Chairman Bob Strobel Calls the Meeting to Order at 7:06 P.M

Town ofNorthwood

Planning Board

August 12, 2010

Chairman Bob Strobel calls the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m.

PRESENT: Chairman Bob Strobel, Vice Chairman Herb Johnson, Selectman Representative Robert Holden, Babette Morrill, Roger LeClerc, Rick Wolf, Adam Sprague, Alternate Victoria Parmele, Town Planner Elaine Planchet, and Board Secretary Lisa Fellows-Weaver.

ABSENT: Alternate Pat Bell

VOTING DESIGNATION:Bob Strobel, Herb Johnson, Robert Holden, Babette Morrill, Roger LeClerc, Rick Wolf, and Adam Sprague.

Mr. Strobel welcomes Boy Scouts from Camp Wah-tut-ca who are attending a public meeting as a merit badge requirement.

MINUTES

June 24, 2010

Mr. Johnson makes a motion to approve the June 24, 2010 minutes, as amended. Mr. LeClerc seconds.

Page 4: Change CBNS to CBNA

Motion passes; 6/0/1. Mr. Holden abstains.

APPOINTMENTS

Meet with Northwood Economic Development Committee (EDC)

EDC Members present are Vice Chairman Dave Tousignant, Kevin Ash, Judy Burke; and Town Administrator David Stack.

Mr. Strobel welcomes the EDC to the meeting and apologizes for the delay in getting together for this meeting.

Mr. Tousignant states that the EDC would like to address three items with the planning board: an Economic Revitalization Zone, Third Tier progress, and the

Master Plan.

Economic Revitalization Zone

Mr. Tousignant begins with the Economic Revitalization Zone. He explained that DRED met with the EDC and did a presentation relative to available funds with a program promoted by the state, to help communities and employees build the job base in NH. He refers to a pamphlet of this program and states that the town needs to identify economic zones. He states that the EDC discussed possible zones and feels that Routes 4 and 202 are the most likely areas to see businesses grow and best suited area for growth to occur in Northwood. The EDC mentioned these areas to the DRED representative who is the head administrator of this program, and had agreed that these areas are viable for zones.

Mr. Tousignant states this is a financial tool should a business want to borrow funds. The zone needs to be adopted by the town in order to get the process working. He explains that there is an urgency as the funding is based on a first come first served basis. He states that the EDC has met with the selectmen who requested the EDC meet with the planning board.

Ms. Planchet asks if specific areas are necessary or if all of Rte. 4 could be designated and would qualify. Mr. Tousignant replies that the DRED representative did state that the Rte 4 and 202 corridors would qualify. He adds that zones can be singled out and would then be separate applications.

General criteria arereviewed by Mr. Strobel. Mr. Strobel states that it appears that Rte. 4 and 202 would be good areas. Mr. Tousignant states that the EDC is trying to be preemptive should there be an interest. He adds that by naming Rte 4 and 202 as an economic zone, it does not change any existing ordinances or criteria for building or zoning ordinances. He states that this is a vehicle for funding and the preset criteria must be met.

Ms. Parmele asks to confirm that DRED said that theoretically the entire Rte 4 could be mapped out. Mr. Tousignant states that the EDC did ask specifically about Rte 4. Ms. Parmele asks if this will be a factor to weigh against Northwood if it were too broad and take away from the application. Mr. Tousignant states that an applicant would be developing a parcel and DRED reviews the cases on a case by case process. Mr. Ash states that he does not see a real down side. Mr. Holden states that if an economic zone is identified as Rte. 4 this will open the area up to more business owners, residents, and tax payers, which is very important. Planning board members agree.

Mr. Strobel reviews the list of approved zonesthroughout NH. He expresses concern that if these areas where designated he feels that there are specific areas in town that would be for businesses and other areas that development would not be appropriate. He notes the area around HarveyLake and CBNA as it is so residential. Mr. Ash states that the planningboardwould not be losing any controls due to the regulations. Discussion ensues regarding overlay zones and protection of these areas.

Mr. Johnson makes a motion, second by Ms. Morrill, to recommend to the selectmen that Rte. 4 and 202 corridor be designated as an Economic Revitalization Zone.Mr. Strobel asks what the next step is and Mr. Tousignant explains that the EDC will give a presentation to the selectmen and the EDC will contact DRED and continue to follow through. He adds that there will be a notice on the town’s website that there is an option available for them. Vote: 7/0.

