PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY – FEBRUARY 7, 2006
356 Main Street – Farmington, NH
Members Present: Charlie King, Don MacVane, Hiram Watson, Jim Horgan, David Kestner, Charles Wibel,
Absent: Jason Lauze – Alternate
Selectmen’s Rep: Paul Parker
Staff Present: Paul Esswein, Doreen T. Hayden
Public Present: Mark Phillips-Farmington Ridge LP, Malcolm McNeill – Farmington Ridge LP, Betty Vachon, Bill Vachon, Greg Balser, Jean Pease, Rick Lundborn – Norway Plains Associates, Sonya Stiles, Gary White, Jon Cross, Tom Huckins, Mr. & Mrs. Michael Paquette, Tami Paquette, Paul Paquette, Beth & Joe Bloskey, Ken & Verna Emerson, Beverly Butt, Harold Butt, Annette & Ed Syvinski,
(please note: that although the attendance sheet requests that names be printed, the public continues to write and
some of the writing is not legible therefore spellings could possibly be wrong.)
Chairman King called the meeting to order at 6:09 p.m.
Review and approve meeting minutes of 01-03-2006; Jim Horgan motions to approve as written, 2nd Don MacVane, discussion; Doreen T. Hayden advises the board that Paul Weston found a typographical error on page 2 of 8; 3rd paragraph; word sight should be changed to site, no further discussion, all those in favor, motion passes.
Review and approve meeting minutes of 01-10-2006; Chairman King motions to approve as written, 2nd Don MacVane, no further discussion, all those in favor, motion passes.
Review and approve meeting minutes of 01-17-2006; Jim Horgan motions to approve as written, 2nd Hiram Watson, no further discussion, all those in favor, Don MacVane and Charles Wibel abstain, motion passes.
Review and approve meeting minutes of 01-24-2006; Jim Horgan motions to approve as written, 2nd Hiram Watson, discussion; Paul Parker has 2 items; Page 1 of 4; next to last paragraph referring to T. O. P. U.; suggests that this should be spelled out “Table of Permitted Uses” for clarity and then can refer to as T. O. P. U. throughout the minutes; Page 3 of 4; 5th paragraph down; consensus among the board is to strike the sentence “Jason Lauze – comments – but I (Doreen) could not hear what he commented!”; no further discussion, all those in favor, Don MacVane and Charles Wibel abstain, motion passes.
6:15 p.m.
Chairman King calls for a 5-minute recess as Paul Esswein advises that the Public Hearing Portion of the meeting does not begin until 6:30p.m. as was noticed and that this portion of the meeting cannot begin before it is noticed, 2nd Hiram Watson, no further discussion, all those in favor, motion passes.
6:31 p.m.
Chairman King reconvenes the meeting.
Paul Esswein recommends to the Chair that he make an announcement regarding the upcoming April 1st, 2006 OSP seminar in Manchester and that anyone that so wishes should get their application into the Planning Department to allow sufficient time to issue check request and send out in the mail to meet the registration deadline of March 24th.
Paul Parker makes a statement encouraging all to attend this OSP seminar; very informative and useful conference.
The last Public Hearing: On the Amendments to the Farmington Zoning Ordinance in preparation for the Town Meeting to be held March 14, 2006.
Chairman King turns the floor over to Paul Esswein who hands out the “structure” of the proposed Warrant Article and makes comment about the legal input received from the Town of Farmington Attorney. One issue that the Attorney recommended was the complete removal of Section 1.07 that gives authority to the Planning Board to grant waivers; only paragraph “C” would be his concern.
Don MacVane motions to eliminate Section 1.07; 2nd Charles Wibel, discussion; Paul Parker would like more discussion regarding what legal is having a problem with, although due to the shortness of time I’ll agree to it being taken out; Chairman King directs comment to Paul Esswein – you had said his (Attorney) main concern is paragraph “C”; Paul Esswein – Yes; Chairman King – however the subdivision and site plan review gives the Planning Board authority to grant waivers; Paul Esswein – I am only paraphrasing what the Attorney said. Discussion continues on this subject.
Paul Parker entertains discussion on the structure of the grouping of the Warrant Articles and feels there should be some changes on the grouping. David Kestner agrees with Paul Parkers comments and continues with the discussion on the impact of the recommendations by Paul Esswein and the Town of Farmington Attorney regarding the Warrant Article.
