PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
May 28, 2008
APPROVED:
_____
AGENDA: PUBLIC HEARING: SITE PLAN/SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
PROPOSED CHANGES
SIGN PLANS: ROGER G. BERLINGAME/DEVOST YACHT CLUB
CONDOS, 210 W. Shore Rd., #108-051 & 109-001
SMARTGROWTH – DAVE JEFFERS
PCC: MEL HANSEN/HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
MICHELLE BONSTEEL, Code Enforcement Officer
ATTENDING: Dan Paradis (Chairman), Elizabeth Seeler (Vice Chairman), Janice DellaCroce, Clay Dingman, Jerry McGwin
Alternates: Tom Babcock, Murray Campbell, Steve Favorite
ABSENT: Don Milbrand (Selectman – conflict), Denice DeStefano (conflict),
Alternate: Don Martin
OTHER: Michelle Bonsteel (Land Use Officer)
The meeting opened at 7:00 pm. Mr. Babcock sat in for Ms. DeStefano. As there was no-one in attendance for the Site Plan/Subdivision changes, Mr. Paradis chose to change the order of the agenda.
SIGN PLANS FOR ROGER G. BERLINGAME/DEVOST YACHT CLUB CONDOS:
As this case had already been determined, the Board looked at the mylar and plans to determine that no changes had been made. The Board then signed the plans, mylar and notice of decision. As there were 3 mylar pages, it was noted that registration fees are owed for the additional 2 pages. The secretary will hold all signed copies until the fees have been paid. She explained that she will be in the office on Friday.
SMARTGROWTH: DAVE JEFFERS/ADAM LASNEY OF LRPC AND CAROL FOSS OF THE AUDUBON SOCIETY OF N.H.
Mr. Jeffers stated that they have looked at our Master Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Subdivision/Site Plan Regulations and compared them to the State laws. They expect to finish by the end of June. Tonight they just wish to touch base with the Board. LRPC is in conjunction with Audubon issues. They have developed a matrix and a document that summarizes what they have found. Copies of these were distributed to the Board.
-2-
Planning Board Minutes
5/28/08
SMARTHGROWTH continued:
Mr. Jeffers explained that, on the matrix, what is in green deals with the Master Plan, in yellow with the Zoning Ordinance, blue with Site Plan Regs., and orange with Subdivision Regs. Mr. Jeffers pointed out the red printing on the first page where the Zoning Ordinance mentions minimum lot size as two acres but cluster development is determined by section 4.7A. He stated that lot sizes are determined by districts in an earlier section. He asked the Board to look everything over and to drop him an e-mail or give him a call for any feedback.
Mr. Jeffers then went over some of the Principles:
Principle #1, maintain traditional compact settlement patterns to efficiently use land, resources and infrastructure investments. He stated that there is some contradiction to the 1998 survey. Mr. Paradis explained that we have a later survey than that one. Mr. Jeffers asked about cluster development and have we had this awhile. Mr. Paradis stated that we have. Mr. Jeffers then asked if anyone is using this and was told that they have not. Mr. Paradis further explained that we have not had a lot of multi-use cases. Mr. Favorite stated that sewer to the Lake may make this more of a concern once it is developed. He feels that we shall have to address this sooner than later.
Principle #2 & 5: Foster the traditional character of NH downtowns, villages, and neighborhoods by encouraging a human scale of development that is comfortable for pedestrians and conducive to community life & Provide choices and safety in transportation to create livable, walkable communities that increase accessibility for people of all ages, whether on foot, bicycle, or in motor vehicles. Mr. Jeffers said that a number of the ideas overlap. For encouraging businesses, there is Downtown improvement in the Master Plan and he asked if we can update this as to steps to be taken. Mr. Paradis stated that Mr. Favorite was the head of the Downtown Improvement Committee until it disbanded a short time ago. The vision has been there for a long time. The problem is that the State controls the two roads. It is hard to know where to start; hard to get the first step going. This year, $10,000 was shot down at Town Meeting yet 92% of those answering the survey want improvements. Mr. Favorite stated that this has been on-going since 1962. It is wanted but without funding. Mr. Paradis explained that we have been awarded a PlanNH Charrette. Mr. Favorite added that at Town Meeting, Ms. Corrow (Town Manager) said that if we raised the $10,000 we could get $50,000 for infrastructure. DOT shoots plans down as they are not on their 10 year plan. Mr. Paradis added that it is hard to get owners of the buildings/businesses to show any interest. Ms. Seeler said that they don’t even join the Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Paradis went on to say that after the 1998 plan, we did get an Historic District overlay adopted in the downtown and now have an Historic District Commission. Mr. Favorite added that 3 surveys have all said that the downtown was important.
