PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
August 12, 2009

APPROVED:
_________________

AGENDA:                  CONT. SITE PLAN:  CATHOLIC BISHOP OF MANCHESTER, 17 W. Shore   Road, #111-005
CONT. COMPLIANCE HEARING:  DOUGLAS VOELBEL, 16 Pleasant St.,
#114-190
MERGER:  SUSAN WORTHEN McCOMBS, Peaked Hill Rd.,
#210-005 & -006
PCC:  SILVER SHORES

ATTENDING:            Dan Paradis (Chairman), Elizabeth Seeler (Vice Chairman), Janice DellaCroce, Denice DeStefano, Clay Dingman
Alternates:  Steve Favorite

ABSENT:                   Don Milbrand (Sel. Rep. - work), Murray Campbell
Alternates:  Tom Babcock (leave of absence), Don Martin

OTHER:                      Barbara Greenwood (Budget Comm.), Lorraine Bohmiller (interested in the                                   Planning Board), public

The meeting opened at 7:00 p.m.  Mr. Favorite sat in for Mr. Campbell.

CONTINUED SITE PLAN:  CATHOLIC BISHOP OF MANCHESTER
Mr. Paradis stated that we have three issues to resolve before opening this hearing:  the one-year time period, having an office in the Lake District, and the footprint of the original building.

The one-year time period:  Father Leblanc read K of C minutes in which there was referral of the social center.  These were dated May 12, 2008, June 9, 2008, Oct. 13, 2008, Jan. 19, 2009, Feb. 9, 2009, and March 9, 2009.  The Diocese goes slowly but has wanted to preserve the footprint.  Mr. Paradis stated that discussions started well before the year was over and Ms. Seeler added that, during the same time period, there was a merger of the Diocese and the town had a couple of changes to employees who were involved.  Mr. Paradis mentioned that, in retrospect, it would have been best if they had sent a letter to the Planning Board concerning this.  Mr. Dingman felt that clear evidence had been presented.  It was felt that this issue had been satisfied.  Mr. Paradis will ask Ms. Bonsteel to write a letter giving the history of the town’s activity in this case.  Kevin French brought up the Shoreland Protection Act and read the portion regarding rebuilding.  Ms. DeStefano asked what the reference was to town counsel and Father Leblanc stated that this is in the Feb. 9th minutes.  Father Leblanc will provide copies of the minutes for our records.

 

-2-
Planning Board Minutes
8/12/09

CATHOLIC CHURCH SITE PLAN continued:
An office in the Lake District:  Mr. Paradis explained that an office in this case is an accessory use such as is needed for a marina.  It is part of the function of the Church.  Ms. Bonsteel, Land Use Officer, has agreed with this interpretation, he added. 

Footprint of the building:  Beth Morrison presented photos of the covered porch and stated that it will remain a covered porch.  She apologized that she only has photos taken from the front of the building.  Mr. Dingman questioned what is included in the original footprint.  Mr. Paradis stated that the problem is that it is a non-conforming lot.  Mr. Dingman asked if this was a porch, was it not excavated.  Mr. Paradis felt that it is not addressed and there was no cellar at all previously.  This is a small corner.  Ms. Morrison stated that sonar tubes held it up.  Sean Lannon, abutter, stated that the photos do not show the full extent of the building.  He asked permission to go home and get a photo that he has.

In the meantime, Mr. Paradis let Kevin French, surveyor of the property, continue with the new plans and checklist which Mr. French presented.  Mr. French went over the both checklists completely.  Mr. Paradis asked the intent of the sewer system.  Mr. French thought that it would remain the same as before.  He mentioned that a silt fence on the lower side will be used during excavation.  Mr. Paradis asked the use of the cellar space.  Father Leblanc stated that, at this point, it will be for storage; in the future, it may be used for additional meeting space and for overflow in the hall.  The basement will be heated.  Ms. Morrison added that both levels will be sprinklered. 

