Washington Planning Board
Washington Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
March 4, 2014
0.0 Assembly: 6:30PM
0.1 Members present: Cook, Crandall, Dagesse, Marshall, Schwartz
0.2 Alternates present: Kluk
0.3 Members and Alternates Absent: Terani
0.4 Visitors: Dale Moser, Chris Krone, Robbie Ostertag
1.0 Minutes: Minutes from February 4, 2014, Crandall had a minor change and suggested that we change the word “member” in the paragraph when Marshall is speaking about Kluk and Schwartz being introduced to John Deloia of Eckman Construction to “representative”. Schwartz said that her notes said member but if that was his intent she would change it. All agreed and Schwartz will make the change. Crandall motioned to approve, Dagesse seconded and all voted in favor.
2.0 Old Business:
2.1 Business permit –
Snell Construction & Excavation business permit application was table last month so we could do an informal site visit. Cook , Crandall, Dagesse and Schwartz rode over to take a look at the property. They observed no vehicles and no outward sign of a business. Cook read through the listed requirements for a home business exemption to the site plan review process. A. yes, B. yes, C. yes, D. yes, E. yes, F. no, we need to have Snell write a statement of property usage to put in his file, then he will meet all the requirements of section 5 of the Site Plan Review. Crandall asked to look at the LUO concerning home businesses to make sure Snell meets the criteria. He did. Marshall asked about exemptions. Crandall made a motion to approve as a home business with an exemption to the Site Plan Review, Marshall seconded and all voted in favor to approve conditionally that Snell will write a statement of property usage and deliver it to the board.
2.2 Business permit –
Dale Moser, Lemon Tree Pastries & Desserts, Rt. 31. We discussed with Dale the need for a site plan review. She had filled out some of the application with Dagesse and Cook asked her to come in on Thursday so they could help her fill out the rest of the application and make a map of her property. Moser explained that her business will be a self-serve bakery counter with a cooler on her front porch, people will be able to pick up their ordered items and/or buy other items left for sale, she will have a money box for payment. The board tabled her application until it is completed. Schwartz said we could go ahead and schedule a hearing and site visit now if she will complete the application. Moser said she will be away when our next meeting takes place so we scheduled March 20th at noon for the site visit and 1 o’clock the same day for the hearing.
2.3 Business permit –
Robbie Ostertag came to speak to us about a business permit for his logging business. He parks his log truck in the yard but does most of his work on site away from his home. He does cut up and split firewood in the yard occasionally and delivers it to customers but no customers come to his home, they reach him by phone. We read through the list to see if he met the exemptions to the site plan review for a home business. A. yes, B. yes, C. yes, D. no, Ostertag stated that he will remove his sign to comply, E. yes, F. yes, he wrote a statement of property usage and gave it to us. Marshall made a motion to approve Ostertag’s business as a home business exempt from the site plan review, Crandall seconded, all voted in favor. Ostertag said he would remove his sign by tomorrow, 3/5. Schwartz stated that if he wants a sign again he would have to reapply for one and also submit an application for a Site Plan Review for his business.
2.4 Business permit -
Chris Krone came in to talk about his signs and business. He wants to repaint his signs and is hoping to increase the size of one of them. His business is Tintagel Antiques and it was started by his parents in the 1970s. He described his three signs to the board. The first is a warning sign on North Main St., the second sign is by the transfer station on South Main St. and the third sign is at the house, all of them have been up since the 80s. He said for the warning sign he would like to repaint it and add a border making it larger. It is in the state right of way, around 13 feet off the road. He showed us a drawing of what he wanted to do. We advised him that if he kept it the same size (no border added) he could repaint it and it would be grandfathered. Krone said that when the state widened Rt. 31 they smoothed it and changed the curve. He feels that with the speed limit it is dangerous. He wants the warning sign to be seen earlier to drivers. Schwartz said that if he doesn’t change the dimensions it is grandfathered and he could raise it higher in the same location. Kluk asked if he might want to get the state to put up a hidden driveway sign for him? Krone said he is fine with changing the colors of his sign and raising it up a bit. It was suggested he talk to Ed Thayer about a hidden drive sign if he wants to go that way. Hi 2nd sign by the transfer station on South Main St. is a wooden sign that he wants to repaint and reattach in the same location on the red maple tree. He wouldn’t make any changes to the wording. Crandall asked if he would like a copy of the sign section of the LUO but Krone said he already has one. The 3rd sign at the house, he asked if he raised it up by 2 feet would that be OK? It is a wooden sign about 36”x30” and mounted on a tree. He showed us pictures of all the past signs his parents had at this location. He said it is faded and showed us a picture of what he wants to replace it with. He wants it a little bigger, 38”x44” and adding the wording “Fine Crafts” to the “Tintagel Antiques”. He said that in the past his parents had things in the shop besides antiques. His dada made pewter objects and his mom made baskets. He asked if it would be OK to have 25% of his shop for crafts. Previously his parents had things like furnishings and refinished furniture in the shop and his dad had people over to do the refinishing. He told us he wants to continue restoring and binding books. He asked if he can have people come to the shop and give him books for restoration? The board didn’t have a problem with that. We said he would need a new application for the sign at the house because it was considered a new sign. He gave us a permit application for that sign and a check for $30. Marshall made a motion to approve the new sign permit, Crandall seconded the motion and all voted in favor. Krone invited all of us to his exhibit at the library on display now.
