NOTTINGHAM PLANNING BOARD
August 20, 2008
PUBLIC SESSION
APPROVED & AMMENDED
Type of Meeting: Scheduled Workshop
Method of Notification: Posted at the Nottingham Municipal Building & Nottingham Post Office
Meeting Location: Nottingham Municipal Building
Members Present: Mr. Dave Smith; Chair, Mr. Peter Gylfphe; Vice Chair, Ms. Sue Mooney, Mr. Skip Seaverns, Bob Davidson, Mr. Scott Canney, Mr. Bill Netishen; Selectmen’s Representative, Ms. Cheryl Smith; Alternate Member
Members Absent: Ms. Traci Chauvey; Alternate Member,
Others Present: Mrs. Lisa Sears; Land Use Clerk, Judi Thibault, Gail Mills, Scott Curry, Earlee Rourke, Attorney Chris Boldt, Roscoe Blaisdell
Chair Smith called the meeting to order at approximately 7:03 pm.
Minutes
August 6, 2008
The Board made the following changes:
Line 46 our should be out
Line 58 add an apostrophe after clients
Line 59 Boards should be Board’s
Line 77 delete which
Line 101 add a t to Bold
Line 104 He stated should be Atty. Boldt stated and he step should be Mr. Netishen stated
Line 109 add t to Bold
Line 135 delete the semi colon after it
Line 146 add an s to appearance
Line 152 add an ed to bias
Line 157 not should be note
Line 158 add an s to know
Line 162 add and s to individual
Line 171 add a space between in and case
MOTION by Ms. Mooney to approve the August 6th minutes as amended
SECOND by Mr. Gylfphe
VOTE 6-Aye. 0- Opposed 1- Abstained MOTION PASSED
MOTION by Mr. Seaverns to approve and appoint Gail Mills, Scott Curry, Judi Thibault and Earlee Rourke as alternate members of the Nottingham Planning Board.
SECOND by Mr. Canny
VOTE 7-Aye. 0- Opposed 0- Abstained MOTION PASSED
The newly elected alternates left the meeting, with the appropriate documents to be sworn in by the Town Clerk.
Chair Smith opened the public meeting for:
Public Meeting Continuance – Subdivision Application (acceptance, compliance, and final approval of a 3-lot subdivision) – Paul & Leslie Longueil Revocable Trust of 1996, Paul & Leslie Longueil, Trustees – Cooper Hill Road – Map 16 Lot 15A – Case #P07-15-SUB.
Atty. Boldt thanked the Board for finding the alternate members.
Ms. Mooney recused herself under advice of counsel. Chair Smith seated Ms. Cheryl Smith for Ms. Mooney.
Mr. Seaverns stated that he believes that voting for or against an application are not grounds for a recusal. He didn’t agree with the information Atty. Boldt provided on this issue. Mr. Seaverns resigned his position stating that he didn’t believe that the voters had elected members of the Board so that they could recuse themselves as a result of a particular vote they made, and “that was not proper, or correct or right”. Chair Smith noted that he was sorry to hear of his resignation.
Mr. Gylfphe stated to Atty. Boldt that he believes that he could give the applicant a fair judgment in this case but had decided to let Atty. Boldt decided whether he should recuse himself or not. Atty. Boldt stated that he respectfully request that he does recuse himself. Mr. Gylfphe then recused himself.
Chair Smith seated Scott Curry for Peter Gylfphe and Earle Rourke for Skip Seaverns.
Mr. Netishen read a prepared statement. He noted that he had abstained from voting on the case at the Planning Board and he strongly believes that he acted without bias as a member of the BOS and the Planning Board, and has no prejudges regarding this case. He also stated that his decisions affect all aspects of the community so as a result of maybe an appearance of bias he will step down (recuse) from his duties on the Planning Board for this case only.
Chair Smith seated Judi Thibault for Mr. Netishen.
Chair Smith recused himself at the request of the applicant. The remaining members of the Board nominated Earle Rourke to act as Chair of the Board for this case.
MOTION by Mr. Curry to elect Earle Rourke as chairperson.
SECOND by Mr. Davidson
Mr. Curry noted Mr. Rourke’s experience as a past member, including past Chair of this Board and as a past member of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Mr. Rourke noted that he has had Mr. Longuiel appear before him in the past many times and he asked Mr. Longueil if he has any objections to having him sit on this Board for this case. Mr. Longueil did not object. Mr. Rourke accepted the Chair position.
VOTE 5-Aye. 0- Opposed 1- Abstained MOTION PASSED
Chair Rourke seated Gail Mills for Dave Smith. Mr. Davidson nominated Mr. Curry for the vice chair position.
MOTION by Mr. Davidson to elect Scott Curry as vice chair.
SECOND by Mr. Canny
Mr. Davidson stated that Mr. Curry has more experience with the Planning Board than he does and believes him to be very qualified for the position.
VOTE 6-Aye. 0- Opposed 1- Abstained MOTION PASSED
The Board decided if the Board finds they need to fill the Secretary position they will do so at that time. Mrs. Sears left the meeting to get materials for the newly elected alternates.
The Board began a brief overview of the case. Chair Rourke had Mrs. Sears read the notice of decision for the ZBA for this case.
MOTION by Ms. Smith to recess the hearing, stating that she would like time for herself and the new alternates to get up to speed on the case and to review the files. She noted that it would be unfair to the client if they were unprepared to hear the case.
