Pittsfield Planning Board
Town Hall, 85 Main Street
Pittsfield, NH 03263
Minutes of Public Meeting
July 26, 2007
ITEM 1. Call to Order at 7:00 P.M. by Eric Bahr, Chairman.
ITEM 2. Roll Call
Members Present: Eric Bahr (EB), Chairman, Bill Miskoe (BM), Vice-
Chairman, Rich Hunsberger (RH), John Lenaerts (JL), Selectman Ex
Officio, and Delores Fritz, Recording Secretary.
Members Absent: Paul Metcalf (PM), Fred Hast (FH), Daniel Greene (DG),
Peter Newell (PN), Alternate, Chris Conlon (CC), Alternate.
.
ITEM 3. A continued Public Hearing for a Site Plan Review filed by David
Ossoff, 5 Main Street, Pittsfield, NH 03261 (Tax Map U-6, Lot 1) for an
indoor paintball field. The property is owned by David Ossoff, 5 Main
Street, Pittsfield, NH 03263. Public Hearing to include Fire Department
sign-off. This property is located in the LIGHT COMMERCIAL/
INDUSTRIAL Zone.
(EB) It is my understanding that we are present tonight to review the Fire
Department and Police Department sign-off sheets continuing the Site Plan
Review filed by David Ossoff for an indoor paintball field.
Mr. Ossoff related that he had recently met with Fire Chief Gary Johnson
and they discussed the various conditions necessary for approval. He noted,
“The only real question I have in regard to his conditions is the occupancy of
up to 50 people.” Mr. Ossoff wanted to know if business was doing well
and more than 50 people showed up at any given time and on a regular basis,
2
what procedure was necessary to increase the number for occupancy. He
was advised by (BM) that he could at that time go back to the Fire Chief and
discuss how he could raise the occupancy numbers. (EB) in the worst case
scenario, it would come back before the Planning Board for modification.
(RH) questioned whether there would be parking issues and Mr. Ossoff
reminded him that Ordinances go by footage, not occupancy.
The Board and the applicants discussed in length the necessity and the
structure of the three-hour firewall as a condition posed by the Fire Chief.
(EB) reiterated the Fire Chief’s concerns that occupants would not know the
exit route if they had not been present previously noting also that there were
other businesses within the structure. Fire Chief Johnson has recommended
acceptance of the application provided the nine recommendations he
outlined be corrected/added and also any concerns as outlined by Police
Chief Wharem. He noted that although Water and Sewer have not signed
off on this project, he did not feel that it would be an issue.
(BM) Motion to approve applicant’s request for Site Plan Review for indoor
paintball field provided Fire Chief Johnson’s nine conditions are met as well
as the recommendations as offered by Police Chief Wharem are
acknowledged and accepted. (JL) Second. After discussion, carried 4-0.
Jim Steenbeck noted that he foresees that the occupancy amount of 50 may
be an issue in the near future. (BM) noted that this would have to be
negotiated with the Fire Chief, as they cannot overrule his recommendations.
There might be something as noted in the Fire Codes regarding occupancy
numbers. (RH) questioned whether it meant 50 individuals on the field or in
the entire facility and related that there is a “mechanical number” in relation
to sitting/standing and square footage.
(EB) The motion was carried 4-0 and applicant was notified of the 30-day
appeal process. He suggested that he contact Mike McLaughlin, Building
Inspector regarding building permits and occupancy approval.
ITEM 4. A conceptual hearing involving the request of Jim Pritchard,
P.O. Box 385, Pittsfield, NH 03263 concerning consideration of a citizen
petition for zoning amendments based on the citizen zoning ordinance
petition of 2006.
3
(EB) related that Mr. Pritchard has essentially sent us a letter and compact
disc for each Board member rewriting the Zoning Ordinance. Though I have
not reviewed the entire disc, there is a five-page introduction and this is not
the same as the citizen’s petition from last year. I have taken a brief look at
it and it is a very comprehensive document. It might be a good idea to ship
it to Regional Planning and have them take a look at it, clean it up and then
we can open it up for discussion. There is money within the budget to do
this. He has noted Zoning Ordinances from various other towns. This
would involve not “repairing what we have” but rather doing a complete
new ordinance. His research is outstanding.
The Board members discussed the possibility of having work sessions to do
this. (BM) questioned why the Planning Board would consider initiating
something like this from someone who does not even live in our Town.
(RH) felt that Board could put together their own package though this would
take a great deal of time. “I do not agree with his tactics and the way he
does things.” I would like to see our priorities include 55+ clusters and
things such as this. I think we should all be interested in a good cluster
ordinance and not stopping development but shaping it. We could start with
a new one, but we should create it. Most of the Towns have them outlined
on their Websites. (BM) noted, “Are we willing to commit this Board to one
Work Session each month for the next six months? Otherwise, it would not
be ready in March, 2008.” We would need to be willing, as a Board, to
dedicate one work session per month. If we are not willing to do this, then
we should not even start it. In order to get this done, we are going to be very
busy.
(EB) noted that come April 2008, there will be a dramatically different
Board. Is it agreed that we schedule the third Thursday of each month as a
Work Session meeting to complete this task? He noted that every time we
write another ordinance, we dilute the ordinance effect. Zoning Board
should deal with uses. Various scenarios were discussed as to what
should/should not be included in ordinances. Board members agreed that
each third Thursday of the month until December 2007 would be utilized as
a Work Session to update the Zoning Ordinances. If necessary, they would
meet the fourth Thursday of the month.
(Eric Bahr, Bill Miskoe, Rich Hunsberger and John Lenaerts were given the
copy of the disc as presented by Mr. Pritchard.)
4
ITEM 5. Selectman’s Report
(JL) noted that we now have a new Town Administrator who was the DOT
Commissioner for some years, has been a State Representative, and is
presently the Chairman of the Bow Board of Selectman.
ITEM 6. Approval of Minutes of June 21, 2007 and July 5, 2007.
(EB) noted that since (BM) was not present at these meeting, there would
not be a quorum for approval tonight. Therefore, these approvals will be
tabled until the next Planning Board meeting.
ITEM 7. Members Concerns
(EB) noted that Laura Spector, Mitchell & Bates, has filed an Appearance
and an Acceptance of Service in the matter of Pritchard v. Town of
Pittsfield, et al., Docket No. 07-E-0233.
ITEM 8. Adjournment
(BM) Motion to Adjourn. (RH) Second. Carried 4-0.
Meeting adjourned at 8:00 P.M.
Approved: August 2, 2007
Eric Bahr, Chairman