2.5 Business Permit –
We received the paperwork from Cullen, Thunder Mountain Construction. He is a general construction contractor with no outside storage and no sign. We went through the application and the list of exemption requirements for the Site Plan Review. A. yes, B. yes, C. yes, D. yes, E. yes, F. yes. Since he met all the requirements for an exemption to the Site Plan Review Dagesse motion to approve his permit as a home business with an exemption to the Site Plan Review, Crandall 2nded the motion and all voted in favor.
3.0 New Business:
3.1 Marshall asked about the web site news item sent out today concerning the RV section ballot for Town Meeting. He wanted to know about the renewable permits that were mentioned in the last statement of the ordinance language. Schwartz said this is existing language from the ordinance in the LUO and renewable permits were allowed prior to 2005. Since then they have not been issued.
3.2 Kluk asked about the language on the ballot for the 2-day town meeting, she said the language was confusing, it was not specific what day the second meeting would be held. Dagesse said the language is specified in the RSA but she will send out an explanation by a web site news item. Marshall thinks Town Meeting should be on the previous Saturday before the Tuesday election day. Schwartz said that School Meeting is on that day. Marshall thinks they could hold the school meeting in the morning and then Town Meeting in the afternoon.
3.3 Discussion, future uses of the old School House
Crandall wanted to have a discussion of future uses of the school house, he said that on a FAQs sheet from the Safety Complex it said that the Planning Board would discuss new uses for the School house if the Police leave the building and go to the new building. They had a list of uses for town or outside entities including office space for town committees, welfare department, a community medical facility, an art gallery, a craft coop or a professional business lease. Crandall commented that welfare has already made it know hat they don’t want to be separate from the town offices in the Town Hall. Marshall said that as a deputy welfare officer he has met with people that the Welfare Officer didn’t want to meet with alone for various reasons. Kluk said that these ideas come from the Master Plan and she feels it is premature to discuss them prior to Town Meeting, we don’t know what the outcome of the vote will be yet. Crandall asked if the PB should make a recommendation before Town Meeting. He feels the Police Department should stay in town and they could scale back the Safety Complex. He asked if the warrant article could be amended? Marshall said that an option is to vote for or against the project depending on where you want the Police, the building has been designed for all 4 services. Crandall made a motion – “The Planning Board has considered a myriad of possible future uses for the old School House and recommends to the Selectmen that the building continue to be used by the Police Department as the police presence in the town center best serves the town. The Selectmen should make improvements to the building to better serve the Police Department”. There being no second the motion was dismissed.
4.0 Driveway permits: None
5.0 Mergers:
5.1 Lanni, Cook explained that a merger we approved a while back was discovered to have been incorrectly done because the deeds were in the name of a revocable trust. Cook asked Lanni to refill out the paperwork so we could correct the merger. We discovered that with the new paperwork the 2 lots were owed by 2 different trusts and we can’t merge them at this time. Cook will call the Registry of deeds for advise on how to handle the situation and will speak to the town attorney if needed. She will contact the property owner when she has been advised.
6.0 Communications:
6.1 Intent to Cut – Eccardt Farm, Ayers Pond Road, TM 9-23, TM 9-66
6.2 Intent to Cut – Dole, Ayers Pond Road, TM 6-4
7.0 Date for next Planning Board meeting, April 1, 2014, at 6:30PM.
8.0 Adjournment: Time 8:20 PM
Motioned by Dagesse, seconded by Crandall, all voted in favor.
Respectfully Submitted,
Nan Schwartz