Pittsfield Planning Board
Town Hall, 85 Main Street
Pittsfield, NH 03263
Minutes of Public Meeting of June 21, 2007
ITEM 1. Call to Order at 7:00 P.M. on June 21, 2007 by Eric Bahr,
Chairman.
ITEM 2. Roll Call
Members Present: Eric Bahr (EB), Chairman, Paul Metcalf, Jr. (PM), Fred
Hast (FH), John Lenaerts (JL), Selectman Ex Officio, Peter Newell (PN),
Alternate, and Delores Fritz, Recording Secretary.
Members Absent: Bill Miskoe (BM), Vice-Chairman, Rich Hunsberger
(RH), Chris Conlon (CC), Alternate and Daniel Greene.
ITEM 3. Public Hearing for continued reconsideration of revocation for a
one-bedroom watchman’s apartment, an auto repair shop, and a pallet shop
filed by Walter Jensen, P.O. Box 2645, Concord, NH 03302 for property
located at 12 Broadway, Pittsfield, NH 03263 (Tax Map U-2, Lot 1). This
property is located in the Commercial Zone.
(EB) reiterated Mr. Jensen’s history as to why this continued Public Hearing
was taking place. He related that there was a report available dated
June 19, 2007 from Michael MacLaughlin, Building Inspector, and a report
dated June 21, 2007 from Fire Chief Gary Johnson. Atty. Charles Russell
appeared for Mr. Jensen who has “sustained an eye injury today and did not
feel up to appearing tonight.” (Atty. Russell was given a copy [3 sheets] of
these reports for review.) Atty. Russell related that though there appeared
to be a lot of items not yet completed, there are quite a few that have been
completed. He noted that he viewed this report as “tying up a lot of loose
ends rather than being an end result for denial of revocation.” There appears
to be violations but nothing is noted as to what has been done. (JL) noted
that it seems much more than tying up loose ends; there is a lot to be done.
This is a lack of compliance that has been required.
2
(FH) inquired as to how long this has been going on? (EB) noted that this
has been going on for over a year. If this were just a fire alarm part that was
on order, I would be inclined to agree with Atty. Russell rather than 90 days
of work that is taking two years. (FH) noted that the building still has to be
sprinkled and Mr. Jensen has known this since he first owned it. (EB) noted
that the Fire Chief had noted that as long as old one is torn out and being
replaced, that this is acceptable for now but everything else was to be done.
All the other “stuff” that is not done is unacceptable. (FH) mentioned that
with the pallets stacked around the building fire could easily go through
them and cause a major fire. (PN) noted that this has been ongoing since
October, 2006 and in eight months nothing has been done. (EB) related that
it is now pushing a year since we voted to revoke the Site Plan and there has
been no movement to get violations done. (FH) stated that he had no
intentions of updating the violations until he was pushed. Some of the
things that need to be done could be done in a very short time.
Open to Public Input
Mr. John Topouzoglou related that it is not easy to have a business and there
are a lot of places in town that are worse and have been for years. Things
change, I change, and if we make better changes for the community, it is
good.
Close Public Input
Atty. Russell related that he has been here before asking for more time and
he was again asking for more time to complete the items listed on the report.
Mr. Jensen is making progress, but slowly. Regarding the apartment and the
sprinkler system, which is not in a congested area, we are already in Court.
There is a Status Conference scheduled for August 15, 2007. As I noted
previously, this report does not list all that has been done.
(FH) related going back to the original report stating no outside storage as
pallets were supposed to be hauled off regularly. I go by and note several
loads of pallets and they are always there and I believe, getting very close to
Town property. As far as fire is concerned, any windy night something
could set off a fire and it would drift just about anywhere and there would be
quite a few BTU’s there. (EB) asked Board if they were considering another
extension on revocation of the Site Plan? (PN) noted that there was an
inspection on October 15, 2006, which is just about the time that I came on
3
board to the Planning Board. I agree that Mr. Jensen has accomplished some
things, but I own my own business, and if I were in this situation, these
things would have all been done a long time ago. We are responsible for
these kinds of things that are happening in Town, and for the good of the
citizens should and would we be this generous to everyone? I am not
inclined to give him more time.
(PN) Motion to revoke Site Plan approval for 12 Broadway and instruct our
code enforcement officer to take all appropriate action following that.
(PM) Second. Carried 4-0.
ITEM 4. A Public Hearing for application for a Site Plan Review filed by
David Ossoff, 5 Main Street, Pittsfield, NH 03263 (Tax Map U-6, Lot 1) for
an indoor paintball field. The property is owned by David Ossoff, 5 Main
Street, Pittsfield, NH 03263. This property is located in the LIGHT
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ZONE.
(PN) Motion to approve application as complete. (PM) Second.
Carried 4-0.
Mr. Ossoff appeared tonight with Jim Steenbeke and Matt, his partner.
Mr. Ossoff noted, “These gentlemen are planning on putting in an indoor
paintball field. The playing area would be about 10,000 sq. ft., and there
would be a bathroom and hallways on main floor as well as a glassed in
waiting area. On the Mezzanine there would be a pro shop, reception area,
Main Entrance, viewing area as well as a food area, though no food will be
prepared on premises, it will be from a local pizza shop.’
(EB) noted that the Department Heads approval forms have not yet been
returned due to vacations/conferences and will be available shortly. He
requested any maps that might be available for Board’s review.
Break 7:25 P.M. Resume 7:30 P.M.
