Minutes
NEWMARKET PLANNING BOARD MEETING
SEPTEMBER 9, 2014
MINUTES
Present: Eric Botterman (Chairman), Diane Hardy (Town Planner), Janice Rosa, Jane Ford, John Brackett, John Badger, Peter Nelson (Alternate), Rose-Anne Kwaks (Alternate)
Absent: Dan Wright (Town Council ex officio) arrived at 7:52 p.m. due to the Town Council primary election commitment, Val Shelton (Vice Chairman) excused
Called to order: 7:01 p.m.
Adjourned: 8:31 p.m.
Agenda Item #1 – Pledge of Allegiance
Agenda Item #2 – Public Comments
Chairman Botterman appointed Rose-Anne Kwaks to sit in for Val Shelton.
There were no public comments.
Agenda Item #3 – Review & approval of minutes: 08/12/14
Chairman Botterman mentioned there are no formal minutes of the site walk of 07/21/14. A quorum of Planning Board members was not present. Therefore, it was not considered a meeting. There are informal minutes and they will be kept as a record of the site walk with regular meeting minutes.
Action
Motion: Rose-Anne Kwaks made a motion to approve the minutes of August 12, 2014
Second: Janice Rosa
Vote: John Badger & Dan Wright abstained due to absence
All others in favor
Agenda Item #4 – Regular Business
NIP Lot 6 LLC/Shearwater Investment Corp – Continuation of a public hearing for an application for Major Site Plan review, at 2 Forbes Road (NIP Lot 6 LLC), Tax Map R3, Lot 9-6, and 181 Exeter Road (Shearwater Investment Corp.), Tax Map R3, Lot 8, both in the B2 Zone. The proposal is for a 24,000 square foot expansion of the existing industrial building located at 2 Forbes Road, with associated parking, drainage, and landscaping improvements. Pending site plan approval, the lots will be merged to make one lot.
Chairman Botterman stated the applicant requested a continuance.
Action
Motion: John Badger made a motion to continue to October 14, 2014
Second: Janice Rosa
Vote: All in favor
There were questions from the public about the continuance. Chairman Botterman explained the application would be continued to the October 14, 2014 Planning Board meeting. A member of the public asked if they would be notified by mail again. Chairman Botterman stated that continuances did not require new notification and there would be no mailed notifications for this application.
Rose-Anne Kwaks asked if members of the public could still speak on this application. Chairman Botterman explained that could not be done, as that would be information that should be contained within a public hearing. He stated anyone could call the Town Hall prior to the next meeting and check on the status of the application for that meeting.
Diane Hardy explained this application was continued, because the applicant had been required to do a geotechnical report by the State of NH and they are in the process of doing that now. The Board has not received any comments back from the State.
Hayden Family Revocable Trust/Mark L. & Karen S. Hayden, Trustees/Chinburg Builders, Inc. – Continuation of a public hearing for an application for Subdivision related to a ten (10) lot Residential Open Space Design Development at 74 Bald Hill Road, Tax Map R7, Lot 24, R1 Zone. The proposed development involves the construction of single family homes on a small cul-de-sac, and the preservation of 21.09 acres as open space on a parcel of approximately 36 acres. A Special Use Permit is also requested in reference to Section 6.0 Residential Open Space Design of the Newmarket Zoning Ordinance.
Christian Smith, consulting engineer for the applicant, stated, since the last meeting, they have had Technical Review Committee (TRC) hearings, they responded to the engineering review, as well as Department of Public Works (DPW) comments and had a follow up Conservation Commission hearing.
He stated they added six parking stalls within the right of way on the straight section of the road. Just south of that, they added a 30,000 gallon cistern, with a pull-off for the Fire Department. They revised the drainage and the road to a proposed 22’ width. They provided the Board with revised waiver requests. There will be Cape Cod Berm curbing and be a closed drainage system. The drainage pond that was formerly on Lot 11 has been revised to an underground trench. That was per Department of Public Works and Underwood Engineering. There are overflows in each catch basin. The lot configurations have not changed. The Conservation Commission was pleased with the location and number of the parking stalls.
