JANUARY 5, 2005
PUBLIC SESSION
APPROVED BY THE BOARD FEBRUARY 2, 2005
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Mr. Dave Smith, Chair Mr. Rolfe Voltaire
Mr. Jon Caron, Selectmen Representative Mr. Bill Booth, Alternate
Mr. Skip Seaverns
Mr. Peter Gylfphe
Ms. Kay Kyle
Mr. Scott Curry, Alternate
Ms. Judi Thibault, Alternate
OTHERS PRESENT:
Ms. Kelly Tivnan, Recording Secretary
The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:10pm.
The Chair asked Mr. Curry to sit in for Mr. Voltaire and Ms. Thibault to sit in for Mr. Rourke.
INTERIM GROWTH MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE:
Mr. Smith read the Interim Growth Management Ordinance out loud for the people in the audience. Ms. Melissa Zonick said that she was representing the Colby's. She said that she had reviewed the RSA and she did not feel that the growth in Nottingham represented unusual circumstances. She said that Nottingham had 36% growth and she said that growth in Northwood had doubled and it had increased by 80% in Lee. She said that the growth in Nottingham was reasonable for the area. She said that she was not sure about the constitutionality of this ordinance. She said that question had not been decided by the courts yet. She said that she felt this ordinance was arbitrary and a small group of people were singled out. She said that this ordinance violated due process because it still
allowed commercial building. Mr. Caron talked about household estimates and he said that the numbers he had were generated by the Office of State Planning. He said that Nottingham had the highest growth for the region and higher than all the surrounding towns. He said that there had been a large increase in the number of building permits issued in Nottingham. He said that over the past 3 years the number of building permits had increased from 30-102. He said that the Department Heads were feeling very strained. Ms. Zonick said that as far as residential permits Nottingham ranked 33 out of 234 towns in growth. Mr. Caron said that the town lawyer had reviewed the Interim Growth Management Ordinance. He said that the procedure was the same for anyone with 3 lots and he noted that the ordinance would only last 1 year. Ms. Zonick said that this ordinance was based on a legal technicality. She said that this was treacherous
ground and the ordinance would be litigated. Ms. Mary Martin said that anyone could subdivide into 3 lots. She said that she would support this ordinance and she felt that the statements against it were misleading. Ms. Elaine Schmottlach said that she was pleased this ordinance had been put forth. She said that she had been concerned about the issue of growth in Nottingham. Ms. Judy Colby said that Joe and David Colby owned a large piece of property on Deerfield Road. She said that they were trying to sell the property as part of their retirement process. She said that their property had been devalued by $700,000 because of this ordinance. Ms. Kyle said that the property had not been devalued, the value had just been postponed. Mr. Smith said that this ordinance would be voted on by the town at the town meeting. He said that if it was approved at the town meeting it would be effective for 1 year. Mr. Seaverns said
that they wanted to ensure the Master Plan reflected what the town wanted. Mr. Caron said that if the town voted for the ordinance it would run out at town meeting 2006. Mr. Smith said that the ordinance would be effective for up to 1 year. He said that the Planning Board needed to feel comfortable that the ordinances could handle the town growth. Mr. Caron said any permanent ordinance needed to be more strict. He said that he would like the ordinance to reflect the desires of the people in town. Ms. Thibault said that the Planning Board was not looking to make radical changes. She said that they were looking to put on the brakes so that the Planning Board had time to get things in order. Mr. Caron said that the Planning Board was stopping so that there could be frank and open discussion during the process. Ms. Zonick said that the Planning Board should stop everything if that was their plan. Mr. Seaverns said that the
Planning Board had considered that but he said that the Planning Board could not shut down for a year. He said that was why the Planning Board had decided to only allow minor subdivisions for the year. Another member of the audience asked if a developer could do a 3 lot subdivision and come back in 1 year and do another 3 lot subdivision, etc. Mr. Seaverns said that there was no time limit in the Interim Growth Management Ordinance. He said that he did not see why someone could not do that if they only did one 3 lot subdivision at a time. Mr. Curry said that the Planning Board had been talking about this ordinance for 6 months. He said that this had not been a secret process. He said that he knew it was difficult to sell property but he noted that people could have sold their property prior to the passage of the ordinance. Mr. Seaverns asked if the Planning Board could change the number of lots in the ordinance to accommodate the
Colby's. Mr. Joe Colby said that he had 109 acres. Mr. Smith said that there were issues the Planning Board was trying to deal with. He said that included their policy on not allowing cluster developments. Mr. Gylfphe said that there were not any apartments in Nottingham and there was not any affordable housing. He said that the process needed to be straightened out because there were a lot of conflicting rules. He said that the Planning Board would hopefully be able to clarify the process. Ms. Kyle said that the approval process for large subdivisions could take a long time. Mr. Gylfphe said the process usually took 3-6 months.
