SPECIAL PLANNING BOARD MEETING  - 5/24/05
 
Chairman David Swanson opened the meeting at 3:05 pm with Rolly Allen, Pam Peterson, John Brown, Cathy Clark and Tim Costello present and Peter Foster absent.
           
The purpose of the meeting was to consider a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on the application for a variance by PHELPS (43.5-2-38), Dock Rd, Hamlet.
           
ZEO Graham Bailey handed out a page containing suggested Review Criteria which address items in the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to a recommendation to the ZBA with respect to a variance  He recommended that the Planning Board should fill in, as all or part of its findings, such a page in connection with each recommendation to the ZBA

The Phelps’ had provided revised drawings.  Cathy Clark questioned how far under the dwelling the support beams begin.  According to the ZEO, the Phelps have represented that they are limiting construction to only the portion over the land.  A permit from the LGPC would be required to construct any addition over the water.  The application states that the original height is 29 ft and the new height will be 36 ft from the lowest point on the Lake side.  The current structure has 3 bedrooms on the first floor and an attic.  The structure with the new construction will have a first floor and a second floor with cathedral ceiling and no attic.  The bedrooms will be moved to the 2nd floor.  There is no increase in square footage as presently defined in the Zoning Ordinance.  The current lot coverage is 57% which will remain the same.  The roof ridge line will be changed from parallel to the road to perpendicular to the road     The ZEO noted that the code does not address views from the road.
 
The house is on the sewer system.  Concerns were expressed about general density of the area, how it will look from the lake, and blocking part of the view of the lake.  It was thought that, with the proposed changes, the house will look better than the present building.

Discussion ensued concerning the type of recommendation to be made.  ZEO Bailey noted that whatever paper is submitted to the ZBA should constitute both a recommendation with respect to the variance and a site plan review. He further noted that the site plan review  may be approved by the Planning Board without a Public Hearing but cannot be disapproved without a Public Hearing.  A Public Hearing is always required in connection with variances and subdivisions.
 
Cathy Clark indicated concern about the Planning Board making a decision on a variance without knowledge of the comments received in writing and at the Public Hearing.  Tim Costello noted that the Zoning Board might not follow the recommendation of the Planning Board constituting  a site plan approval in which case there should be no site plan approval.
 
Rolly Allen moved and Tim Costello seconded a motion to recommend approval of the Phelps request to the ZBA with the following conditions:
 
1)  No new construction shall occur over the water or beyond the mean high water mark.
 
2)  The increase in height shall be no more than 7 feet from the existing height and the total height shall not be more than 36 feet.
 
3)  The ridge line of the new construction shall be perpendicular to the road as per the plans submitted.
 
4)  Because of its lakeside location, the owner is encouraged to use an earth tone finish on the outside of the house.
 
5)  The stormwater concerns shall be taken care of to the satisfaction of the ZEO.
           
The findings of the Planning Board with respect to the foregoing motion are set forth in Exhibit A hereto attached.
 
            Since the Planning Board is required to give site plan approval for development within 100 ft of the Lake, the foregoing motion (with its five conditions)  was also stated to constitute Site Plan Approval provided that the ZBA approves the variance with such five conditions and in a manner not inconsistent with the foregoing language of this paragraph..
 
            The motion as unanimously approved by all six members of the Planning Board who were present at the meeting.
 
            Respectfully submitted,
 
            Judy Stock
            Acting Recording Secretary

Exhibit A

 

Criteria for Planning Board Recommendation for Variance Application

 

 

Single Family Dwellings, Additions or Accessory Structures   The Planning Board will address the following criteria. 

 

  1. Does application contain sufficient information for the Board to render an informed and reasoned recommendation? (Formal determination on application completeness to be made by Zoning Board of Appeals)

                        Need to verify all new construction will be over land

 

  1. Is proposal compatible with Hague’s Comprehensive Plan?

                        Yes

 

  1. Is the proposal environmentally satisfactory (Storm water runoff, Wastewater, etc)?

Yes – Parcel is on town Sewer and project will have negligible stormwater impact

 

  1. Is the size, architectural style compatible with the surrounding development?

Yes – Proposal generally considered an aesthetic improvement

 

  1. Does the proposal impact the health, safety and general welfare of the community?

No impact

 

  1. Is the proposal likely to negatively impact the surrounding property values

            No

 

  1. Is a site visit required?

            Was accomplished by Planning Board

 

  1. Recommendations, comments and conditions

 

Recommend approval of the Phelps request to the ZBA with the following conditions:
1)  No new construction shall occur over the water or beyond the mean high water mark.
2)  The increase in height shall be no more than 7 feet from the existing height and the total height shall not be more than 36 feet.
3)  The ridge line of the new construction shall be perpendicular to the road as per the plans submitted.
4)  Because of its lakeside location, the owner is encouraged to use an earth tone finish on the outside of the house.
5)  The stormwater concerns shall be taken care of to the satisfaction of the ZEO.