They also provided one additional waiver request. They are uncertain if it is actually required. It has to do with plan scale.
There will be a street light at the end of the street at the intersection with Bald Hill Road.
Chairman Botterman stated the parking spots that were added were requested by the Conservation Commission. Dan Wright stated he could speak to that. He stated the Conservation Commission was very pleased with the end result of the location of parking spaces and the accessibility of the trails.
Chairman Botterman clarified the 30,000 gallon cistern replaced the need to use the hydrant located in Newfields. Christian Smith stated, if the Town finds they do need to utilize the hydrant, they can still do that, too.
John Badger asked if there would be a Homeowners Association. Christian Smith stated he thought there probably would be one. The applicant is choosing to gift the land to the Town, he was not sure if there would have to be one. The subdivision road will be a public road.
John Brackett asked if the extra parking spots would fill up with snow or would they plow them. Christian Smith stated they would plow them out. There is room off of there. There is a 20’ grading and maintenance easement off to the side.
There will be signage indicating there is public access to the open space.
Diane Hardy stated she has been in touch with Underwood Engineers and they have the plans and revised drainage study. They will be ready shortly for a TRC meeting. (Meeting is scheduled for September 23, 2014 at 10:00 a.m.)
She stated they are waiting for the open space maintenance plan. She would like to have the Conservation Commission weigh in on that. Chairman Botterman asked Christian Smith if he could contact Chinburg’s office and ask them to get that in, as soon as possible.
Janice Rosa stated she had attended the site walk and there was quite a bit of debris. She asked how they could make sure that debris got cleaned up. Diane Hardy stated Mr. Hayden agreed to some things, when he was out there. She would like to see some notes placed on the plan. There was also some debris on the other side. Chairman Botterman stated it was not a design element, but it could be included in a condition of approval.
Action
Motion: Janice Rosa made a motion for a continuation of the Hayden Family Revocable Trust/Mark L. & Karen S. Hayden, Trustees/Chinburg Builders, Inc. for a public hearing for an application for Subdivision related to a ten (10) lot Residential Open Space Design Development at 74 Bald Hill Road, Tax Map R7, Lot 24, R-1 Zone to October 14, 2014.
Second: Dan Wright
Vote: All in favor
Waterway Realty LLC – Design Review for property at 310 Wadleigh Falls Road, Tax Map R5, Lot 85, R-1 Zone. The proposal is for a Residential Open Space Design Development.
Tim Lavelle, from James Lavelle Associates, represented Waterway Realty, LLC.
Chairman Botterman stated this was a Design Review. The Board will not be accepting the application this evening. It is a preliminary discussion.
Tim Lavelle stated the property is an existing 20 acre tract. It has an existing house and barn, which has two family units in it. There is a second house and barn and that also has two units in it. They are proposing cutting the houses and barns off onto their own parcel, giving them 4 acres and then building an open space design subdivision with a cul de sac on the remaining land, leaving 11.9 acres of open space. This land is almost surrounded by conservation pieces. The piece to the north and northeast is owned by the Audubon Society, the piece in the corner is owned by the Town and another piece on the east/northeast is owned by the Town.
The Town’s regulations say that open space should not be scattered. The open space with this lot will tie several open space parcels together.
They are looking for some input. They have not completed the topography on the property. The have only done some work at the front. This is very preliminary. They have had the wetlands mapped.
Chairman Botterman asked if the 11.9 acres of open space was all wetlands. Tim Lavelle stated there is a good portion of dry land in the back, but there is a wet portion that bisects it.
Chairman Botterman asked about septic systems. Tim Lavelle stated they proposed a septic system for each home.
Rose-Anne Kwaks stated the name of the company is very appropriate for the site, “Waterway”. She stated she is the former owner of the abutting land that is now owned by the Audubon Society. During her site walks, they needed waders to walk through that land. She cannot imagine there is any way to put houses on some of the lots. The water is 2-3 feet deep. She asked if this was a Class A Watershed Protection Area. Diane Hardy stated a portion of the Piscassic River and Follett’s Brook is nearby. Rose-Anne Kwaks showed a picture of her property from the air. She stated the land is wet. She thought it was a Class A Watershed Protection Area. Diane Hardy stated, as part of the review, they would look at that. Tim Lavelle indicated where the low lying area of the Waterway property was on the plan. He stated there is a big hill in the middle of the property and it drops off in every direction.
