Planning Board Meeting ~ October 5, 2022

2022-10-05 · Planning Board · 1:32:38 · watch on YouTube →

A planning board meeting with three of its members present. Town Planner George Thebarge previewed the public workshop on the state's affordable housing law set for the following Wednesday at the fire station, and reported that the state's guidance had finally arrived. The bulk of the evening was the Celebration Tree Farm conditional use application: a public hearing at which one resident spoke in support and written comments both for and against were read, followed by board deliberation on parking, driveway sight distance, sanitation, fire safety and noise. No decision was taken on the tree farm; the applicant was asked to bring a scaled parking plan, a simple lighting plan and a driveway permit application from the road commissioner to the November 2nd meeting. The board did approve amending the Bowie Hill subdivision plan to remove the note that prevented demolition of the old Parker Schoolhouse, on evidence that it is beyond repair, with wood and artifacts to be set aside to memorialise it.

What was discussed

1. 0:07
   Quorum and minutes

   Three members were present (Allan Purinton, Juliet Caplinger and John Talbot) giving a quorum. No amendments to the agenda were offered, and the minutes of the September 7th meeting were accepted as presented.

2. 0:07
   Affordable housing workshop announced

   George Thebarge said the planning board's public workshop on the state law requiring towns to change their zoning to accommodate more housing is set for the following Wednesday at 6 p.m. at the fire station. He had received a 20-page analysis from the Department of Economic and Community Development the week before and cut it to five pages covering only the parts that affect Durham.

3. 0:07
   What the state guidance changes

   George Thebarge said the guidance does not change the law, only how it is read, and that it is a preliminary take; rules are still to be promulgated. One clarification matters for Durham: a town cannot require a larger lot size for accessory dwelling units, which here means accessory apartments, so that route cannot be applied to them.

4. 5:54
   When the rules will come

   Asked when the implementing rules would arrive, George Thebarge said the state had promised this guidance last summer and only produced it now, that it still has to go through a vetting process, and that the state is not working on the assumption that many towns hold town meeting in March and April.

5. 5:54
   How the workshop will run

   The board agreed the chair should open by explaining why the planning board is doing this (pointing to the comprehensive plan, the land use ordinance amendments and the select board) so it is clear the initiative is not the planner's, and George Thebarge would then present the technical options. He stressed that his role is research and options and that the policy choice is the board's.

6. 5:54
   The three options to be put to the public

   Option one is to follow the comprehensive plan's recommendations, which are close to what the new law requires. Option two is to change only what the law compels and not try to control the outcome. Option three is to offset the required increase in units by increasing lot sizes, which affects people in its own way. A survey will ask which direction residents favour. Road ordinance language, described as cleanup, will also be covered.

7. 11:25
   Celebration Tree Farm: site walk on the record

   John Talbot recorded that a site walk had been held at 5 p.m., attended by Allan Purinton, Juliet Caplinger, himself, George Thebarge, Fire Chief Tripp and members of Celebration Farm. Board members confirmed none had had offline conversations that needed disclosing.

8. 11:25
   How the use is classified

   George Thebarge said that after working with the code officer he concluded the composite use is agritourism, which is not a listed use in the Durham land use ordinance, so it falls under item 31, other commercial uses not specifically listed. That is permitted in the rural residential and agricultural district but not in resource protection, so moving the few affected features out of resource protection removes the zoning question and leaves only the conditional use criteria.

9. 11:25
   What the applicant had submitted since August

   The applicant had filed a supplemental packet addressing the road commissioner's concerns about sight distance and parking and the fire chief's about fire safety and maximum occupancy of the building, together with a revised site plan moving the bus and associated parts out of the resource protection zone, and a list of the events proposed.

10. 16:40
    Public hearing ground rules

    George Thebarge ran through the bylaws: evidence may be oral or documentary, speakers are not to be interrupted, the chair may set time limits, the applicant may rebut, and an aggrieved party is distinguished from any member of the public. He stressed the board may only consider the conditional use criteria (whether the project is good for the town is not the test) and that there are statutory deadlines for a decision.

