TOWN OF BRADFORD
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 10, 2019
Meeting was called to order at 7:10pm.
Members Present: Claire James, Carol Troy, Tom Dunne, Pam Bruss
Members Absent: Laurie Colburn, Carol Meise, Steven Chase, Alternate; Michael James, Selectman Rep.; Doug Troy, Alternate; Marlene Freyler, Alternate
Review and Consideration of August 27, 2019 Minutes
A computer problem precluded drafting of the August 27, 2019 minutes. This will be reviewed at the next meeting.
Appearances
- Conservation Commission did not appear before the board.
- Mike Tardiff requested rescheduling his appearance for the September 24, 2019 meeting to review the Housing and Land Use Chapters of the Master Plan.
Chestnut Hollow Rd.
- Follow up on this item is complete. Pam communicated with the owner since the last meeting and reviewed with him the process required to change the status of the road. She also advised that it was clear from the property file that there was no intention at the time of site plan approval to change the status of this road. She further advised the owner that if he comes before the town at annual meeting, a history of the situation, financial impact, maintenance costs, etc. should be communicated to the taxpayers so no one is voting without a complete background. The owner asked if he could sit down and view the property file. This will be accommodated.
Master Plan Update
- Claire asked the board members to review the Housing and Land Use Chapters prior to next meeting, in order to be prepared for discussion of these chapters with Mike Tardiff.
Follow up on Map 2, Lot 102 (Pending Site Walk, 69 Center Rd.)
- Pam advised that she is now a Board of Director for the Kearsarge Food Hub and that this might present a conflict of interest in relation to this property. She spoke with the KFH board at a recent meeting and was invited for a walk of the property. Agricultural pursuits are exempt from some requirements otherwise applicable to most commercial operations, which makes things a bit unclear in this case with respect to determining proper site plan and other procedures. Pam suggested scheduling an initial site walk of the property by Planning Board members to make sure that conditions are safe. (e.g.- If there are educational services being provided to visitors of the property, do fire, police, etc. have adequate access? Items such as water runoff and proximity to other lot lines are also examples of things to be considered). A site walk will be scheduled some time in October.
Agriculture Zoning Review
- A meeting of the Agriculture Zoning Review subcommittee will take place at the BACC on September 16th.
Review of State ADU Ordinance
- Claire provided a handout to the board members highlighting important aspects of the new state ADU regulations and reviewed these with the board. The town will need to ensure compliance with the new state regs and as such a review of these updates was necessary. The only mention of ADUs per the Town of Bradford’s regulations was found in the definitions section of the Zoning Ordinance. No other information was found. Items such as the state’s definition of an ADU, the process and means of adopting zoning for ADUs (i.e. – how they are allowed: special exception, standard building permit or conditional use permit), minimum ADU requirements and standards, restrictions, etc. were reviewed. Carol suggested that a small subcommittee be formed to look into this further, so that the Town can draft its own regulations in compliance with the state. Pam and Carol stated they would be interested in working on this in conjunction with other members of the board.
Follow up with Stan Ovrevik re Zoning Regulations applicable to train car proposal
- Pam advised the board that she spoke with the owner of the train car business and that the train cars are classified as mobile homes. In addition, they would not be winterized. Mr. Ovrevik’s proposal was that the cars would be removed during the winter, leaving only the proposed restroom(s) as a permanent structure during that season. The board referenced the zoning ordinance as it related to mobile housing for more clarification. Per the ordinance, the board found that mobile homes are considered to be “Temporary Structures”. They can be used only for a six month period at a time, when being utilized for construction purposes. Outside of construction purposes, any property owner or lessee may accommodate a mobile home for a non-paying guest for a period of time not greater than 90 days in a one-year period. Thus, Mr. Ovrevik’s proposal for the train cars as discussed is not in compliance with the Town ordinance. Pam will follow up with Stan to advise regarding these regulations.
Kennel Follow Up
- Claire advised that as requested per the last board meeting, she called the state office and confirmed that the license granted for Hampshire Kennels in July of 2019 was a re-licensing and that the very first time the license was filed was back in October 2018. She noted that back in May or June when she first contacted the office she was advised that no kennel licenses were on file for the Town of Bradford but that when she called a second time was told that there was a license on file for Hampshire Kennels, which did not seem to make sense, given the initial license date of October 2018. (i.e. – if the initial licensing date was October 2018, the state office should have advised her as such during the initial call in May/June of 2019. Instead, they had advised at that time that no licenses were on file for the town of Bradford).
- Claire advised that the state’s definition of a kennel is any establishment that sells 50 puppies or more per year, however this may be soon reduced to 25 or more puppies if the current proposed legislation is passed. In contrast, the Town’s definition is such that 6 or more adult dogs on site constitutes a kennel and that as such, a site plan must be submitted to the town and a special exception be granted by the Zoning Board. She noted that there are locations in town other than Hampshire Kennels which house, or may house, six adult dogs or more but are not licensed and were not approved by town Zoning or Planning boards. Related to this, Claire noted that while she had not spoken directly to Wanda Watson, she had heard Ms. Watson had questioned why other unlicensed establishments in town technically falling under the town ordinance’s definition of a “kennel”, were not given similar treatment as compared to her own kennel. (All dogs in her kennel were recently removed by state and local authorities). Pam advised that the Planning Board send a letter to the Select Board informing them of any other establishments in town that may be out of compliance. Claire will draft a letter to this effect to be reviewed at the next meeting.
- Pam advised that there is a complaint currently against Hampshire Kennels related to noise. The Select Board has reviewed this letter and has asked the Zoning and Planning boards to make comment regarding same. Unfortunately, the letter was not able to be reviewed as it was in the Town office which was inaccessible at the time of the meeting. It will be reviewed at the next meeting. Pam responded that it is not for the Planning Board to follow up on the complaint. The Select Board needs to ask the Code Enforcement Officer to take the site plan and conduct a site walk to determine compliance, as per normal procedure. If found to be out of compliance, then the Planning Board may be called upon to do a site plan review of the property. The next steps are as follows: The Planning Board needs to locate the approved site plan. The Select Board will then need to ask the Code Enforcement Officer to take this plan and conduct a site walk to determine compliance. Pam advised that Karen stated that she found the approval paperwork for Hampshire Kennels. Claire pointed out that given a license date of October 2018, all of the present members of the Planning Board were also on the board at the time of licensure and that there is no recall amongst the board members of a site plan review or public hearing and subsequent approval (as well as no record of either) for this business,
Sign Ordinance Enforcement
- Carol discussed the sign ordinance as related to the owners of Five Acres Nursery and their request for movable sign components. She advised that she had noticed out of compliance signs for other local businesses, including Twigs and Compassion Vet, while driving through town. She questioned what should be done, as it is unfair that Five Acres is trying to abide by the sign regulations but other businesses are clearly not in compliance. Pam suggested writing a notice to the Select Board regarding sign compliance in general.
Maple View Subdivision
- Claire advised that she was asked by a resident to look into the Maple View development regarding the condition of the roads in this subdivision. Claire will look at the site plan for this subdivision to determine if the roads are in compliance and will follow up at the next meeting.
Meeting adjourned at 8:15pm.
Minutes submitted by Claire James.