Jane Ford asked whether he believed the coverage of the road, the parking, and the homes would make the water roll off faster, which could affect the wetlands. Tim Lavelle stated it would, if it was not designed properly. They have not looked into a drainage design yet. There is a lot of old pavement up there now.
Janice Rosa asked if they have looked into the cost of bringing the sewer lines up to there. Tim Lavelle stated they have not looked at it, but are open to it. Janice Rosa stated it may be more cost-effective than building individual septic systems.
Diane Hardy stated the Class A Watershed Protection Overlay District includes Class A surface waters including the Piscassic River and Follet’s Brook.
Chairman Botterman stated they need to do a yield plan. The Board has not received one yet. There are certain stipulations governing those. She stated they need to look at the formula to make sure the percentages are adequate to meet the Town’s requirements.
John Brackett asked if there were any trails there that you can pass through without three feet of water. Tim Lavelle stated there are no trails on this property. He thinks they go around this property. The back of it isn’t entirely wet. There are stone walls out there.
Rose-Anne Kwaks stated that piece abutted her old property in the back and they do get water. It floods and there is water right up there. It comes up a couple of hundred feet onto their piece. She stated it is a flood plain. The tributary that goes to Follett’s Brook completely overflows and comes way up on all of those properties. You cannot traverse it when it gets wet.
She stated the newer house that David Walker had built, with the lean-to, which was the house where Mr. Walker, Sr. lived, is not two separate units. One unit was built as an accessory apartment and it was never permitted through the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Tim Lavelle stated it did not properly go through any Board. He stated there are two units. Rose-Anne Kwaks stated one was built as an accessory apartment. Diane Hardy stated this does raise a good question. Right now, there are two principle residences on the property. Under the ordinance, you can only have one primary residence per lot. The old homestead has two units in it and is clearly recognized as a duplex. It is not clear how that additional unit got into the other building, when the unit was created, and whether it is a legally nonconforming unit. What this leads to is the front structure is nonconforming, in that it does not meet the frontage requirements. The use is nonconforming, because you have four units on one lot. Only one single family unit is allowed per lot in this zone. This question is a Code Enforcement question. It is also a question of whether increasing the nonconformity of the lot is allowed and whether it requires some review by the Zoning Board of Adjustment. She and the Building Official met with the Assessor and they are trying to get more information. They should have it by the time this application is submitted to the Town.
Chairman Botterman allowed the public to speak at this point.
Ellie Connor, 295 Wadleigh Falls Road, stated she knows about the house. She knew Richmond Walker very well. He loved to tell the history of the house. She asked if they extended the sewer line, would that impact the other houses in the area. She has a septic system and their house is a quarter mile back from the road into the woods. Chairman Botterman stated that would not impact her. She would not be forced to tie into it.
Steven Doherty, 322 Wadleigh Falls Road, asked about the placement of the road. The road is between his property line and both of the houses. Heading onto the property, there is a very swampy area and next to that is a pond that fills with water in the spring. He is having trouble picturing how the road can fit in there. Also, the open field is extremely wet, especially in the spring. He can see a stream from his back window going down through the field itself. Tim Lavelle showed him the plan he had brought. Chairman Botterman stated whatever they do on this property it cannot add additional runoff to any other properties. Their drainage design will have to mitigate any additional runoff caused by the pavement or the houses. Mr. Doherty stated that was his concern. His backyard was wet. He asked if the houses would be in the wooded portion of the property. Brian Colsia, owner of the property, stated yes. There is an open area in the middle surrounded by woods. That is where they would place houses. They would be within the woods and up on the hill. There is old pavement up there. There were little roads there at one time. Chairman Botterman stated he thought that land was the Town pit and the DPW at one time. Brian Colsia stated that would make sense. There are little roads and you can tell there were barns at one time.
