Lewis Builders Development, Inc. submission of an application for formal consideration and approval of a proposed 12,000 sq. ft. golf teaching facility building to be located at far end of driving range at the Atkinson Country Club Resort, Clubhouse Drive, Map 1, Lot 12, RR2/SCR Zone: Harold Morse recuses himself. Paul DiMaggio asks the abutters in attendance to identify themselves rather reading the entire abutters’ list. Mrs. Clemmons of 20 Providence Hill Road, Robert Levine and Joshua Mannion of Lewis Builders and Christine Lewis-Morse identify themselves. Paul DiMaggio reads the application submitted from Lewis Builders. The golf teaching facility is to be located on 400 acres at Clubhouse Drive. Mr. Mannion submits updated plans dated April 18, 2007, but Paul DiMaggio informs him that the plans must be submitted 18 days in advance. Mr. Mannion informs the Board the updated plans are in response to the Town Engineer’s recommendations.

Discussion and Comparison of the original plans and the 4/18/07 updated plans: The golf teaching facility will be located at the far end of the existing driving range, it will be 12,000 sq. ft. with a two-story, split, outdoor, covered building with one level above ground, approximately 160 ft. long and 32 ft. wide with stalls facing the driving range, garage door area with video equipment to analyze swings, classrooms for clinics and an indoor putting green. The building will hit into the existing driving range area. The building will be 25 ft from floor to peak. It will also consist of a pro shop, restrooms and lobby. Mr. Mannion discusses the site plan which shows a 100 ft. buffer, outdoor grass tees, indoor space for rainy days and winter months, practice green outdoors and 28 parking space.

Bill Rollins of Stantec (formerly Vollmer Associates) discusses his recommendations:

1. No alteration or drain permit is required. This has been removed from the updated plan.

2. Parking space numbers are required. Lewis Builders is proposing 28 spaces, but Stantec questions whether 28 spaces will be enough for the 48 seats in the teaching facility. Mr. Mannion refers to Atkinson zoning as to how they chose the number of spaces. Stantec feels the project does not fit into any of the zoning categories. Mr. Mannion is not planning on filling the classroom at one time. The building would be for golf instruction only and not open to the general public. Mr. Mannion used the private high school category in the Zoning Ordinance, the number of square feet, the number of employees and the current function facility’s spaces as additional parking in determining the number of parking spaces. Paul DiMaggio asks if there is enough parking spaces and if the correct zoning category was used. Mr. Mannion said there is room for another additional 10 spaces. Parking along the road will not be allowed. Jack Sapia had no problem with the parking spaces, but there should be a turnaround in the plan for drop offs by the parents. Stantec is concerned there is not enough parking. Paul DiMaggio does not feel the proper criteria was selected for calculating the number of parking spaces, and does not see any categories that apply.

3. Stantec would like to eliminate the off-street loading area and is concerned there is no turnaround area for box trucks (i.e., FedEx, UPS). This should be incorporated in the delivery/loading area. Mr. Mannion informs the Board that most deliveries would go to the existing pro shop and items would be brought to the new facility via golf carts.

4. Stantec questions the hours of operation. Mr. Mannion informs the Board the hours of operation would be 7am–9pm Sunday-Saturday in the summer and 9am–8pm Sunday–Saturday in the winter.

5. Stantec questions whether there is enough room to extend a 6-inch water line to the new building. There is 4 ft between the irrigation line and the new water line and will this be enough room. Mr. Mannion said that Peter Lewis feels the water line can be put in and there is enough room. These water lines involve private utilities, and therefore not a concern of the Board or Stantec.

6. Stantec questions the road profile with setup grade. Stantec would like Lewis Builders to consider installing guardrails along the edge because of the safety issue. Peter Lewis’ view is that the road is a driveway and does not want to install guardrails unless the Board forces him to. Ted Stewart said the driveway is out of the right-of-way and the owner is at risk, but if the driveway is considered a fire lane, then the plan will have to follow the specs. The Board is concerned with accidents occurring in the winter months because of the curve and setup grade. The Board does not feel this road is a driveway, and it should fall under the public roads guidelines. The road is much too steep and should have a guardrail.

7. Stantec questions the floodlights for the nighttime driving range and the lack of wattage information. Mr. Mannion informs the Board that a detailed sheet of lights and wattages, Note on Sheet 6, indicates the distances to the nearby structures and the buffer of trees. The lights will be shut off by 9:30pm, and this will be added as a footnote. The Board asks if the lights will shine out towards the neighbors? Paul DiMaggio urges the Board to consider having lighting here at all. The facility will be used in the winter and lights will be on earlier and the trees will be bare in the buffer. Ted Stewart states that in the winter months, most people have their own lights on and it does not seem that it would be offensive and that Mr. DiMaggio is overprotecting the abutters. Mr. DiMaggio feels the 100 ft buffer needs to be enforced. Jack Sapia suggests the planting of large pines to block the lights in the buffer. Paul DiMaggio would like to see the abutting lots on the future plans. The Board is informed that the lights will be shut off at 8pm in the winter and 9:30pm in the summer.

