NOTTINGHAM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
JUNE 1, 2005
PUBLIC SESSION
APPROVED BY THE BOARD JULY 20, 2005
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Mr. Dave Smith, Chair Mr. Jon Caron
Ms. Mary Bonser Mr. Bill Booth
Mr. Peter Gylfphe Ms. Sandra Jones
Mr. Scott Curry
OTHERS PRESENT:
Ms. Kelly Tivnan
The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:00pm.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Mr. Curry made a motion to approve the minutes from the Planning Board meeting of 5-4-05. Mr. Gylfphe seconded the motion. The present members of the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 4-0.
Ms. Bonser made a motion to approve the minutes from the Planning Board meeting of 4-27-05. Mr. Gylfphe seconded the motion. The present members of the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 4-0.
GATCHELL:
The Chair called the Gatchell public hearing to order at 7:05pm.
OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Jon Berry
Mr. Berry said that Northwood had scheduled a joint meeting with Nottingham to discuss the Gatchell development on June 8, 2005. Mr. Smith said that the Nottingham Board had a workshop scheduled that night. Mr. Curry said that he felt the Nottingham Board had pressing business they needed to discuss at their workshop. Mr. Smith asked if it would make sense for Nottingham to have their counsel attend the meeting in Northwood. Ms. Bonser said yes. She said that the Planning Board could trust Mr. Teague to give a suggestion regarding Gatchell. Mr. Curry said that he thought there needed to be another date for the joint meeting between Nottingham and Northwood. Mr. Smith asked if they would need to renotice abutters to have a full joint meeting. Mr. Gylfphe said that he would go to the meeting in
Northwood as the Nottingham Planning Board representative. Mr. Smith said that the Nottingham Planning Board would send Mr. Gylfphe and Mr. Teague to represent their interests at the meeting in Northwood.
Mr. Curry made a motion to recess the Gatchell application to June 15, 2005 at 7:15pm. Ms. Bonser seconded the motion. The present members of the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 4-0.
PUBLIC HEARING-ROBINSON APPLICATION:
At 7:25pm the Chair opened the public hearing for the Robinson application.
Mr. Smith read the application and information out loud about what Ms. Robinson wanted to do. He noted that she wanted to buy a property and convert it into a day care facility. He asked what time people would drop off their children. Ms. Robinson said that it would probably be between 8:00am and 9:00am. Mr. Smith said that the location was close to the school parking lot. Ms. Robinson said that some people would be dropping off kids at the school and at the day care center. She said that she had asked the School Board for permission to allow parents to park at the school and walk their younger ones over to the day care center. Mr. Smith said that Ms. Robinson should talk to the Police Department about this as well. Mr. Gylfphe noted that the proposed location for this project was ideal.
Mr. Curry agreed that this would fill a need in the community but he said that he also thought Ms. Robinson should get advice from the Police Department. Mr. Gylfphe said that there might be a need to expand the amount of parking from what was shown on the drawings. Ms. Robinson said that would be easy. She said that the day care could also run a caravan between their building and the school. Ms. Bonser said that Ms. Robinson should have the Fire Department write a letter about safety issues for the Planning Board to review. She said that she would feel better with advice from the police and fire departments. She said that any permit would be conditional based on what those departments stated.
Mr. Gylfphe made a motion that the Board approve the Robinson application pending state approval of the project which would include recommendations from the local police and fire departments.
Ms. Robinson noted that the traffic through the school would be minimal because most of the school kids would already be in the building between 8:30 and 9:00am.
Mr. Curry seconded Mr. Gylfphe's motion for approval.
