Washington Planning Board

Public Hearing and Meeting Minutes

January 31, 2022

0.0 Assembly: 6:00PM, on 2^nd floor of Town Hall and by Zoom

0.1 Members present: Hatch, Revane and Schwartz at Town Hall, Crandall and Kluk on Zoom

0.2 Alternates present: Kapteyn

0.3 Members and Alternates Absent: Terani and Chidester

0.4 Visitors: Laurie Dube, Allan Dube, Tom Marshall, Linda Marshall, Ken Tanner, Bill Marko, Gary Kendall, Cindy Barker, Leigh Bosse

Hatch opened the Public Hearing at 6:00PM.

1.0 Public Hearing on proposed changes to the Land Use Ordinance – Hatch stated that this is the 2^nd hearing after receiving feedback and holding a working meeting on the proposed changes. He stated that he would go through the proposed changes one by one and then take questions or comments after each.

200.4 Business Use – Hatch stated we are deleting the 2/3rds vote of town meeting for a business building over 10K sf on advice from the Town’s attorney as an improper use of the voting body and adding Commercial Shooting Ranges as a non-permitted business. He asked for comments. Marshall said he has a problem with the 10,000 sq ft restriction. He thinks there could be a storage business or a nursing home that would easily be over that size. He thinks this is over the top and there are other things in place to limit size. Hatch stated that this has been in the LUO for a long time, it isn’t new and we are leaving it as is and just removing the need for a 2/3 vote at Town Meeting. He said we haven’t had time to further look at the question of size. Revane stated that the ZBA can grant variances and if someone came with a larger building they would look to consider it. He said that anything in the LUO can go to the ZBA. Marshall wants to reach out to legal for clarification. Kluk said that the town’s legal counsel already gave us clarification and he said exactly what Revane stated.

Hatch moved on to the inclusion of Outdoor Commercial Shooting Ranges in the non-permitted businesses. A Dube stated that at the January 4^th hearing the main objection to these was noise. He cited RSA 159-b that includes the state’s definition of shooting ranges. He said that archery, skeet & trap shooting, air rifles, etc are included in the definition and he doesn’t think it is something we should do. Kendall stated he is opposed to the proposed language and said we already have a noise ordinance in place. He read a written statement to the board and gave us a copy of it. He thinks it is unnecessary because we already have a provision in this section that covers not allowing businesses that cause undue hazard to health, safety or property values or that are offensive because of noise or vibration, … L Dube said that she thinks an out right prohibition is too strong and that the PB should come up with more criteria to help (large lot, level, etc). She said we have an outdoor culture here and by just prohibiting something is losing a chance to do it right.

#304 BUILDING EXTERIORS – Hatch stated that this isn’t changed from the first hearing. Kluk said that we removed the need for a Compliance Permit here because it was covered elsewhere. Hatch noted that and asked for comments. There were none.

#305 MINIMUM DIMENSIONS – Hatch said we are proposing to change the title to MINIMUM HABITABLE DWELLING REQUIREMENTS and strike the word “new”. He asked for comments. A Dube questioned what happens with the title change if the definition that references this goes down or vice versa. Kluk suggested we just reference section 305 in the definition and lose the title reference. All agreed to strike the title in the definition.

#306 RECREATION VEHICLES – Hatch stated that the only change is to strike “state approved” from 306.0, and substitute “waste containment system functioning according to manufacturer’s specifications”. We also changed the wording in 306:2 to “Substantial signs of construction progress and the submission of timely wastewater pump-out receipts are required in order to renew the parking permit”. He asked for comments and there were none.

#501 LAND USE COMPLIANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION PERMITS (LUCC) – Hatch stated that we are specifying that temporary structures do not require a building permit but will require a separate Temporary Structures Permit from the Select Board. L Dube asked if this is a one time permit or is it good for years. Schwartz said that the term is written on the permit and it is up to the BoS to decide. Revane said that temporary structures are put up without a building permit, the BoS wanted a no fee / low fee permit to be able to check the applicable setbacks, he said they could use the same. Hatch said it is the BoS’s discretion as to how they do this.

#502 OCCUPANCY – Hatch stated we are adding “interior” to D. and adding F, which requires the building to adhere to the requirements of the LUCC permit issued by the BoS. We also added Non-Dwelling Structures to 502.3 and some clarification of requirements. We will lose the reference to the title of 305 but keep the section 305 reference. He asked for comments and there were none.

