|
Town of Work Session Minutes Members
Present: Barbara
Annis, Rick Davies, Ed Mical, David Hartman, and Dan Watts Members Excused:
Paul Violette, Hank Duhamel Members Absent:
None Alternates Present:
Harold French, Alternates Excused:
Peter Wyman Alternates Absent:
None Presiding:
Barbara Annis Recording:
Tracey Hallenborg
OPEN MEETING Ms. Annis opened the meeting at 1. Paul Violette contacted Ruairi O’Mahony to request that he number
the pages of the Transportation Chapter that he sent via e-mail. Ruairi
contacted Mr. Violette this morning to let him know he would be in the
office later in the day; he was not sure what time due to inclement
weather and traffic being atrocious.
It was agreed to postpone the meeting with Mr. O’Mahony until
the 2. COMMUNICATIONS A general discussion was held regarding different items that need to
be done. Ms. Annis stated there are two packets that need to be put
together: 1. The Ballot and the Warrant to include: the Articles and Rationale.
2. Informational
packet if the public has any questions regarding Workforce Housing there
would be all
the details on it and the Building Code so it is available to
them for review. David Hartman requested a hard copy of Ruairi O’Mahony’s e-mail
of the Transportation Chapter. It was agreed after Mr. O’Mahony sent
an updated copy via e-mail; the secretary would make a copy for each
Board Member and leave it in the Town Clerk’s Office for pick up. David Hartman brought up point made at the Selectman’s meeting
regarding Planning Board meetings being held on National Holidays. Ms.
Annis stated there was a discussion regarding this in the past. After a
short discussion it was agreed to keep the schedule as is, so as not to
have too many back to back meetings.
Ms. Annis suggested talking about this topic when the Board
reviews their procedures this year. Rick Davies stated he attended the Central New Hampshire Regional
Planning Commission meeting last Thursday where Christopher Pope spoke
about the ice storm of 2009 and how most of the information regarding
the storm was broadcasted on television and the majority people were
without power. They are thinking of concentrating on more radio coverage
in the future. Mr. Davies also said they spoke about the Treasury Report
showing the balance sheet is in better order than it was six months ago.
Ms. Annis stated she and Paul Violette met with Kit Morgan who is in
charge of Park&Ride; Joan, Mr. Morgan’s secretary; Jim Marshall,
who works for finance in the DOT department; Richard Radwonski, who
works for Division V; Nick Coates, of Central New Hampshire Regional
Planning Commission. They discussed the Energy Efficiency Grant for the
Park&Ride; which it is at average 80% in capacity right now. The
Energy Grant for this area is $1.6 million.
It was discussed to possibly enlarge the Park&Ride to 42
spaces to qualify as an application for the Energy Grant. Ms. Annis
stated that everyone seemed to be in favor of it. The State would sign
on and apply along with the Town for the grant. Ms. Annis and Mr.
Violette met with the Selectman Thursday night and they approved
applying for the Grant. There
will be another meeting this On Tuesday Ms. Annis stated she appeared before the Town and
Municipal Committee where two new bills were being proposed for Planning
Boards:
1. A Land Use person would be appointed and hold the office until
someone else was chosen in their stead. 2. Is a three year term but again it was added on that if no one is appointed at the end of your term you would need to stay on until someone is appointed. Ms. Annis stated she opposed the first bill and she agreed with the 2nd bill having a term but did not agree with someone staying on until someone else was appointed. Ms. Annis commented on how Bow handles their appointments by having
the Board of Selectman do all the Appointments in one day six weeks
after their May Town Meeting. Warner has their Appointments all
staggered throughout the year. Rick Davies started a general discussion regarding the size of the Park&Ride and the need to plan ahead for growth. Ed Mical asked Mr. Hartman if any new information was received
regarding the correspondence from the Office of Energy and Planning to
talk about the proposed changes or approval of the new floodplain maps.
Mr. Hartman stated he would check with Laura Buono, Town
Administrator if she had any more information on the topic. Ms. Annis asked what the Board’s direction would be for this year
now that after tonight the Zoning changes should be complete. She stated
there are a number of unfinished items that needed to be put aside
because the Board needed to move onto Workforce Housing due to the law
being effective and also the Building Code needed to conform to the
State Law. The road specs
for Alan Brown were brought up as one of the things to work on. A few
other items discussed were: definition of structures and building;
converting C-1 District in Davisville to a C-2, although these items
will take some research and time Ms. Annis felt they should be addressed
so the Board could proceed onto other issues.