Ellie Connor stated the lots were small. She asked what size homes they would build. Brian Colsia stated the square footage would be about 1,600 or 1,690. Ms. Connor asked if they were proposing modular homes. Brian Colsia stated they were not modular homes. They would be stick built single family homes.
Chairman Botterman stated, in looking at the plan, it is a good plan, but there will be some challenges. Making a yield plan will be a challenge with the wetlands that are present.
Acadia Engineers & Constructors Inc. - Review engineering inspection report from Emanuel Engineering Inc. and discuss follow-up actions regarding 13 Water Street, Tax Map U3, Lot 4, M2 Zone.
Peter Nelson and Janice Rosa recused themselves due to conflicts.
Chairman Botterman stated they had a site walk prior to their last meeting. Some things had been done on the site that had not been approved on the site plan. The most significant issue is the seashells were put down in the parking area instead of pavement. The Board had an inspection report from Emanuel Engineering.
Chairman Botterman stated his opinion is, if the Board would like to allow any of the unapproved changes the property owner made to remain, there should be another public hearing to let people comment on them and they should go through the process. If the Board wants to tell them to comply with the plan, the Board can vote to do that.
Rose-Anne Kwaks stated Emanuel Engineering questioned where Tim Nichols had obtained his information about using seashells. Diane Hardy stated she sent Emanuel Engineering’s report to Tim Nichols and she never heard back from him. She also had told him this would be on tonight’s agenda. Rose-Anne Kwaks stated they should follow the approved plan and pave the area.
John Brackett stated he could speak to snow removal on seashells. It is very difficult to contain the shells in a specific area. They are difficult to work with. Chairman Botterman asked, from a Planning Board public policy perspective, why the Board should care what a property owner has to do to maintain private property. John Brackett stated down the road these shells could run off and end up on other properties. Diane Hardy stated this is also next to a public access easement. The Town has to maintain that area. If it is filled with seashells that have gone awry, it becomes the Town’s problem. John Brackett stated it is not easy to separate shells from mulch either. You would end up having to replace the mulch at the Town’s expense.
John Badger stated he walks through there a lot. The shells do not look good. He agrees with the snow removal problem and the maintenance issue. He asked whether the homeowners were prepared to take care of the seashells and spread them back out in the springtime when the snow melts. It was very clear in the inspection report from Emanuel, where the seashells meet the Riverwalk, it really does not look good. He also spoke about the removal of some signs, particularly “No Parking” and “Fire Lane” signs. He asked if the Fire Chief had approved that. Diane Hardy stated he had not. He stated the Board would need the Fire Chief’s input. He stated he was not supportive of this.
Jane Ford agreed and stated, if a Town gives a developer a direction to do something and the developer does something else, she has concerns about that. It is important what kind of message the Town of Newmarket is giving to the community and future development. She was concerned about the snow removal and the impact to the Town’s expenses. The lack of respect to the Town of Newmarket’s due process concerns her greatly.
Chairman Botterman stated there are two issues. One issue is the failure to follow the process. There is an approved site plan. The developer knew, if he made changes, he had to come back to the Board. To change the location of the underground storage tank is insignificant, but changing the pavement is significant and he should have known enough to come in. The other point is whether the Board likes those changes. What he is hearing now is the Board does not like the changes. At this point, the Board has a decision to make to either say they want the parking lot built and paved per the approved plans or say to give the developer the opportunity at another public hearing to come in and try to convince the Board and engineers and whoever else that the seashells are appropriate.
John Badger stated he was not on the Board when this was approved. He knew it was coming in at the time when his other term expired. He stated there are a lot of people who are not happy with the way the project turned out, with the design and look of it. The Planning Board that approved this was very generous to the developer. For the developer to do what he did is a problem. The developer needs to come back and say he will commit to the plan that he committed to earlier and make it as the Board approved it and not ask for any waivers or changes. Chairman Botterman stated, if that is the case, they do not need him to come back. They can just enforce the site plan approval.
