NOTTINGHAM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
JULY 27, 2005
PUBLIC SESSION
APPROVED BY THE BOARD AUGUST 24, 2005
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Mr. Dave Smith, Chair Mr. Peter Gylfphe
Ms. Mary Bonser, Selectmen Representative Mr. Bill Booth
Mr. Scott Curry
Ms. Sandra Jones
Mr. Jon Caron
OTHERS PRESENT:
Ms. Kelly Tivnan, Planning Board Secretary
Mr. Skip Seaverns
The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:10pm.
Mr. Smith and Mr. Caron had a discussion about what would be required for the dedication of Gatchell Road. Mr. Caron said that Mr. Gatchell needed to deed the road to the town for dedication. Mr. Smith said that he and Mr. Teague had talked about other options for the note in question on the Gatchell plan. Mr. Caron said that the note recognized that the road was private now and it would be moot once the road was approved. He said that if the Planning Board did not sign the plan than they needed to hold a hearing on the road. Mr. Smith said that in that case the note could stay as it was written. Ms. Bonser said that she was not comfortable signing the plan at this point. Mr. Seaverns said that it lent more credibility to the people trying to make the road public if the Planning Board signed the
plan. Ms. Bonser said that according to page 26E of the regulations they should add to the plan that the Planning Board accepting the plans does not mean the road was accepted by the town. Mr. Caron said that the note as written served the intended purpose of putting the owners on notice. Mr. Seaverns said that there should be a note on the plan which said how to do what needed to be done in order to get the road dedicated and accepted by the town. Mr. Caron said that it was possible that could be made a standard note. After some discussion the Board members felt that Mr. Gatchell did not need to change the note on his plan at this time. The Board members said that they would discuss this again at the next public hearing date for the Gatchell application.
Ms. Bonser reminded the Planning Board they needed to think about where they stood on the USA Springs application and they needed to look at what authority they had over groundwater.
Ms. Bonser said that she had brought the Wakefield subdivision regulations for the Board to review and discuss. She said that she liked the opening pages and she thought they were a good blue print. Mr. Caron briefly discussed the definition of a boundary line adjustment on page 4. Ms. Bonser discussed her thoughts on some of the other definitions. She asked if the Board wanted to have a time line for how often people could subdivide their land. She suggested 3 years. She noted that the Planning Board needed to sell this plan to the public. Mr. Caron said that he thought the time line should be more like 5 years. He said that the Planning Board needed to look at all the effects of a project for 7-10 years. He said that they needed to be able to respond with ordinances. Mr. Curry
said that landowners should not have to be responsible for looking ahead 10 years. Mr. Caron said that the Planning Board needed to look at the 10 year effect. He said that there needed to be a balance. Mr. Seaverns said that the ordinances could give the Planning Board flexibility or they could be very specific. Ms. Bonser said that the Planning Board did not want to foster development with their ordinances. Mr. Curry said that many small subdivisions on the same property put a burden on the Planning Board. Mr. Caron said that the Board could put a time line in the regulations and then waive it if necessary. Mr. Seaverns said that he thought perimeter surveys should be required. Ms. Bonser said that perimeter surveys were very expensive and she was afraid that requiring them would encourage more development. Mr. Caron said that minor subdivisions should be 3 lots or less and major subdivisions should be 5-7 or more lots.
Mr. Seaverns said that the Planning Board did not need to require perimeter surveys for minor subdivisions. Mr. Smith asked how someone would currently do more than one habitable structure on one lot. Mr. Seaverns said that it would have to be multi-family. Mr. Caron talked some more about minor subdivisions. Mr. Smith said that he would like to have parts 1, 4, and 5 in the Nottingham definition of minor subdivisions. He cited page 4 of the Wakefield regulations. Mr. Seaverns said that 4 units were allowed in a multi-family home. He then discussed a case where apartments had been converted to condominiums. Ms. Bonser said that she did not think the time line for subdividing should be more than 3 years for a minor subdivision. Mr. Curry asked if there would be other things covered in the ordinance about conversions. Mr. Caron said that time shares would be a part of that. Mr. Seaverns said that the model
subdivision regulations did not mention membership, condominiums, or time shares. Ms. Bonser asked if a definition of boundary line adjustment should be included in the section of the regulations about definitions. Mr. Caron said yes. Mr. Seaverns said that boundary line adjustments should come before the Planning Board. Mr. Curry said that boundary line adjustments should be a part of the subdivision regulations. He said that they should be one of the 3 types of subdivision applications. Mr. Seaverns said that there should be a division of the land regulations. Ms. Bonser said that the regulations should be more clear. Mr. Seaverns cited procedure from RSA 676:4 1E1. Mr. Curry said that he liked all of page 11 in the Wakefield regulations. Mr. Caron said that the Planning Board should be looking at preserving the character of the land in their town. The Board had a discussion about page 22 entitled application
receipt and acceptance in the Wakefield regulations. Ms. Bonser said that the Planning Board should talk about a timeline for changes to their ordinance. Mr. Curry said that there needed to be a public hearing in December to change the Zoning Ordinances. Mr. Caron said that the absolute drop dead dates for the Planning Board to make changes to the ordinances would be as follows:
January 17, 2006- First Hearing
January 27, 2006- Notice Date
February 6, 2006- Last Planning Board Hearing on the Changes
February 7, 2006- Changes Need to be Filed with Town Clerk
Mr. Curry made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:20pm. 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
| 
