NOTTINGHAM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FEBRUARY 1, 2006
PUBLIC SESSION
APPROVED BY THE BOARD FEBRUARY 15, 2006
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Mr. Dave Smith, Chair Mr. Jon Caron
Ms. Mary Bonser, Selectmen's Representative
Mr. Bill Booth
Ms. Sandra Jones
Mr. Peter Gylfphe
Mr. Scott Curry (Arrived 7:15pm)
OTHERS PRESENT:
Ms. Kelly Tivnan, Planning Board Secretary
The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:05pm.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Ms. Bonser made a motion to accept the Planning Board minutes from January 11, 2006. Mr. Gylfphe seconded the motion. Ms. Bonser, Mr. Gylfphe, Mr. Smith, and Mr. Booth voted in favor of the motion. Ms. Jones abstained from the motion. The motion passed 4-0 with 1 abstention.
Ms. Bonser made a motion to accept the Planning Board minutes from January 18, 2006. Mr. Gylfphe seconded the motion. Ms. Bonser, Mr. Gylfphe, and Mr. Smith voted in favor of the motion. Mr. Booth and Ms. Jones abstained from the motion. The motion passed 3-0 with 2 abstentions.
BOND REDUCTION-BROOKS CROSSING:
OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Ken Berry
At 7:15pm the Chair opened the discussion on the Brooks Crossing bond reduction.
Mr. Smith noted that the Planning Board had received a request for a bond reduction on the Brooks Crossing subdivision. Mr. Berry said that he was representing the applicant. He said that they wanted to do a bond draw down. He said that the only work left to do was the pavement. Mr. Curry said that it looked like they were talking about reducing the monumentation by half. He asked what would happen if the certification were wrong. Mr. Smith asked who might verify the information. Mr. Berry said that the land surveyor put his seal on the plan to assure that the certification was correct. Mr. Wright noted that the Building Inspector could always go look if there was a question.
Mr. Curry made a motion to approve the bond reduction for Brooks Crossing subdivision from $226,003.46 to $203, 547.19 because they had documentation from Rockingham County Conservation District. Ms. Jones seconded the motion. The present members of the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 6-0.
PUBLIC HEARING-GILLESPIE:
OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. David Mott, Mr. Brett Gillespie
The Chair called the public hearing to order at 7:25pm.
Mr. Mott said that the monuments had been viewed and the wetland stamps had been added. He said that he had made the plan the correct size to take to the Registry of Deeds. Mr. Smith said that there had been a site walk and they had found all of the granite bounds. Mr. Gillespie said that he had a wetlands permit and a letter from the Police Department. Mr. Smith said that it seemed like the house was being built as a duplex. He said that it had 2 kitchens. He said that Mr. Gillespie was short on frontage if he was building a duplex. Mr. Gylfphe asked if the house had a firewall. Mr. Smith said no. Mr. Gylfphe asked if it had separate exits. Mr. Smith said no. Mr. Gylfphe said that it did not qualify as a duplex then. Mr. Mott said that the Planning Board was approving
this project as a single family home lot. He said that if Mr. Gillespie wanted to change that he could come back before the Planning Board. Mr. Wright said that if Mr. Gillespie wanted to build a duplex he could appeal to the ZBA. He said that if Mr. Gillespie built a duplex on a single family lot than it was a problem for the Building Inspector to catch. Mr. Curry said that if the Planning Board approved the plan and Mr. Gillespie built a duplex than the Planning Board would have approved a subdivision that did not meet the regulations. Mr. Smith said that this was an unusual situation because the house was in the process of being built. Mr. Wright said that the Planning Board could include in their motion that this would be a single family dwelling. Mr. Curry said that the Planning Board could give a note to the Building Inspector saying that they approved a single family dwelling lot. Mr. Smith read the Police Department letter out
loud and he confirmed that he had found all of the bounds. Mr. Curry said that he wanted to be fair to Mr. Gillespie by telling him that the Planning Board was proposing a regulation which stated that a land owner could not subdivide more than once within 4 years. Mr. Gillespie said that he did not plan to subdivide again within 4 years. Mr. Mott noted that the closest utility pole was on the plan.
Mr. Gylfphe made a motion that the Planning Board approve the Gillespie subdivision application and they note that his house would be a single family dwelling. Mr. Curry seconded the motion. The present members of the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 6-0.
PUBLIC HEARING: HATCH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT:
OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Craig Saloman, Attorney
At 8:05pm the Chair opened the public hearing for the Hatch Lot Line Adjustment application.
