Pittsfield Zoning Board

Pittsfield, NH 03263
Minutes of Public Meeting

April 1, 2004

Chairman Elliott called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM

Members in Attendance:
Roll Call was taken; Robert Elliott (RE), Chair, Susan Muenzinger (SM), Robert Lincoln (RL), Christine Westerberg (CW), Paul Metcalf (PM) and Glenn Porter (GP) Alt. were present.

Review of Minutes: Minutes from March 10 to be addressed at April 15 meeting.

Work Session:
1. Municipal Water and Sewer Systems v. Community Water and Sewer Systems – a discussion as to if Community Systems can be used in place of Municipal Systems to meet the one acre requirement in the Suburban Zone. The Planning Board submitted a memo to the ZBA requesting that they provide a Zoning Ordinance interpretation from Table 2 to help them with a Conceptual Proposal they were presented with at their last meeting. Hank FitzGerald, reported that the Town Administrator approached Town Counsel for his interpretation. Attorney Bates stated that there are arguments to support both sides and he referred the issue back to the ZBA for their interpretation. The Board discussed the following points:

· The ZO aims to treat all properties uniformly in a district. Allowing Community Systems to replace Municipal Systems may not leave all properties on equal footing.

· If the definitions are found to be synonymous, the ZO should be changed to fit everyone’s needs. The Board maintained that this is definitely an issue that the Joint Committe should address in their ZO review.

· Allowing the definitions to be equal would technically be giving a Variance without procedural actions.

· There are examples of properties in town that are within the water district that do have private wells. How was that allowed and is that fair? When were they put in? Are they Grandfathered? Which are for apartments? Where are they? The Zone is split so it is difficult to determine which have wells or not. The Board agreed that an investigation into the facts would be necessary before a fair interpretation can be made. Pennachuck will be contacted.

· It was stated that said private wells within the water district were not in the suburban but urban zone, which is in an entirely different situation in terms of acreage requirement.

· There is a 10 – 20 year plan to bring Municipal Systems up into that area.

· Community systems are private systems set up to service a certain number of properties. Technically, Pennachuck is a private entity, but they are the only outfit that supplies water to the town so they are considered Public water.

· Municipal (Public) systems are off-site as opposed to Community systems, which are on-site and have potential environmental impacts to consider.

Public input was solicited:

· Susan Willoughby, a DES employee, offered definitions maintained by the State organization. Public water supplies have many definitions and encompass a variety of sizes. “Community Supply” – (the smallest) is defined as having 15 house hookups or serving 25 year-round residents or greater and is under the umbrella of “Public Supply”. The DES regulates it. Any Septic system supplying as few as two houses is still public and called a “Commercial System”. The State regulates its design. A cluster usually has a community water supply that serves all the houses in the cluster. Many sizes of privately owned systems exist. Municipal is equivalent to a Public system and a Community system is Private because the general public cannot tie into it. They are regulated differently.

· Fred Hast – Selectman – stated that the Developer stated that he would set up this system to be ready to hook into the Public system when it is expanded. He also stated that it might be cheaper for the Developer to approach Pennachuck to see if they would expedite expanding the system if he covered the cost. The same with expanding the Sewer system. There would also be fees accrued to hook into the system.

(SM) made a motion stating that the Community Water and Sewer System proposal does not meet the ZO requirement in Table 2 that states Municipal (Public) Systems can be placed on 1-acre lots in the Suburban Zone.

(RL) Seconded

5-0 voted in favor. Motion carries. A memo will be sent in response to the PB, stating that this alternative action does not meet the requirement.

2. PB/ZBA Joint Board Committee – (RE) and (SM) have volunteered to participate as members of the new joint committee that will develop a list of ZO and Subdivision Regulation issues that needs to be reviewed.

3. ZBA Work Session meetings – (RE) proposed the idea of having a regularly scheduled Work Session bringing the monthly meetings up to 2 per month. The Board members maintained that they would make themselves available to meet as needed. The majority do not want to ad in a second scheduled session without just cause or only to accommodate added traffic.

Members Concerns:
· The next meeting is scheduled for April 15, 2004 for a home Occupation to put a Dog Kennel on the property.

· ZBA elections will be tabled until April 15, 2004. A list of names and terms will be supplied.

Adjournment:
(RL) Made a motion to adjourn the April 1 meeting.

(PM) Seconded the motion.

5-0 voted in favor. Motion carries.

Meeting adjourned at 8:20 PM

Respectfully Submitted by:

Dina S. Condodemetraky

The April 1 2004 minutes were approved on April 15, 2004 by a 5-0 vote.