Minutes

TOWN OF TEMPLE, NEW HAMPSHIRE

PLANNING BOARD

JANUARY 28, 2015

FINAL MINUTES OF PUBLIC MEETING

Board members present:  Mary Beth Ayvazian, Camilla Lockwood, John Kieley, Tedd Petro, and Allan Pickman

Call to order by Pickman at 7:30 p.m.

Public Hearing – Agriculture:  At 7:30 p.m. Pickman opened the second public hearing on a proposed amendment to zoning which would require modified Site Plan Review (SPR) for new agricultural buildings larger than 3,000 square feet.  Kieley provided a brief summary of what transpired at the first public hearing (01/07/15), and acknowledged the board had considered the public’s comments and concerns.  This led to one proposed amendment being withdrawn, and the other one being simplified.  Another outcome was agreement to move ahead with forming an agricultural advisory committee.  Kieley stated the planning board wishes to be supportive of agriculture in town and not be restrictive, but must consider protection of abutters and property values.  This would involve an abbreviated SPR process developed for agriculture.  He mentioned the proposed forest monastery project, and indicated the board is not trying to make the procedure difficult and is willing to waive items.

This was followed by brief dialogue with audience members, including:

• Differences between types of buildings, i.e. storage sheds as opposed to barns of a similar size
• What elements would make up the ‘Site Plan Review – Lite’ for Agriculture
• Existing mandate from the state that says restrictions on agriculture cannot be unreasonable
• Including a section on Agriculture in the revised Master Plan
• Have the agricultural committee develop a list of agricultural building and land uses
• Comment that farmers will just skirt any new rules and build cheap, ugly buildings which would be a step backward for land values
• Allow and encourage agriculture in town while protecting property rights and values for residents
• Clarification of the 3,000 square foot measurement to include all usable space on all levels, and not just the footprint of the building
• Comment from audience member that property owners feel they have a right to do what they wish with their property, whether their neighbors like it or not
• A general consensus that the largest barn in town is most likely the one at Touchstone Farm (Martin)
• Suggestion to increase the property line setbacks
• Working together to find solutions
• Length of process for Ag SPR should be 90 days or less from receipt of a completed application
• Suggestion that a ‘hobby’ farmer may not be aware of procedure and timeframe
• Smooth starts for projects would begin with a person coming in and having a conversation with the board
• Explanation of how the amendment language will be appear on ballot for residents to vote
• Development of an SPR regulation for agriculture involves planning board creation of a draft document, presenting it at a public hearing, and then a board vote on approval

Motion by Lockwood that the language presented to amend Article 8, Section 2 be placed on the ballot in March, second by Ayvazian.  Kieley asked for confirmation that a modified SPR for agriculture would be developed.  The vote on the motion was four in favor, with Petro opposed.

Motion by Kieley that the planning board further refines an abbreviated SPR for agricultural buildings, and incorporate that into the SPR practices after holding a public hearing.  This was followed by brief discussion on how to move this forward expediently, including involvement of the agriculture committee.  The motion was seconded by Lockwood.  Petro then asked the board to consider waiting to vote until after the committee was formed.  Pickman said “in the spirit of the meeting” a vote could wait, and no vote was taken.  Hearing closed at 8:07 p.m.

Public Hearing – Aquifer Protection Ordinance: At 8:07 p.m. Pickman opened the public hearing to address a petition warrant article suggesting amendment of the Aquifer Ordinance.  The author of the petition, Pete Von Sneidern, was asked to speak about his petition.  He provided a history of his involvement with motor vehicle repair, referred to past polluting garage practices as “old type”, and indicated the proposed change would permit auto repair in an aquifer zone while mandating voluntary adherence to Best Management Practices (BMPs).  He emphasized that compliance with BMPs should negate worries about adverse effects on local aquifers.  He also said the Aquifer Ordinance does not specify “commercial” activity, and could affect a person working on one vehicle in his basement or garage.  This was followed by discussion about specifics of regulation and enforcement, defining commercial activity, and guidelines vs. regulation.  Lockwood spoke about the importance of aquifers, saying any available water supply is valuable and any polluting substances could be extremely damaging.  Kieley said if someone wishes to site an auto body or repair shop in an aquifer area, they could go before the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA).

Pickman closed the hearing at 8:21 p.m.  He advised the board would need to vote to recommend the warrant article or not, and the result of their recommendation will be printed on the ballot.  Pickman made a motion to recommend planning board approval of the petition warrant article, seconded by Ayvazian, with a vote of none in favor and all members opposed. 

Approval of minutes:   Motion by Kieley to approve the minutes of 01/14/15 as written, second by Lockwood, and so voted.  Motion by Kieley to approve the minutes of 01/21/15 as written, second by Ayvazian, and so voted.

Motion to adjourn by Ayvazian, with all in agreement, and so voted unanimously at 8:26 p.m.

Minutes submitted by Betsy Perry

~ Next meeting to be held on February 4, 2015 at 7:30 p.m. ~