Bob Jones: He felt that a building of this magnitude should be reviewed by the Planning Board before acting on issuing a building permit. He denied the building permit because of the potential of a commercial use.

Ron LeBlanc: His daughter attended UNH and graduated with a degree in equine science. She needs an indoor riding facility in order to run year round. The farm is currently and has always been a horse farm. In the 1970’s, the then owner was going to erect an indoor riding facility. It is an agricultural building and the property is a working farm. The Building Inspector sent a letter denying a permit because a non-residential use requires formal non-residential site plans and suggested that he speak with the Planning Board. He created a sketch of the location of the building and parking area. He asked the Planning Board how extensive of a drawing will he need for an agricultural building. The Planning Board informed him that he will be inviting people to his property which will affect traffic flow, and he should have a survey plan for a site plan. Ted Stewart felt the survey plan would be necessary if encroaching on the setbacks. Ted asked if the building was near the 50 ft setback, and Mr. LeBlanc said this will be determined with the final plans but that he had 50 ft from the end of the road to the end of the arena. Sue Killam felt that the traffic flow, hours of operation and drainage should be looked at with a site plan. Mr. LeBlanc informed that Planning Board that any horse shows would be held when the track was not being used so they could utilize the track for parking spaces. The same amount of lessons will be performed, except they will be held inside the indoor ring. Mike Fletcher is concerned with the parking of vehicles and trailers on Meditation.

Harold Morse did not feel that a site plan is necessary in this instance because of the agricultural use and current horse farm. He felt the Building Inspector should issue a permit if the building meets all codes and setbacks. Tim Dziechowski and Joe Guischard agree. Ted Stewart would like to see the setbacks on paper. He is also concerned that a new parking area would affect the street, but the sketches show no adverse affects to the roadways, surrounding topography and is self-contained. Sue Killam still feels a site plan is necessary. She feels that there should be some sort of document for the Planning Board to fall back on if there are any problems that may occur. Ted Stewart feels the building permit and the business permit is enough documentation to refer back to. There is no other building being erected other than the equine arena which is 80 x 180 and is a movable structure which can be unbolted and moved.

Mr. LeBlanc indicated that the perimeter of the property has previously been surveyed, and he can broaden his sketch to include where the arena, barn, drainage and parking will be. Mike Fletcher also feels a site plan is needed. Sue Killam now feels the survey plan is enough documentation. Paul DiMaggio feels a site plan is an absolute must and that the Planning Board has the right to review life safety, health, etc. The site plan should ask how the neighbors feel about the construction of the structure. He also feels that if money is changing hands, it is a commercial use. Just because it is an agricultural use, it should not be relieved of the Town’s Ordinances. Mr. LeBlanc feels he can provide the Planning Board with the information they are looking for without the expense of providing a site plan. Mike Fletcher feels there should be a site plan for the Planning Board to refer to from time to time. Ted Stewart feels the survey report and the Building Inspector’s report is sufficient documentation. Tim Dziechowski feels the building is a reasonable expansion and does not warrant a site plan. Paul DiMaggio feels the Planning Board needs to protect the rights of the Town and the Planning Board is losing site of what it was established to perform. He feels the Planning Board needs to take a look at the laws in the book and how the Ordinances are being enforced. The major concerns of the Planning Board are neighbor input, soil and structure review by an engineer and a structural design by an engineer to be given to the Building Inspector.

Glen Greenwood addressed the Planning Board that building and riding stables are agricultural and farming uses and are in the same definition as non-residential uses which are treated as non-residential uses as of an amendment in 1990. Some feel this is a commercial endeavor rather than an agricultural endeavor. Sue Killam feels the Planning Board should look at the plans to see if there is need for the circuit rider to review them as well. Sue Miner addressed the Planning Board as an abutter and indicated she is glad to see more use of the horse farm. She is concerned about traffic issues. Her other issue is that the new parking abuts A&C Tire’s parking which is part of the LeBlanc property. Does another business permit need to be issued due to A&C using part of the property? There are also apartments on the property, and she feels the property lines need to be clearly delineated and documented. She does not feel this needs to go through a site plan process, but to make sure the information is well documented. Mr. LeBlanc said there are no stalls inside the new building, it is just an indoor riding arena, and there would not be anymore cars than what is already there. Paul DiMaggio feels you need to over-regulate due to the growth in Atkinson. Mr. LeBlanc is concerned because a prior riding arena was permitted for personal use only and is now changed from that. Sending this through the Town Engineers will cost up to $10,000 and the feeling is that if Mr. LeBlanc can provide drawings with parking, drainage and lights, that will be an adequate document.

DES letter indicating they received the application for a site specific permit to construct the units. The Conservation Commission has this same letter but has not reviewed it yet. Vollmer has written a letter indicating that they are not prepared to address the Planning Board because they have not had the opportunity to review the amended traffic study analysis.

Sue Killam reads the abutter list.

Chris Frey: Chris reviews Bill Rollins letter that most of his comments have been addressed. The turning radii is fine, but the bump outs will affect the turning radii and do not recommend the bump outs. Chris suggests that after the construction of the units and if speed is an issue, then to revisit the speed bumps recommendation. Regarding life safety issues, no revised plans submitted because there are no technical changes made to the plan. There was one small change to the plan involving three notes confirming the waiver for green space, life safety issues received from Mike Murphy which will be reviewed if there is an impact or a need for additional resources and the provision of community transportation if an impact on elderly affairs, which Atkinson Farm will provide the transportation to its occupants if the need arises.