Principle #3: Incorporate a mix of uses to provide variety of housing, employment, shopping, services and social opportunities for all members of the community. Mr. Lasney stated that we do have mixed businesses and residential dwellings but the Master Plan states that residential is a conflicting use to the downtown. Mr. Paradis stated that our problem is one of parking as it is limited.
-3-
Planning Board Minutes
5/28/08
SMARTGROWTH continued:
Principle #5 (see above): Asked about our multi-use path and where it is located. Mr. Paradis explained that it begins in the area of the walking bridge (beside the old location of the Millstream Restaurant) and continues up to Village Pizza where it follows along the side of the road a ways before continuing up to the Lake. Mr. Favorite added that it is 1.2 miles long. Mr. Jeffers than stated that there is language in here that roads are 20’ wide (Zoning Ordinance, Manufactured Housing Section). He stated that in the Subdivision Regs. 5.11 focuses on manufactured housing while 5.10 cites 50’ wide roads. Ms. Bonsteel felt that the latter refers to right-of-way. Mr. Paradis pointed out that, on the next page, V, G.1 has 24’ and 20’ in it. Mr. Paradis then mentioned that frontage includes a subdivision road which was interpreted as any road on an approved Subdivision plan. One change we are addressing tonight is to define subdivision road as one brought up to town specifications. There is one case on the agenda tonight that may be affected by this as the Board told them previously that they could count frontage that was on an approved plan. Mr. Paradis felt that the Board could wave it as it will be in the Subdivision/Site Plan regulations.
Mr. Jeffers then asked about our impact fee ordinance. Mr. Paradis explained that we had to incorporate a Capital Improvements Plan first and that has just come into being. We have not used impact fees as yet.
Mr. Jeffers asked about research on population and housing trends as LRPC's document indicates that the number of housing decreased at one time. He wondered if there was change to cause this. Mr. Favorite stated that in the 1990’s we were increasing condo units and low income housing. The Board determined that the document is wrong. A discussion followed in regard to the campground on Wulamat Road and how it went from camping to Recreational Park Models.
Ms. Bonsteel noted that we are having our town maps brought up to date along with overlays (Pemigewasset, water/sewer, Shoreland Protection Act, etc.). She added that the 250’ setback of the Shoreland Protection Act is difficult in that Bristol is unique, having rivers right through the downtown. She asked if anyone has considered this.
Mr. Favorite asked if we need a balance of protected lands. Bristol is 14.2 miles with no place to go except up. Mr. Jeffers stated that this is up to the towns. Some towns are acquiring protected lands, especially in the southern part of the State. This could be town ownership. We should think about why we would want to protect the land. It is advised that there be continuity and similar topography. Mr. Favorite asked if there is anything on environmental for natural habitat. Mr. Jeffers pointed out that this comes under Ms. Foss and her issues.
Priority #7: Involve the community in planning and implementation to ensure that development retains and enhances the sense of place, traditions, goals, and values of the local community. Mr. Paradis explained that the Historic District statement was true at the time of the Master Plan.
-4-
Planning Board Minutes
5/28/08
SMARTGROWTH continued:
Ms. Foss stated that she was engaged in similar issues pertaining to natural resources and habitat. She then distributed a summary for feedback and she will e-mail the document for comment. She stated that the Master Plan is good and covered most of the topics. We do need more on energy efficiency, light pollution, ridgelines, and stormwater management. As to the Zoning Ordinance, we had the basic ordinance and then it was amended a slew of times. She would suggest that we compile a new document. There is a Lake, Pemi Overlay, and a Wetland Overlay. Mr. Paradis explained that Lake is a district not an overlay. Ms. Foss stated that the Pemi Overlay is okay where her issues are concerned. She asked if it would make sense to have the other two rivers under the same overlay. Mr. Paradis explained that the Shoreland Protection Act did not cover the Pemigewasset River until recently and that is why we developed the Pemi Overlay. This has been revised to meet the old overlay plus Shoreland Protection. We have tried to conform to that with a few more restrictions. We probably need to delete naming the two rivers and follow just the Shoreland Protection Act. Mr. Babcock added or we could be more restrictive.