11. 16:40
    The applicant's revised proposal

    Jonah Burd said that after talking with the neighbour directly across the road they would limit amplified music to two events a month, April through October only, which is 12 days a year, and would cut attendance from up to 100 to 50 or fewer, with the annual Celebration Market during the Christmas tree season the exception. They have dropped weddings entirely, and all events will end at 9 p.m. rather than 10.

12. 22:24
    Public comment

    Greg Grigsby of Bridgton (?) spoke in support, saying he knows Jonah Burd from a men's group and could speak to his character rather than the technical issues. Nobody (?) spoke against the application.

13. 22:24
    Written comments

    George Thebarge said four more comments arrived that day, printed for members. Most letters were positive; a few raised concerns. Jane Rice's letter raised traffic, the number of cars, the membership structure and the hours of amplified music.

14. 28:25
    The membership programme explained

    Jonah Burd described a community supported forest membership modelled on community supported agriculture: 90 members who receive a Christmas tree, a wreath and a small tree, plus year-round trail access. Of the 90, about five have used the trails, a handful of times. Members also get a discount on holding events or attending workshops, not a right to use the farm as they please.

15. 28:25
    The cooperative ownership question

    The business is a worker and community owned cooperative with four worker-owners. Forest members may apply for ownership with a further $1,000 investment, subject to approval by the existing worker-owners, and would hold a minority board position, so control stays with the workers and management. Separately, Land in Common, a community land trust, owns the 110 acres the farm works, and its own membership carries no general access rights.

16. 33:36
    Noise, hours and the parcel in question

    Asked about a report of amplified music past 10:30, Jonah Burd committed to a 9 p.m. finish going forward, and the chair said past history was not the point. It was confirmed that the application concerns the 8.3-acre parcel 43, not the whole 110 acres. The event limits before the board came out of the applicant's conversation with the neighbour across the road.

17. 33:36
    Public hearing closed

    The chair closed the public hearing, noting no further input would be taken from the public unless a board member asked a question, and opened board questions.

18. 39:17
    The use classification settled

    The board agreed by consensus that the application should be judged under item 31, other commercial uses not specifically listed, on George Thebarge's analysis that the composite is agritourism and agritourism is not itself listed.

19. 39:17
    Resource protection and the leach field

    Everything (?) proposed has been pushed out of resource protection except a small extension of the existing leach field (approved by the previous code enforcement officer) to take waste water from a new sink and shower, described as perhaps two square feet inside the zone. George Thebarge said he did not think the code officer would have an issue with a leach field there.

20. 39:17
    Composting toilets and sanitation

    Allan Purinton asked how the composting toilet buckets are sanitised without killing the composting process. The applicant said the seats are sanitised and the buckets washed and reused, and that a bleach solution would not ruin the process.

21. 39:17
    Fire safety obligations

    The board noted the fire chief's point that smoke detectors in the barn are subject to a specific requirement, and that the size of the barn does not set the occupancy. Any approval here does not remove the applicant's obligation to work with the fire chief and the code enforcement officer on capacity, extinguishers and the rest.

22. 44:23
    Driveways and traffic safety

    Asked whether the existing driveway permits suffice, George Thebarge said a conditional use has to satisfy the traffic safety criterion on its own terms: the driveways may have been there for decades, but if they are unsafe for the proposed increase in use the board can deny the permit or require improvements. Any new driveway work is also subject to the road commissioner's approval.

23. 44:23
    Whether site plan review is triggered

    The chair raised that the ordinance requires a site plan for commercial use covering parking and access. George Thebarge set out the triggers under section 8.1: new commercial construction, expansion of existing commercial buildings, and creation or expansion of non-residential parking and access drives over 2,500 square feet: in each case excluding agricultural buildings and gravel areas used for agriculture. Whether designating field parking for a commercial use counts he called a grey area.

24. 49:57
    A precedent from Stackpole Road

    A member noted the board had approved a wedding venue on Stackpole Road as a conditional use with parking in a field and no site plan review, and asked whether that was before or after the 2019 land use ordinance amendments.

25. 49:57
    Pulling in only the standards needed

    George Thebarge pointed to section 7.5(b): where a project does not require separate site plan review, the board may apply the article 8 design standards as approval conditions. He went through the parking standards (roughly 12 feet for a one-way aisle and 18 for two-way, spaces nine by twenty feet standard or six and a half by fifteen) which could be applied to this layout without a full site plan process.

