PlnMins070308 1 070708 08:00AM
SUNAPEE PLANNING 1 BOARD MINUTES
2 July 3, 2008
3 Town Hall
4 7:00 PM
5
6 Present: Peggy Chalmers, Chairman
7 Allan Davis, Vice-Chairman
8 Bruce Jennings
9 Philip Porter
10 Peter White
11 Emma Smith, Ex-officio
12 Michael Marquise, Town Planner
13 Roger Landry, Zoning Administrator
14
15 Absent: Derek Tatlock
16 Frederick Gallup, Ex-officio alternate
17
18 The meeting was called to order at 7:03PM by Chairman Peggy Chalmers.
19
20 The Board reviewed the minutes of the June 5, 2008 meeting. The following
21 corrections were noted:
22 Line 36 – add the applicant before Sonya
23 Line 40 – add The parking on the side of the building has been moved to the front.
24 Line 48 – There will be a rain garden
25 Line54 – Replace Bob Anthonyson with Roger Landry.
26 Line 57 – remove and between damaging and trees
27 Lines 57 & 58 – Remove sentence Roger Landry confirmed that is what Tony prefers.
28 Line 79 – replace and by with about before the words May 1. Replace it should with the
29 drainage system should.
30 Line 92 – remove it is important.
31 Line 93 – remove the word place and replace with that.
32 Line 98 – add for the applicant after the word stated.
33 Line 101 – Change the word Our to His.
34 Line 127 – Change May 4 to May 1.
35 Line 134 – add the words fire rated between hour and room
36 Line 146 – Change they should to the Planning Board should.
37 Line 161 – Change at the time was to at that time about.
38 Line 162 – Change use of a lot to use on a lot.
39 Line 261 – Change if it says to if the regulations say.
40 Line 266 – Change look and to look at.
41 Line 279 – Delete motion was not voted on and add Board agreed.
42 Line 329 – Replace of with on after structure.
43 Line 332 – Change and merged to that were merged.
44 Lines 332 & 333 -Change believes it was to believes they were.
45 Line 333 – Change asked is to asked if.
46 Line 341 – Change have added to want to add.
47 Line 343 - Change wanted to wants.
PlnMins070308 2 070708 08:00AM
Line 344 48 – Add was after He then.
49 Line 345 – Change seats that to seats for which.
50 Line 346 – Change sight plan to site plan.
51 Line 347 – Change approve to approved.
52 Lines 350 & 351– Change allowed by every 9 feet to based on 9 ft. width per space.
53 Line 368 – Change and a door will replace to accessed by a door that will replace.
54 Line 369 – Change believes he to believes Mr. Bushey.
55 Line 385 – Change reviewed our to reviewed by.
56 Line 386 – Change added that it to added so that the bond.
57 Lines 390-392 – Delete paragraph.
58
59 A motion was made by Bruce Jennings to approve the minutes as amended. The
60 motion was seconded by Phil Porter and approved unanimously.
61
62 7:19 PM CONTINUATION
63
64 Map 129, Lot 73 Sonya Land Investments LTD.
65 18 Central Street
66 Site Plan Review
67 Converting 4 BR Home into 1 BR
68 Apartment and Real Estate Office
69
70 Bob Anthonyson stated there were some outstanding issues which he addressed as
71 follows:
72 1. They are changing the request to just office space use and eliminating the
73 residential use.
74 2. There will be no addition employees. The number of employees is 4 and the
75 square footage space is 850 sq. ft.
76 Rodney Gonyea stated that they have 5 employees list on line. Mr. Anthonyson stated
77 that 5 agents work for the firm, but will not be at the firm at any one time. There are 5
78 agents, but in terms of legal employment there are 3. There would be 4 workers, at any
79 given time, max.
80
81 Mr. Anthonyson continued with the issues.
82 3. Lighting – the cut sheets have been submitted. There are 2 different post lights
83 under consideration. They will be down lighted and they just have to select the
84 appropriate bulb. One post light will be by the front door. Only signs A and
85 B will be lighted.
86 4. Maintain rain garden – Charlie Hirshberg has submitted a letter (see copy on
87 file).
88 5. Landscaping – there is a separate planting plan with the number of plants, the
89 species, size, and spacing, including the plants in the rain garden.
90 6. Signs – Sign A will be lighted on both sides and sign B will be lighted only on
91 one side.
92 7. Parking spaces – they are not reducing the number of parking spaces. They
93 will be increasing the number of spaces if they cannot use the garage.
