces herself, Mr. Steward, and Mr. Boucier.
Explains what they’re here to argue, and formally request that Kevin O’Connell recuse himself from the case as he was involved with the Planning Board hearing that they are appealing.
John explains the situation to the audience, and asks the board they’re feelings on going forward as there are only five members of the board present tonight.
John also states to Mr. Stewart that this would leave the board with only four members tonight, and that he’d still need three yes votes to pass anything tonight.
Mr. Stewart replies he’s OK with that.
Kevin asks Attorney Parent if she has minutes and recording of the Planning board meeting that show that he voted, because he doesn’t recall voting that night.
Attorney Parent states she’ll give the board a copy of the recording.
Kevin replies they’ve stated that in the past but the board has only received one hearing copy to date.
The Board discusses Kevin stepping down. Roger makes a motion to allow Kevin to stay on the case, and not recuse himself. Craig seconds. And the board votes four yeas, zero nays, and one abstention from Kevin.
Attorney Parent moves forward by stating the three questions they request answered are the net developable area, the twenty percent bonus, and if duplex housing units are allowed.
Attorney Parent states she’ll go though these in reverse order.
Attorney Parent goes through Section IX .C.3 and 4 of the open space ordinance
Open space says single family and duplex.
Attorney Parent then goes through Section IX .J.1, setbacks for single and duplex units.
Next Attorney Parent goes through Section IX.F.1 to discuss the net developable area calculations.
At this time Attorney Parent introduces Mr. Ron Boucier from the Turner Group to explain how they came up with the calculations.
Dan; ”The ordinance does say developable.”
Attorney Parent;” but the regulations and Master Plan say what developable is, any land in town is developable ”.
Craig asks if you can put a septic in the buffer?
Ron Boucier replies they can get a waiver from the state.
Dan questions, “Can you develop in the buffer?”
Mr. Boucier replies that he’s getting to what the ordinance says is developable land.
Attorney Parent replies it’s a density calculation to get to the developable land. And a twenty percent bonus that may be allowed.
John replies;” that the Planning Board may approve, not shall approve or must approve. “
Mr. Boucier shows the board topographic and wetland maps of the properties. Talks of the dimensions of the two lots in question, the total area, how they deducted the wetland and steep slope area to come up with the net developable area. Then Mr. Boucier asks the board if they have any questions.
The board had no questions.
Mr. Boucier then hands out a density calculation narrative, and proceeds to read the narrative.
Attorney Parent states she wants to point to developable area as described in the towns Master Plan; pages 43 to 46, Page 45 talks of wetlands, soil types, but not buffers, and it’s consistent not to talk of the buffer. She also speaks of how they came up with the unit count, the wetlands, density calculations, and twenty percent bonus to arrive at thirty-two units on sixteen lots
Dan asks Mr. Boucier to state his position.
Mr. Boucier states he’s a certified land engineer, and that they’re a team effort.
Dan questions why the plans don’t have a wetlands stamp.
Mr. Boucier states this copy doesn’t, but it can have one.
Dan asks why a stamped plan wasn’t presented.
Mr. Boucier states they stand behind their work. And these are the calculations.
Dan: without the stamp, it’s just numbers.
Atty Parent, “We didn’t stamp the plan, but here’s the calculations.”
Dan. “But that’s your interpretation of the ordinance.”
Atty. Parent replies but the fact there’s no stamp doesn’t change the calculations.
John Forsyth questions as to when the wetlands were mapped.
John Gryval replies he also has questions as to when they were mapped,
But that that’s a Planning Board issue.
John Forsyth also states that he’s seen American Bittern, in that area, and asks what the town can do to help protect this bird.
John reads aloud the portion of the open space ordinance that requires Conservation Commission input. “But what we’re here for today is the density calculations.”
Atty. Parent: “We need the interpretation of the wetland buffer, net developable area, unsuitable soils and wetlands.”
Atty. Parent talks of how the plan meets the Master Plan.
John replies the Master Plan is at a higher level.
Parent replies the Master Plan serves sort of a different purpose. But that under law you can’t add stuff to be disincentive.
Mr. Stewart mentions that they also need an answer on duplexes on the lots.
John Gryval adds we must also clarify, as a board, when the density bonus comes into play.
Stewart, Clarification would help to know what they need to meet for the bonus.
Questions then arise as to frontage, and wildlife patterns.
John tries to answer the concerns of the forum.
Dario Carrara restates “ Why are we here?”
John “ to answer questions”
Dario talks of the ordinance and states, “I didn’t hear anyone say duplexes weren’t allowed, just how many units do they account for.”
Mr. Stewart replies that they want to know if duplexes are allowed on each lot, and are they one or two units.