Ms. Foss said that we have good erosion control on the Pemi. We may want to add it for the rest of the town. Bristol is not experiencing a lot of subdivision though we look at southern growth. Several of the Zoning Districts seem to be urban growth. There is some water/sewer so this is a subject we could work with. Mr. Paradis stated that we have tried to control growth through zoning. There is lousy zoning, he feels, along route 104E where there are two districts, one on each side of the road. Ms. Foss stated that Concord has an urban growth boundary and water and sewer lines stay inside the boundary. This encourages development within that area. Ms. Bonsteel explained that there are plans to extend sewer to the lake and extend water through Lake St. Mr. Paradis added that water/sewer lines have been done on an ad hoc basis. Ms. Foss stated that she will note this is not applicable and the Board can do as they like.
Ms. Foss continued with the Subdivision Regs. stating that they are weak on natural resources. There is nothing on the environment in the Purpose section. It is covered in other sections, however. Mr. Paradis stated that the Purpose does mention the Master Plan which addresses this. Ms. Foss felt that this will depend on how specifically we want to be. She mentioned one area that needs urgent attention: Section V. G7. “Natural water courses shall be cleaned and increased in size, where necessary, to take care of storm runoff.” Ms. Foss also mentioned that we neglected to get impervious cover into our Site Plan Regs. and it should be added. In the Zoning Ordinance, impervious is only in relation to structures. Mr. Paradis thought that it is in the Shoreland Protection Act. He explained that the Board recently put in impervious for structures and were to look at all impervious surfaces next as we did not want to confuse voters with both at one time.
Ms. Foss then addressed the checklist and said that there are no checks and balances. Ms. Bonsteel agreed. It is supposed to see that no new flow goes off the premises.
-5-
Planning Board Minutes
5/28/08
SMARTGROWTH continued:
Mr. Paradis stated that the current law by structures was for looks, such as in the Lake District. Ms. Foss stated that there are no State mandates to have open areas. In the middle to southern part of the State, they are trying to limit the growth areas. Mr. Favorite said that Maine and Vermont are trying to protect land, as well. Ms. Bonsteel said that Fish & Game want protected lands to be contiguous. They encourage towns to do this if they think they can get the land. Developers will talk about land swaps but these have to favor the towns. The question is who maintains the lands once they are protected. Ms. Foss stated that new tools have the highest priority and State agencies and Environmental services have developed Natural Services. There is a high transmessivity (aquifers, wild habitat, etc.) and this gives guidance.
Mr. Favorite brought up impact fees again and stated that someday sewer will go to the lake and bring growth in that area. He questions who is to blame for cottages getting water damage when they build on swamp areas that have been filled in. We are trying to protect the lake. What are other towns facing that have lakes? Ms. Foss stated that a major project is the Lake Winnipessaukee Watershed Management Plan. Mr. Favorite asked if we need an impact fee for sewer to the lake. Ms. Foss felt that Bristol has not seen much yet but the whole ridgeline issue may need to be addressed. Development up high will impact. Mr. Paradis stated that we already have the Red Fox area. Ms. Foss advised that we get land trusts to take care of this.
Mr. Babcock asked if her report will take us back to the State for help. Ms. Foss said that she is just looking at our documents. Mr. Paradis stated that we really appreciate the help from Mr. Jeffers, Mr. Lasney and Ms. Foss. Mr. Jeffers added that they will be in touch toward the end of June. His
e-mail is: djeffers@lakesrpc.org. Ms. Bonsteel stated that Mike Izard is the liaison for Bristol and has mentioned an informational meeting on impact fees that is to be held. It is to be held in Northfield and the Board is invited. She believes that it is to be on June 12th. Mr. Jeffers stated that he will send the information to the secretary who can forward it to the members. He then asked when it would be best to hold their public hearing: on a meeting night or another. After discussion, it was determined to place it on the agenda for June 25th.
