TOWN OF SUTTON

Pillsbury Memorial Hall

93 Main Street

Sutton Mills, NH 03221

PLANNING BOARD MEETING

DRAFT Minutes for Tuesday November 14, 2023, at 7:00 p.m.

 

CALL TO ORDER: Chair Pogust called the meeting to order at 7:00pm. He noted there was a quorum and took the roll.

 

ROLL: Glenn Pogust (Chair), Chuck Bolduc, Jason Teaster, Christine Fletcher, David Hill, Kristin Angeli (Alternate), Dane Headley

 

ABSENT: Roger Wells, Peter Blakeman (Alternate)

 

ALSO PRESENT: Will Davis, Horizons Engineering, David and Carla Chabot, Carl and Gail Olson, Jen McCourt, Debbie Lang

 

PUBLIC HEARINGS

 

1. Case PB-2023-11 Seminara Conditional Use Permit – Continued Public Hearing

The materials for this case were not sent in on time, so it will be continued to another meeting.

 

It was moved by David Hill and seconded by Christine Fletcher to continue the Seminara hearing until January 9, 2024. The motion was approved unanimously.

 

2. Case PB-2023-12 Sossong Driveway Appeal

 

Will Davis with Horizons Engineering was present to discuss the case.

 

Will explained that the applicant applied for a driveway permit on Newbury Road and it was denied due to lack of site distance on both sides. A site visit was held with the road agent since then and a new plan has been provided which the Road Agent said would be acceptable. The road agent suggested cutting four trees, which are identified along the right-of-way on the road. This has been shown on the plan. Chair Pogust said that two of the trees are on a property owner’s land and they object to the cutting. He wasn’t sure if they were, in fact, in the right-of-way. This will need to be determined before the Town can move forward with the approval. Will acknowledged that the trees were not included in the survey as they seemed to be in the right-of-way. He didn’t believe the applicants were in a huge rush to get the driveway in, so there was time to look further into the issue. Chair Pogust said that even if the trees are on the neighbor’s property, if it is in the right-of-way, they can possibly be cut. The Board will need the advice of Town counsel if that is the case.

Will said that the pavement of the road is 22’ wide, so the right-of-way would be 14’. The measurement from the edge of the pavement to the back side of the trees is 8’ and 9’. Chuck suggested the best practice would be to contact the landowner to straighten this out. The landowner was complaining that she was not asked about the trees before the appeal was filed. Chair Pogust said that the Town will need to consult counsel to see what can be done. He said the applicant should also check to make sure the road isn’t a scenic road, because if it is a scenic road, Planning Board approval is required for any tree cuttings in addition to approval of the appeal of the administrative decision.

Will said the road agent said he would be comfortable with the site distance if the trees were removed. It was noted that the site line was still less than the required 300’ in each direction. The 300’ would be impossible to achieve due to the nature of the contours of the road. Peter said that they can allow for accommodations to the 300’ site line by determining things such as the amount of traffic usually present on the road.

Will asked if there was anything else the applicant should consider, for instance, if the landowner doesn’t want the trees to be cut when asked. Chair Pogust said that Will should let the Town know as soon as he finds out whether the landowner objects to cutting the trees, and if necessary, counsel will be consulted to see what the next steps are. Chair Pogust suggested getting the position from the abutters as soon as possible, considering the holidays.

It was moved by David Hill and seconded by Christine Fletcher to continue the hearing for the Sossong driveway appeal until the January 9, 2024 meeting. The motion was approved unanimously.

 

ADMINISTRATIVE

 

1. Approval of Meeting Minutes of October 10, 2023

It was moved by Dane Headley and seconded by Chuck Bolduc to approve the latest draft distributed by Chair Pogust for the October 10, 2023 minutes.

2. Approval of Meeting Minutes of October 24, 2023

It was moved by Jason Teaster and seconded by Chuck Bolduc to approve the minutes of October 24, 2023 as distributed. The motion was approved unanimously.

 

OLD BUSINESS

 

1. Discuss revisions to the Subdivision Regulations and the Site Plan Review Regulations

On December 12, there will be a public hearing on the draft ordinance and on the proposed amendment to the zoning map to designate the Sutton Mills Village Overlay District. A draft of the regulations will be posted prior to this meeting. Peter said they have to have this meeting noticed before the end of that week. Chair Pogust said he would have a draft ready in time for this. The public is welcome to talk about the ordinance at the hearing on December 12th. It was noted that all comments by the Board regarding this or any other issue, should be forwarded directly to Peter and he would distribute them to the rest of the group.

Chuck said it would be good to do as much as possible to let people know about the draft and the meeting.

2. Review and sign Mylar for Gilbert Subdivision, PB-2023-08

A shared driveway easement was not referenced on the Mylar so the Planning Board could not sign it. The three lots are currently up for sale. The subdivision has been approved, but the Mylar is not correct so the Board could not sign it.

 

NEW BUSINESS:

1. Building Permits for Peacock

Chair Pogust said that the developer has done what he needed to do and he has asked for all seven building permits. He has indicated that he will start with three of the houses. The developer will have one year to build all of the houses. The developer has to show “as built” plans for the drainage, which Novis will review and sign off on. This is among the things that have to be done before any certificates of occupancy can be issued.