Third Tier Review

Mr. Tousignant thanks the planning board for their efforts with the third tier application. He requests that the EDC review and provide feedback to the board prior to the final drafts being developed. Mr. Strobel explains that all drafts are public documents and prior to accepting the third tier section,

public hearings will be held. It is during this time that any feedback and comments would be receptive. Ms Planchet adds that there is a lot of work that still needs to be done. She states that when there are changes made to the site plan regulations, typically these changes are sent to town counsel for review. She notes that the document would still be a draft in progress. She suggests that the board may want the EDC to review any documents during this time as well. Mr. Tousignant states that the EDC is seeking input to help the board and the EDC is seen as a forum for businesses.He states that this is the mission of the EDC. Mr. Strobel thanks the EDC for their work on this project.

Master Plan

Mr. Tousignant explains that the EDC has started a sub-committee for a revision to the town’s MasterPlan. He states that in review of the 2004 Master Plan, it is not reflective for this economy. He states that the subcommittee will be developing some recommendations for the planning board. He states that the EDC feels that the Master Plan needs to be kept up to date.

Ms. Parmele asks how the EDC sees the vision for economic development changing. Mr. Tousignant replies that in the past there has been an idea of conservation and now the businesses are trying to become more vital. He states that this needs to be incorporated into the Master Plan.

Mr. Ash states that the committee has been discussing preserving the quality of life in town and he suggests that the approach of the Master Plan be revised to be more business friendly, while still preserving the town’s goals. Mr. Strobel replies that the Master Plan is a guided document that feeds the regulations. He adds that he appreciates the fact that the EDC would like to be involved in the review.

Ms. Planchet explains that the Master Plan is the responsibility of the planning board and that any work that would be done would need to be discussed and recommended to the planning board to be adopted. She states that the Master Plan is used as a guide to develop the ordinances, which is changed by the voters. Ms. Planchet states that she has reviewed the language in the current Master Plan and the town’s development ordinance. She refers to a handout she prepared which includes excerpts from the current master plan and ordinance relative to economic development. She adds that the framework the EDC wants may already be within the document and that this may be the time to develop changes in the ordinance to address economic issues.She states that sections of the master plan could be updated and then the visioning section may need to be adjusted. Ms. Parmele states that there may be other areas that are better than others for development. Mr. Tousignant states that they are currently trying to generalize the best areas of growth throughout town. Ms. Planchet offers to assist with research regarding possible business overlay districts in town and notes that this is a great time to begin work to draft ordinance amendments.

Ms. Parmele asks Mr. Stack about a charette. Mr. Stack states that he met with some folks from Northwood Farmer’s Market. He states that the market has been very successful and is growing and there is some concern with parking and access. He states that he has met with Cynthia Copeland and the transportation planner from the Regional Planning Commission to see if there is any type of funding or assistance available for possible expansion.

Mr. Stack states that during discussions, it was noted that the town may want to apply for a Plan NH Charette for the intersection and to focus on the area. He states that this area could be a focus for commercial development with walk-ability and access. Mr. Stack states that the EDC has discussed applying for the January application period. Ms. Parmele states that this is an ideal spot.

Further discussion is held regarding the growth and the possibility of tracking data from the farmers market. Ms. Morrill asks whether it is known how many vendors are from Northwood. Mr. Strobel notes that many of the vendors are not from Northwood. Ms. Parmele states that a farmer’s market and the charette is good for the town and this could be a vibrant area. Mr. LeClerc adds that it is important to note that the residents have this market and the opportunity to purchase items.

Ms. Planchet states that the EDC may be interested in a document she’s developing as a result of the third tier discussions and the focus on lesser impacts if there is an approved site plan on file. She adds that approvals are site specific, so a business coming to town may ask what may be done on a particular property. She explains that this worksheet contains specific site plan approvals by lot.

Mr. Tousignant thanks the board for their time. Mr. Holden states that on behalf of the selectmen, he appreciatesthe efforts and activities of EDC to improve the economy of Northwood. Mr. Strobel also thanks the EDC for the work they have been doing.

Mr. Strobel explains the process of subcommittees.

Recess at 7:50 p.m. Session resumes at 7:55 p.m.

NEW CASE:

CASE 10-05: MJM Sommer, LLC, Anytime Fitness Express, 262 First NH Turnpike-Suite 1. Map 231; Lot 9. Applicant seeks site plan review to extend hours of operation to be open 24 hours for fitness center business. (Property currently owned by Piper Cove Properties).

Babette Morrill recuses herself from this case and leaves the table.

VOTING DESIGNATION: Bob Strobel, Herb Johnson, Robert Holden, Victoria Parmele, Roger LeClerc, Rick Wolf, and Adam Sprague.