(Still no-one present for the Site Plan/Subdivision proposed changes)
-6-
Planning Board Minutes
5/28/08
MICHELLE BONSTEEL, LAND USE OFFICER
Ms. Bonsteel stated that she is having a problem with a property on Shore Drive. A woman is complaining that a 6’ fence for her neighbor has been placed just 16” from her house and now the egress from a window on that side can no longer be used nor can they paint that side of the house. The fence owner did get a building permit and the fence is on his property. She feels that this is a civil case and the Board agreed. The woman also complained that it impedes view for traffic and Ms. Bonsteel informed her that this is a police issue. Ms. Bonsteel went on to say that many towns require a drop in the fence height or do not allow stockade fences. Mr. Paradis felt that this has not been a big issue here. Ms. Bonsteel stated that all of this fence business began with the Swiss View fence. Ms. DellaCroce stated that the Swiss View fence is on the beach and is a ZBA issue. The on-going problem in this case began with a neighbor that was made to cut their eaves as they hung over the adjoining property. Mr. Favorite stated that it is neighbor against neighbor. Mr. Paradis said that it is a civil matter. Ms. Bonsteel mentioned that she is no fan of petty regulations but we may need to change it to 6’ fences for the backyard and drop down for the front yard.
A discussion followed on fences and court orders for Silver Shores and Swiss View. Ms. Bonsteel mentioned that now the Big Catch wants docks. Mr. Favorite stated that, originally, Silver Shores wanted moorings and compromised with a dock. Ms. Bonsteel stated that people have the impression that the town is giving off the beach. The Board felt that this is not so.
A discussion began concerning Wulamat Road, specifically Blueberry Shores/Bristol Shores. Ms. Bonsteel stated that they got a Special Exception for boat storage and a parking lot on the lot across the street. They now want to take 12 of the parking spaces and put in a tennis court. It is an accessory use and there is no principal use on the lot. She feels that it needs a variance. Mr. McGwin mentioned that it will mean additional lighting and is a whole new use. Ms. Bonsteel said that it will have additional noise as well. It was determined that it would need a Site Plan also. Mr. Paradis suggested that Ms. Bonsteel read the file when they got the Special Exception for the boat storage and parking lot.
Mr. Paradis asked if there is anything new with the Elderly project. Ms. Bonsteel stated that they are going to the ZBA for Administrative Decision and for a Variance for the masonry walls. She feels that the latter does not belong in the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Bonsteel spoke with the applicant team in the parking lot after the last hearing and told them that it is not too late to change the design. She suggested that footage could be added to the break areas of the building front and windows could be more in keeping with a New England look (2 over 1 or 6 over 1 for example). They could have a possible portico for the front entrance. She asked them to try to keep it more to the look of the neighborhood.
-7-
Planning Board Minutes
5/28/08
MICHELLE BONSTEEL continued:
Ms. Bonsteel added that the off-premises sign is also to go to Zoning. Mr. Favorite brought up the Summer St. access. Mr. Dingman stated that the only paving that he was aware of previously was for the pathway out back. Ms. Seeler suggested Ms. Bonsteel look at the 86 Summer St. case. The Board explained that, for the front, they never got a curb cut from the State. Ms. Seeler said that she might check with Betty Dole (in assisted living in Ma. now). Ms. Dole and her husband used to complain that this neighbor were always parking on their land. Ms. Bonsteel stated that there is only one tenant now (5 apartments are empty). Mr. Dingman stated that his impression is that this is just repaving but he understands that there was no parking in the front of the building.
At this time, Mr. Paradis thanked Ms. Bonsteel for coming in.
PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SITE PLAN/SUBDIVISION CHANGES (still no public)
Proposal #1 & #2:
E. Seeler made a motion, second by T. Babcock to adopt proposal #1 and #2 as presented. The motion carried.
Proposal #3: Mr. Paradis explained that this is not in the Zoning Ordinance and feels that this will suffice for now and we can address the Zoning Ordinance for next March. He mentioned that for the PCC: Mel Hansen and Habitat, this may create a problem as the Board previously determined that the approved subdivision road on a plan would suffice for frontage. Mr. Paradis felt that the Board could possibly waive this when it comes before us at a hearing, or we could hold this off until we also put in the Zoning Ordinance change.
E. Seeler made a motion, second by C. Dingman, to adopt proposal #3 as presented. The motion carried.
Proposal #4: Mr. Paradis explained that this is per Bernie Waugh’s suggestion (Town Attorney).
C. Dingman made a motion, second by T. Babcock, to adopt proposal #4 as presented. The motion carried.
Proposal #5: Another Attorney Waugh suggestion.