Ms. Bonser asked if the Board could approve this application conditionally stating that all recommendations from the local police and fire departments needed to be met. Ms. Robinson said that she had spoken to the Fire Department and they had told her that they did not have anything to add other than things that would need to be done anyway in order to get permission from the state for this project. Mr. Smith asked where the turnaround would be placed. Ms. Robinson said that it would be in the back of the building. She said that there was plenty of room for adding parking spaces if necessary. Mr. Smith asked about the maximum number of teachers they would have. Ms. Robinson said that the ratio would vary depending on the number of kids and their ages. Mr. Curry said that it would be necessary to have
at least the number of parking spaces that they had teachers working in the building. Ms. Robinson said that would not be a problem. Mr. Seaverns said that there could not be any parking on the street. Ms. Robinson said that they could put that in the handbook. Ms. Bonser suggested an amendment to the motion on the table saying that the approval was subject to all the representations made in the application and in front of the Planning Board as well as any requirements of the Fire Department, Police Department, and Building Inspector. Mr. Gylfphe noted that the state requirements for day care facilities were stringent. He said that the day care should have 12 parking spaces. Ms. Bonser asked if the day care wanted to expand their business whether they needed to come back in front of the Planning Board. Mr. Smith said yes. He said that the day care also needed to have adequate turnaround space behind their building. He said
that the Planning Board would release their letter of approval for the project when they got letters to review from the Police Department and the Fire Department.
Mr. Gylfphe retracted his original motion.
Mr. Gylfphe made the amended motion that the Planning Board approve the application of Cheryl Robinson to convert the property at 249 Stage Road into a day care facility as long as it was subject to all representations made by Ms. Robinson in her application and in front of the Planning Board and as long as it met the requirements of the Fire Department, the Police Department, and the Building Inspector. Ms. Bonser seconded the motion. Ms. Bonser, Mr. Gylfphe and Mr. Smith voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Curry abstained from the motion. The motion passed 3-0 with 1 abstention.
PUBLIC HEARING-HITCHCOCK MINOR BUSINESS/NOTTINGHAM NURSERY SITE PLAN REVIEW:
The Chair called the public hearing to order at 8:00pm.
OTHERS PRESENT: Ms. Jen Viarigo, Ms. Lori Hitchcock, Mr. Xavier Asbridge, Mr. Bill Graham
Ms. Viarigo from Appledore Engineering showed the plan for Nottingham Nursery to the Board. She explained the use of the barn and office space and she said that the site had been approved for use by Little River Auto in 1997. She explained that the applicants would like to store the nursery stock in the parking area which had been approved for Little River Auto. She said that there would be 8 parking spaces and she said that the applicants had an approved driveway permit application from the state. She said that there would be a place to turn around on the site. She said that the plan had been prepared for the site in 1997. Ms. Bonser noted that the plan needed a bigger signature box. Mr. Bill Graham from 38 Old Turnpike Road said that he was an abutting property owner. He noted that the land
had once been owned by Gary Lee and his parents. He said that there had not been any residential neighbors to the property when the plan had been done in 1997. He said that there were residential neighbors now. He said that the neighbors needed to be shown on the plan. He said that he was concerned that chemicals being sprayed onto trees by the nursery would get into the water. He said that he was also concerned about the amount of water consumption for the nursery. He said that his well was near to the nursery site. He also noted that there was some confusion about boundary lines for the property. He said that he did not want the general public on his property. He said that he did not want that liability. He said that there needed to be a buffer zone which would be 6 feet high in 3 years instead of just a chain link fence. Ms. Viarigo said that the applicant would respond to Mr. Graham's concerns. She
said that the business did have to go through a state approval process. Mr. Asbridge said that the area was flat and he used organic fertilizer. He said that chemicals for pest control were highly regulated. He said that runoff and drift were not allowed. He said that he had put rocks on the property line but he was willing to get it surveyed. He said that he would plant a buffer if Mr. Graham wanted. Mr. Gylfphe asked if the well for the property was in the middle of the display area. Mr. Asbridge said yes. Mr. Graham noted that the commercial zone was right next to the residential zone. He said that people going through the nursery could see into his house. He said that it was a privacy issue. Ms. Viarigo said that the applicant did not have a problem with putting in a buffer. Mr. Asbridge said that he could put in a temporary screen and plant behind it in order to create a long term screen. Ms.