26. 54:58
    Two reasons the chair thought a site plan was due

    John Talbot argued the parking and access was one trigger and the yurt another, as a new non-residential structure that he would not call an agricultural building, but said he was partly playing devil's advocate. The board settled on pulling the relevant standards into the conditional use review rather than running a separate site plan process.

27. 54:58
    Entrance and exit

    Members asked whether the two driveways, which do not connect, would be used as an entrance and an exit. The applicant said that during the tree farm season traffic goes one way around an island at the driveway near the house, and that the overflow area is used for the agricultural season.

28. 1:00:12
    Design rather than staff direction

    The board's central objection was that safety is being handled by staff directing parking rather than by design. Members said the conditional use criteria cannot rest on a person being there, and that a parking attendant does not answer a sight distance problem.

29. 1:00:12
    What the board wants instead of an engineer

    Members were clear they did not want the applicant to spend thousands on engineering. What they asked for was a simple, accurate scaled sketch using the ordinance's aisle widths and space sizes, showing both the main and overflow parking, and an application to the road commissioner for a driveway permit, which addresses sight distance: a minimum of 360 feet, with 400 preferred.

30. 1:05:19
    Campsite, and capping cars

    A single campsite on the property does not make it a campground, which by definition requires two or more. Members discussed whether to cap vehicles as well as people, working from an estimate of 20 to 25 cars for 50 people, and agreed the annual Christmas market should be excepted from the 50-person limit.

31. 1:11:12
    Getting the event limits on the record

    The chair pressed for clarity on the record: with weddings dropped, what about bar mitzvahs, birthday parties, retirement parties, memorials and baby showers. Jonah Burd said all of them fall under the same limits (50 people, a 9 p.m. cutoff, and no more than two events a month with amplified music) and that the chair's concern was for what a future operator might claim was agreed.

32. 1:11:12
    Next steps set

    George Thebarge said he would prepare draft findings against each conditional use criterion based on the evening's discussion, plus draft conditions, for the next meeting. The applicant is to submit the parking plan and apply to the road commissioner for the driveway permits.

33. 1:16:16
    A lighting plan

    Members asked for a simple lighting plan showing where lights would go and that they are downward facing: not for photometric detail, but so the board can see how people get safely to the parking areas at 9 p.m. Ground solar lights were mentioned as what is already there.

34. 1:16:16
    Running down the conditional use criteria

    The board went through each criterion. Public health: sanitation and hand washing, with no food service or catering proposed. Traffic safety and public safety: as discussed. Sedimentation and erosion: minimal, with nothing left in resource protection. Scale and intensity, and noise and hours: addressed by the 9 p.m. cutoff and the event limits, with a continuous decibel limit already in the ordinance for the overnight hours.

35. 1:16:16
    Title, right and interest, and financial capacity

    The board has the deed showing ownership of parcel 43, and the applicant confirmed a 99-year lease on the surrounding 110 acres, which covers the trail access. Financial capacity evidence was judged unnecessary here because the improvements are minimal, unlike a project involving storm water detention.

36. 1:21:17
    Timetable for the decision

    Materials are due two weeks before the meeting, and the applicant was told to plan on returning on November 2nd for a possible decision. The chair said the two absent members would be asked to vote next time after watching the recording and reading the minutes, and that if the requirements are met he did not foresee further obstacles.

37. 1:21:17
    Bowie Hill subdivision: request to remove note 11

    The board took up a request to amend the Bowie Hill subdivision approval to remove note 11, the condition preventing demolition of part of the old school. A structural engineer's investigation found it not cost-effective to move and not salvageable, the town had already deemed it a hazard, and the chair and treasurer of the historical society had written agreeing it should come down.

38. 1:26:27
    The developer's account

    The subdivision's co-owner, Jonathan Bosom (?), said the building had been set into the subdivision's open space to keep it out of the approval process, that he then received a demolition permit from the previous code enforcement officer which he had not expected, and that when the town relayed complaints he paused and assembled opinions from the historic district commission, the code enforcement officer, structural engineers and a house mover. The ordinance bars demolishing a church or schoolhouse over 100 years old.

