DOC

PLANNING BOARD

By Melissa Alexander,2014-06-17 02:01
7 views 0
PLANNING BOARD ...

Rye Planning Board February 8, 2005 Page 1 of 9

    Note: See next month’s meeting minutes for approval and corrections

    PLANNING BOARD

    Rye, New Hampshire

    MINUTES 7:00PM Rye Town Hall February 8, 2005

Members Present: Robert Brown, Chairman; Mel Low; Priscilla Jenness, Selectmens

    Rep; Kevin Mills; Bill Zechel; Mark Galvin, Alt. For Kim Reed;

    Robert Hablutzel arrives at 7:14 PM.

Also Present: John Elsden, Alt. Priscilla Patrick.

Call to Order

1. Approval of Minutes:

    Regular monthly meeting January 11, 2005; and two special meeting

    minutesLow makes a ―motion to accept the minutes as written. Seconded by

    Jenness. All Favored. Mills abstained. MOTION CARRIED

2. Public Hearings:

A. Malcolm Smith, 311 Washington Road, Major Site Plan Application to locate

    two manufactured homes as office units, zoned Commercial. Septic system

    design required. Engineering is Altus Engineering.

Jeff Clifford of Altus Engineering presents the case.

Mr. Clifford addresses the last meeting and the slight adjustments that had to be made.

    He addresses septic system approval from the state. He states that approval letters from

    the state have been provided to John.

Brown ascertains that they were here previously on December 14. The application was

    not accepted at that time because there were some things that were needed.

Mr. Clifford addresses the site plan. He addresses the trailer locations, septic location,

    parking (they are providing 6 spaces), lighting, small enclosure for solid waste, signage

    (―STOP‖ sign and ―NO ENTRY‖), one way traffic circulation through the site, and

    ―ENTRANCE ONLY‖ sign and a business sign that meets the ordinance requirements.

    He states that they requested waivers. They provided the cut sheets for the lights, photos

    of the mobile units in lieu of elevations, they have developed a Use Intensity statement

    (explains proposed uses and intent, ie. minimal visitors 2 per day on average), growth

    potential, traffic generation (11 trip ends per average weekday including employees), 8

    am to 8 pm hours of operation, wastewater explanation (approved by state), public

    screening.

Mr. Clifford addresses the waivers. (Assisted by Brown, page 5 of Staff Report).

Rye Planning Board February 8, 2005 Page 2 of 9

    Note: See next month’s meeting minutes for approval and corrections

WAIVERS:

    ? 403.2B10- Existing/Proposed sidewalks and curb cuts none proposed, they are

    really existing sidewalks curbed together;

    Mel makes a ―motion to grant the waiver.‖ Seconded by Zechel. All Favored. MOTION CARRIED.

    ? Final Topographic and soils plan. He states that soils maps are used for intensive

    septic systems and are also used for storm water calculation. After testing, they do

    not feel that this is needed. They are not changing the impervious on the site. He

    states that the soils are identified as 510A. Test pit discussion

    Mel makes a ―motion to grant the waiver.‖ Seconded by Zechel. All Favored. MOTION CARRIED.

    ? Storm Water Drainage Mgmt. Plan water drains onto abutting property which is

    the same land owner, there is not much run off from the site, there is a roadside

    swale on Rt. 1 that does function. There is no erosion out there at all. He states

    that they are not changing the amount of pervious on the site; everything is on the

    existing pavement.

    Mel makes a ―motion to grant the waiver.‖ Seconded by Zechel. All Favored. MOTION CARRIED.

    ? Elevation drawings. Applicant states that they have submitted photographs. The

    buildings will remain on wheels and will be on a concrete pad.

Brown states that the units do not exist because there was never a permit issued for them.

    They were on the site but they did not legally exist.

Mel makes a ―motion to grant the waiver.‖ Seconded by Jenness. All Favored.

    MOTION CARRIED.

Brown asks if there are any public or board comments. There being none he closes the

    public hearing.

    Galvin makes a ―motion to accept jurisdiction over the application.‖ Seconded by Low. All Favored. MOTION CARRIED.

    Galvin ascertains that there are no violations on this property. The violations are on the

    abutting property owned by the same owner.

Brown states that they cannot hold a hostage.

Rye Planning Board February 8, 2005 Page 3 of 9

    Note: See next month’s meeting minutes for approval and corrections

    Galvin makes a ―motion to accept the application.‖ Seconded by Low. All Favored.

    MOTION CARRIED.

Mr. Clifford states that he will bring the Mylar to be signed.

