Pittsfield Zoning Board of Adjustment
Town Hall, 85 Main Street
Pittsfield, NH 03263
Minutes of Public Meeting
August 13, 2007 (Monday)
ITEM 1. Call to Order
Meeting called to order at 7:04 P.M. by Ed Vien, Chairman.
Roll Call
Members Present: Ed Vien (EV), Chairman, Susan Muenzinger (SM), Vice-
Chairman, Carole Dodge (CD), Paul Metcalf, SR. (PM), Larry Federhen
(LF), Alternate and Delores Fritz, Recording Secretary.
Members Absent: Jesse Pacheco.
ITEM 2. A Public Hearing to consider the Motion for Rehearing filed by
Mary H. Pritchard, Trustee, P.O. Box 385, Pittsfield, NH 03263, by and
through her counsel, Gordon R. Blakeney, Jr. to reconsider its decision made
on June 14, 2007 denying the appeal of Administrative Decision of the
Planning Board for subdivision approval dated April 29,2007 for property on
Thompson Road, Pittsfield, NH 03263.
(EV) After reading this from the Agenda, it should be noted that this will not
be a public hearing tonight and there will be no public input. However,
Atty. Blakeney, I believe, would like to address the Board and then Atty.
Sullivan. (Atty. Sullivan questioned whether the Board and Atty. Blakeney
had received his Objection to the Motion. To date, neither party had
received this Objection. Copies of Objection were made and distributed for
all parties.)
Atty. Blakeney related that this Motion relates to a procedural matter
recognizing that the approved Minutes from June 14, 2007 could be an
appeal issue. If there are enough changes in these Minutes , it could create
2
an issue. State Statutes relate amended petition can be filed up to thirty days
after the Minutes are approved, which would be thirty days from this date.
We had the same issue in December and the meeting was delayed. It would
again delay things. I object to the Zoning Board hearing it tonight.
(EV) related that he had discussed this with Town counsel and they related
that there is no reason to change our policies. This meeting was scheduled
tonight to coincide with the 30-day scheduling date from date of receipt.
The Motion was received on July 12th and thus the meeting tonight. The
draft Minutes were posted appropriately and at the next meeting, which is
tonight, the Board approves those Minutes. Unless there are some earth
shattering changes, Town counsel did not feel that this would be an appeal
point. I have reviewed the Minutes of June 14, 2007 and see no changes.
Atty. Sullivan related that he did not agree with Atty. Blakeney’s reason that
the draft Minutes were not good enough. In a practical sense, if you allow it
to be continued until the Zoning Board meeting in September, it may prevent
the eventuality of being appealed. I realize time and money is involved, but
by raising another appeal issue it may “muck up the process even more.”
(EV) Am I correct that you both agree that it should be done at our next
meeting in September?
Atty. Sullivan related that “Yes, we do agree, but for different reasons, as
this is not a winnable appeal.”
(EV) After questioning the Board members, it was noted that (SM) related,”I
would like more time to read the Motion once again and the Objection to the
Motion. I have read the Minutes and they are okay though I have not
reviewed the tape. I have no issue holding it off until September 13, 2007,
which is our next Zoning Board meeting.” (CD) noted that since both
parties agreed, it would make sense to go along with their request. (LF) and
(PM) also agreed. (EV) agreed that we could work with both sides on this
issue.
(SM) Motion to reschedule meeting to consider the Motion for Rehearing
filed by Mary H. Pritchard, Trustee on September 13, 2007. (PM) Second.
Carried 5-0.
(EV) Continued to date certain September 13, 2007.
3
ITEM 3. A non-binding Conceptual Hearing with regard to the Pittsfield
Youth Athletic Park, 171 Tilton Hill Road, Pittsfield, NH 03263
(Tax Map R-14, Lot 59). Larry Berkson, Pittsfield Youth Baseball
Association, Inc. P.O. Box 112, Pittsfield, NH 03263 is representing the
Pittsfield Youth Athletic Park regarding this endeavor. Brown Engineering,
14 Leavitt Road, P.O. Box 34, Pittsfield, NH 03263 has submitted the plans
for these proposed changes.
(EV) noted that this is a non-binding conceptual meeting and not a hearing.
This Board can assist you only in that it can advise you of the necessary
paperwork. (PM) noted that he and his wife sponsor one of the baseball
teams and if they would like him to recuse himself, he would be happy to do
so. (EV) noted that this is a non-binding conceptual meeting and since no
decisions will be made by the Board, it would not be necessary for him to
step down at this time.