Chairman King motions to recommend the acceptance of the suggested Warrant Article structure, 2nd Hiram Watson; discussion; Charles Wibel suggests that the public should be offered time for comments; An individual from the public asks to have a quick run-down on what the changes to the Zoning Ordinance are; Chairman King begins his review of the items on the Warrant Article; Jim Horgan asks Chairman King to define the Overlay Zone distinction and when it can be in conflict; Paul Esswein interjects whichever overlay has the strictest rules will apply.
Chairman King continues with his review of the Warrant Articles.
Jim Horgan asks for explanation of Section 3.09 and the definition of temporary. Paul Esswein advises that there was no definition of the word temporary as far as a time limit goes, and by adding that temporary means not more than 30 days that it alleviates any questions of length of time and controls long term placement of signs.
Chairman King continues with his review of the Warrant Articles.
Tom Huckins questions the Buffer Zone and Overlay Zone, Paul Esswein explains the clarification of the Buffer Zone and reads Section 4.03 definitions of “old” and “new” Overlay / Buffer Zones. Tom Huckins also questions the definition of the Rear Lot Subdivision; Chairman King responds; Couple more questions from various individuals from the public on the Rear Lot Subdivision which Chairman King addresses.
Chairman King continues with his review of the Warrant Articles.
An individual from the public asks what does the parking requirements mean? Chairman King explains.
Chairman King would like to now go back to his motion to recommend to the Board Of Selectmen the structure to the Zoning Ordinance Warrant Articles to be presented; 2nd Jim Horgan; discussion; Hiram Watson wants to add – clarify grammatical changes as discussed this evening.
7:12 p.m.
Petition Article: To Change minimum acreage in the Village Center District.
Chairman King reads the petition article signed and validated to amend Section 2.05 of the Zoning Ordinance
Jim Horgan poses a question to the people who signed the petition on what it is they want. Jean Pease speaks about the eye sores they see happening in and around the downtown area, houses being built right on the road, some being built on top of wet areas, particularly the lot size are the petitioners issues.
Charles Wibel and Chairman King each make comments and entertain into discussion regarding lot sizes and density definitions in the Village Center District.
Jean Pease – so the petition did not reflect the correct area for the zone; Chairman King and Paul Esswein – yes that is correct.
Bill Vachon and Betty Vachon each addressed the members of the board in support of the petition and confirmed that the petition had wrong language for what they (petitioners) wanted to accomplish.
Chairman King poses a question to Paul Esswein – Do you have comments? Paul Esswein – I will wait until the April Workshop Session to discuss.
Charles Wibel motions to not recommend the petition as it will not accomplish what the original intent of the request was; 2nd Jim Horgan; discussion; Hiram Watson recommends the petitioners come to the 04-18-2006 Planning Board Workshop Meeting and have open discussion with the members of the board, all those in favor, motion passes to “not recommend”.
David Kestner agrees with Charles Wibel, Paul Parker agrees that the petition does not do / address what the intent of the petitioners want.
7:40 p.m.
Continuation of application for sub-division and site plan review by: Farmington Ridge Limited Partnership: (Tax Map R47, Lot 5 and Tax Map U10, Lot 41-1): To create 2 parcels; one containing
10.9 +- acres and another 130 +- acres: Site Plan Review of 70-unit manufactured home development on approximately 130 acres. Access to the proposed development is via Dick Dame Lane.
Malcolm McNeil – Attorney introduces himself and makes introductions of others that are also here tonight; Rick Lundborn – Norway Plains Associates, Mark Phillips – Partner in Farmington Ridge Limited Partnership;
Malcolm McNeil opens his presentation by informing the members of the board that this is a 2-part application and that tonight they are here to only act upon the subdivision section. Malcolm McNeil also advises the board that they are beyond the statutory dates that the board has not meet but that he is not going to pursue that avenue as he understands there has been delays with the Traffic Analysis Studies and there are still outstanding questions to be answered by LC Engineering on the questions that the Town of Farmington submitted. Malcolm McNeil hopes that the board will be in a position at the 03-07-2006 Planning Board Meeting to move forward and gives his consent to wait until then.
Jim Horgan asks before the next Workshop Session of 02-21-2006 if we can discuss the results of the Traffic Study to be prepared on 03-07-2006 Planning Board Meeting.
Chairman King motions to accept the applicants’ suggestion to Site Review Discussion on 03-07-2006; 2nd Charles Wibel.
Malcolm McNeil asks if they can be notified if the board discusses the answer to the questions as submitted to Mr. Caron at L C Engineering; Chairman King – Yes.
Malcolm McNeil turns the discussion over to the subdivision of the 10.9 acre parcel off of Bunker Street, making comment that dimensionally meets the Town of Farmington requirements and they just want to separate the 10.9 acre piece.