SECOND by Ms. Mills
Chair Rourke had Atty. Boldt present a brief overview of the case including what happened at the ZBA. Mr. Curry noted that it was a benefit to the Town and the applicant that this case is so new to most of the members. He noted that this case is at the start of the Planning Board process anyway and no one has heard anything more than anyone else. Atty. Boldt agreed and noted that even though this plan has been in play for about a year there has not been a formal hearing on it yet. He agreed with Chair Rourke that it may be to the Board’s benefit to get a brief overview of the plan and then recess. He noted that he did not expect final approval tonight but they did believe that they have a complete application. He gave a brief history the project and what happened at the ZBA; noting that they needed to go to the ZBA
for relief from having to have the curb cut in the frontage due to the large amount of wetlands on the site.
The Board reviewed the plans along with Atty. Boldt.
VOTE 4-Aye. 3- Opposed 0- Abstained MOTION PASSED
Atty. Teague noted that it would be helpful to have this overview of this complicated case. He agreed that the Board members would need some time to review the documents but that everyone is starting at “square one”. The Board will still need to vote to accept the application.
Ms. Smith asked for documents on the completeness of the application. Atty. Boldt noted that there is a review from SRPC and their response to it in the file. Mr. Curry wanted the Board to agree on what documents they need to review but Ms. Smith disagreed noting that she believes it is the responsibility of the alternates now sitting on this case to review the whole case file. Mr. Curry agreed.
Atty. Boldt requested that the date it is recessed to be certain, and then he continued his review of the plans. He noted all the different accesses/shared driveways and that the access road is a private way but has the emergency lane status from the Town of Nottingham. He also noted that this is actually not a complicated plan; it’s a 3 lot subdivision. Other items discussed were; the acreage of each lot, the percentage of wetlands for each, and the fact that the access could not be done through the frontage because of the wetlands so that is why they went to the ZBA. Ms. Smith asked the percent of total parent parcel that is poorly or very poorly drained. Mr. Blaisdell replied greater than 50%. Shared driveways were also discussed.
Atty. Boldt acknowledged that the shared driveways usually go on the common boundary line but he did note that the Town ordinances do not require that. Mr. Curry asked how this could be in regards to RSA 674:41. Mrs. Sears suggested Mr. Curry read the ZBA finding of fact sheets in the ZBA file. Mr. Blaisdell acknowledged that there will be a need for a dredge and fill permit to improve the existing wetlands crossing, as it will not meet the DES regulations currently, as it is a change of use.
Mrs. Sears noted that a memo had come in, in regards to having a clear numbering of the homes for the 911 system. Atty. Boldt noted that the fire chiefs from Nottingham and Northwood would be consulted as to how they would like to best handle it. Atty. Boldt asked that the entire ZBA file be made available for the Planning Board.
The Board discussed that Atty. Teague had been asked to attend this meeting due to the procedure issues (the recusals) with the Board. He noted that he had not been asked to participate in any of the subdivision or zoning board issues. He noted when he first became involved in the case and then has now been asked by the Board of Selectmen, at the request of the Planning Board to now become involved in the subdivision part of the case.
Board members were given copies of the plans. Dave Smith wanted to clarify for the current Board that the previous Board had discussed that there is a RSA that allows the Planning Board to hire outside counsel and that that “third party” cost is then charged to the applicant. Atty. Boldt stated that the law is not completely clear on if an attorney’s fee (reasonableness) can be applied to that RSA on the billing of third party costs, but noted that he was sure that they could work out something that is mutually agreed upon.
MOTION by Ms. Smith to request that Atty. Teague be present at any of the Longueil hearings/meetings.
SECOND by Ms. Mills
RSA 674:44 Section 5, page 473 was sited as the related RSA but Atty. Boldt noted that was in regards to site plan reviews. Mr. Curry questioned if there was a need for Atty. Teague at every meeting. Ms. Smith stated that it was the desire of the previous Board and she would like to continue it. She explained that if any decision was to be made and Atty. Teague was not present that she would ask that the hearing be recessed until he had a chance to review the documents. She noted that having him present may be more efficient. Mr. Davidson stated that having Atty. Teague present when Atty. Boldt is present; to give an opinion and so they would not have to rely on the applicant’s attorney.
Mr. Canny noted that the only reason that Atty. Teague was requested, by the previous Board, was for the procedural issues and recusals not for the “nuts and bolts” of the case. He stated that he didn’t believe that it was necessary to have him here now that the case is starting. Atty. Boldt noted that he and Atty. Teague could work out a reasonable situation but if this turns out to be like a regular case then he thinks that his client should not be charged for Atty. Teague’s attendance; as it could be viewed as not necessary or reasonable.
The Board agreed that they would like to have Atty. Teague present when ever Atty. Boldt is present. Ms. Smith amended her motion as follows.
MOTION by Ms. Smith to request that Atty. Teague be present at any of the Longueil hearings/meetings that Atty. Boldt is present for, with the option to consult Atty. Teague with any questions as needed.
SECOND by Ms. Mills
The attorneys agreed to notify the Planning Board office or each other, with at least a 24 hour notice to let each other know if they plan to attend a hearing.
VOTE 5-Aye. 2- Opposed 0- Abstained MOTION PASSED
The Board discussed a date to recess this hearing to which allows members adequate time to read the files and one that did not conflict with any other obligations.
MOTION by Mr. Curry to recess this case (#P07-15-SUB.) until September 24, 2008 at 7:15.
SECOND by Mr. Davidson
VOTE 7-Aye. 0- Opposed 0- Abstained MOTION PASSED
It was noted that this Board will open the hearing on September 24, 2008. Both Attorneys agreed.
MOTION by Ms. Smith to recess this case (#P07-15-SUB.) until September 24, 2008 at 7:15.
SECOND by Mr. Davidson
VOTE 6-Aye. 1- Opposed 0- Abstained MOTION PASSED
The next schedule workshop meeting is on August 27, 2008.
Respectfully Submitted,
Lisa L. Sears
Land Use Clerk
These minutes are subject to approval at a regularly scheduled Planning Board meeting at which time the above minutes are corrected or accepted.
| 