Mr. Saloman said that he was talking about 2 parcels of land. He said that one was a 5 acre parcel owned by Mr. and Mrs. Drew and the other was 10.9 acres owned by Faith Realty Trust. He said that both lots would have the required acres and frontage for building. He said that the applicant wanted to join Parcel A with the lot owned by Faith Realty Trust. Mr. Smith asked whether the stone walls indicated boundaries. Mr. Saloman said that the stone wall was the property line. Mr. Gylfphe said that L14 needed either granite bounds or drill holes. Mr. Curry said that the state subdivision number needed to be on the plan. Mr. Saloman pointed out Note #2. Ms. Jones said that this application was asking to make one lot bigger and more suitable to build on. She said that both lots would
remain conforming. Mr. Curry said that the plan needed to have the granite bounds set.
Mr. Curry made a motion to accept the Hatch/Drew Lot Line Adjustment application. Ms. Bonser seconded the motion. The present members of the Planning Board voted unanimously in favor of the motion. The motion passed 6-0.
Mr. Gylfphe said that the applicant also needed a topography waiver request.
Mr. Curry made a motion to recess the Hatch/Drew Lot Line Adjustment application until February 15, 2006 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 6-0.
DAN MATHER-ADVICE:
OTHERS PRESENT: Dan Mather
The Chair opened the discussion with Dan Mather at 8:25pm.
Mr. Mather said that he had the road frontage for 2 house lots. He said that he might have between 26 and 30 acres of land because the old deed had said 20 acres "more or less." He said that he had gotten a shared driveway permit. He said that he needed 200 feet of road frontage. He said that he was trying to avoid putting in roads because of the expense. He said that he wanted to keep his house. He said that he had paid the current use penalty to take 2 acres of land out of current use. He said that he had the gravel on his property to put in quality roads and shared driveways. Mr. Gylfphe asked if Mr. Mather was looking to subdivide. Mr. Mather said yes. He said that Lot #1 and Lot #2 would have different driveways. Mr. Gylfphe said that Mr. Mather would need 420
feet of frontage. Mr. Mather said that was why he would need a variance. He said that he could not afford to put in roads. He said that someone wanted to do commercial building on the land and someone wanted to put in HUD housing. He said that would hang up the land for a long time. He said that those people would not make money off the land than he could. Ms. Bonser said that the biggest huurdle to Mr. Mather's plan would be frontage. Mr. Gylfphe said that Mr. Mather was trying to make back lots. Mr. Mather said that they would be waterfront lots. He said that he would like to do a commercial lot on Route 4. He said that he could legally make two 10 acre lots but that those would not make enough money for him. Mr. Wright said that this land was a prime target for him. He said that it would be a good location for a self storage place or a business park. He said that the land sunk below the highway which
would be good for the view and the land was almost all commercially zoned. Mr. Smith said that the state was talking about changing the intersection. Mr. Mather said that the state had been talking about traffic lights but he said that the abutters would complain. Mr. Wright said that the state had bought 4 lots. He said that he had talked to the project manager and the state was still planning to go forward with the lights. Mr. Curry said that Mr. Mather would need a variance on the rules for back lots. He said that there could only be 2, not 4. Mr. Smith asked whether the back lot rules would apply here. Mr. Curry said yes. Mr. Mather said that he had permission from the state for a 20 foot shared driveway. He said that he should have 800 feet of road frontage. He said that he would need a variance for that. Mr. Curry said that Mr. Curry would need two variances, one for frontage and one for back lots.
Mr. Gylfphe suggested that Mr. Mather could put in a cul-de-sac. Mr. Mather said that would be too expensive. He said that he wanted to stay with building driveways. Mr. Wright asked if a decision was made to put commercial condo units on the land whether they would need to put in roads. Ms. Bonser said yes. Mr. Booth said that the Fire Department would need to get in to the development in an emergency. Mr. Mather asked if the river could be used for fire protection in place of a cistern. Mr. Curry said yes. Ms. Bonser suggested that Mr. Mather ask the ZBA for direction. Mr. Smith said that he did not see how the back lot rules applied in this situation. Mr. Curry said that Mr. Mather was in a tight spot because he could not subdivide normally and he could not subdivide into back lots. Mr. Gylfphe said that back lots needed frontage. Mr. Mather said that he had 2 shared driveways which had been approved
by the state. Mr. Curry noted that driveway permits expire after 1 year. Mr. Wright noted that someone had expressed interest in building an equestrian center on the property.
Mr. Booth left at 9:10pm.
Mr. Wright said that he would like to talk to the Planning Board after the March election. He said that he would like to make a presentation about some ideas he had to encourage more commercial development in town. He also talked about his background.
At 9:20 Ms. Jones said that she would like to ask the Board about something. She said that she wanted to subdivide her property for her son and daughter in law. She said that she needed 6 acres and she had 5.2. The Planning Board suggested that she apply to the ZBA.
Mr. Gylfphe made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:25pm. 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
| 
