PLANNING BOARD WORKSHOP MEETING
TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 2004
356 Main Street
Members Present: Hiram Watson, Gerald White, Bob Talon, Troy Robidas, Charlie King, Norm Russell,
Don MacVane
Selectmen’s Rep: Paul Parker
Staff Present: Fran Osborne
· Chairman Charlie King called the meeting to order at 7:05 p. m. Minutes of August 3, 2004 were reviewed. Hiram Watson made a motion to accept the minutes as written, Norm Russell made amendment to strike out on page 3, 2nd paragraph 3rd line – owned by Karoly Mathieu, Troy Robidas 2nd, all in favor, motion carried.
· Open Space Cluster Ordinance – Chairman King after discussion asked that this be moved to later in the meeting. Troy Robidas made motion to address later in the meeting, Gerald White 2nd, all in favor, motion carried.
· ZAMPS Subcommittee Update – Chairman King gave update. Site Review Regulations have been forwarded to Mike Garrepy – should have his comments/recommendations back in 2 weeks and will be on the agenda for review and comment. The subcommittee is working on the Subdivision Regulations and we should have revisions soon. Norm Russell – revision on the “mission statement” in the Master Plan has been completed recently. Overall updates of the Zoning Ordinance are being done.
Troy Robidas made a motion to recess at 7:10 p.m., Gerald White 2nd, motion carried. Meeting reconvened at 7:20 p.m.
· New Business:
(1) Building Permit for Paul Ramsey on Places Crossing Road, a Private Road (Tax Map R4, Lot 1). Chairman Charlie King and Norm Russell are re-cused for this building permit application. Vice Chairman Gerald White will Chair this application for a building permit. Gerald White seated Don MacVane for Norman Russell. Fran – the Code Enforcement Officer has just returned from a month’s vacation and has not been able to visit the site which he would like to do. A letter from Richard & Tina Pike is attached stating he will be responsible for maintaining the road. A modular home is planned to be built on
Paul Ramsey’s lot by the Pike’s. Paul Ramsey (landowner) stated the lot had a house on it with septic, well and old stone foundation still there, electric is there and it is a 5-acre lot. I’m looking for a building permit and don’t understand why it has come to the Planning Board.
Paul Parker – per legislation we are reviewing the building permit for a private road.
Richard Pike – potential homeowner is willing to take care of the road to some sort of standard approved by the town.
Paul Ramsey – I understand Michael Stewart was denied a building permit on this road, but he is living there even though denied a building permit.
Richard Pike – the road needs a ditch line defined, water can’t run off – it runs down ruts in the road, the road needs to be crowned.
Bob Talon – it is a driveway toward the end of the road. There are pull off areas to turn around.
Richard Pike – the road is ? mile in. A septic system design has been approved. There is a right-of-way that continues on by this lot. Discussion.
Paul Parker – how long has the house been gone?
Richard Pike – it was donated to the town to burn so it couldn’t have been too bad.
Paul Ramsey showed a plot plan to board members. He is using the existing well and septic. Mike Stewart is living there with a denied building permit. Mr. Pike works for Ford Construction in Rochester.
Planning Board Workshop Meeting August 17, 2004 (continued) Page 2
Paul Parker – are you aware of what the Private Road Acknowledgment says. Richard Pike – yes.
Troy Robidas – one thing the board has looked at is a road association agreement.
Paul Ramsey – the letter submitted is stating Mr. Pike will be responsible for the road. Draw up some sort of agreement - that’s just a thought.
Bob Talon – there is a right-of-way to access the property. He has the right to pass and repass. This is a deeded right-of-way. He has no right to go after property owners unless they are willing to go along with the homeowners association.
Paul Parker – it might be to your advantage to have the association.
Don MacVane – these people are all in front of you on the road. We may be premature in what we ask.
Check with the road agent on the road issue. What standard for the road? Discussion on road issue.
Hiram Watson made a motion to recommend approval of the building permit for a private road for Paul Ramsey and forward to Selectmen for their approval based on CEO, Jack Dever’s meeting with Clark Hackett (road agent), and Richard Pike to review the road and make their recommendation to the Selectmen, Bob Talon 2nd, all in favor, motion carried. Fran will set up an appointment with Jack Dever (CEO), Clark Hackett, Highway Superintendent and proposed homeowner Richard Pike hopefully for Thursday, August 19, 2004.