Paul Esswein interjects that he did receive a revised plan and has reviewed the subdivision checklist, the plan has been revised and he recommends the board approve the 10.9-acre subdivision.
Jim Horgan questions the potential access and Chairman King replies; Hiram Watson questions the access on Bunker Street; Charles Wibel comments if we approve I would like the language added and understood by the applicant that the 10.9-acre parcel cannot be developed as a Mobile Home Park.
Paul Parker directs comment to Jim Horgan and Chairman King and refers to the 1988 traffic study relating specifically to Bunker Street and not suited as access.
Malcolm McNeil re-addresses the board stating the subdivision is a dimensional issue and defends the development of this parcel.
Jill Tozier asks how many houses do they intend on putting into that 10 acre parcel? Chairman King replies that potentially there could be 40-50 new homes, however the density could increase the house lots.
Jean Pease asks what if Dick Dame Lane is not used, access would then be what?
Chairman King and Malcolm McNeil have discussion and make comment to Jean Pease statement.
Rick Lundborn interjects and questions why are we concentrating on the development of the 10-acres, that is not why we are here, we are here for approval of subdivision, and this is not part of the park nor is it part of mitigation.
Mark Philips-General Partner speaks to the board and advises that this parcel for subdivision has come about as a recommendation from his banker. They have demolished 1 mobile home and another is scheduled for demolition this week. He debates the issue of the benefits, and a discussion ensues pertaining to access.
Chairman King discusses the ordering of a 50ft easement; Mark Philips and Rick Lundborn advise that there is a very large wetland area that would need to be filled if and this easement would be required.
Malcolm McNeil addresses the members of the board and states that Dick Dame Lane has no relation to this 10.9-acre parcel and that we do not have any hidden agendas.
Charles Wibel states that at this point not a requirement for a R. O. W.
Chairman King brings forth discussion on frontage requirements and access on / to the 10.9-acre parcel.
Chairman King opens the floor to the public for comment.
Charles Wibel motions to approve the 2-lot subdivision of a 10.9-acre parcel and 130-acre parcel with provisions that the vested rights to develop the 10.9-acre parcel as a manufactured housing park is relinquished, and that any future development of this parcel must comply with all requirements of the Farmington Zoning Ordinance and applicable regulations of the Farmington Planning Board; 2nd Don MacVane; discussion; Chairman King advises if the proposed Zoning Ordinance does not pass that the applicant will have the ability to develop and there will be no vested rights, no further discussion, all those in favor, motion passes.
Chairman King motions to continue the Public Hearing of the Site Review portion only, 2nd Don MacVane, no further discussion, all those in favor, motion passes.
8:30 p.m.
David Kestner motions for a 5-minute recess, 2nd Jim Horgan, no further discussion, all those in favor, motion passes.
8:39 p.m.
Chairman King reconvenes the meeting
Application for Lot Line Adjustment By: Thomas E. Huckins (Tax map R15, Lot 8): Property known as 282 Chestnut Hill Road, Located in the (SR-1) Suburban Residential 1 Zoning District.
Thomas E. Huckins presents on his own behalf; the piece of property that Pike Industries owns, juts down and abuts my property; Tom shows each of the members where on the map he is referencing and where the lot line adjustment is going to take place.
Paul Esswein comments that the subdivision regulations have nothing specific relating to lot line adjustment and feels it would seem prudent to asks for an actual survey from the larger lot as well as the joined lot.
Tom Huckins advises that Berry Surveying will be doing the plan.
Chairman King asks the applicant if he is looking for contingent approval, prior to his submittal of a full survey; applicant responds – yes.
Paul Esswein interjects that the application is complete, but is missing the surveyed maps; the maps presented are only older maps with the area of the lot line sketched in.
After some further discussion between the applicant and the members of the board; Don MacVane motions to continue the application to Planning Board Meeting of April 4, 2006; 2nd Jim Horgan; discussion; the applicant is asked if this gives him sufficient time to have the parcel surveyed by a licensed surveyor and submit the actual plan showing all of the dimensional information; applicant is in agreement; no further discussion, all those in favor, motion passes.
Application for Subdivision By: Michael & Bambi Paquette (Tax Map R30, Lot 4): Property known as Ten Rod Road, cornered at Pound Road, Located in the (AR) Agricultural Residential Zoning District.
Chris Jacobs – Crown Point Surveying presents for Michael and Bambi Paquette; he opens by explaining there is a 3.2 acre piece that is intended to be cut-off from 55-acre parcel; access to / from the 3.2 acre will only be off of Ten Rod Road and not Pound Road. Chris Jacobs presents the topography and discusses various findings on the parcel.