Hitchcock said that most of the customers would be in front of the barn area. She said that would be the commercial use area. She said that the rest of the back land would be agricultural. She noted that they did live on this property. She said that they would need to bring in stock until they could get their stock growing. Mr. Curry asked how many signs would be used. Mr. Graham said that he was concerned about the current location of the sign because he thought people would go in the driveway closest to the sign which was the wrong one. Mr. Smith said that he would like the sign to be near the entrance to the business. Mr. Curry said that the applicant would need to follow all town regulations regarding signs. Ms. Hitchcock said that there were 2 signs on the property. She said that they would move one of them close to the driveway to avoid confusion. Mr. Gylfphe said that he didn't like the parking spaces and the
well in the display area. Mr. Asbridge said that the parking spaces were existing. He said that he did not care and he would move them if necessary but he would like to have people parking in front of the building. Ms. Viarigo said that according to the state the driveway would need to be widened to 24 feet. Ms. Bonser asked if anything on the property would be combustible. Mr. Asbridge said possibly. Ms. Bonser said that she would like letters from the Police and Fire Departments about this proposal. She said that the Planning Board should do a site walk of the property. She said that she also thought the Planning Board should have copies of each permit, the leach field and the well should be on the plan, there should be a survey of the property line, and a tree buffer should be put into place. Mr. Curry said that he would like more information regarding the signs. He asked if there was a wide shoulder on the road near
the property. Ms. Bonser said yes. She said that the wide shoulder was existing. Mr. Curry asked about water consumption. Mr. Asbridge said that he had not tested the capacity of his well. He said that he could put in another well at some point if it became necessary. He said that he would have low water use and he would not water too much. Mr. Smith noted that on the plan there was a line in the field. Ms. Bonser said that the applicant should ask advice from the Fire Department about chemicals and any other issues and they should ask the Police Department about traffic concerns. Mr. Smith read the impact statement out loud. Mr. Seaverns said that the commercial and agricultural areas should be defined on the site plan.
Mr. Smith said that the Planning Board would do a site walk of the Nottingham Nursery site on June 7, 2005 at 7:00pm.
Mr. Smith said that the Planning Board needed to consider the minor home business application. Mr. Curry asked how many trucks would be visiting the site. Mr. Asbridge said that he did not think there would be very many. He noted that they were talking about the size of a Ford F-150 or one size up, they were not talking about full sized trucks. He asked what he should do with the 3 front spaces. Mr. Smith said that the applicant should keep the 3 front spaces. He asked how many plants would be in the display area. Mr. Asbridge said that there would be between 25 and 30. Mr. Gylfphe said that he thought the parking spaces made the area compact. Ms. Bonser said that the area was congested. She said that the town wanted to encourage more agricultural uses for land though. Mr.
Seaverns noted that this business was retail.
Ms. Bonser made a motion that while the approval process was continuing the applicant be able to maintain their minor home business with the understanding that the permission would expire when the site plan was approved or on July 1, 2005 whichever came first. Mr. Curry seconded the motion. Ms. Bonser, Mr. Gylfphe, and Mr. Smith voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Curry voted against the motion. The motion passed 3-1.
Mr. Curry made a motion to recess the Nottingham Nursery site plan review application to June 15, 2005 at 7:05pm. Ms. Bonser seconded the motion. The present members of the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 4-0.
PUBLIC HEARING- GORDAN SUBDIVISION APPLICATION:
The Chair called the public hearing for the Gordan subdivision application to order at 9:20pm.
OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Tim Lavelle
Mr. Lavelle said that the roadway easement had now been set and more bounds had been set. He said that only one had not been set because the area was under water. He said that he had added a 10 foot easement to the cemetery and anyone who wanted could go in. He said that he had contacted the Fire Department but he did not have a letter from them yet. He said that he would look into that. He said that the neighbors well had been added to the plan and the setback was now shown. Ms. Bonser asked about 911#'s. Mr. Lavelle said that he did not have them yet but he said that the request had been made. He said that he also needed to put on the plan a wetland stamp and 7 lines for signatures. Mr. Smith asked if the Planning Board needed a deed for the easement. Mr. Curry said yes. Mr.