A general discussion was held regarding different ways to finish
up. It was agreed that a
checklist of “things to be done” needs to be compiled. A discussion was held regarding Wind Power and Solar Power and their
effect on the Zoning Ordinance as far as allowing the use of these
alternate energy sources and the height regulation, etc.
A motion was made to have ten minute recess. All were in favor. 3. PUBLIC HEARING AT Ms. Annis opened the Public Hearing. She explained a few things the
Board had approved and will be on the Warrant namely: Amendment #1, The
Workforce Housing Overlay; Amendment #2, The Building Code Ordinance; a
Public Hearing was held and all agreed on the Hardship requirements on a
Variance; everyone also agreed in regards to the open space development
(acreage change). She stated amendment #5, in regards to building or
structure, would not be in this year’s Town Warrant after hearing
comments so further research can be done. The height regulation will be
discussed tonight along with the B-1 section and changes to the footage.
More research will be done regarding gross floor area of the C-1
District buildings therefore the article will not be on the Warrant this
year. A. AMENDMENT #5 Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 5 as
proposed by the Planning Board to amend the Zoning Ordinance as follows? This proposed change was presented at a public hearing.
ARTICLE
IV –
YES ____
NO_____ RATIONALE:
The purpose of amendment #5 to increase the allowable height of
structures from 35 feet to 45 feet in Commercial (C-1) Zone
is designed to be less restrictive, while also providing an
opportunity for new and additional businesses to locate in Warner in the
Commercial Zones. The Fire Department has assured us they are equipped
to handle incidents at these heights and they support the amendment.
Under current building codes and under current plan review by
Fire Department inspectors adequate fire detection and suppression
systems would also be required for new construction and for expansion of
existing construction. Ms. Annis opened discussion for Amendment 5. Rick Davies stated that
the Rationale should read Business and Commercial Zones. There was a
brief discussion in regards to clarifying only the first sentence is
being changed in Article VI. Ed Mical suggested adding …. to show
continuation of existing sentence. Mr. Mical also stated it should read
35 feet “in height”. Mr.
Mical also suggested changing the ‘Zone” to District in the verbiage
since in the Zoning Ordinance it specifically says “District” and
also to add B-1 District to the first sentence in the Rationale.
After a brief discussion regarding the wording of the Rationale
it was agreed to have the Rationale read: The purpose of amendment #5 to increase the
allowable height of structures from 35 feet to 45 feet in Commercial and
Business Districts is designed to be less
restrictive, while also providing an opportunity for new and additional
businesses to locate in Warner. The Fire Department has assured us they
are equipped to handle incidents at these heights and they support the
amendment. Under current
building codes and under current plan review by Fire Department
inspectors adequate fire detection and suppression systems would also be
required for new construction and for expansion of existing
construction. David Hartman questioned whether the Fire
Department was equipped to handle a fire at 45 feet tall. Ed Mical
stated that they would be able to handle a fire at that height and would
be able to call on other Departments for additional help if needed. Ms. Annis opened the Public comments and
questions part of the session. Charlie Goodwin was wondering if the Fire
Department was appraised of the fact that the building could actually
have a larger reach than 45 feet high depending upon the grade at
different parts of the building. Ed Mical stated the Fire Chief, at the
time of talks regarding raising the height limits and he did not have
any direct issue with it and talked about sprinkler systems being
installed in buildings to help with the issue as far as fire protection.
Mr. Mical also stated that as far as ladder heights there is also mutual
aid that can be called for additional ladders of a larger height. Ms.
Annis stated that Paul Violette was in charge of this portion of the
Zoning and she felt Mr. Violette would have discussed this issue with
The Fire Chief before writing this up. Janice Loz asked what is the purpose of
changing the height from 35 feet to 45 feet since at this time you can
have a building over 35 feet in the Commercial District as long as the
front, side and rear depths are increased accordingly. Mr. Davies stated
that the only way to do that at this time is to get a special exception
and meet with the Zoning Board. Ms. Loz stated her concern is putting a
tall building on a small piece of property. Ms. Annis stated that she
did not feel it would be possible to put a tall building on a small
piece of property because of the various setbacks, parking area needed
and only 75% of the property can built on therefore with all the
restrictions it would probably not be possible to build a tall building
on a 1 acre lot. Charlie Goodwin asked if the Town could put
a definitive height limit. Ms. Annis explained an applicant still could
come in for a site plan and the Planning Board would need to make a
determination unless it is a special exception and then it would be the
Zoning Board’s decision. Rick Davies stated a Town had a provision
where at the 35 height regulation but in the commercial Zone it was 60
feet but within 150 feet of the edge of the residential Zone it could
not be more than 35 feet in height and the height was based on the front
of the building. Clyde Carson asked if the wording of the
Warrant would be written so as to explain if you say yes it means ……
and if vote no it means…… Ms.