Paul Parker made a motion for a five minute recess at 7:45 p. m., Troy Robidas 2nd, motion carried. Meeting was reconvened at 8:20 p.m.
· Open Space-Cluster Ordinance review:
Chairman King – We will review town legal counsel’s recommendations as well as Planner, Mike Garrepy’s suggestions for changes to the latest draft 3/24/04.
Attorney Laura Spector (Mitchell & Bates Professional Association) recommended changes.
III, (l). Discussion. Paul Parker – it’s fine as it is. Motion by Paul Parker, Gerald White 2nd to leave
this section as it is per Mike Garrepy’s suggestion, motion carried. Discussion on road standards being included in the Subdivision Regulations.
VIII. Lot Frontage – discussion. Bob Talon and Norm Russell understand it as it is written.
Troy Robidas – is it really necessary to have this in there? Norm Russell – preserving road frontage was desirable. Discussion of subdividing front lots and coming back to do back lots. Preserve road rural character. Bob Talon made a motion and Paul Parker 2nd to leave VIII. as it is, motion carried.
X. Legal counsel recommends adding provided in Paragraph XIV after – if the required criteria (3rd sentence. Mike Garrepy recommended this change. Motion by Bob Talon, 2nd by Norm Russell to make this change, motion carried.
XII. Town counsel opinion was read. Paul Parker disagrees with her opinion. Discussion on (a) through (g). Troy Robidas – the developer might come up with an alternative in addition to what we have. Omit (c) and (d) discussion. Paul Parker feels it should stay. Bob Talon agrees. Norm Russell – this is an ordinance, so we cannot waive this. A variance would be needed. Have the applicant go by what is acceptable or go to the ZBA, consult legal – there may be a mechanism to follow up if the developer has other ideas. Discussion on (c) 1., 2., 3., 4., and 5. options available to the developer or
private landowner, corporation, non profit, or other entity, etc.
Norm Russell made a motion to leave (b) and (c) and edit section (g) shall be created where appropriate, Troy Robidas 2nd, Paul Parker not in favor, motion carried.
XIV(a)(2) Open Space Criteria and Layout. Discussion on 0%, 5% or 10% open space. You could
get an additional 5 or 10% thrown in if 25% or less open space non-buildable land. This is a bonus on top of a bonus. We want 40% open space for cluster with minimum of 25%. To qualify for an additional bonus you could put in 50% but only 25% or less can be non-buildable land.
Bob Talon – the “entirety” is what is being looked at. Discussion. Paul Parker – made a motion it should be left as is, Norm Russell 2nd, motion carried.
XV.(a) Conformance - Legal counsel made recommendation to delete “the Farmington Master Plan and
Planning Board Workshop Meeting August 17, 2004 (continued) Page 3
with.” Troy Robidas made a motion to delete the above portion, Gerald White 2nd, motion
withdrawn by Troy.
Paul Parker made a motion to delete the Farmington Master Plan and with, go to Section 2. – reference in Purpose Section – consistent with the Farmington Master Plan and the following objectives, Troy 2nd, all in favor, motion carried.
XV.(b)(8) Charlie King – why would we want to remove this? This is the authority. Discussion on removing
after Developments per this section as granted by RSA 674:32. Bob Talon – mobile homes are allowed but not in cluster development. Bob Talon made a motion to delete this per this section as granted by RSA 674:32, Troy Robidas 2nd, Paul Parker not in favor, motion carried.
XV.(c) Charlie King – (1) this refers to lot frontage 50’
(2) duplex units per structure 75’
Discussion on frontage requirement in subdivision regulations and legal recommendation.
Norm Russell – (1) eliminate “lot or”
(2) frontage per duplex unit
(3) frontage per joined array
(4) after (3) unit structure per (3) unit multi-family structure and after
(4) unit structure per (4) unit multi-family structure
Paul Parker made a motion to add after c) Lot Frontage – shall apply to all residential
Structures within the development, add Norm’s recommendation (1) eliminate “lot or”, (2)
frontage per duplex unit, (3) frontage per joined array, (4) after (3) unit structure per (3) unit
multi-family structure and after (4) unit structure per (4) unit multi-family structure and
Charlie King’s recommendation to add a new section (c) 5) All lots on existing streets/roads
must meet required frontage of that particular zone, Troy Robidas not in favor, motion carried.