Dan Wright arrived at the meeting at 7:52 p.m. The Board brought him up to speed on the discussion thus far. Dan Wright stated he agreed the Planning Board was very generous with this application. The owner had also come before the Town Council with surveying work, the cost of which the Town actually absorbed. He could see putting seashells down at a private residence on Cape Cod. When this is plowed and the seashells end up on the sidewalk, someone litigious could have an issue and then the Town becomes liable, if they approve this. There is a right way to do things and a wrong way.
Jane Ford asked if they could establish a timeline by which this would be corrected.
Diane Hardy suggested they need to get a plan of action from Tim Nichols within 30 days and implementation within 90 days. Chairman Botterman stated the plan of action should be more like 15 days and the implementation within 30-45 days.
Diane Hardy stated the Board had spent a lot of time redoing the Stormwater Regulations. They got a grant from PREP (Piscataqua Region Estuarine Partnership Program) to put together state of the art Stormwater Regulations. One of the changes the Board put in these regulations is contained within Section 3.02 Parking Requirements. She read the following: “Parking lots, driveways, and aisles shall be paved. However, every effort shall be made to use pervious asphalt or concrete where appropriate to reduce increases in runoff using design guidance developed by and in consultation with the UNH Stormwater Center. At a minimum, pervious asphalt or concrete or other pervious permeable pavement shall be considered for travel lanes not regularly utilized by large trucks, pedestrian areas or overflow parking.” She has correspondence from Tom Ballastero, who is the head of the UNH Stormwater Center program. She had asked the Town’s engineer to consult with them regarding the applicability and appropriateness of the seashell pavement that is out there as a medium for stormwater management for and as a substitution for porous pavement. She read Tom Ballastero’s letter. He stated shells are often found in concrete and asphalt aggregates in Florida. In this case it appears the concept is a gravel surface, only the gravel is crushed shells. He had no experience with this. These are the people who are studying state of the art innovative stormwater technologies appropriate for New England and they have no experience with this. He stated, if this was a private road, they would not be much of an issue. If it is a public road, he considers it unacceptable until such time the developer or engineer furnishes appropriate information. Road design is all about subbase and subgrade preparation. He would consider this design no more pervious than a gravel road, which is pretty impervious. Diane Hardy stated Mr. Ballastero is very highly regarded in the field of civil engineering and stormwater management. She would defer to him for expertise in this area. She added that Mr. Ballastero had said if this was a private road, he had no issues. The road in question here is a public area, not a private road and this was not approved. It is right on the waterfront and adjacent to a public resource the Board is trying to protect.
Diane Hardy stated the Board can draft a letter to Tim Nichols. John Badger stated they could put a fifteen calendar day limit for compliance. Chairman Botterman stated there may be some issues he will say he will not address. There is a whole list of issues from Emanuel Engineering. The developer should go point by point and say whether they will address something. He would like that within fifteen days, so the Board can have it before the next meeting.
Action
Motion: Rose-Anne Kwaks made a motion that they request the developer of 13 Water Street, Tax Map U2, Lot 4, M-2 Zone to have fifteen calendar days to comply with the current plan approved by the Planning Board
Second: John Badger
Vote: All in favor
Rockingham Golf, LLC – Request for a waiver of Impact Fees assessed for Recreation Facilities and Water Supply & Treatment for the subdivision at 200 Exeter Road, Tax Map R3, Lot 23-100.
Chairman Botterman stated they have received two (2) waiver requests for impact fees related to the Rockingham Golf Course project. One is for recreational facilities and the other is for water supply and treatment.
Diane Hardy stated Section 7.07(F) Impact Fees in the Zoning Ordinance talks about the grounds for waivers. There are certain conditions upon which waivers are granted. Item #2 is the one that is most applicable to this request.
(2) The Planning Board may agree to waive all or part of an impact fee assessment and accept in lieu of a cash payment, a proposed contribution of real property or facility improvements of equivalent value and utility to the public. Prior to acting on a request for a waiver of impact fees under this provision that would involve a contribution of real property or the construction of capital facilities, the Planning Board shall submit a copy of the waiver request to the Town Council for its review and consent prior to its acceptance of the proposed contribution. The value of contributions or improvements shall be credited only toward facilities of like kind, and may not be credited to other categories of impact fee assessment. Full or partial waivers may not be based on the value of exactions for on-site or off-site improvements required by the Planning Board as a result of subdivision or site plan review, and which would be required of the developer regardless of the impact fee assessments authorized by this Ordinance.