John explains at this point we usually go into deliberative session, and recaps that we’re going to hear the following
1. The Wetlands buffer
2. If a duplex is to be counted as one or two units
3. What’s composes the net developable area.
4. Application of the twenty percent density bonus.
John asks for a motion.
Roger makes motion close the Public input portion of the hearing and go into deliberative session.
Seconded and passed, four yeas, no nays, with one abstention by Kevin.
John asks the board for a ten-minute recess and the board agrees.
After the recess Roger opens that he feels the duplex issue should go first.
Dan replies that he feels duplexes are allowed but the intent of the ordinance is to count them as two units.
Roger states he agrees with Dan.
John states he agrees.
Craig also agrees, but asks X amount of homes or X amount of lots.
Dan replies he thinks the spirit of the ordinance is that it’s homes.
Craig, “One duplex is two units in the density count?”
Dan, “That’s my interpretation.”
John, “Du in French is two.”
Dan, “on the other side it doesn’t say two, is it up to us to us to say that’s where the real question is. “
Craig, ”When I thought of this, I thought of two units that could be sold separately.”
John,” I’m assuming that’s what they’re suggesting.”
Dan,” What we have to go on is the spirit of the ordinance, because the answer’s not here.” holds up the ordinance.
John,” I agree.”
Dan, ”The spirit of the Ordinance.”
John,”and intent,”
Dan, “…that’s’ what you said Craig.”
Kevin talks to the board about the Public Hearing the Planning Board held on the Open Space ordinance before it was adopted, and how the Board used a plat to show how the recently approved Hall subdivision could have looked if it was done as an open space development. Kevin described the layout and composition of the houses, a mix of single family and duplex, and how they were clustered together, preserving the open field next to them.
John states he talked with the Planning Board about Open Space.
Roger makes a motion to state that the Zoning Board’s decision is that duplex units are allowed, and the motion is seconded.
John asks if they’re any more discussion on the motion, hearing none he call the vote, the motion passes four yeas, no nays, and one abstention by Kevin.
Dan makes motion that it’s the Board’s decision that a duplex counts as two units, Craig seconds.
John asks if they’re any more discussion on the motion, hearing none he calls the vote, the motion passes four yeas, no nays, and one abstention by Kevin.
Next the board discusses the net developable area and buffer.
Dan states, “You can’t build in the buffer.”
The Board talks of the developable area, and what areas you have to remove to come up the final net area.
John states,” The net developable area under the Open Space Zoning Ordinance states the area of all lots shown to be developable under the Subdivision regulations and Zoning Ordinances, and that the area of those lots which is determined to be not suitable for on-site sewage disposal shall be subtracted from the developable area of the total parcel. “ Sec IX.F.1
“In the Zoning Ordinance under Wetlands Conservation District, Special Provisions, no septic system shall be placed within seventy five feet of wetlands, so you must take that area out.” Sec III.I.2.e.2,
Craig, “Can they use the buffer in the density calculations?”
Dan, ”That brings us back to developable land under the Zoning Ordinance.”
John, “I think the seventy five foot has to be taken out.”
Craig, “I don’t know, take it out when you develop?”
Dan, ”The Zoning Ordinance comes back to the seventy five feet.”
John, “ You have to subtract the area not suitable for on site sewage, you can’t place a system within seventy five feet of the wetlands, it has to come out.”
John, “Kevin, you’re being quiet tonight”
Kevin, “Yes, I am”
Dan makes a motion to state that the Zoning Board’s decision is that the seventy-five foot buffer around wetlands for septic must be removed from the density calculations, the motion is seconded.
John asks if they’re any more discussion on the motion, hearing none he calls the vote, the motion passes three yeas, one nay, and one abstention by Kevin.
The Board now moved on to the question of the twenty percent bonus.
Roger and Craig stated the Planning Board may grant it.
Dan, “…May, it’s up to their discretion.”
Dan makes a motion to state that the Zoning Board’s decision is that the twenty percent bonus is solely at the discretion of the Planning Board; Roger seconds the motion.
John asks if they’re any more discussion on the motion, hearing none he calls the vote, the motion passes four yeas, no nays, and one abstention by Kevin.
Motion made to close the Public Hearing, motion seconded, voted in the affirmative, and hearing closed at 10:17 pm.
Board reads minutes of Sept meeting, Roger motions to accept with correction on line 20, “rater corrected to rather”.
Motion seconded, and board votes in the affirmative.
Kevin asks if the board has any changes they feel the Planning Board should look at for next year.
The board follows with a few suggestions that Kevin will relay to the Planning Board.
Roger motions to end the meeting, seconded, and voted in the affirmative, Meeting closes at 10:45.
| 