Discussion on adding “on interior roadway’s on (2) (3) and (4) as in (1).
XV.(e) 1) Discussion on legal recommendation “ reasonable amount of land,” and defined minimum. Mike
Garrepy’s suggestion was to amend this to state “all developments presented under a condominium form of ownership shall delineate a reasonable amount of land per unit under a limited common ownership scenario for the exclusive use of unit holder”. Paul Parker made a motion to accept Mike Garrepy’s suggested change as above on XV.(e) 1), no 2nd, motion did not carry. Discussion on condos vs. single-family home. Troy – just leave it
Bob Talon – soil types designate how big that lot should be for septic and well and limited designated space. Bob Talon made motion to leave XV. (e) 1), 2) and 3) as is, Troy Robidas 2nd, motion carried.
XVII. Legal counsel recommended changing the last sentence to “In the event a special use permit
expires, a new application…..”
Norm Russell made a motion to incorporate last sentence as above by legal counsel into the paragraph, Paul Parker 2nd, motion carried.
XVIII.(b) Discussion on legal counsel and Mike Garrepy’s suggestion. RSA 674:21 regarding waiver
provisions for innovative land use controls permitted under RSA 674:21, utilizing the conditional or special use permitting process. Discussion on g). and further legal clarification on the waiver approach.
Paul Parker – Planning Board can grant Special Use Permit process by 674:21 – does not allow for waivers.
Bob Talon – I think they are both right (legal counsel & Mike Garrepy). We can’t change dimensional requirements, so Laura Spector is right.
Mike Garrepy comments – this ordinance is giving the Planning Board the authority to do this.
Bob Talon – find a way to rewrite this. Discussion with Paul Parker on 1).
Charlie King – could we consider a motion for Mike Garrepy and town counsel Laura Spector to work this out agreeably in some way.
Bob Talon – discussion on modifying lot size and acreage. We cannot modify setbacks.
Planning Board Workshop Meeting August 17, 2004 (continued) Page 4
Bob Talon made a motion for Mike Garrepy and legal counsel Laura Spector to review for further clarification or recommendation, Paul Parker 2nd, motion carried.
XXI. Definitions – Conservation Land – Troy made a motion to delete after Land given to a public body dedicated to conservation of forests, Gerald White 2nd, Troy Robidas withdrew his motion.
Paul Parker made a motion and Troy Robidas 2nd, to delete “land given to a public body and or to a private conservation trust, motion carried.
Definitions – Density, Baseline – legal counsel recommended deleting all but the first sentence. Norm Russell made a motion to accept legal counsel recommended change, Troy Robidas 2nd, motion carried.
XXI. (5 ) Definitions – Non-Buildable Land – legal counsel recommended adding “only” after “for Open
Space Residential Cluster Development.” Norm Russell made a motion to approve legal counsel
Recommendation, Bob Talon 2nd, motion carried.
Chairman Charlie King asked for additional comments.
Norm Russell – discussion on density bonus in the AR zone – you may not want to give this in the
AR because of scattered and premature development. Either eliminate or designate maximum density bonus. Discussion on considering this at a later public hearing. This area has the least amount of services.
Bob Talon – this is the area we want to conserve open space. In this area we are dealing with soil types. A 3-acre lot could be reduced in size – the AR zone could benefit the most. Discussion on developer incentive.
Charlie King – change 0 to 35% density bonus or 10 to 25% in the AR. Discussion on large tracts and developing to better potential for preservation of open land space.
Norm Russell – there would be benefit to doing a cluster development.
Charlie King – do we ask Mike Garrepy for this thoughts? Paul Parker – this would be to our advantage.
Troy Robidas – discuss other town’s density bonuses. Norm Russell – we don’t recall any towns that did this.
· With no further business to discuss, Paul Parker made a motion to adjourn at 10:05 p. m., Troy Robidas 2nd, motion carried.
APPROVED
____________________ __________________
Charlie King, Chairman Date
Planning Board
Town of Farmington
| 