94 There are 11 spaces on the plan.
95 Michael Marquise stated that the number of parking spaces required is 7.
PlnMins070308 3 070708 08:00AM
96
97 Mr. Anthonyson stated that there will be 3 white pines toward 22 Central St. instead of
98 one and that they will be 6’ to 7’ tall and spaced 20’ apart. Phil Porter asked what
99 percent of the lot is impervious and Roger advised that they can go up to 80%. Rodney
100 Gonyea, abutter, asked if the majority of the rain garden will be bark or lush. Mr.
101 Anthonyson stated it will be lush and have 27 plants. Roger asked the height of the rain
102 garden and Mr. Anthony replied that it will be 8’ to 10’ high on river birch. Others will
103 be 3’ to 4’ high and some will be lower. Mr. Gonyea also asked how they are going to
104 plow as he has researched rain gardens and they dip in the middle. He stated that
105 plowing will damage the rain garden as they will be pushing grass and bluestone into it.
106 Mr. Anthonyson stated there is space between the rain garden and the parking and they
107 will insure that the rain garden is well maintained. Mr. Gonyea presented pictures of the
108 view of the property taken from the windows in his house. Atty. Dunn, representing the
109 abutters, stated that Mr. Gonyea is asking that the pictures become part of the record. Mr.
110 Gonyea stated that the trees do not block the view from his kitchen.
111
112 Arlene Adams, abutter, stated she talked with Tony Bergeron about the front of the Sonya
113 property. Looking across the street, she will see the parking lot. Atty. Dunn,
114 representing the abutters, presented pictures taken from the Buswell home. Ms. Adams
115 stated that a perennial garden will not block the view. She presented pictures of effective
116 screening with evergreens. She stated that Tony Bergeron has no objection to the
117 screening being something different that a perennial garden. She also stated that if the
118 applicant only needs 7 parking spaces, only 7 should be granted. She is also concerned
119 that the applicant will be parking boats on the side of the parking spaces. She stated that
120 he has a history of putting boats on a property, getting sited, and then moving them to
121 another location until he is sited there. She is also concerned about what will happen
122 with the pedestrian traffic on the street and the signage being lighted at 10:00PM when
123 the office is not open.
124
125 Mr. Gonyea stated he thinks the applicant has the option of angle parking. He presented
126 pictures from 1959 and 1961 from the Registry of Deeds, an article from the Argus
127 Champion, and pictures of the street. He feels this business will totally change the
128 integrity of the street. There are kids on bicycles and skateboard. Atty. Dunn stated that
129 what all these people are saying is that it will substantially change the character of the
130 neighborhood and the Planning Board can act on that. He presented more pictures of
131 Central St. and stated that the rule of precedent does not apply as this is a non132
conforming situation changing the property from a residential to a business use. He also
133 stated that there is a new New Hampshire law that distinguishes between a use variance
134 and an area variance. An area variance has to do with setbacks and the fact that this lot is
135 only .328 acres and the require area in this zone is.5 acres which leads to problems such
136 as snow, better screening, etc. He stated that the court says this only has to do with the
137 criteria the Zoning Board will apply and it is clearly a variance requirement. He stated
138 that the Planning Board can make judgments based on the criteria in the site plan
139 ordinance and in doing so have every right and authority to limit the size on this property
140 to far less that what is required. He stated the Board is entitled to say no signs or no signs
141 on the street. The abutters have a problem with lights on the signs. He also stated that
142 Board has the right to say effective screening, not just screening. The Board is also
PlnMins070308 4 070708 08:00AM
entitled to say there should not be any parking spaces over what 143 is required for a
144 residence. He cannot see more than 7 being justified. He also stated it is reasonable to
145 say that if there are boats there with signs, it is contrary to site plan approval and the
146 Board can revoke the site plan approval.
147
148 Joyce Buswell, abutter, stated that perennial plants lose their green through the winter
149 and early spring. She stated that if arborvitae are set back enough, the snow plows will
150 not interfere. It is fast growing, thick, and provides dense coverage. She also stated that
151 the no parking signs will not be attractive. Peggy responded that the signs were in
152 response to the abutter’s request. Ms. Buswell asked how they are going to mark parking
153 spaces on bluestone and Bob Anthonyson stated they can use hoses. Roger Landry
154 advised that there are bluestone areas around town that are not delineated and if they have
155 more cars than permitted, people can call and complain. He also stated that he spent time
156 at the property with Tony Bergeron and perennials were preferred because of the wing of
157 the plow, but if screening can be put back farther, it may be possible to have more
158 screening. Ms. Buswell stated that the structure was built as a single family residence
159 and not as a commercial building and that the use of the building is changing. Peggy
160 stated that is allowable in the zone as it was voted in by the town 8 years ago. Ms.