Annis explained that the Article would be stated then Yes or No and in
the Rationale it will be explained why it is being proposed. She also
explained more detailed information will be available to Public. With no further questions the Public
hearing on that portion of the Amendments was closed. Ms. Annis asked
the Board if they had any further discussion. Mr. Hartman asked if the Board received
anything official from the Fire Department in reference to the proposed
Rationale of Amendment 5 Article IV sentence stating: The Fire
Department has assured us they are equipped to handle incidents at these
heights and they support the amendment. Mr. Hartman stated he would feel
better if he had some type of proof from the Fire Department they agree
with the statement. Dan Watts asked if more thought should be
put into the gradient height based on where the building is being
positioned instead of just picking a number. He was wondering if it
should be put off until next year. Harold French thought the Board
should go forward with it since some of the Board Members were missing
and would not have a vote. Rick Davies agreed with Mr. Watts that more
thought should be put into it.
Harold French made a motion to go forward
and put it on the Warrant with the corrections, Mr. Mical seconded the
motion. Ms Annis stated it would read.
No structure shall exceed 35 feet in height except 45 feet in height
is allowed in the C-1 and B-1 Districts, unless approved by the Board of
Adjustment. The Board……
YES ____
NO_____ RATIONALE: The
purpose of amendment #5 to increase the allowable height of structures
from 35 feet to 45 feet in Commercial and Business Districts and
is designed to be less restrictive, while also providing an
opportunity for new and additional businesses to locate in Warner. The
Fire Department has assured us they are equipped to handle incidents at
these heights and they support the amendment.
Under current building codes and under current plan review by
Fire Department inspectors adequate fire detection and suppression
systems would also be required for new construction and for expansion of
existing construction. Mr. Hartman stated he wants to be
absolutely sure the Board receives from the Fire Department those
verifications to be kept on file that they agree to statement in the
Rationale. It was agreed that the statement The Fire Department has assured us they are equipped to handle incidents
at these heights and they support the amendment could be removed if
the Board does not receive a letter from the Fire Department agreeing
with the statement. Harold French made a motion to accept the
amendment as is conditional upon receiving a letter from the Fire
Department. Mr. Mical seconded the motion. The Vote was taken: Ed Mical
yes; Dan Watts yes; David Hartman no; Rick Davies no; Harold French yes.
The majority vote carried for Amendment #5 to appear on the Warrant. B.
AMENDMENT #6 Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 6 as proposed by the Planning Board to amend the Zoning Ordinance as follows? This proposed change was presented at a public hearing. ARTICLE X -
BUSINESS DISTRICT B-1 Section
F: Change the maximum
gross floor area of buildings as permitted in this District and included
in TABLE 1 of the use regulations from 2,000 square feet to 4,000 square
feet and to read as follows: “The maximum gross floor area
shall be 4,000 square feet for new construction as permitted in Table 1
of the Use Regulations. Existing buildings may be expanded to include a
total of 4,000 square feet. Adequate
parking must be provided”.
YES
____ NO
____ RATIONALE:
The purpose of amendment #6 is to provide for additional
business opportunity and growth while maintaining reasonable building
sizing and also to help address the parking needs of the B-1 District. Ms. Annis asked if there were any comments from the Board. There was
a brief discussion regarding the sizing information for buildings
currently in the B-1 District. It was concluded that the majority of the
buildings were larger than 4,000 square feet. It was agreed that 4,000
square feet is not a very big for a business in a Business District and
would be a good number. Ms. Annis opened the discussion to the Public. Mr. Carson was wondering if it would be better to limit the size of a
business within the building not necessarily the size of the building
itself to better fit in with the downtown area. Mr. Goodwin agreed that
4,000 square feet is a good number. Ms. Annis closed the Public hearing and returned to the Board. Mr. Hartman MOVED to put in Amendment #6 as a Warrant Article. Ed
Mical seconded the motion. Rick Davies suggested that in the future the Board may want to
consider a 6,000 to 8,000 square foot building that would need to be
three of more business within the building to replicate the Downtown
area. The Board unanimously
VOTED to present the Article on the Warrant. 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no further
comments from the public. 5. ADJOURN David Hartman made a motion to adjourn. All were in favor. The
meeting adjourned at |