C. Dingman made a motion, second by J. DellaCroce, to adopt proposal #5 as presented. The motion carried.
Proposal #6: Mr. Paradis mentioned that the only concern is the numbering: he has placed it in the logical place which is after #25 but wonders if it should be #29 and #30 instead. Mr. Dingman felt that it should stay as presented as we put in dates of amendments when they are revised.
C. Dingman made a motion, second by T. Babcock, to adopt proposal #6 as presented. The motion carried.
-8-
Planning Board Minutes
5/28/08
PROPOSED SITE PLAN/SUBDIVISION REGULATION CHANGES continued:
Proposal #7:
E. Seeler made a motion, second by C. Dingman, to adopt proposal #7 as presented. The motion carried.
Proposal #8, 9, 10, & 11: These are all for changes to the amount of copies needed to accompany an application.
J. McGwin made a motion, second by C. Dingman, to adopt proposals #8, 9, 10, & 11 as presented. The motion carried. This was later rescinded when Ms. DellaCroce noticed that the sizes were not complete.
C. Dingman made a motion, second by E. Seeler, to amend #11 to “(20) reduced scale copies with a sheet size of 81/2” x 11” or 11” x 17”.” The amendment was carried as well as the previous motion including the amendment.
MINUTES OF MAY 14, 2008: The following amendments were made.
Page 2, 3rd paragraph from the bottom, next to last line, change “affluent” to “effluent” and last line, replace “for” with “of”. Page 3, 2nd paragraph, 7th line, replace “we had to be” with “they had to use” and 8th line, replace “they are non-porous” with “the pavement is non-porous”. In paragraph 4, last line, replace “replacing the 12’” with “providing a 12”. Page 4, 1st paragraph, 3rd line, replace “she” with “her” and 8th line, replace “told” with “sold”, and last line, replace “rules” with “rule”. Paragraph 2, 9th line, replace “affluent” with “effluent”. 3rd paragraph, 4th line, replace “water line” with “wetland”, 8th line, replace “signed of” with “signed off”, and 9th line, replace “stated that they do not want” with “stated that the Fire Dept. doesn’t need”. 4th paragraph, 1st line, add “c” after “9.8” and after “Zoning Ordinance” insert “specifying that wetlands do not count for lot size requirements”. Page 5, under PCC:, 5th paragraph, 5th line, replace “wild life” with “wildlife” and 7th line, replace “a possibility could require impact fees to the subdivision” with “impact fees could be required for the subdivision.” Page 6, under PCC:, 2nd line, replace “he” with “him”. Page 7, under PCC:, 4th paragraph, 4th line, replace “okay” with “overlooked”. Page 8, CIP, 1st line, replace “CiP” with “CIP” and 2nd line, replace “2019” with “2018”. Under “OTHER”, 2nd line, after “changes” add “during the Site Plan Review for the Elderly project.”
C. Dingman made a motion, second by J. McGwin, to accept the minutes as amended. The motion carried.
COMMUNICATIONS: The 12th Annual Scholarship Scramble Golf Tournament invitation was read. The Lincoln Land Lines magazine was looked at and will be held in the office for awhile. Also read were letters to Craig Campbell and to Patricia Thurber from Michelle Bonsteel, Land Use Officer.
REPORTS:
HDC = nothing
SELECTMEN = not in attendance
CIP = nothing
-9-
Planning Board Minutes
5/28/08
DISCUSSION FOR WHERE TO HOLD MEETINGS: It was noted that the division of this meeting room must be divided and soundproof as they will be holding juveniles in the Police section. Suggestions that Mr. Paradis has heard are the Middle School and the Old Town Hall. It was generally thought that the Board would like to keep this room for consistency as well as availability to the copier or other information when needed.
ENGINEERING REVIEW AND INSPECTION FUNDING AGREEMENT: Ms. Bonsteel had sent in a form for the Board to look at. Mr. Paradis felt that this is a need such as the Land Use Officer’s agreement between the Planning Board and the Engineers for the Elderly project. It is for setting up an escrow account. Mr. Paradis feels that there should be a request for proposals and that we should look at Meredith’s Ordinance and then get people on our side. He will have Ms. Bonsteel, Land Use Officer, e-mail a copy to each member of the Board.
NEXT MEETING: The next meeting will be held June 11th at 7:00 pm. There will be a public hearing for PSNH for cutting on scenic roads. No hearings are ready though there could be PCC’s.
With no other business, E. Seeler made a motion, second by C. Dingman, to adjourn at 9:45 p.m. The motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Jan Laferriere, secretary