Mr. Lannon returned with a 2004 photo.  Mr. Paradis felt that it is still hard to tell.  J. P. Morrison Jr., construction contractor, stated that the area has always been used and wondered why anyone wants to beat up on the Catholic Church.  Mr. Lannon stated that he did not want to beat up on the Church but that the ordinance says it should be in the footprint.  The question came up as to where the septic goes for the white cottage (on the Church property).  It was felt that Mr. Barnard will address that when he speaks about the septic system.

Mr. Favorite asked about the pines on the back side which had been mentioned in the previous meeting.  Mr. Paradis said that they are about 20’ away but should be looked at.  Father Leblanc stated that they expect to remove some.  Erin Guidi, abutter, stated that the roots go where the basement is proposed.  In the back of the cottage, she questioned if the pylon will be disrupted and cause the ledge to fall.  Mr. Paradis suggested that an arborist look at this.  Father Leblanc stated that they are concerned with the integrity of the cottage and it will be looked into.  Ms. DellaCroce asked if they will remove the trees and was concerned about erosion.  Mr. Paradis stated that, if they are removed, smaller shrubs or something could be placed to control this.  Ms. Morrison stated that the trees in question are not on Church property; there would have to be an agreement with the abutter.  Ms. Guidi asked about an arborist and Mr. Morrison felt that the Guidi’s should get an arborist and then talk to the Church.  Ms. Guidi stated that an arborist would not be in their budget right now and the roots are already there, running beneath the old building.  Mr. Barnard stated that the prevailing winds come from the North so the danger from falling trees would be to the Church buildings.  He added that they should not remove
-3-
Planning Board Minutes
8/12/09

CATHOLIC CHURCH SITE PLAN continued:
the stumps but to grind them, leaving the roots.  Ms. DellaCroce reminded him that digging the new foundation would disrupt the roots.  Father Leblanc said that the Diocese is concerned about this as well and would like the abutter to give them a letter with their concerns. 

When asked how much room is needed for putting in the basement, Mr. Morrison stated a couple of feet, but added that it is unpredictable and depends on each case.  Mr. Barnard mentioned that the concrete people can do the work from the inside so that the wall is not quite so wide.  Mr. French stated that the nearest tree, an oak, is 10’ away.  He felt that the others should probably come down as the time to do so is now.  Mr. Morrison asked which direction they would fall and Mr. Lannon stated that two lean towards the Church building and the others toward the Church cottage.  Paul Harrington, representative for the Diocese, stated that they could get an easement from the couple who own that property and the Diocese could take the trees down.  Mr. Dingman stated that the trees, being on the adjacent property, are really not under the Planning Board’s purview. 

Mr. Morrison went back to the footprint issue and stated that you could walk down the back step; there were 3 wooden steps in that corner.  A discussion followed.  Mr. Paradis explained that the property tax card shows that there is no corner in that area.  Mr. French stated that the area is presently a concrete pad; it is an impervious area connected to the building.  Mr. Lannon said that it is connected to the cottage.  The wall is a retaining wall.  The Board mentioned that they might need to look at the area again.  A discussion as to what to do now was held.  Mr. Paradis said that we cannot accept the application  as complete until we determine this as it would start the time clock.  All of the other concerns have been addressed.  In looking at Mr. Lannon’s photo, it does not seem to have the roof over that corner.

Ms. DellaCroce asked about the septic system.  Mr. Barnard, septic designer, stated that the present one can go to a special point; it would not meet today’s standards.  There is a 1,000 gallon tank.  The State will require a new septic design but they will not have to implement it until the present one fails.  The new design is good for four years so it must be kept current.  The soils there are deep and well-drained.  The Guidi’s have a holding tank so it should not affect their system.  Ms. Seeler asked if they intend additional office space or future development for the basement, how that affects the septic design.  Mr. Barnard stated that it will be a multi-functional design for the worst case scenario.  Patricia Lannon asked if they intend on using it as living quarters.  Father Leblanc answered that they will probably use the main house in Plymouth. 

