NOTTINGHAM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
JUNE 22, 2005
PUBLIC SESSION
APPROVED BY THE BOARD AUGUST 17, 2005
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Mr. Jon Caron Mr. David Smith, Chair
Ms. Sandra Jones Mr. Peter Gylfphe
Mr. Scott Curry
Mr. Bill Booth
Ms. Mary Bonser, Selectmen's Representative (Arrived 7:10pm)
OTHERS PRESENT:
Mr. Paul Colby, Building Inspector
Ms. Heidi Carlson, Fire Department Representative
Ms. Kelly Tivnan, Planning Board Secretary
Mr. Caron called the meeting to order at 7:05pm.
DISCUSSION OF FIRE PROTECTION:
Ms. Carlson said that she had come to this meeting thinking that it was a fact finding mission. She said that she wanted to find out what the Planning Board wanted from the Fire Department. Mr. Caron said that historically in town they had needed a fire pond if someone was going to develop 8 or more lots. He said that he would like to know how the Fire Department felt about cisterns. He wondered if the Fire Department felt that cisterns were better than fire ponds. Ms. Carlson said that cisterns were more reliable. She said that both cisterns and fire ponds needed maintenance. She said that fire ponds dried up in the summer but cisterns cost more. Mr. Curry asked about the possibility of putting aside money for a tanker truck. Mr. Colby said that a tanker truck was a 2,500 gallon cistern
on wheels and that it would not do the town any good if they did not have anyone to drive it. Mr. Curry noted the geography of Nottingham. Mr. Colby said that people could not go 65mph to get to Route 4. Ms. Carlson suggested that the town would need an impact fee ordinance for something like tanker trucks. She said that if the Planning Board wanted to look at making regulations she wanted to make sure that the whole Fire Department was on the same page. Mr. Caron said that a change had been made to the ordinances to allow developers to put in fire ponds, cisterns, or sprinklers. He said that the limits had also been eliminated which had left the results to the discretion of the Planning Board. He said that the Planning Board had been dealing with avoidance. He said that the Planning Board needed to know what the needs of the Fire Department were. He said that the Board had allowed for too many exceptions to the rules. He
asked what the need for cisterns was and whether sprinklers were an adequate trade off. Mr. Curry said that the regulations were clear. He said that cisterns needed to be built. He said that the Planning Board continued to the waive the cistern regulation so they must not like the regulation. Ms. Bonser asked if the Fire Department had places in town where they needed water sources. Ms. Carlson said that she would look at where the reliable, easy to access water sources were in the community. Ms. Bonser said that it seemed unfair that some developers needed to build cisterns and spend that money while others got out of it by building near to someone who had already built one and spent that money. Mr. Seaverns said that if a person put in a road than their project should be considered a major subdivision and they should spend the money for a cistern. He said that at least 3 cisterns had been utilized. He asked if the town had
authorized the Fire Department with the capability to put cisterns all over town. He said that if impact fees were collected and not used within 6 years than the money needed to be returned. He said that in that case fire protection would not be provided. Mr. Netishen said that the town maintained cisterns. He asked if they had the maintenance capability for the present and into the future. Mr. Seaverns said that the town could ask the people to put money for maintenance of cisterns into an escrow account. Mr. Netishen asked if the town did that. Mr. Seaverns said no. Mr. Curry asked what the Fire Department needed in order to give adequate fire protection to the town. Mr. Seaverns asked if the Fire Department wanted to provide input on applications for new developments. He said that the former Fire Chief, Gary Chase, had wanted to be involved. Ms. Carlson said that she thought the current Fire Chief wanted to be
involved in the process as well. She said that she did know though that looking at plans took a lot of time and that most department heads did not have that much time to devote to it. Mr. Caron asked if the way the development was set up changed what the Fire Department needed. Ms. Carlson said that density was a factor. She said that the amount of hose was also a factor. She said that putting something every 1,500 feet was not reasonable for a town the size of Nottingham. Mr. Curry asked if sprinklers were equivalent to cisterns. Ms. Carlson said no. She said that the two things were not interchangeable. She said that they were two totally different things. She said that sprinklers and cisterns could work together. She said that sprinklers were good for limiting damage in residential homes. She said that they did not help forests, businesses, barns, or other non residential buildings. She said that if
they were looking at the worst that could happen the primary thing they wanted to protect was people's homes. Ms. Bonser said that it seemed like sprinklers might be good in smaller subdivisions and cisterns might be better for bigger subdivisions. She said that would be 2 different issues. Mr. Curry said that it sounded like sprinklers were good for life safety and the protection of homes but cisterns might help more with fires in the forest. Mr. Booth noted that the cost of sprinklers was about $5,000 per home. He asked about the cost of cisterns. Mr. Colby said that cisterns usually cost about $2 per gallon. Mr. Curry said that the Planning Board should ask the Fire Department for their recommended language if they decided to change the ordinance. Mr. Seaverns said that the Planning Board wanted an indication that the Fire Department had looked at the area of the proposed development before they had made their recommendations.