Chairman King asks Paul Esswein if it meets all the requirements of the subdivision regulations; Paul Esswein replies that it does have the acreage requirements, adequate space and no wetland impact.
Chairman King states that after his review of the application he has a couple of issues; needs to show 40K of contiguous uplands, the engineer does not show on the plan, a requirement of the subdivision is to show the entire topography and wetland areas, also questions if they have requested a waiver to that requirement.
Charles Wibel asks where the R. O. W. to the Cemetery is and that it should be clearly delineated on the plan.
Paul Parker questions if the Cemetery is considered part of the 40K of uplands; Chris Jacobs responds that it doesn’t need to be there are 139K square feet and the State requirement is 25’ from Cemetery.
Chairman King opens the floor to the public for comment.
Jill Tozier – I am an abutter and pretty pleased with only 1 – 3-acre piece being cut-off, I’d also like to ask what your intentions on the future development will be, are you planning on putting in a large development. Applicant Michael Paquette comments that it is not his intention to subdivide the parcel; his intention is to continue the use for farming. Jill Tozier states that she is concerned on the driveway placement and questions the wetlands being pretty heavy in that area.
Debra Lee Butts – Asks to be shown on the map where the driveway will be coming off.
Paul Parker any questions to the line site being that it is on the corner and wetlands are a subject? Chris Jacobs responds to Paul Parkers’ question.
Paul Parker motions to accept the application as complete, 2nd Jim Horgan, no further discussion, all those in favor, motion passes.
Chairman King motions to approve the 2-lot subdivision with the delineation of the R. O. W. to the Cemetery include the total amount of uplands, request of waiver on the delineation, 2nd Don MacVane; discussion ensues and Chairman King withdraws this motion.
Chairman King motions to accept the waiver of a complete delineation and topography on the parent parcel making this subject to receipt, 2nd Jim Horgan; no further discussion; all those in favor, motion passes.
Chairman King motions to approve the 2-lot subdivision with the delineation of the R. O. W. to the Cemetery, include the total amount of uplands, request of waiver on the delineation, 2nd Don MacVane, discussion; Charles Wibel would like the applicant to put the delineation of the R. O. W. into the deed; Chris Jacobs explains that the surveyors do not create the deeds, but what he does is include it on the plan and attaches an addendum that gets recorded along with the plat that then becomes part of the deed; no further discussion, all those in favor, motion passes.
9:05 p.m.
Chairman King motions to extend the meeting for an additional 15-minutes; 2nd Jim Horgan, no further discussion, all those in favor, motion passes.
Application for Lot Line Adjustment By: Joe and Beth Bloskey (Tax Map R13, Lot 10-1): Property known as 78 Hawthorne Hill Road, located in the (AR) Agricultural Residential Zoning District.
Mr. and Mrs. Bloskey presents for themselves; states that they presently own a 7-acre parcel and are purchasing a 5-acre parcel from Mr. Paquette.
Paul Esswein comments that it does not meet maximum square foot requirement; but doesn’t seem to be an issue, no specific requirement for applicants of a lot line adjustment.
Chairman King – meets all the metes and bounds; Jim Horgan asks if the land is to be purchased, applicants respond yes; Charles Wibel comments 231’ road frontage and there is a 250’ road frontage requirement it was explained that the lot line was 250’; Don MacVane asks to be shown on the map the applicants lot line.
Charles Wibel motions to accept the application as complete, 2nd Don MacVane, no further discussion, all those in favor, motion passes.
Don MacVane motions to waive the minimum requirement of 10K feet, 2nd Charles Wibel, no further discussion, all those in favor, motion passes.
Charles Wibel motions to approve the application for a lot line adjustment, 2nd Jim Horgan, no further discussion, all those in favor, motion passes.
9:25 p.m.
Jim Horgan motions to adjourn, 2nd Hiram Watson; discussion; Paul Esswein brings up the point that the Town of Milton must be notified on the Farmington Ridge Application Hearings this is in regards to “Regional Impact”, some discussion ensues on this regard, no further discussion, all those in favor, motion passes.
_________________________________________ ______________________
Charlie King, Chairman Date
Farmington Planning Board
APPROVED AS AMENDED 03-07-2006; CHANGES ARE INDICATED IN BOLD TYPE:
1ST CHANGE – Page 3 of 8 – 2nd to last paragraph add - all those in favor, motion passes, to “not recommend”.
2nd CHANGE – Page 7 of 8 – last paragraph add - it was explained that the lot line was 250’.
| 