Smith asked if there were bounds set to indicate the easement. Mr. Lavelle said yes. Mr. Smith said that the Planning Board needed a mylar, the granite bounds needed to be set, the Planning Board needed to have a letter from the Fire Department to review, the plan needed the necessary stamps, the Board needed a deed for the easement, the plan needed a signature box, and the front corner of the plan needed to be fixed. Mr. Ladd said that there needed to be a buffer around the cemetery. Mr. Smith said that could be a note on the plan. He said that the note would have to cite the state RSA. Mr. Gylfphe agreed. Ms. Bonser agreed as well.
Ms. Bonser made a motion to recess the Gordan application to June 15, 2005 at 8:15pm. Mr. Gylfphe seconded the motion. The present members of the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 4-0.
PUBLIC HEARING- WELCH SUBDIVISION APPLICATION:
The Chair called the public hearing for the Welch subdivision application to order at 9:40pm.
OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Richard Ladd
Mr. Ladd said that he had gotten additional driveway permits for the property. He said that to show the larger lot was buildable he had done a test pit and gotten a driveway permit and 911#. He said that he had also gotten a letter from the Fire Chief. Mr. Smith read the letter from the Fire Department out loud. Mr. Ladd said that the cistern was 3000 feet to the west. Mr. Curry said that there needed to be a topography waiver for the additional acreage. Mr. Smith read the waiver requests out loud.
Ms. Bonser made a motion that the Planning Board accept the cistern waiver request and the topography waiver request. Mr. Gylfphe seconded the motion. The present members of the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 4-0.
Ms. Bonser made a motion to accept and approve the Welch subdivision application. Mr. Gylfphe seconded the motion. The present members of the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 4-0.
PUBLIC HEARING- BLUE FIN SUBDIVISION APPLICATION:
The Chair opened the public hearing for Blue Fin at 10:00pm.
OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Richard Ladd
Mr. Ladd said that the bounds had been set. Mr. Curry said that the topography waiver was noted in the minutes. Mr. Ladd said that he had added the driveway that the Board had requested. He said that he had called the wetlands bureau. He said that the state would not deny a landowner access to their own land. Mr. Gylfphe asked about the stone bound at the top of the plan. Mr. Ladd said that he had used that bound to calculate where the other bounds would be. He said that he needed a dredge and fill permit. He said that he would apply for that the following day. Mr. Smith wondered why the applicant was not going with dredge and fill because they would eventually need to. Mr. Seaverns said that the driveways needed to be in the frontage. Mr. Ladd said that the state would not
deny the crossing. Ms. Bonser noted that the Planning Board did lots of waivers of requirements for applicants. Mr. Seaverns said that every waiver the Board granted set a precedent.
Mr. Curry made a motion that the Board recess the public hearing for Blue Fin to July 20, 2005 at 7:15pm. Mr. Gylfphe seconded the motion. The present members of the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 4-0.
OTHER BUSINESS:
At 10:30pm the Board discussed other business.
Ms. Bonser explained the case of Steve Brady on Nottingham Lake. She said that there was a map and an approved plan but some people had an agreement with a lawyer. She said that part of this was a private road and the lawyer had said that Mr. Brady should sign the agreement. Mr. Ladd said that two individuals could not take away the rights of the public. Mr. Seaverns said that the road was in the wrong spot so the subdivision was not per the plan.
Ms. Bonser made a motion that the Board approve the bill from the Strafford County Regional Planning Commission. Mr. Gylfphe seconded the motion. The present members of the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 4-0.
Mr. Smith read out loud a letter that the Planning Board had received from the Fire Chief. Mr. Seaverns noted that the Fire Department provided recommendations for fire safety. Ms. Bonser suggested that the Planning Board ask the Fire Chief whether they could take Heidi Carlson up on her offer to talk to the Board about fire safety. Mr. Seaverns said that life safety issues should be in the building code.
Mr. Gylfphe made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 11:00pm. Ms. Bonser seconded the motion. The present members of the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 4-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Kelly Tivnan
Planning Board Secretary
| 