Board was able to review maps. Mr. Steenbeke explained the plans to the
PB. He noted that the “green and blue” areas are new walls. The sprinkler
system will have a five-foot space for accessibility. There will be an alarm
door to prohibit clients’ entrance into undesignated area. About 28 parking
spaces are available on Joy Street and Main Street.
4
(EB) Since there are some individuals here who are abutters that are
interested in this project, they are invited to view the plans with Board and
applicants.
Resident questioned what the age limit would be? Mr. Steenbeke related
that for insurance purposes, there is an age limit of about 8-10 years though
no one under sixteen would be admitted without a guardian. He noted that
his clients are usually between the ages of 21 and 32-33 and this is
something that is not really geared towards teenagers. The average cost is
about $50.00 a day, which includes all day entrance fee ($25.00) and then
rental of equipment and purchase of paintballs. This is not really geared
towards youngsters. No food preparation will be done on premises but
rather be acquired from an in-town pizza store. Someone inquired as to how
many would be in this area at one time? Mr. Steenbeke noted that
approximately twenty people at one time. The game usually lasts about ½
hour. He related that 90% of the time there would be scheduled leagues and
one day a week would be for “walk-ins” which would be a non-league day.
It was noted that a referee would be on the field for all events.
(PN) questioned the parking areas on Joy Street? A resident was also
concerned about parking. Mr. Ossoff related that the first eight spaces on
Joy Street are for Precision Trucking but could possibly be utilized at night.
On Main Street there are six spaces plus one handicapped parking space.
Realistically, there are plenty of parking spaces. (PN) noted that people are
not going to park on Joy Street, but will probably try parking on Main Street.
Mr. Steenbeke noted that ¾ of the operation time will be used up by leagues.
Mr. Ossoff noted that they would install a light on the backside of the
building and that houses start quite a ways down from Joy Street from this
area. A small, self-illuminated sign would be placed on the building in the
area noted as “Factory Outlet.” Sign would not be illuminated when
paintball field is closed.
(EB) questioned hours of operation? Mr. Steenbeke noted that they would
be closed on Mondays. Tuesday through Thursday and Sunday would from
Noon to 10:00 P.M. and Friday and Saturday would be Noon till 11:00 P.M.
The majority of the traffic would be after 5:00 P.M. and on weekends.
5
Open to Public Input
Mr. Topouzoglou related that he was unfamiliar with this game. He related
that this would be a new business for Pittsfield and hoped that it would be
right for Pittsfield hoping that it would fit and be good for the Town. It is
better than nothing.
Close Public Input
Mr. Ossoff related that they had met recently with Mike MacLaughlin
regarding the existing fire alarm system and a few other issues such as exit
lighting. He noted that they are meeting with electrical and alarm system
“guys” to get all this straightened out and anything that has to be done, will
be done right away. There should be no conflicts regarding this. They will
draw up the plans as to what needs to be done and then we can have the Fire
Chief approve it.
The Board and Mr. Ossoff, Mr. Steenbeke and Matthew further discussed
septic, traffic, parking, lighting, noise, sign and illumination, times of
operation and target date for opening. It was related that the Zoning Board
had approved their application for Special Exception and they were now
waiting the 30-day appeal process time. It was agreed that the Department
Head approvals should really be a part as to whether to grant this Site Plan
Review.
(EB) noted that there are probably four times a year in Pittsfield that parking
would be an issue, which it is for everyone. He questioned Board members
as to the necessity of a Site Walk but all members felt that it was not
necessary since all had been in building at one time or another. It was
agreed that hours of operation could be 8:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M., whether
they choose to be there or not, and that no alcoholic beverages would be
served.
(PM) Motion to continue hearing to July 5, 2007 at 7:00 P.M. (PN) Second.
Carried 4-0.
(EB) noted that Board could probably finish it up on that date.
Break 8:00 P.M. Resume at 8:07 P.M.
6
WORK SESSION
(EB) “Ed Vien, from the Zoning Board is here tonight.”
The Board discussed in length the various home occupations and whether
Home Occupation should require Special Exception. It was noted that the
Board has right to waive or request Site Plan Review and whether a Site
Plan Review should be required for non-residential uses noting that all home
occupations are non-residential uses. It was questioned whether any home
occupation needs to be reviewed by Planning Board. Some potential
changes concerning home occupation were suggested (see attached) and
noted that it would require Town Meeting and be voted on by Town. It was
noted that since the Planning Board has already decided on a definition for
frontage that this would also be included in Zoning Ordinances.
The definition of Combined dwelling/business was discussed and it was
decided the definition should note, “Any combination of dwellings and
business use not covered by Home Occupation.” The zoning districts and
uses should be amended in this regard (see attached).
ITEM 5. Approval of Minutes
(FH) Motion to approve minutes of June 7, 2007. (PM) Second.
Carried 3-0. (PN Abstain).
(JL) Motion to approve Minutes of May 17, 2007. (PM) Second.
Carried 4-0. (EB Abstain).
ITEM 6. Members Concerns
(EB) noted that Board has been invited to CNHRPC tour of open spaces on
July 19, 2007 at 6:00 P.M.
(JL) Motion to have Work Session on July 19, 2007 and attend this bus tour
sponsored by CNHRPC. (PM) Second. Carried 4-0.
7
ITEM 7. Adjournment
(PM) Motion to Adjourn. (PN) Second. Carried 4-0.
Meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M.
Approved: August 2, 2007
Eric Bahr, Chairman