Diane Hardy stated the developer has made some facility improvements, which he is claiming is comparable to the value of impact fees that would be charged. At this point, the Board could request the Town Council to review it and consent prior to the acceptance of the impact fee waivers. The developer is claiming the Recreational Facilities fee is the value of the golf course being available and open to the public.
There was discussion about the Town Council’s involvement in the waiver requests. Rose-Anne Kwaks stated the Town Council is the only one who can approve land acquisitions. That is the item the Planning Board would refer to the Town Council. Not the approval of the waiver of fees, but an approval of the acquisition of land. The capital improvements that he made do not fall under the Town Council’s purview. The contribution for which he is asking for a waiver of impact fees was a result of something he was required to do by the Planning Board to get approved for the Site Plan. It does not qualify as a reason to be granted a waiver.
Jane Ford stated she hoped the Board would keep in mind, while the golf course has value to the public it brings value to the developer, as well, with the sale and marketing of homes in the subdivision located next to a golf course.
John Badger stated, speaking as a golfer, the developer saved the golf course. Jane Ford stated, as a golfer, she would agree with that. As a Planning Board member, she would ask the Town to consider the value of this land and the opportunity it brings to the developer vs. if he built a subdivision without a golf course.
Peter Nelson stated, with 52 lots, you have at least a couple of hundred people moving in with other recreation needs. Those people will be enjoying recreation in other places besides the golf course. The impact fees are to be spread throughout the town, not on a site specific basis.
Rose-Anne Kwaks stated she attended the first meeting for this development. She was in favor of this, if the golf course would remain, even though she felt it was not the right thing for the Planning Board to do. The Board should not have approved this plan with the golf course being operated for profit as a commercial enterprise. The land is supposed to be non-commercial and it is commercial. The developer subdivided a piece where the clubhouse is and he rents it out, so the gentleman can run the golf course. She cannot see how the developer can ask for a waiver. When you have a golf course and greens, they are not going to allow cross country skiing, snowshoeing or snowmobiles. John Badger stated he lived in Ridgefield, CT, and they had a public Town golf course and they put stakes around the greens in the winter, they had 18 holes, and you could cross country ski and snowshoe. There were trails there. All you had to do is stay off the greens. That is something the former owners of this golf course did not wish to allow. This is a winter recreation opportunity and an opportunity to expand the use for the town.
Chairman Botterman stated he is not hearing a lot of support for the waivers. Diane Hardy stated she sat through all of the TRC meetings with Chinburg and the engineers. In the original plan, he was not going loop the waterline. He was going to dead end it. We knew there was a problem with fire flows and domestic water supply in that area. Through the negotiations, they were able to get Chinburg to agree to, not only to loop the waterline, but to increase the size of the waterline from an 8” main to a 10” main. She recognizes that as a major capital enhancement to the Town’s water supply. She feels the water supply waiver is a reasonable one. She recommends they grant it. The TRC Committee asked him to make those improvements, and he voluntarily agreed. He was not required to do them, as a condition of approval. Jane Ford stated this also helped the development. She asked if they could give a portion of the waiver.
Chairman Botterman stated the Board can do anything they want, as long as they can justify it. He had no issue with granting the water supply waiver. The developer spent a lot of money increasing the waterline and looping it to Ladyslipper Drive, which does not benefit his development, alone. It benefits overall fire protection at Ladyslipper Drive and in that section of Town. John Badger stated it cost the developer $130,000. Rose-Anne Kwaks stated he is putting 52 houses up there. This is the cost of doing business. The Town is in the middle of dealing with 12 million dollars for the wastewater treatment plant upgrade. Another $38,000 would help. Chairman Botterman stated this impact fee waiver request had nothing to do with that. This is for water. They could never use this impact fee for wastewater treatment. He understood what she was trying to say. Rose-Anne Kwaks stated they also have the MacIntosh Well going in. There are a lot of costs to the water infrastructure. They still have to put money toward that.