Dwelling - Hatch read through the proposed definition changes to Dwelling and asked for comments. There were no comments.

Seasonal Building – Hatch read through the new definition and asked for comments. We will lose the reference to the title of 305 but keep the section reference.

Marshall stated in closing that we fall victim to explaining ourselves. He would have the Planning Board include all the sections (as is) and proposed language on the ballot for the voters. Hatch said that in the past we have always had a separate document available for all voters explaining the changes and showing the new language for the voters.

There were no other comments on the proposed changes to the LUO and definitions so Hatch closed the Public Hearing at 6:40PM and thanked the members of the public for attending and giving input.

Hatch opened the regular Planning Board meeting at 6:41pm.

2.0 Minutes: January 4^th Meeting – Hatch asked if any changes were needed, Crandall pointed out that in 4.3, Revane asked him to get a price for handrails and lighting. He spoke with Revane and the BoS were coming up with prices for this, so we can strike that line. Kluk made a motion to approve the minutes with the change, Crandall seconded the motion and all voted in favor.

Minutes: January 11^th working meeting – Crandall had a correction to strike an unnecessary “the” from the 200.4 Business Use section, Kluk motioned to approve with the correction, Crandall seconded the motion and all voted if favor.

3.0 New Business – None

4.0 Old Business:

4.1 LUO Proposed Changes – Hatch said we will go through the ballot and make changes where needed. We took up each question separately. 1. We discussed and decided to add upon the advice of Town Counsel we are removing… but retaining all other provision of the section.; 2. Revane made a motion to strike this question from the ballot. We discussed the all the issues and decided that more work, discussion and research needs to be done on this issue. Hatch seconded the motion to strike and called for a vote – 4 voted in favor to strike it with Crandall opposing. The motion passed.; 3. We decided to keep as written.; 4. We will keep as written.; 5. Revane asked if “timely” was referring to the submission of receipts or the pumping of the wastewater. Schwartz said it refers to the pumping and doesn’t need to be edited.; 6. We will remove the word “separate”.; 7. We will keep as is.; 8. We will keep as written but lose the reference to section 305’s title.; The definitions were kept as written. Kluk would like absentee voters to have a copy of the explaining document. Schwartz said it will be available on-line on the Town’s website and we can let people know that. Hatch made a motion to accept the ballot as edited and agreed on, Revane seconded the motion and all voted in favor. Schwartz will make the changes and send out a new version to members tonight. She will pass the ballot on to the Town Clerk with the approved changes tomorrow.

4.2 Town Center Vision project – Revane reported that the article for the warrant for access and driveway work is written and they have had discussions with Chidester and Thayer about the project. Crandall will try to find out from Chidester how many steps are anticipated. Hatch asked what will be at Town Meeting to show what is proposed. Crandall said that we have posters to display and one is displayed now downstairs in the Town Hall.

4.3 Old School House project - Revane said the contractor is working on the interior of the Schoolhouse and it is moving along slowly.

4.4 Master Plan – Schwartz said that we need to look at the Master Plan after Town Meeting and commercial zones should be our number 1 issue to look at this year. Hatch asked about updating the document. Kluk said she has a lot of material and Schwartz said she does also.

4.5 ZBA Report – Hatch said ZBA had a meeting scheduled but won’t be meeting because they have no current cases.

4.7 UVLSRPC – Hatch said they are meeting next week. Schwartz asked if he would pick up the Planning Books when he is there.

5.0 Unresolved Business

5.1 Georgann Casey – No news. Hatch asked that we remove this item from the agenda.

5.2 Kathryn & Steve Becker and Jane Shamaly – Schwartz said she heard from the Beckers and they have contracted with Meridian to do the survey work and will have a plan and an application for their Annexation/ Lot Line Adjustment soon.

6.0 Driveway Permits: None

7.0 Mergers: None

8.0 Communications: None

9.0 Meeting date for next Planning Board meeting – March 1, 2022 - at 6:30PM, at 2^nd floor at Town Hall and Zoom.

10.0 Adjournment: Time: 7:32PM

Motioned by Hatch, seconded by Revane, all voted in favor.

Respectfully Submitted,

Nan Schwartz