NOTTINGHAM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
JUNE 29, 2005
PUBLIC SESSION
APPROVED BY THE BOARD AUGUST 17, 2005
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Mr. Jon Caron Mr. David Smith, Chair
Ms. Mary Bonser, Selectmen Representative Mr. Bill Booth
Mr. Peter Gylfphe
Mr. Scott Curry
Ms. Sandra Jones (Arrived 8:00pm)
Mr. Caron called the meeting to order at 7:20pm.
MODEL SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS:
Mr. Caron said that the Planning Board should discuss what was good and bad about the subdivision regulations. Mr. Seaverns talked briefly about cluster subdivisions. Ms. Bonser asked when subdivision approvals expired. Mr. Caron said that subdivision approvals did not expire but he said that the Planning Board needed to define substantially complete. Mr. Curry said that he thought it would be easier if all the building files were organized by map and lot numbers. Mr. Caron asked when a final approval was actually final. He said that permits expired and there was no one to track that. He said that Nottingham did not have any full time planning staff. Mr. Curry said that the Planning Board needed to put better notes on the plans. He wondered whether the Planning Board could have specific
notes recorded with the plans. He said that the Planning Board could have applicants do a comment sheet to put with the approved plans. Mr. Seaverns said that the comments needed to be on the plans. He said that both parties needed to buy in to this idea. Mr. Gylfphe said that traditionally the Board had not done conditional approvals. He wondered what would happen with USA Springs. He said that the Board would be seeing more and more cases like that. Mr. Seaverns said that the Board also needed to look at which sheets would get signed by the Planning Board. He said that any sheet with comments on it should be signed. Ms. Bonser said that the Planning Board needed to discuss conditional approvals. Mr. Seaverns said that there was a difference between conditional approvals and putting notes on plans. Mr. Curry said that the Planning Board did not have the staff for follow ups after something was approved. Mr.
Seaverns said that was why the Planning Board needed to look at everything before they approved a plan. Mr. Bock said that the Board of Selectmen had recently looked at building permits and fees. He asked if they should think about doing that for the Planning and Zoning fees. Mr. Seaverns said that the prices were based on a certain formula. He said that the former Building Inspector, Mr. Smith, and the former Planning Board secretary, Ms. Stanton had figured out their costs. Mr. Curry said that the department did generate money through building permits that could be used to help with some of these things. Mr. Seaverns said that the Planning Board needed to think about who was responsible for what if they wanted to do more follow up work. He said that the Planning Board might need to talk about setting up escrow accounts with applicants for the follow up process. Mr. Bock said that the Planning Board might need a greater level of
support. Mr. Curry said that he thought the town needed a part time or a full time planner. Ms. Bonser wondered if the necessary work would be too complicated for the Strafford Regional Planning Commission. Mr. Curry said that the Strafford Regional Planning Commission was busy and not dedicated to full reviews of every plan for Nottingham. He said that the Board needed different support. Mr. Gylfphe asked how involved the Planning Board wanted to be with enforcement. Mr. Seaverns asked if the Planning Board wanted to impose that added expense on all new subdivisions. He noted that some subdivisions were smaller than others and that expense could be a hardship for some smaller developers. Mr. Caron said that he liked a lot of the definitions in the model subdivision regulations. Mr. Curry discussed completed applications and said that the Planning Board should be more stringent. Mr. Caron said that there should be 3
separate application processes for the different types of applications that the Planning Board received. Mr. Seaverns said that the Planning Board needed to have acceptance hearings one night a month. Mr. Caron said that the Planning Board needed to speak in generalities when they were talking about policy. He said that it would simplify their process if they had a planner that they trusted to do technical things. Ms. Bonser said that the Planning Board needed to present that idea with their budget. Mr. Curry said that the Planning Board needed a cleaner process. He said that if an application was complete than the Planning Board could set a hearing date and they would have as much time as they wanted instead of being held to a 30 day clock. Mr. Seaverns made a list. He said that there needed to be a date certain for when applications would be accepted, then all the applications needed to be sent to a planner for a technical review,
then the applications needed to be noticed, then the application needed to go in front of the Planning Board acceptance hearing where the Board would receive input only from the planner who would tell them whether the application was complete and if the application was complete then the Planning Board would set the date for an approval hearing, finally the application would go before the Planning Board at the approval hearing and public comment would be accepted. He said that it was very important for the Board to create a process they could go by. Mr. Caron said that design review should be done prior to the involvement of the Planning Board on specific applications only. He suggested the possibility of preliminary conceptual consultation. The Board members discussed that idea and in general agreed that it was a good one. Mr. Seaverns amended his list to reflect a conceptual workshop with the applicant before their application was submitted and a
preliminary design review for specific applications only. He said that the planner would need to be present at certain meetings so the Board could ask questions. Mr. Bock asked about the relationship between the planner and the Building Inspector. Mr. Caron said that the Building Inspector would be involved with more specific details of the buildings than the planner. Mr. Seaverns said that the two roles would be related. Mr. Curry said that the Planning Board should have a rule that people could not subdivide their land more than once during a certain period of time. He said that would force applicants to look into the future. Mr. Seaverns noted that if the Planning Board changed the process they would be inundated with applications in December. Mr. Bock said that the Planning Board needed to start anything they were going to do as soon as possible. Ms. Bonser requested that the Board ask Ms. Copeland to come to their next
workshop meeting and offer input.
Mr. Curry made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:00pm. Ms. Bonser seconded the motion. The present members of the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 5-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Kelly Tivnan
Planning Board Secretary
| 