2. Proposed Petition Zoning Ordinance

Jen McCourt said she owns property in Sutton and grew up in the town. She was approached by some residents to look at amending the Zoning Ordinance. She and some residents have come up with a petition amendment to the zoning ordinance that will help protect the lakes under the Shoreland Protection Act. State law does not prevent someone owning a larger parcel off the water, developing it, and allowing everyone who lives there to use another small property on the lake. Docks will likely be wanted, creating a marina. These small lakes and ponds should not be over-developed. Jen thought development on the lakes and ponds was ok under normal circumstances. She has been to all of the protective associations to talk about the suggested zoning amendment. Jen asked the Board to approve this and thanked them for hearing their case.

Chair Pogust said the Planning Board and Select Board can decide, on the warrant, to recommend or not recommend such amendments. Jen said they would obviously like the support from the Town.

Jason asked if there was a metric they used to come up with the prohibition of any common area used by a group of “three or more” unrelated persons or by any other form of joint ownership entity consisting of 3 or more members. Jen said that state law talks about having two or more units and that it seemed that three or more units have larger consequences.

Chair Pogust said the way the amendment was written he could see it being challenged as an infringement on someone’s property rights as far as something they can/cannot do. He suggested that instead, perhaps for every lot given access to the lake, there needed to be 150’ of lake frontage? This could limit the impact on the lake frontage and use the existing ordinance to require that if a lot is going to be allowed to grant access to a back lot, that it has the extra 150’ to cover that additional lot. This would be self-limiting but doesn’t restrict the right of property owners to deed access to someone. He thought that counsel would have to be consulted on this.

Peter said that the language has to be specific and legal. It is under the Selectmen’s purview to make sure it is legal by going to counsel.

Chair Pogust said he could understand the want to stop development like Slope ‘n Shore in New London and Blye Hill Landing in Newbury. He thought it would be easier to get his suggestion passed than Jen’s suggested language. He added that it would likely be easier, legally, to solve the problem. His suggestion means that they won’t be having more lots accessing the lake than what would be legal under the current zoning.

Jen said there are pieces that have substantial frontage on the lake, some of which may be considered to be steep slopes. If 4-5 people were using one area because it was most accessible, she is concerned that too many docks in that one area would create a marina.

Chair Pogust said he wasn’t sure if a use like this (use of waterfront without residential use) would be allowed; it is not permitted under the zoning ordinance. The use of the property would be considered an amenity and likely not permitted. Peter didn’t think this would be an issue as long as each lot had the required amount of frontage.

It wasn’t known if the steepness of the frontage in some areas of the lake would be considered a steep slope. Those areas could not be considered for usable frontage. Chair Pogust said that he thinks the Town won’t want to put an imposition on people’s property rights. He said that there is nothing in the proposed ordinance that says to whom property owners can and cannot deed a right of access over their property.

Chuck said that it would be best to have the same access point shared by more people than to have them distributed all throughout the lakefront. After a quick calculation, Chair Pogust determined that his suggestion would limit the access to 14 lots, maximum.

Jason said if they think about the language, they should focus on the ecological pressures.

Chair Pogust said if they have an ordinance that talks about what can be deeded from the lots and if it can be limited, that is one thing. If someone wants to allow someone to use their property, there isn’t anything the Town can do unless it becomes a commercial venture. If they say that if any piece of property has deeded rights to the lake, enough frontage for each lot has to be achieved, this would limit the number of lots that can be deeded access to the lake.

Peter said in NH anyone can moor a boat as long as they have access to walk to the water’s edge.

Chair Pogust said the existing ordinance uses the natural limitations of the shorefront but doesn’t restrict what people can do with their land.

Chair Pogust also noted his concern that if there are too many warrant articles relating to zoning to be voted on at Town Meeting, it would be harder to get the zoning amendment the Planning Board has been working on, passed. He said he knew he couldn’t tell her not to go forward with the petition amendment for this year, but if it is felt that “too much” is going on or changing, no one will vote in favor of either. Chair Pogust asked about the imminence of any sale of the property on Blaisdell Lake that appears to be of immediate concern to Jen. She said that the property in her mind has not yet been put up for sale.

Chair Pogust said that the Select Board will ask Town Counsel to make sure the substance of the proposed ordinance amendment and the wording of the proposed warrant article are legal. It will then be determined by the Select Board whether they will allow it to be on the warrant. The Planning Board would then decide to recommend or not recommend adoption of the warrant. The Board can also decide not to take a position.

 

ANY OTHER BUSINESS:

Christine thought a formal orientation should be held for new Planning Board members. Peter said there are resources available to new members through NHMA (NH Municipal Association) and other state agencies. They must follow the State’s RSAs. Dane said that anyone can Google NH RSA and the topic and the RSA will come up. He said that the NHMA website has articles that are useful on the website’s library.

 

 

ADJOURNMENT:

 

It was moved by David Hill and seconded by Christine Fletcher to adjourn the meeting.

The motion was approved unanimously.

 

 

The meeting was adjourned at 8:45pm

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Kristy Heath, Recording Secretary

Town of Warner