Planning Board Meeting

Meeting date: 
Wednesday, August 23, 2017

Planning Board

August 23, 2017

Approved December 19, 2017

 

Members Present: Bruce Healey, Chair; Deane Geddes, Vice-Chair; Russell Smith, Ex-officio Member.

 

The meeting began at 7:00 p.m.

 

Mr. Healey noted that there was not a quorum. However, he said that since tonight’s business involved Conceptual consultations only, it was acceptable to proceed in an advisory role. Mr. Geddes and Mr. Smith agreed.

 

ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS

 

Minutes

The available draft minutes for review were deferred until the September 19, 2017 Planning Board meeting.

 

CASE: Case 2017-010 Conceptual Annexation Review- Robert Britt-11 Washington

St., Newbury, NH Tax Map 16A-276-428 – Proposing a lot line adjustment with

property owned by Mary Thayer-16 Pine St., Newbury, NH Tax Map 16A-249-427.        

 

Mr. Healey read into the record the following statement:

The PB is authorized to provide Conceptual Consultation subject to the following: This is preliminary review.  Conceptual Consultation is a voluntary step available to the applicant.  Such discussion may occur without the necessity of giving formal public notice but such discussions may occur only at formal meetings of the board. This meeting is a review of the basic concept of the applicants land use proposal or project.  The meeting is intended as assistance by answering general questions and questions regarding application requirements. The discussions must be in general terms such as desirability of types of development and whether any State or local ordinances may apply to the applicant's proposal or project. Such consultation shall not bind either the applicant or the board and statements made by planning board members shall not be the basis for disqualifying said members or invalidating any subsequent action taken by the Planning Board.

 

Mr. Healey informed Robert Britt, applicant, that there was not a quorum for tonight’s meeting and asked if the applicant still wished to meet with the Board members in attendance. Mr. Britt said yes.

 

Mr. Healey reviewed the history of this lot line adjustment, noting that the Board approved a lot line adjustment in February 2016 with the condition that a new deed and plat be submitted to the town. This was delayed and Mr. Healey stated that he contacted Mary Thayer and was told that the required documents were in process. There was a problem with the financial institution that had a lien on the property. Mr. Healey noted that there was a shed on the property and there was assurance that the shed was located on Ms. Thayer’s property. The financial institution disagrees and considers the shed an encumbrance. The shed is owned by Mr. Britt.

 

Mr. Britt presented his suggestions regarding achieving a resolution. He noted that he and Ms. Thayer have been neighbors for 31 years. He said they met with the surveyor and the surveyor told them the shed was on Ms. Thayer’s property.  Mr. Britt said he agreed to purchase the property in question so the shed will be on his property.

 

Mr. Healey said a variance is needed because the rear setback is within the 15-foot setback.

 

Mr. Britt said he got a variance for the shed 22 years ago but does not have the Notice of Decision regarding same. Mr. Britt said that, because he already had a variance, he decided to go for a Lot Line Adjustment. He noted that 22 years ago there was not a survey done on the property.

 

Mr. Healey said that now a survey has been done, the problem has been surfaced. Mr. Healey said he will look in the property file for the Notice of Decision for the Variance from 22 years ago. Also, he noted that he will confer with Ken McWilliams, the Board advisor on two points: (1) the fact that Ms. Thayer’s lot is becoming less non-conforming, and (2) the rear setback.

 

Discussion followed.

 

Mr. Geddes stated that this situation needs to be fixed. Mr. Smith agreed.

 

Mr. Britt said if he takes down the shed there will be no problem for him, but Ms. Thayer will still need a variance. He noted that when the Planning Board approved the lot line adjustment 22 years ago they did not request a survey. Mr. Britt stated that he believed that was negligent.

 

CASE: Case 2017-009 Conceptual Site Plan Review- Hokanson Realty, LLC (Owner) William Tutthill of Kitewing, LLC (Agent) – 4 Rte. 103A, Newbury, NH Tax Map 020-156-327 – Proposing to share building with another web based outdoor recreation business and potential retail business – Nordic Skaters.

 

Mr. Healey read into the record the following statement:

The PB is authorized to provide Conceptual Consultation subject to the following: This is preliminary review.  Conceptual Consultation is a voluntary step available to the applicant.  Such discussion may occur without the necessity of giving formal public notice but such discussions may occur only at formal meetings of the board. This meeting is a review of the basic concept of the applicants land use proposal or project.  The meeting is intended as assistance by answering general questions and questions regarding application requirements. The discussions must be in general terms such as desirability of types of development and whether any State or local ordinances may apply to the applicant's proposal or project. Such consultation shall not bind either the applicant or the board and statements made by planning board members shall not be the basis for disqualifying said members or invalidating any subsequent action taken by the Planning Board.

 

Mr. Healey informed William Tuthill, applicant, that there was not a quorum for tonight’s meeting and asked if the applicant still wished to meet with the Board members in attendance. Mr. Tuthill said yes.

 

Mr. Tuthill and Ben Prime, owner of Nordic Skaters, discussed their proposal with the Board. Mr. Tuthill reviewed his business summary statement for Kitewing LLC. He said his business uses the back portion of the building for storage, light assemble, and occasional shipping and receiving. The space in the front of the building has remained empty.