Hablutzel arrives.

B. Kenneth and Paula Moore, convert a yet to be constructed duplex into 2

    condominiums at 27-29 Wentworth Road, Tax Map 26, Lot 11:

    Brown discusses the special exception and variance that were granted. This application was continued from last month’s regular meeting.

    Mr. Elsden summarizes the Staff Report. He states that Mr. Moore did bring in the soils plan. He addresses the application. He has received construction approval from DES and a driveway permit from DOT. 4 parking spaces are indicated on the plan; Atty. Donovan has some comments on that. The Condo. Declarations are in Atty. Donovan’s possession

    for review. The floor plans had been submitted but Atty. Donovan stated that they were inadequate. They did label the water shed off.

    Brown ascertains that they have the DOT permit for the driveway because of the curb cut. The driveway had to be moved because of the septic location.

    Mr. Moore discusses his submissions. He addresses the Storm Water Management plan and drainage. He discusses the site plan - parking, ingress and egress, snow removal and storage, storage areas (solid waste, recycle bins, propane tanks).

Unintelligible discussion.

Jenness discusses the fire ratings on the doors, storage areas, etc.

    Mr. Moore addresses architectural issues, foundation, etc. He states that under the porch there would be a half wall and the LPG will be stored there. Discussion on site plan. There will be a basement floor level area under there with a slab with a wall that will probably be 4 or 5 feet high. It will be open porch under there but it will be an area that has a slab on it.

Patrick questions the layout of the units.

Unintelligible discussion.

    Discussion on parking, turnarounds, guest parking, and separation of the garages underneath into separate units.

Rye Planning Board February 8, 2005 Page 4 of 9

    Note: See next month’s meeting minutes for approval and corrections

    Mr. Moore states that the basic dimension of the building is 40 by 60 ft. (not including the alcoves). He states that they tried to do everything to comply with all of the setbacks, height, etc.

    Low questions why he chose to go condominium which is contrary to the zoning.

Brown states that condominium is not really contrary to the zoning.

    Low states that they need to go to the BOA. There are not any other condos in the whole neighborhood. It is all single family. He can see why he would request a duplex because there were two units there before. This will change the whole zoning structure that they have that they try to maintain.

    Galvin states that he was surprised in the minutes to read the section that says Drake questions if there are any variances needed to build a new building and Atty. DuCharme states that no variances are needed for the applicant. As a result of this discussion there was an approval requiring that it would only occur if the Planning Board approved the site plan. It does not seem to him that based on that information, when later it was found out that a variance was needed, that that conditional approval was invalid. It is important that the representations of the applicant and applicant’s agents are accurate so that the

    members of the board can rely on the information. He has not seen the BOA minutes for the subsequent meeting. How was the position when it went back? The Planning Board wants you to provide a zoning variance vs. the zoning board saying they cannot approve it because it violates the zoning. He feels that this is potentially for commercial gain creation of a greatly enhanced duplex property is a single residence zone and that seems to be a pretty direct violation of what the Planning Board was here to sit on.

Brown addresses the variances granted on January 7.

    Galvin states that the special exception was approved based on the representations of the applicant that no variances were needed, which was not accurate. He feels that would negate the special exception.

    Brown states that he is not sure that the BOA would go solely on the representations of the applicant’s attorney.

    Atty. Donovan states that there is a rule that the attorney is not supposed to mislead any……

    Galvin states that the ordinance states that representations of the applicants become conditions of approval.

Discussion.

    Brown states that the bottom line net result is that they got the variances.

Rye Planning Board February 8, 2005 Page 5 of 9

    Note: See next month’s meeting minutes for approval and corrections

    Atty. Donovan discusses the misunderstanding that because there were two SF dwelling

    units on that lot that entitled them to a duplex and that was not the case because the

    zoning ordinance prohibits two dwelling units from being on the same lot. So they have a

    non-conforming use situation. If one wants to rid themselves of the nonconformity then

    they have to go back to conformity.

Galvin voices concern on the communication between the boards.

Low discusses the condominium aspect. He states that this is the first case that he has

    seen on a residential lot and not a commercial lot that the applicant has come in and

    requested construction of condominiums. He states that if they approve this then they are

    weakening their zoning. The next person is going to come in and say ―he did it I want

    it.‖ How are they going to say that they cannot?

Brown discusses condos and construction and individual residences.

Low states that he just cannot remember a residential.

Atty. Donovan mentions Joe Sayers, Ocean Blvd. He states that had two dwelling units

    on it.