Ms. Morrison stated that, previous minutes stated that it might become a residence but Father Leblanc said that it would never be used that way.  She wanted that noted.  Mr. Paradis stated that if the use is changed for anything other than storage (in the basement), they will need to come back to the Planning Board.  As things stand now, they will need to go back to the Zoning Board in order to square off the building.  Ms. Morrison asked if they would need to if they cut the corner off and she was told that they would be okay then and would not need the ZBA.  Mr. Morrison stated that the reason for squaring off
-4-
Planning Board Minutes
8/12/09

CATHOLIC CHURCH SITE PLAN continued:
the corner is that it will not hurt the abutter and will cost less for the Church.  It would be more efficient.  Mr. Barnard mentioned that, if the Planning Board would like to go out and see the site again, they usually set a date and only the Board can discuss the situation unless any other type of evidence is brought in.  Mr. Paradis said that the Board has already done individual visits.  He believes that once this issue is resolved, things can move quickly.  A discussion followed as to dates to apply for the ZBA and their next hearing date.  It was determined that, if the application is in to us by Sept. 14th (Sept. 7th to the Land Use Officer), the hearing would be set for October 6th.  Mr. Barnard asked about a continuation if they determine not to go to the ZBA.  The Board agreed to set this.  Mr. French asked if they could do it as a conditional.  Mr. Paradis felt that the Board cannot do that in this type of case.  They have been through everything else so, once this is determined, all will go quickly.

C. Dingman made a MOTION, second by E. Seeler, to REQUEST EITHER A REVISED PLAN
WITH THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT OR TO GET APPROVAL OF A SQUARED OFF BUILDING FROM THE ZBA.  The motion CARRIED.

C. Dingman made a MOTION, second by J. DellaCroce, to CONTINUE THE SITE PLAN FOR THE CATHOLIC BISHOP OF MANCHESTER TO SEPTEMBER 9, 2009.  The motion CARRIED.

CONTINUED COMPLIANCE HEARING:  DOUGLAS VOELBEL
As Mr. Voelbel has not responded or asked for a continuation, the Board determined that his Site Plan has now expired.

MERGER:  SUSAN WORTHEN McCOMBS
No-one was present for this merger.  Mr. Paradis read the State law regarding mergers and suggested that Ms. Bonsteel could handle these as the Planning Board representative.

E. Seeler made a MOTION, second by C. Dingman, to APPOINT THE LAND USE OFFICER AS THE PLANNING BOARD DESIGNEE FOR MERGERS.  The motion CARRIED.

PCC:  SILVER SHORES
Sharon Lorah, President of the Silver Shores PUD, presented a plan of the area.  She explained that a PUD is a Planned Unit Development not a condominium.  They have individual cottages, 18 sheds, and a common area (in front and on the other side of the driveway).  All but two of the sheds are on the other side of the driveway, as well.  They allow up to a 12’ x 20’ shed for each cottage.  Cottage #1 would like a shed and the association has determined that their shed should only be a 10’ x 12’ as they built a porch on the cottage without permission.  Mr. McCaffrey would also like to increase his shed to the largest size allowed.  The need for storage is great as there are no basements. 

 

-5-
Planning Board Minutes
8/12/09

SILVER SHORES PCC continued:
In a discussion as to the difference between a PUD and a Condo., Ms. DeStefano thought that the common land is divided equally among the owners where condos are taxed according to the size of the unit.  A discussion was then held as to the Ordinance interpretation; it was felt that the Board did not address accessory building when they restricted the expansion of buildings in the Lake District.  Ms. Bonsteel feels that the wording makes it include the accessory buildings and she is sending them to ZBA, therefore, a Variance will be needed for the two sheds.  Ms. Lorah stated that Ms. Bonsteel suggested that they seek a Variance to cover all shed to the maximum size they are allowing.  Ms. Seeler felt that they would only have one year to do the full plan if it got approved.  Mr. Paradis added that zoning laws change also and he feels that they should address the two sheds that are wanted now.  The other option is to remind the Planning Board to look at the Ordinance again to determine the wording and, if they decide to remove accessory buildings from this, they can wait until March town meeting.  If the town votes to accept the new wording, they would not need a variance in that case. 

Ms. Lorah mentioned that cottage #19 would like to change to a rectangular shape, also.  The Board said that they would need a variance.  At this point, Mr. Paradis explained that a PCC (Preliminary Conceptual Consultation) is not binding on the Board or the applicant.