Mr. Berkson related that he was advised that he could appear tonight and
possibly get a Waiver since he has letters from all the abutters agreeing with
the project. I realize now that this was not accurate information that I
received. However, what the Pittsfield Youth Baseball Association would
like to do is to add a Babe Ruth baseball field. The project has snowballed
since its initial conception. We, at first, had wanted to just add the Babe
Ruth baseball field but after discussing with our contractors and other
individuals, we realized that we had to move a lot of dirt anyway and
decided that it would also be beneficial to upgrade the existing fields since
they can be quite muddy due to rains and have in the past, washed away.
There would be thirteen teams playing baseball and then soccer after that.
Our wish is to build the Babe Ruth baseball field, add more parking spaces
including those for buses which would be paved and if necessary, the “new
soccer area” could also be used for parking, and beautify the area making it a
“WOW” factor. Our issue is the line of parking along the road, which would
be paved, and I understand would be considered as a st ructure. This would
be very close to the Freese property. Again, I would like to note that we
have a letter from all the abutters approving of this project. “Do we need to
come to you for that or get a Waiver?” (EV) noted that if it does not meet
the setbacks, it would be necessary to apply to the Board.
4
(EV) Could you differentiate between the size of the fields and the age
brackets?
Larry Williams, Jr. related to the Board fence lines, sizes of diamonds, age
brackets and the various teams that would be utilizing each particular field.
Mr. Berkson further elaborated on the brook at the back of the property,
bleachers, dugouts, bull pens, upgrading of present fields, holding pond,
parking spaces with overflow parking solution, tournaments, temporary
building, retaining walls, flagpoles and cosmetic work, bathroom facilities,
tree and stump removal and driveway permits. (EV) explained the necessary
setbacks for Suburban Zone. He noted that if any of the required setbacks
were encroached, it would require them coming before the Zoning Board.
Mr. Berkson noted that they would like these fields to be the best small town
fields in Central New Hampshire. It would be part of the infrastructure of
the Town. I have been talking to various committees and will be discussing
this soon with the Economic Development Committee. (LF) inquired as to
the cost estimate of this project. Mr. Berkson noted that this has not yet
established. We already have several large monetary contributions and are
looking to get donations of free service that will be required for the project
which will lessen the amount that will be need to spend on the rest of the
project. He noted that this project is three times as large as any undertaking
he has done in the past. He noted that he would probably be back before the
Zoning Board with an application for Variances soon.
ITEM 4. A continued Public Hearing with respect to an application for a
Variance filed by George E. and Roselyn Brackett, Clough Road, Pittsfield,
NH 03263 (Tax Map R-11, Lot 7). This property is owned by George E.
and Roselyn Brackett, 192 Rochester Road, Northwood, NH 03261. This
property is located in the RURAL Zone. Applicant has submitted a letter
requesting withdrawal of application.
(EV) read letter submitted by applicant withdrawing the application. (No one
was present regarding this matter.)
(SM) Motion to allow applicant to withdraw application for Variance. (LF)
Second.
5
Discussion:
Board discussed applicant’s request for refund of any fees. Since this
request for Variance was posted in newspaper and all abutters notified, no
remaining fees exist. However, Board agreed that any paperwork submitted
could be returned to applicant. It was noted that application should be
allowed to be withdrawn without prejudice.
(SM) Amend motion to allow applicant to withdraw application for Variance
without prejudice. (LF) Second. Carried 5-0.
ITEM 5. Public Input
None.
ITEM 6. Approval of Minutes of June 14, 2007
(CD) Motion to approve Minutes of June 14, 2007. (PM) Second.
Carried 5-0.
ITEM 7. Members Concerns
(SM) noted that there was no criteria noted in the Board’s Notice of
Decision as to why request to hear Motion was denied and there should have
been. (CD) related that we need to articulate why. (SM) noted that in the
Handbook for Local Officials, The Board of Adjustment in New Hampshire
(January 2006) on Page 68, there is a form for “Findings of Facts” and on
Page 70 one for “Notice of Decision (Denied).”
(SM) reminded the Board that there is a Site Walk for the proposed Pittsfield
Youth Athletic Park scheduled for Wednesday, August 15th at 6:30 P.M. for
anyone who would be available to make it.
(SM) wanted to know if anyone was aware of any individual that would be
applicable for the Zoning Board as the second Alternate? She requested
that if anyone knows of someone, to please contact them in this regard.
6
ITEM 8. Adjournment
(CD) Motion to Adjourn. (LF) Second. Carried 5-0.
Meeting adjourned at 8:20 P.M.
Approved: September 13, 2007
_________________________ ________________________
Ed Vien, Chairman Date