Materials are reviewed and general discussions are held. Mr. Strobel notes that the request is for a 24 hour businessand members noted that there are no other businesses in town that are currently operating at 24 hours per day. Mr. Strobel states that there is not a regulation that limits hours of operation. Ms. Planchet explains that she does not believe that there are any businesses that have hours of operation approved by the planning board for 24 hour operation. She states that there is not a regulation for this either. She states that in discussions with Linda Smith, she recalled that this was due to the fact that the police department was part time until recent years. Ms. Planchet states that this case is different also because it wouldn’t be open to the public, but for members only to access the facility on a 24 hour basis. She adds that the location is approved for business hours of 5 a.m. to midnight.

Additional discussion was held regarding the security system. Ms. Planchet notes that the security system is monitoredand that information has been provided on the security system. Mr. Strobel refers to the packet, which provides a description of the security system where members access the facility through their membership card/key.

Mr. LeClerc asks about the abutter’s notifications and notes that the existing retail businesses were not notified. Ms. Weaver explains that abutter’snotices are sent to the propertyowners not to the rental units. Mr. Strobel confirms that only property owners are notified, which may differ than the people residing at the property.

Additional discussion is held regarding the town’s current police coverage. Mr. Wolf states that he does not believe that there is 24 hour police coverage in town. Mr. Holden replies that he believes that there is 24 coverage and Mr. Strobel agrees. Mr. Holden refers Mr. Wolf to the police commission.

Mr. Wolf asks why there are no comments from the fire and police departments. Mr. Wolf states that he feels it is important that be received. Ms. Planchet states that she will contact the departments for comments and they should be received for the next meeting.

Additional discussion is held regarding any exterior lighting. Ms. Planchet will request additional information from the applicant.

Mr. LeClerc asks why the applicant is requesting a waiver of fees. Ms. Planchet explains that this application is for a change in hours. The board will not be looking at drainage, parking, etc.Mr. LeClerc states that this proposed use is for a full gym and there is a lot of liability. He states that this is not the same type of business and the criteria for this business have not been met. Mr. Holden states that this is a request for a change in hours. Mr. LeClerc states he does not feel that Curves and Anytime Fitness are the same type of business and he has an issue with the application proposal.

Mr. Strobel asks if Curves filed a site plan application or was the entire lot granted approval with sub-rental units. Ms. Planchet replies that the site was approved for three retail/office spaces. She states that she believes that code enforcement reviewed information and made a determination that Curves met the criteria for retail/office space use. She adds that the town is now following the assumption that there was a fitness facility in the unit and this is another fitness related function for this space and the approval would be for the activity, not the hours of operation. Ms. Planchet notes that when she originally spoke to the applicant, she explained that there was an existing approval granted for the same activity. Mr. Strobel asks if this is for office/retail use and Ms. Planchet replies yes; however, since the fitness activity was permitted for a number of years, then the activity as well has been allowed. Mr. Strobel states that this would still be included under office/retail. Ms. Planchet states that there are not many distinctions in the ordinance.

Mr. Johnson states that he is not really concerned with the use as much as the fact that there is a waiver request for fees for a business. Ms. Weaver states that the applicant is responsible to cover the public notice and abutter’s notice fees and payment has been received for these fees. Mr. Strobel states that the waiver request would then be for the site plan application fee of $200.

Mr. Wolf states that he feels that there is a difference with the prior business to the proposed business. He adds that he has noticed some construction being performed when the letter provided notes that no construction would be done. Mr. Strobel states that the planning board does not have any jurisdiction of the interior.

In addition, Mr. Wolf states that there have been many conditional approvals granted by the board over the past year and the work has never been followed up on or completed. He adds that the selectmen do not back up the planning board and the building department does not enforce the planning board’s decisions. Mr. Holden states that he disagrees with the opinion of Mr. Wolf as he feels that the code enforcement department is being diligent in making sure that the town is properly protected. Mr. Wolf states that he has a hard time making decisions on items that do not get followed up on and people are not made to complete their projects. Mr. Holden requests that the selectmen be provided information as to the incidents and issues that are not being addressed. Mr. LeClerc states that something needs to be done as one place is operating. Ms. Planchet states that when the planning board approves a plan with conditions, the conditions must be met before the chair signs off on the plans. She adds that the process is that the code enforcement officer does not issue permits for building unless there is a signed plan. She notes that there was one instance this past year where a permit was issued and there was a misunderstanding where the notice of decision was received and deemed sufficient enough to issue a permit. Ms. Planchet states that if there is a case that conditionsare required and there is no building then there is no building permit required and the activity cannotbe held up for that reason.