 

Mr. Tuthill said Mr. Prime, Nordic Skaters, of Norwich, VT, approached him about using the empty space. Mr. Prime described his business as primarily a web-based business with daily pick-ups from UPS. There will be one to two employees on site, and very little retail traffic.

 

Nordic Skaters specializes in Nordic skates and cross country ski equipment. Mr. Prime said his goal is to become a cross country ski supplier to area school teams and, to that end, a school van might bring students in for fittings. All skis and skates are rented for a minimum of two weeks and there are an average of 10 rentals weekly during the season.

 

Mr. Healey asked Mr. Tuthill if he owned the building. Mr. Tuthill said he is waiting for DES Certificate of No Further Action regarding the presence of an old home heating tank on the premises that was “closed in place”. DES wants to ensure that there is no presence of an old spill from the days when the building was a Texaco gas station. Mr. Tuthill noted that property ownership is currently in limbo pending notification from DES.

 

Mr. Healey asked Mr.Tuthill to discuss the property floorplan. Mr. Tuthill said there is an apartment on the second floor that is currently empty and measures about 1,100 square feet. He said the ground floor measures about 3,800 square feet. He said the intent is to rent about 2,500 square feet of the ground floor.

 

The parking spaces in the front were discussed. Mr. Prime said there is room for nine to ten spaces. Mr. Healey suggested that Mr. Prime review the Onsite Parking regulations contained in the Site Plan Review regulations.

 

Mr. Geddes asked about the amount of activity anticipated for shipping, namely how many deliveries are expected and how will they arrive. Mr. Tuthill showed photos of the back of the building. Discussion followed.

 

Mr. Healey informed Mr. Tuthill that the Board will need a letter of agency from the current owners. He also informed Mr. Prime that he should review the signage regulations. Mr. Primes showed photos of the current signage on site at the Norwich, VT location.

 

Mr. Healey suggested that the applicant should submit a Minor Site Plan Review.

 

CASE: Case 2017-011 Conceptual Site Plan Review- The Fells (Owner), George

Pellettieri & Kyle Cummings (Agents) – 456 Route 103A, Newbury, NH Tax Map

Map 018-232-347 – Proposing The Fells Conceptual Plan.   

 

Mr. Healey read into the record the following statement:

The PB is authorized to provide Conceptual Consultation subject to the following: This is preliminary review.  Conceptual Consultation is a voluntary step available to the applicant.  Such discussion may occur without the necessity of giving formal public notice but such discussions may occur only at formal meetings of the board. This meeting is a review of the basic concept of the applicants land use proposal or project.  The meeting is intended as assistance by answering general questions and questions regarding application requirements. The discussions must be in general terms such as desirability of types of development and whether any State or local ordinances may apply to the applicant's proposal or project. Such consultation shall not bind either the applicant or the board and statements made by planning board members shall not be the basis for disqualifying said members or invalidating any subsequent action taken by the Planning Board.

 

Mr. Healey informed George Pelletieri, agent, and Susan Warren, executive director of The Fells, applicant, that there was not a quorum for tonight’s meeting and asked if the applicant still wished to meet with the Board members in attendance. Mr. Pelletieri and Ms. Warren said yes.

 

Mr. Pelletieri reviewed the history of the parking lot application to date, noting that the first proposal was submitted in 2008, another proposal was submitted in fall 2016, and the third proposal is submitted for this meeting. He noted that the current proposal contains modifications suggested resulting from the first two proposal submissions.

 

Mr. Pelletieri said the current proposal is much smaller, it wraps around the existing gatehouse building, and it has zero impact on the adjacent wetlands.

 

Mr. Healey asked if the parking lot is more than 250 feet from the brook. Mr. Pelletieri said yes.

 

Mr. Pelletieri said the current proposal is for a 50-space parking lot, including handicap spaces. It offers improved entrance and exit, improved turnaround space for buses, and flexible handicap options. He said the new entrance is south of the existing entrance.

 

Mr. Geddes asked about employee parking. Mr. Pelletieri said it was in the 50 space allotment.

 

Mr. Healey asked about the lighting. Mr. Pelletieri said it will be at ground level and will not include poles.

 

Mr. Healey asked about the amount of fill needed. Mr. Pelletieri said most of it will be a two-foot, five-foot or six-foot amount, depending on how much the lot is sloped off.   

 

Mr. Smith asked about the surface of parking lot. Mr. Pelletieri said it is a gravel type of surface that will be prepped for paving in the future if needed.  

 

Mr. Healey asked about the septic system. Mr. Pelletieri said it will be replaced.

 

Mr. Smith suggested that the Board schedule a site visit. Mr. Healey agreed.

 

There was discussion about the entrance on the plan. Mr. Pelletieri said it is an entrance and an exit. He added that the existing parking area in the upper field will be restored to a fells.

 

Mr. Pelletieri said the applicant would like to go to a Final Site Plan Review at the September 19, 2017 Board meeting.

 

Mr. Healey said a Site Visit is scheduled for September 6, 2017 at 4:00 p.m. and noted that all appropriate notices will be posted regarding same.

 

ADDITIONAL BUSINESS

 

Master Plan Status

Discussion of the Master Plan status was deferred to the September 19, 2017 meeting.

 

Excavation Sites

Discussion of excavation site regulations was deferred to the September 19, 2017 meeting.

 

The meeting ended at 8:42 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Meg Whittemore

Recording Secretary