Chairman Botterman stated he knows there was an 8” waterline proposed for the development and, through the TRC and discussions, the Town asked Chinburg to loop the waterline to Ladyslipper Drive and make it a 10” line. If he was representing Chinburg, as his engineer, he would have told him not to do it. The cost of him increasing the size of the water line and extending the waterline to Ladyslipper Drive was much more than $38,000. Jane Ford asked how many lots are on Ladyslipper Drive. Diane Hardy stated the water line serves more than Ladyslipper Drive. Jane Ford asked if it would be more than 52 lots. Chairman Botterman stated he thought so. Jane Ford stated she is just finding a way to make this a win-win situation. Chairman Botterman stated he thought it was already a win-win. It benefited the Town significantly. Peter Nelson stated there is a formula for calculating the $737 fee. You can’t get into “horse trading” a number. It is the value of the improvement to the water supply. They obviously went above and beyond the requirement. The water related request is one he sees more positively in their favor. The developer did jump through some hoops to do that.
Rose-Anne Kwaks stated the Town also did him a large favor by allowing him commercial use of the golf course. It is a wash.
Peter Nelson stated he would favor keeping the recreational impact fees. The impact fee for recreation is spread more broadly than just saving the golf course.
Action
Motion: John Badger made a motion that the Board approve Request #2 Water Supply & Treatment waiver of impact fee $38,324.00
Second: John Brackett
Vote: Dan Wright - aye
Rose-Anne Kwaks – nay
Jane Ford – nay
Janice Rosa – nay
Eric Botterman – aye
John Badger - aye
John Brackett – aye
Motion passes 4-3
Action
Motion: John Badger made a motion that the Board approve Request #1 impact fee waiver Recreation Facilities fee of $ 14,352.00
Second: Eric Botterman
Vote: Dan Wright – nay
Rose-Anne Kwaks – nay
Jane Ford – nay
Janice Rosa – nay
Eric Botterman – aye
John Badger – aye
John Brackett – aye
Motion fails 4-3
Agenda Item #5 – New/Old Business
Planner’s Report
Diane Hardy stated the CIP Committee is meeting tomorrow night at 6:00 p.m. for an orientation meeting. They hope to make recommendations by the October 1 deadline. Rose-Anne Kwaks and Jane Ford will be attending.
Diane Hardy stated Ginger Smith has resigned from the Planning Board due to job commitments and she was the Alternate to the CIP. Eric Botterman stated he will volunteer as Alternate to the CIP. Chairman Botterman stated he would like to thank Ginger Smith very much for her service.
Diane Hardy stated they need to start working on the Future Land Use section of the Master Plan. They have a 50 % matching grant to do this through the NH Coastal Program. She asked for two volunteers to meet with Strafford Regional Planning Commission (SRPC) and have a meeting on this. Peter Nelson stated he would like to volunteer. Diane Hardy stated she would also like to invite Val Shelton, as she is the Planning Board’s representative to the Economic Development Committee.
Diane Hardy stated there are new preliminary floodplain maps. FEMA is going through a public comment process. These maps are critical to our floodplain regulations. She wanted to let everyone know we have those maps in the office for people to review. The maps will also go up on the Town’s website. At some point, the Town will be asked to update the regulations to reflect these new maps. Chairman Botterman wanted the public to be aware that, if they have low lying areas on their property, they will want to check these new flood maps, as Newmarket does not allow building in the flood zone. People may find they cannot build in an area that was okay to build in prior to the new mapping. It could have a significant impact on the value of their property.
Committee Reports
John Brackett stated the Conservation Commission was very happy with the result of the parking at the Bald Hill Road subdivision. Janice Rosa stated that parking setup was due to the Technical Review Committee, the Fire Department and Public Works Director.
Agenda Item #6 – Adjourn
Action
Motion: John Badger made a motion to adjourn at 8:31 p.m.
Second: John Brackett
Vote: All in favor