39. 1:26:27
    Memorialising the schoolhouse

    The letter asked that artifacts, significant wood and foundation stones be set aside so the historical committee can memorialise the building: picture frames, a bench, or stones used as a plaque holder at the site. The developer said he would set material aside before demolition and work with the historical society, one of whose members is a carpenter. A board member mentioned his wife had attended Parker School through fourth grade.

40. 1:31:37
    Filling the board's vacancies

    After the business was done the chair noted that with only three members present he would like the vacant seat filled, that an applicant had been sent what he needs to do, and that alternate Tyler Hutchison is interested in moving up. The board adjourned first so the membership discussion would not be conducted as an unlisted agenda item.

What was decided

• 0:07
  Accept the minutes of the September 7th 2022 meeting as presented, moved by Allan Purinton and seconded by John Talbot. Carried 3-0.passed
• 39:17
  Treat the Celebration Tree Farm application as falling under item 31 of the land use table, other commercial uses not specifically listed, on the basis that the composite use is agritourism and agritourism is not a listed use. Reached as a stated consensus of the three members present; no motion was made.passed
• 1:11:12
  No decision was taken on the Celebration Tree Farm conditional use application. It was continued to November 2nd, with the applicant to submit a scaled parking plan meeting the site plan parking and access standards, a simple lighting plan, and applications to the road commissioner for driveway permits on both accesses, and with the town planner to prepare draft findings and conditions.tabled
• 1:26:27
  Amend the Bowie Hill subdivision plan to remove note number 11, the condition preventing demolition of the old schoolhouse, moved by Juliet Caplinger and seconded by Allan Purinton. The minutes record it carried 3-0. A new mylar is to be brought in for recording and signing.passed
• 1:31:37
  Adjourn, moved by Juliet Caplinger and seconded by Allan Purinton. The minutes record it carried 3-0.passed

An outcome reads "unclear" where the recording does not state it plainly. The recogniser drops short words, and "the motion does not carry" is one missing word from its opposite.

Motions the minutes record

The town's own written account of what was decided, taken from pbminutes_10-5-2022.txt. It owes nothing to the recording or to a model: the clerk typed it, with the vote. Where the summary above claims a decision this list does not carry, the summary is the part to doubt.

• accept the minutes from September 7, 2022 meeting as presentedcarried 3-0

  Moved by Allan Purinton, seconded by John Talbot

• Motion not recorded in wordscarried 3-0

  Moved by Juliet Caplinger, seconded by Allan Purinton

• adjourncarried 3-0

  Moved by Juliet Caplinger, seconded by Allan Purinton

Worth knowing

• 16:40
  Celebration Tree Farm cut back its proposal before the hearing, after talking with the neighbour directly across the road: no weddings at all, events capped at 50 people rather than 100, amplified music limited to two events a month and only from April to October, twelve days a year, and every event ending at 9 p.m. rather than 10. The annual Christmas market is the exception to the 50-person cap.
• 0:07
  The planning board's public workshop on the state affordable housing law is set for Wednesday October 12th at 6 p.m. at the fire station, with three policy options on the table: follow the comprehensive plan, do the minimum the law requires, or offset the required increase in units by raising lot sizes. State guidance arrived only the week before and the implementing rules are still to be written.
• 1:00:12
  The board's main objection to the tree farm plan was that safety is being managed by staff directing parking rather than by design, and the conditional use criteria cannot rest on someone being present. It asked not for an engineer but for an accurate scaled parking sketch using the ordinance dimensions, plus a road commissioner driveway permit, which requires a minimum sight distance of 360 feet.
• 1:26:27
  The old Parker Schoolhouse on Bowie Hill will be demolished. The ordinance bars demolishing a church or schoolhouse over 100 years old, but a structural engineer found it beyond repair and not worth moving, the town had deemed it a hazard, and the historical society agreed. Wood, artifacts and foundation stones are to be set aside for a memorial at the site.

Motion language found in the transcript

Located by pattern matching, with no model involved: "I move that", "I'll second", "all those in favour". This is an independent check on the summary above: 1 passage of motion language, against 5 decisions summarised.

Elsewhere

← 2022-09-07 Planning Board2022-10-12 Planning Board →All meetings