Mr. Gylfphe made a motion to recommend the adoption of the Interim Growth Management Ordinance as written. Ms. Thibault seconded that motion. Mr. Gylfphe, Ms. Thibault, Mr. Smith, Mr. Seaverns, Ms. Kyle, Mr. Curry, and Mr. Caron voted in favor of the motion. The motion passed 7-0.
PUBLIC HEARING-GATCHELL SUBDIVISION:
At 8:00pm the Chair called the public hearing to order.
OTHERS PRESENT:
Mr. John Berry
Mr. Berry said that he was representing Mr. Gatchell. He said that the roadway in Nottingham would be private. He said that Northwood might buy land. He said that they would like to put a note on the plan saying that it would be a private road and there would be no financial or liability interests for the town of Nottingham. He asked if that note would be adequate. He said that the Board of Selectmen had agreed to the moving of the town stone. He said that they would like to continue with that. Mr. Seaverns asked if the town attorney had reviewed the note. Mr. Berry said no. He said that they still needed to do that within 2 weeks. He said that they wanted to have a joint meeting with Northwood on January 27, 2005. Mr. Caron said that agreeing to this did
not constitute a dedication. Mr. Curry asked whether Mr. Teague would review this. Mr. Berry said that Mr. Teague would have an opportunity to review this.
Mr. Curry made a motion to recess Gatchell until January 19, 2005 at 7:00pm. Mr. Caron seconded the motion. Mr. Curry, Mr. Caron, Mr. Smith, Mr. Gylfphe, Ms. Thibault and Mr. Seaverns voted in favor of the motion. Ms. Kyle voted against the motion. The motion passed 6-1.
PUBLIC HEARING- LALONDE SUBDIVISION:
At 8:10pm the Chair called the public hearing to order.
The person representing Mr. Lalonde said that the set had been added, the driveway permit had been approved, and a note had been put on the plan. Mr. Curry asked about a special tract. Mr. Smith said that was mentioned in note #8.
Ms. Kyle made a motion to accept and approve the plans for the Lalonde subdivision. Mr. Seaverns seconded the motion. Ms. Kyle, Mr. Seaverns, Mr. Smith, Mr. Curry, Mr. Caron, and Ms. Thibault voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Gylfphe abstained from the motion. The motion passed 6-0 with one abstention.
PUBLIC HEARING- GERRIOR LAND TRUST:
At 8:20pm the Chair called the public hearing to order.
The Planning Board received a letter requesting that the public hearing for Gerrior be rescheduled for February 2, 2005.
Mr. Gylfphe made a motion to recess the public hearing for Gerrior to February 2, 2005 at 7:15pm. Ms. Kyle seconded the motion. Mr. Gylfphe, Ms. Kyle, Mr. Smith, Mr. Seaverns, Mr. Curry, Mr. Caron, and Ms. Thibault voted in favor of the motion. The motion passed 7-0.
Mr. Smith asked how the Interim Growth Management Ordinance would affect the Gerrior application. Mr. Caron said that the Planning Board had not accepted the Gerrior application yet. He said that the Planning Board would have to discuss the question with their counsel.
PUBLIC HEARING-MANCHESTER/ST.JEAN:
At 8:25pm the Chair called the public hearing to order.
The attorney for the St. Jeans provided the Planning Board with a list of things that they had previously asked for. He said that everything they had discussed had been added to the plan.
Ms. Kyle made a motion to accept and approve the plan for Manchester/St. Jean. Mr. Gylfphe seconded that motion.
Mr. Curry asked if all the parties involved were satisfied with the agreement. He was told that they were.
Ms. Kyle, Mr. Gylfphe, Mr. Smith, Mr. Seaverns, Mr. Curry, Mr. Caron, and Ms. Thibault voted in favor of the motion. The motion passed 7-0.
OTHER COMMENTS:
Mr. Caron said that the Planning Board needed to talk to the Department of Housing and Urban Development and to the state for information about plans for elderly housing. Mr. David Garvey said that Stratham had an outstanding growth ordinance. Mr. Caron said that they would need to tweak that for Nottingham. Ms. Bonser said that the state was trying to reduce the number of elderly people in state homes. She said that soon there would be more of a call for housing where elderly people could move in with family members. She said that more and more houses would need to be handicapped accessible.