Ms. Bonser asked what the Fire Department would like to see in the regulations. She said that the Fire Department and the Planning Board should work together on this. Mr. Caron asked how the Planning Board could make sure that cisterns were built. He said that they needed to look at where they truly wanted to go with fire protection and what was reasonable for their town. Mr. Seaverns said that they needed an overlay map of where the Fire Department thought that cisterns should be. Mr. Caron asked if it was reasonable to ask developers to put in cisterns. Mr. Seaverns said that the Planning Board needed to provide tools for developers so they would know what was expected. Mr. Curry said that he wanted justification from the Fire Department when they recommended waiving the requirements. Ms. Carlson asked if the Planning Board wanted the Fire Department to make recommendations on a plan by plan basis. Mr. Colby said that it
would be a good idea to look at interconnecting roads. Ms. Carlson said that the Fire Department did not have the manpower to send people to all of the Planning Board meetings. Mr. Seaverns suggested that the Fire Department ask the Planning Board to send them plans with their input. Ms. Carlson said that Fremont had plan comment sheets. She said that it would be easier for the Fire Department if they did not have to deal directly with the developer. Mr. Caron said that the Planning Board should see plans once before they requested input from the Fire Department. Mr. Seaverns said that it would be time consuming for the Fire Department to have to look at everything. Mr. Caron said that the Planning Board should be doing consultations with staff for proposed major subdivision applications. Ms. Carlson said that she used to try to get the necessary people together for meetings regarding plans. She said that was logistically
difficult to do. Ms. Bonser suggested that the Planning Board could propose the purchase of a certain number of cisterns per year by a warrant article. Mr. Seaverns said that the town could set up capital reserve accounts for cisterns. He said that they should look at which locations would be the priority. Ms. Jones said that a plan without any action was useless. Mr. Seaverns said that if they had a plan in place they could assess impact fees. Mr. Curry said that he would like the town to have the ability to do impact fees. He said that he would for the money to be used to leverage tax money. Mr. Caron said that impact fees could be tied to building permits. He said that people needed to pay their fair share. Ms. Bonser asked if the Fire Department could give their cistern plan to the Capital Improvement Committee. Mr. Colby said that it would be better for the Fire Department to do a fire protection plan than a
cistern plan. Mr. Caron said that the town needed to look at what they could afford. Ms. Carlson said that towns could not look at future things when they were determining whether they could charge impact fees. Mr. Colby said that it would cost $20,000 to do a study of whether they could charge impact fees. Ms. Carlson asked about the procedure for if people wanted to give $20,000 to the town instead of paying to put a cistern in their development. She asked about the town's legal and moral obligation in that case. She suggested that the town could hire a fire consultant to help them with a fire protection plan. Mr. Seaverns said that there should be a reason why the Planning Board waived or accepted things. He said that the Fire Department recommendations should include reasons as well. Ms. Carlson said that she would take all of this discussion back to the Fire Department. She said that they would also look at what other
towns did. Mr. Colby said that the plan for fire protection needed to look at available water sources. Mr. Seaverns said that Mr. Chase had been against the idea of the town paying for cisterns. He said that if Mr. Starr disagreed that could possibly become a part of their future plans. Ms. Jones said that the town putting in new cisterns with impact fees would leave the existing citizens unprotected. She said that new people coming into town could not be asked to pay for putting cisterns into existing neighborhoods. Mr. Caron said that it was in the regulations that there must be "access to water year round." Mr. Colby said that fire ponds were bigger and took up more space than cisterns. Mr. Caron asked about sprinklers. Mr. Colby said that there needed to be a full town water system in order to make every building have sprinklers. He said that there had never been a death from fire in a building where
sprinklers had been installed and were functioning. Ms. Jones said that the town could require people to have fire alarms installed but they could not require them to be turned on. Mr. Seaverns said that people could get lower insurance rates if they had fire protection. Mr. Colby explained the three types of sprinkler systems and he said that the categories were commercial buildings, 1 and 2 family homes, and apartments/condos. He said that bathrooms and garages as well as certain other buildings such as sheds were not required to have sprinklers as part of a normal sprinkler system. Mr. Curry asked if a sprinkler system needed more than one pump. Mr. Colby said that sprinkler systems needed reserve water of 7.5 gallons per minute. He said that sprinklers only protected the living space of a house. Ms. Bonser asked if Mr. Colby had an opinion on no burn fire retardant materials. Mr. Colby said that everything burned. Mr.
Seaverns said that the flame retardant materials would need to be constantly kept up. Mr. Colby said that if the Planning Board wanted to require sprinkler systems than they would need to put that in the zoning ordinance.
OTHER DISCUSSION:
Mr. Seaverns asked Mr. Colby what he thought about the decision of the Planning Board to allow 6 certificates of occupancy at Brooks Crossing. Mr. Colby said that he thought the Planning Board did the right thing. Mr. Seaverns said that based on the information he had the Planning Board had not allowed something like that before.
Mr. Curry asked how the Planning Board was doing with putting notes on plans saying what was required. Mr. Colby said that the Board was doing a lousy job of that. He said that the Planning Board needed more notes on the plans that were more specific. Mr. Caron noted that would make enforcement easier.
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
| 