MINUTES OF JULY 22, 2009:
The following amendments and clarifications were made:
Page 1, under ABSENT and OTHER, close the parenthesis.  At the end of the 2nd paragraph, following “defined” add “in the Town Zoning Ordinance definitions.  Page 2, 3rd paragraph, 1st line, delete “sees” and replace with “recognizes the restriction on increasing the maximum”.  4th paragraph, 4th line, replace “that they” with “that the Planning Board”.  6th paragraph, 2nd line, replace “principle” with “principal”.  Page 3, 1st paragraph, 7th line, replace “Evil” with “Evl”.  8th line, replace “In speaking” with “She spoke” and following “Selectman,” replace “he” with “who”.  Under SET PRIORITIES, 3rd line, insert “Workforce” before “Housing”.  Last paragraph, 1st and 2nd lines, insert “building” before “code” and delete “enforcement”.  Page 4, HDC UPDATE, 1st paragraph, 2nd line, insert “an inventory of Historic properties on” following “taking” and change “add” to “adding”.  Next paragraph, 4th line, replace “line” with “cut-off” and replace “National Parks” with “Department of Interior”.

C. Dingman made a motion, second by J. DellaCroce, to accept the minutes as amended.  The motion carried.

 

 

 

 

-6-
Planning Board Minutes
8/12/09

COMMUNICATIONS:
Mr. Dingman took “The Source” to read.  The Town of Bristol, NH Water Resource Plan will be kept in the office for anyone who wishes to see it.  The LGC Municipal Law Lecture Series and the Fall Annual Planning and ZBA Conference dates were looked at and, if anyone is interested, they may request monies to attend from Paul Weston, Town Manager.  An 8/5/09 letter from DES to Mr. Suldenski was read and Mr. Paradis reported that he had e-mail correspondence with Attorney Bernie Waugh in regard to the 50’ from wetlands being under a Special Use Permit or under the ZBA and Atty. Waugh feels that it should come under the ZBA.

REPORTS:
Historic District Commission: Mr. Dingman reported that the August meeting was canceled due to having no scheduled hearings.  The next meeting will be held Sept. 8th.

Selectmen:  Mr. Milbrand had e-mailed an update, which Mr. Paradis read:  The Central Street bridge is 1-week behind but they are trying to make up the time lost to high water.  The Borough bridge has one remaining approval with DOT to approve the easement obtained by Bristol then it will go for construction bids.  There will be a busy agenda tomorrow night, starting at 5:30 pm, and including the street light reduction rescheduled from last month due to a lack of quorum.

Capital Improvements Plan Committee:  As Mr. Campbell was absent, Mr. Paradis stated that they will meet August 18th.

REQUEST FROM NEWFOUND LAKE REGION ASSOCIATION
Mr. Paradis explained that we received a request to sign a letter of approval for their proposal.  The Board agreed with the first part of it but felt that more information is needed in regard to the second part. 

C. Dingman made a MOTION, second by S. Favorite, to HAVE MR. PARADIS CRAFT A LETTER OF REPLY TO HIS DISCRETION.  The motion CARRIED.

NEXT MEETING:  The August 26th meeting has been canceled so as to give the Board a break.  The next meeting will be held September 9th with the continued site plan for the Catholic Church.  The deadline for applications must be in to us by August 18th (one week earlier to Ms. Bonsteel) in order to be held at our next meeting.

OTHER:
Municipal Officials Presentation:  Ms. DellaCroce asked about the presentation to be held in Sept., as stated in previous minutes.  Mr. Paradis stated that Ms. Bonsteel is to set up a date for this.

Checklist for Site Plan Review:  Mr. Paradis asked the Board to look over the checklist that Ms. Bonsteel is proposing and we shall discuss it at the next meeting.
-7-
Planning Board Minutes
8/12/09

OTHER continued:
Lake Street Paving:  Mr. Favorite reported that the State has now changed the area of paving.  It now will start at Chandler Street and go north to Bridgewater. 

With no other business, C. Dingman made a motion, second by E. Seeler, to adjourn at 9:40 p.m.

                                                            Respectfully submitted,
Jan Laferriere, secretary