Tuftonboro Planning
Board
Minutes-
7
PM- Meeting called to order
Board
members present: Chairman Rick Friend, Dan Derby, Sue Weeks, Wilson Stewart,
Jack Parsons, Tony Lyon, Ted Wright.
Minutes
of
11”x17”
plans of Ron Hooper’s proposed subdivision were distributed, as were packets on
Terry Mitchell’s elder home care plan.
Chairman
Friend has talked with Cathy Pounder about reimbursement to the Town of
The
check given as bond to the Town by White Cliff has expired, and needs to be
renewed.
There
have been problems regarding Planning Board submissions not appearing on the
Town website in a timely manner. The Board discussed the possibility of sending
material directly to the webmaster, rather than through the Town Administrator.
Members
of the public attending: Joe Kowalski, Carolyn Sundquist, and Michelle Giguere,
reporter for the Granite State News.
Chairman
Friend reviewed the proposed amendments, allowing time for discussion following
each one. Changes were moved, seconded, and then agreed upon unanimously by the
Board. Weeks will retype the revised document with strike-throughs to clarify
changes.
Amendments
to the Zoning Ordinances are included in the attached document.
8:10
PM- Meeting adjourned.
Proposed Zoning
Amendments for
Town of
Town Meeting March 2008
Amendment Number 1: Are you in favor of:
Amending the Zoning Ordinance by inserting the adoption date into the title block and page footers, and moving the definitions section from Section 2 to the end of the document, and inserting the Tuftonboro Floodplain Development Ordinance after Section 13 Telecommunications Facilities.
The
Planning Board recommends this amendment to make the Ordinance easier to use
and understand.
Amendment Number 2: Are you in favor of amending Section 2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance so the definitions read as follows:
Building Height: The vertical distance measured from the
average level of the grade at the Building line a point on the ground at the mean finish grade adjoining the foundation
to the highest point of the roof, excluding chimneys, ventilators, silos, and
other accessory features required above the roof.
Expansion: Any increase in the intensity of the use of a
Home Occupation: Any
individual business or profession conducted within a Dwelling Unit or Accessory
Structure which (a) is incidental to the Dwelling Unit, (b) does not change the
character of the Dwelling Unit or the surrounding neighborhood, (c) is
conducted by the resident owner/lessee, (d) employs no more than three
additional employees besides the owner/lessee, (e) there is no exterior storage
of materials or equipment nor permanent display of products visible from the
Street, and (f) uses not more than the
equivalent of fifty (50%) percent (50%)
of the Gross Floor Area of the Dwelling Unit.
Pervious Surface: Consists
of porous material. Does not cause an increased runoff.
Will allow water to pass through at a rate equal to or
greater than the natural infiltration rate of the underlying soil.
The
Planning Board recommends this amendment to clarify the intent of these terms
in the Zoning Ordinance. Note that currently there is no definition in the
Ordinance for Pervious Surface.
Amendment Number 3: Are you in favor of amending Section 3.5.1 of the Zoning Ordinance so that the last sentence reads as follows:
Any use not
specifically listed in the Table shall be deemed to be prohibited
is prohibited unless it is consistent with
the permitted uses and the district purpose.
The
Planning Board recommends this amendment to accommodate compatible uses that
did not exist when the table of uses was created.
Amendment Number 4: Are you in favor of amending Section 3.6 of the Zoning Ordinance so that Home Occupations and Special Home Occupations are removed from the Residential Uses section of the Table and inserted in the Commercial Uses section of the Table.
The Planning Board recommends this amendment in order to place these uses in the correct section of the Use Table and be consistent with the text in the Zoning Ordinance. This does not change the permissibility of Home Occupations or Special Home Occupations.
Amendment Number 5: Are you in favor of amending Section 4.2 of the Zoning Ordinance by inserting the word “Impervious” into the eighth column heading as follows:
Max. %
Impervious
Coverage
Per
The
Planning Board recommends this amendment to clarify the type of lot coverage
this standard includes.
Amendment Number 6: Are you in favor of amending Section 5 of the Zoning Ordinance by deleting Section 5.1.2.
Changes: No Building, Structure, or use which has been
changed from a Non-Conforming Use to a conforming use shall be permitted to
revert to a Non-Conforming Use.
The
Planning Board recommends this amendment to remove any redundancy in the Zoning
Ordinance which creates confusion.
Amendment Number 7: Are you in favor of amending Section 5.1.3 of the Zoning Ordinance by inserting the word “Height” as follows:
Rebuilding: The restoration of a non-conforming Structure damaged by fire or other causes shall be substantially completed in one year and there shall be no increase in volume, height, or floor space of such Structure.
The
Planning Board recommends this amendment to provide clarification.
Amendment Number 8: Are you in favor of amending Section 5.2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance so that the section reads as follows:
Fire Ruins: No owner or occupant of land in any District
shall permit fire or other ruins to be left on a site, but within one year
shall remove such ruins and fill any excavation with solid fill to ground
level, or shall Repair, replace, or rebuild the Structure. All
potential hazards such as foundation holes are required to be mitigated within
90 days after the fire event and until the structure is
reconstructed.
The
Planning Board recommends this amendment to ensure the safety of the community
after a fire event.
Amendment Number 9: Are you in favor of amending Section 6.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance by inserting the words “Pervious Material” as follows:
Surface: All parking areas and Access drives and aisles shall be surfaced with bituminous binder, concrete, asphalt, pervious material, compacted, or crushed stone placed in order to prevent erosion and raising of dust. If paved, the Lots shall be striped to delineate parking spaces.
The
Planning Board recommends this amendment to include a full range of surface
materials.
Amendment Number 10: Are you in favor of amending Section 7.3 of the Zoning Ordinance so that the Explanatory Note reads as follows:
Explanatory Note:
A. The maximum aggregate area is the sum of all attached, projecting, and/or free standing Signs. In no case can all of the Sign areas on a property exceed the maximum aggregate area identified above.
The
Planning Board recommends this amendment to provide clarification.
Amendment Number 11: Are
you in favor of amending the certification language in Articles 12.3.1 and
12.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to read as follows:
“Based on my field investigation conducted on
(date), Lots (lot numbers) contain at least ** Acres of contiguous
non-wetland soil as defined specified
by Article 12.5.3 of the Town of Tuftonboro Zoning Ordinance.
(** is the minimum number of acres required
for a lot in the particular zone in which the parent tract is located.)
The Planning Board
recommends this amendment to clarify the existing certification so that it
conforms to Article 12.5.3 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Amendment
Number 12: Are you in favor of amending the
certification language in Article 12.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance so that it
reads as follows:
“Based
on my field investigation conducted on (date), the
sewage disposal capacity of the newly configured tax lots (lot numbers)
is not diminished by this boundary line adjustment. newly configured tax lots
(lot numbers) contain
adequate non-wetland soil area to support a State approved sewage disposal
system.”
The Planning Board
recommends this revision because the current certification is worded
improperly.
Amendment
Number 13: Are you in favor of amending
Section 13.2.9 of the Zoning Ordinance so that the definition of Height
reads as follows:
Height. The distance measured from ground level to
the highest point on the tower or other structure, including antennas including its attachments.
The
Planning Board recommends this amendment to provide clarification.