161 Adams stated that it is doable to have the screening there. She also stated that the zoning
162 district was put into place after they bought there homes and the zoning rules should not
163 harm them. She asked if that does not take precedent. Peggy advised that everyone got a
164 copy of the proposed laws and no one came to the hearing. Ms. Adams stated that the
165 other businesses are at opposite ends of the street, not where the homes are. Michael
166 Marquise advised that prior to these zoning laws there were no laws as to what could go
167 there and anything could have gone in. Atty. Dunn stated the Board does not have the
168 authority to act against the low of the State without a variance. He stated that the Board
169 needs to determine, in reference to whether this is a permitted use, the following:
170 1. If the extent of the use in question reflects the nature and purpose of the
171 prevailing non-conforming use, which is now residential and the existing house is
172 a non-conforming use.
173 2. If the well established policy of the zoning law is to limit and reduce to
174 conformity as completely and rapidly as possible. The goal is to not have any
175 non-conforming uses. He stated that the applicant needs to go to the Zoning
176 Board of Adjustment for a variance first.
177 3. Whether the use at issue is a different manner of the same use or constitutes a use
178 of a different character, use, or kind. He stated the Planning Board does not have
179 the authority to change the use.
180 4. Whether the use will have a substantially different effect on the neighborhood.
181
182 Atty. Dunn sited a change of use case from 1999 and will provide a copy of the case.
183
184 Arlene Adams stated that on pg. 14 of the Zoning Ordinance, it states that the request will
185 not be detrimental to the neighborhood and that on pg. 38 it states that there will be no
186 lessening of the values of the surrounding properties. She also stated that the Master Plan
187 states they should prevent businesses in the middle of a residential area.
188
189 Mr. Gonyea advised that an appraiser has said that the value and marketability of his
190 property will be negatively impacted and that appeal of the residential street will be
PlnMins070308 5 070708 08:00AM
diminished. He also stated that pg. 8 of the Zoning Regulation state 191 that not limited to
192 campers, travel trailers, motor homes, etc. In reference to boats on trailers, up to 2
193 trailers can be stored on a property in as inconspicuous a location as possible.
194
195 Bob Anthonyson stated that, in response to the lights and signs issues, that are 2 street
196 lights on Central St. and the lights and signs on the property will be a far less impact that
197 the street lights. He also stated that many residential properties have more parking spaces
198 than the minimum required. He has also looked at some deeds and there are no
199 covenants on the abutting properties for them to remain residential.
200
201 Atty. Dunn sited a 1989 zoning case that stated only the Zoning Board of Adjustment can
202 interpret the Zoning Ordinance. The court calls it a non-conforming use. He submitted a
203 copy of the case.
204
205 8:45 PM – The public hearing was closed.
206
207 The Board members discussed the application.
208
209 Use: Bruce Jennings noted that when they identified the district, they did not pull Central
210 St. out. It includes other street and Central St. does not exist separate from this district.
211 He stated he likes the idea of arborvitae for screening, but there could be a maintenance
212 issue. He thinks the Board can address this with comments about maintenance. Phil
213 Porter expressed that just because something is permitted, does not mean it is a good
214 idea. Traffic safety is a concern for him. It is currently a neighborhood with no
215 commercial activity between the applicant’s property and the old IGA store. It is
216 completely residential between the two locations. He stated that he thinks this is an over
217 use and inappropriate for this location. Peggy stated one concern is the Board states
218 allowable uses with the acknowledgement that , because of the district, we anticipate
219 there probably will be a non-conforming lot, do they have a legal basis for rejecting the
220 application because what is different from that and what might be allowed on another lot
221 in another part of the village? Phil stated that is hypothetical and he would rather deal
222 with the case before us. Peggy questioned the issue raised as to whether or not this
223 constitutes a non-conforming use. Peter White stated he does not remember any case
224 regarding a permitted use on a non-conforming lot coming before the Zoning Board for
225 this while he was on the Board. He stated this is a tough application because it will
226 change that property, but there is nothing to prevent others in the neighborhood from
227 changing theirs. He does have issues with the additional parking and the screening.
228 Bruce noted that part of establishing the village district was to have an area where people
229 could walk to services and he thinks this area is perfect for that. Peggy asked if anyone else
230 feels this is a non-conforming use. Allan Davis stated that the Zoning Officer gives an
231 interpretation of whether or not a variance is needed. Bruce stated he does not think this
232 is a non-conforming use based on the way the Board has always interpreted this. Allan
233 stated it is not up to the Planning Board to say if it is a non-conforming use. The
234 applicant has been sent to the Planning Board by the Zoning Officer.
235
236 Parking: Allan Davis stated that with spaces 10 & 11, it seems to have been narrowed
237 and it would be a good space for more screening. Bruce stated the applicant could get rid
238 of space #9 and that would address the abutters’ concern. Michael advised that if they
PlnMins070308 6 070708 08:00AM
are looking at conditions, they would need to make a condition 239 of removing spaces 10 &
240 11 to give more buffering. He also stated that if they extend the hearing, they need the
241 approval of the Selectmen or they can address the application with conditions. He
242 advised that they can make a request to the Selectmen for an additional 90 days or the
243 applicant can agree to an extension. Allan stated he thinks the Board should ask for an
244 extension as there would be a substantial change in the site plan. Emma stated she feels
245 the Board needs to give more consideration to safety and Roger advised that the Police
246 Chief has signed off on it. Peggy asked if the Board is limited under law that one more
247 business will impact the area and does the Board have the ability to restrict one property.