Laurie Rossio: Ms. Rossio presented her amended traffic study analysis. There were no changes to her results and recommendations, and she stands by her initial traffic study analysis. She indicated that there are no standards for 30 MPH roads, only 40 MPH criteria. This is the criteria she used for her analysis. Ted Stewart did not attend the public hearing in which Ms. Rossio presented her initial report and asked her to give him a synopsis of the initial presentation she made to the Planning Board. She also informed the Planning Board that many of the recommendations came from the Salem Planning Board. She said that the project does not cause any measurable changes to the traffic flow. She has had no conversations with Ross Moldoff, Salem Planning Director, regarding the traffic study analysis. Mr. Frey will deliver a copy of the revised traffic study analysis to Mr. Moldoff. She indicated that from the development, the peak hour of traffic would be in the evening. She indicated about a .6% increase in traffic.

Glen Greenwood indicated he is in discussions with the DES regarding groundwater and something should be submitted within a month and that he has been very involved in this process. There is a project specific timeline to receive a permit from the State. He also indicated that the water is staying within the development and is not as contentious of a process.

Paul DiMaggio is concerned that the Town Engineers are not present at the meeting to review the traffic study analysis. Mr. Frey feels all the Town Engineer’s questions have been answered. Mr. Frey informed the Planning Board that two wells have been drilled and a quantity of water has been established for development and the wells have been pump tested. They are confirming an established water supply and the permitting is in process.

Ted Stewart discussed the intersections in questions. North Broadway is a State road and discussions with DOT are in order with regard to improvements to that road. Most accidents occur at North Broadway, but there are not statistics. It is a State maintained highway which means it goes by State standards. It was suggested the Town could accept responsibility for the maintenance if the State improves the Road. Ted feels the residents should not have to take on the burden of maintaining a State road. He believes it is not a prudent thing to do to the taxpayers. He also said that Sawyer Avenue needs to be elevated at the curve to avoid dips and accidents.

Mr. Frey indicated they are constructing primary septic tanks and an erosion digester as a second treatment for the sewage. They will construct additional storage somewhere on the property. Plans have not been submitted to the Town Engineer yet, but he will be receiving them shortly. He has a rough idea as to where another lagoon will be located. The water and septic were Mr. Greenwood’s outstanding issues, and this update is good news. The site plan will show the location of the secondary lagoon, and the storage treatment process keeps pressure off the wetlands.

Paul DiMaggio feels the Town Engineer needs to review all the information that was presented tonight. He feels footnote 7 on the Site Plan needs to be reviewed by the Town Attorney before signing. Harold Morse, from the audience, pointed had pointed out that Paul DiMaggio had originally requested this footnote when the clubhouse plan was prepared in order to follow zoning regulations. Paul DiMaggio would like to review this footnote again.

The 65 day clock is running out, and the Planning Board must take action on this Site Plan tonight. The Planning Board can either grant conditional approval, suggest the applicant request an extension, petition the Board of Selectmen for an extension, or deny the Site Plan. Sue Miner feels the Town Engineer should advise the Planning Board on the information presented tonight and is not comfortable with granting conditional approval. Joe Guischard is comfortable granting conditional approval. Paul DiMaggio feels the Planning Board needs more time and that the Town Engineer needs to review the information presented. Mike Fletcher is comfortable granting conditional approval. Ted Stewart is comfortable granting conditional approval. Tim Dziechowski feels the Town Engineer needs to review the information. Sue Killam feels the Town Engineer needs to review the information. Mike Fletcher feels the project should not be held up because the Town Engineer is not present. Mr. Frey feels all of the issues presented are State permit issues. The three notes on the Plan are responses to technical concerns. The Town Engineer’s input to conditions will not affect the conditions. The conditions will still exist. Mr. Frey feels the process is complete at this point, and there is no need to appear before the Planning Board again. He can clean up the remaining conditions without having to wait for another public hearing. Glen Greenwood’s opinion is that conditional approval can be granted, and that all outstanding issues remaining are administrative and can be taken care of without the Planning Board’s input but only if the Planning Board is comfortable with granting conditional approval. Once the Planning Board grants the conditional approval, the public process ends, the conditions cannot be changed and the procedure cannot be opened back up to the public.

Mr. Frey presents the Planning Board with a letter on behalf of Lewis Builders requesting a 60-day extension for technical review and continue the discussion until the 2/3/07 workshop.

February 21, 2007 is the next public hearing with no further abutter notification.

Eric Steltzer: Mr. Steltzer is introduced to the Planning Board and will be the new circuit rider for the Town. Eric presents his background to the Planning Board. Mr. Steltzer will be working on the Master Plan with the Planning Board and will meet with the Planning Board to write the text. He would like community input to fit into the Towns goals and plans. All numbers in the Plan will be adjusted with regard to statistics. He will incorporate the annual adjustments from OEP. The numbers right now reflect the 2000 census numbers.

Planning Board members introduce themselves to Mr. Steltzer.

Glen Greenwood: Mr. Greenwood discussed CTAP for communities with regard to the I-93 corridor. DOT will provide technical assistance. Rockingham Planning will do the community assessments. This must be completed in draft form by May. Technical assistance has grants of $15,000. Towns apply to Regional Planning Commission for project approval, but the Planning Commission does not have to do the projects. Russ McAllister and Sue Killam are the representatives to CTAP. Mr. Greenwood will leave the material for the Planning Board to review. The I-93 corridor will bring growth to the surrounding communities. The money provided to communities is to manage the growth (studies, buildout analysis, master plans, planning projects). This is a cooperative enterprise between the Planning Commission, DOT and Federal Transportation. No project will be discouraged. This block of money is being offered for many years, and the projects will be done by Rockingham Planning and by individual towns.

Planning Board minutes will be approved at the workshop held on 2/7/07.

The meeting was closed at 10:40 pm.

Next scheduled Public Hearing meeting February 21, 2007.

Respectfully submitted,

Raelene McBride