Mr. Curry referred to something that had happened in 2003 and said that at the Dunbarton subdivision the residents had been asked to sign a petition about having the town take over the roads. He said that the residents were told that the cost of maintaining the roads would be $1 million. Mr. Seaverns said that all of the roads in the subdivision met the specifications to be town roads. He said that the petition would also need to meet all requirements. Ms. Bonser noted that the state was silent on petitions.
Mr. Seaverns said that USA Springs owed money to the town. Mr. Gylfphe said that he thought the information recently submitted to the Planning Board was equivalent of a new application.
Mr. Caron said that the Planning Board needed to look at changing the FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Association) rate maps. He said that the language needed to be in compliance with the federal regulations. He said that there needed to be a public hearing. Mr. Smith asked about the date for that. Mr. Caron said that the Building Inspector had requested that the Planning Board look at changing the wetlands definition, changing the fee schedule, and adopting the building code. He said that the last date for the public hearing was February 7, 2005. He said that there was a Planning Board meeting on February 2, 2005. He said that the last date to publish the notice was January 24, 2005. He said that if they discussed this on January 19, 2005 at 7:00pm it could be posted and
published by January 24, 2005. He said that the Building Inspector wanted the fees taken out of the ordinance. He said that they would change the ordinance to state that the fees would be set by the Planning Board or the Board of Selectmen. Mr. Gylfphe asked if the state had adopted the building code. Mr. Caron said no. He said that the state had allowed the towns to adopt the building code. Mr. Seaverns said that if the Planning Board wanted to have sprinklers installed in new buildings they needed to think about putting that in the building code. He said that he did not think sprinklers should be an option to replace cisterns. Mr. Gylfphe said that he thought sprinklers were a good idea for life safety. He said that they paid for themselves with savings in homeowners insurance. Ms. Kyle asked if there was a time line for demolition. Mr. Caron said that the official time line was 1 year but he said that if someone
was making an effort the court would rule in their favor.
Mr. Gylfphe made a motion to have the public hearing on the changes recommended by the Building Inspector on February 2, 2005 and for the Planning Board to discuss than changes on January 19, 2005. Mr. Caron seconded the motion. Mr. Gylfphe, Mr. Caron, Mr. Smith, Mr. Seaverns, Ms. Kyle, Mr. Curry, and Ms. Thibault voted in favor of the motion. The motion passed 7-0.
Mr. Curry asked if they were going to discuss changing the wetlands definition. The Board decided to wait on that.
Mr. Smith made a motion that the Board meet with Mr. Teague on January 12, 2005 at 7:00pm. Mr. Curry seconded the motion. Mr. Smith, Mr. Curry, Mr. Gylfphe, Mr. Caron, Mr. Seaverns, Ms. Kyle, and Ms. Thibault voted in favor of the motion. The motion passed 7-0.
Mr. Caron left the meeting at this point.
Mr. Gylfphe made a motion that the Board approve the minutes from the meeting of December 15, 2004. Ms. Thibault seconded the motion. Mr. Gylfphe, Ms. Thibault, Mr. Smith, Mr. Curry, Mr. Seaverns, and Ms. Kyle voted in favor of the motion. The motion passed 6-0.
Mr. Gylfphe made a motion that the Board approve the minutes from the meeting of December 1, 2004. Ms. Thibault seconded the motion. Mr. Gylfphe, Ms. Thibault, Mr. Smith, Mr. Curry, Mr. Seaverns, and Ms. Kyle voted in favor of the motion. The motion passed 6-0.
Mr. Curry made a motion that the Board approve the minutes from the meeting of December 8, 2004. Ms. Thibault seconded the motion. The Board did not have a quorum of people who had attended that meeting to vote on the minutes. No vote was taken.
Mr. Gylfphe made a motion that the Board meet with Dan Tatem on February 2, 2005 at 7:30pm. Mr. Seaverns seconded that motion. Mr. Gylfphe, Mr. Seaverns, Mr. Smith, Ms. Thibault, Mr. Curry, and Ms. Kyle voted in favor of the motion. The motion passed 6-0.
Mr. Gylfphe made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:00pm. Mr. Seaverns seconded the motion. Mr. Gylfphe, Mr. Seaverns, Mr. Smith, Ms. Thibault, Mr. Curry, and Ms. Kyle voted in favor of the motion. The motion passed 6-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Kelly Tivnan
Planning Board Secretary
| 