248 Michael advised that the Board has to look at whether this is a large enough impact to
249 require off site improvements. He stated that on pg. 11, item 3 (landscape design
250 standards) has a threshold of 10 parking spaces before it requires more plantings. He also
251 stated that 3 spaces are in the garage and 8 spaces are outside. The regulation refers to
252 parking lots.
253
254 The Board members agreed that they all want more buffering and fewer parking spaces.
255 Bruce recommended that the applicant over plant and double buffer, with the idea of
256 removing some later as they grow or are damaged.
257
258 9:37 PM – The public hearing was reopened.
259
260 Bob Anthonyson stated that he does not have a problem with an extension and if
261 additional buffering is needed. He is also comfortable with losing 3 parking spaces.
262 Michael advised that the Board should ask the Select Board for a 90 day extension or
263 they can get a letter, by a certain date, from the land owner agreeing to the extension so
264 that a request for an extension would not be necessary. He stated that the Board would
265 need an answer by the end of the day on Monday from the Select Board.
266
267 Mr. Anthonyson stated that he requests that the Board vote on this tonight. Michael
268 stated that if the Board asks for an extension to the next meeting on July 17, 2008, the
269 Board is moving forward. Emma Smith will request an extension from the Board of
Selectmen. Mr. Anthonyson stated that he will agree to continue the case to July 17th270 .
271 Michael advised that 2 items need to be acted on the by applicant: buffering and parking
272 spaces. The Board members agreed that 7 spaces would provide more buffering
273 opportunities.
274
275 Atty. Dunn stated that the site plan standards and criteria are for the protection of
276 adjacent properties from other objectionable features. He stated this is a neighborhood
277 and the Planning Board may pay particular attention to that street.
278
279 A motion was made by Allan Davis to apply to the Board of Selectmen for a 90 day
280 extension. The motion was seconded by Phil Porter and approved unanimously.
281
282 9:51 PM -Public Hearing
283
284 1) Map, 133 Lot 01 Site Plan Application Review
285 Sally Bourdon and Lynne Wardlaw
286 Dba Deck & Dock
287 Increase display and sales area inside
PlnMins070308 7 070708 08:00AM
barn and garage 288 an additional 2500 Sq. Ft.
289 Increase parking to include lower lot
290 Convert a portion of house into office space.
291
292 Michael advised that the application was filed three weeks in advance, abutters were
293 notified, notices were posted, and fees were paid. He also advised that this is an
294 amendment to the original site plan and it meets the requirements for amendments.
295
296 A motion was made by Allan Davis to accept the application as complete. The
297 motion was seconded by Peter White and approved unanimously.
298
299 Lynne Wardlaw advised that they are very close in parking requirements in relation to the
300 amount of display space. She stated that they are at the peak of the season now and that it
301 will tape off. They average 2 to 3 cars per hour. She also advised that employee parking
302 is down below on the property. She stated that they want to add square footage and
303 extend the hours. There are 3 part time employees, but only 2 are there at the same time.
304 The maximum staff at any one time is four. Peggy stated that there is roughly 4,000
305 square feet which requires 19 parking spaces and they are showing 15.
306
307 A motion was made by Allan Davis to approve 3,900 sq. ft. as usable display space
308 and accept 15 parking spaces as adequate. The motion was seconded by Phil Porter.
309 Allan Davis amended his motion to add limiting the hours of operation to 10:00 AM
310 to 6:00 PM Monday through Saturday, and 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Sunday. The
311 amendment was seconded by Phil Porter. The amended motion was approved
312 unanimously by the Board.
313
314 10:10 PM – The meeting adjourned.
315
316 NOTE: Any hearings now open and under consideration by this Board are continued to
317 the next meeting of the Planning Board.
318
319 NOTE: The above minutes represent a summary of, not a verbatim of the tape.
320
321 Submitted by, Joan Bleau Approved_____________________
322 Recording Secretary
323
324 ______________________________ _____________________________
325 Peggy Chalmers, Chairman Allan Davis, Vice-Chairman
326
327 ______________________________ _____________________________
328 Bruce Jennings Derek Tatlock
329
330 ______________________________ _____________________________
331 Philip Porter Peter White
332
333 ______________________________ _____________________________
334 Emma M. Smith, Ex-Officio Frederick Gallup, Alt. Ex-Officio
335
| 