8. Stantec questions the ditch line of 150 ft and needs some protection from erosion. Stone check dams have been added to the new plan.

9. Stantec questions the drainage calculations regarding the detention pond above and outlet structure, detention basin at the entrance, and is asking for a foot of free board. Mr. Mannion informs the Board that the pond will be another foot deeper in elevation and will have the drainage calculations for Stantec’s review.

Eric Steltzer of Rockingham Planning Commission discusses his recommendations:

1. In accordance with Section 629:A regarding subdivision percentage of nonresidential development, nothing in the plan shows the percentage of nonresidential development. What is proposed and what is the final percentage? Mr. Mannion informs the Board that they have added calculations in the golf course land areas. It will be not more than 28.4 acres of nonresidential development.

2. With regard to the architecture/schematic of the facility, nothing in the plan shows the frontage, height (under 35 ft limit), architecture, nature of the building, or whether it conforms to existing building and new development. Mr. Mannion informs the Board that Sheet 7 has no elevation review, but notes it will match the existing clubhouse maximum height of 25 ft. The note will indicate that it will not exceed 35 ft. Mr. Steltzer would like to see a frontal view to highlight the height and architectural nature.

3. Street lighting. Mr. Mannion informed the Board that there is one existing light and three additional lights will be added with one on the access road. Mr. Steltzer questions whether one lighting system is sufficient to light the access road driveway and feels it is actually on the access road and falls under the public road regulations. Paul DiMaggio feels more lights would be more sufficient for safety reasons. The road should not affect any abutters. The road is 650 ft, including the parking lot. Mr. Steltzer’s idea is to split the road in thirds and add another light on the S-curve on the other side of the road.

4. Mr. Steltzer is concerned that the abutters will be affected by the flood lights. Sheet 6 shows the proposed lights which are designed to direct the light down on the street. Mr. Steltzer is concerned with the flood lights and would like to see the affects to the abutters reduced. This issue was discussed previously when reviewing Mr. Rollins’ recommendations and is potentially an issue.

5. Utility line shows a water system, but there is not electric line. This has been added to the new plan.

6. Mr. Steltzer questions whether the septic system is suitable for the facility and is it the appropriate distance from the facility. The new plan shows the test pit, and the septic design will be submitted to the Town and the State for approval.

7. Mr. Steltzer is concerned that the landscaping design is not in the site plan. Mr. Mannion informed the Board that the landscaping design and trees alongside the abutters’ land have been added to the site plan.

8. Mr. Steltzer is concerned that there are no stop signs or speed limit signs. He is also concerned with the lack of plans for identifying the golf facility. Mr. Mannion informed the Board that Sheet 4 includes the golf facility identification sign which will match the existing signs located on the golf course. Mr. Steltzer would like to see a detailed picture of the sign included in the site plan. The sign ordinance will not comply with private property.

9. Mr. Steltzer is concerned with the pedestrian access and the fact there are no sidewalks for pedestrian access. Mr. Mannion informed the Board that there is adequate parking for clients to drive to the facility rather than walk to the facility. The facility is a junior golf facility, and golfers will not be walking down to utilize the facility. There are provisions for adding more parking spaces if necessary.

10. Mr. Steltzer is concerned with the access road. He would like to know what the structural makeup of the road is, how it will be protected from erosion and that a level of detail be provided in the site plan. Mr. Mannion informed the Board that the access road will be paved and not accessed by the public.

11. Mr. Steltzer is concerned with the wetlands and that no structure or septic system will be within 100 ft of the buffer. Note 13, Sheet 4 has been revised and after review, Mr. Steltzer agreed with the revision.

Paul DiMaggio asked that Mr. Steltzer and Mr. Rollins review the plans again before the meetings and let them know their recommendations in advance. Paul DiMaggio opened the meeting to the public for their comments. Mrs. Clemmons asked if there would be an age cap at the facility. The age cap will be 17 and under, which will include parents driving or youth drivers at the facility. Most of the traffic will be at the existing golf course facility, but will now be year round. Paul DiMaggio asked Mr. Mannion to speak to the traffic consultant regarding the increase in traffic. The timeframe of the building of the new facility will be before the condo development.

Chuck Earley does not want this to go to the department heads unless it is taken under jurisdiction and feels the Board needs to make a decision tonight. Mr. Rollins feels all the issues have been addressed or are close to being addressed. He feels the greatest concern is the turnaround. Jack Sapia is concerned with the guardrail as well as the turnaround. The Board needs to decide within 30 days whether to take the site plan under jurisdiction.

Harold Morse returns to the Board. Eric Steltzer addresses the Board regarding the CTAP conservation meeting addressing the wildlife action plan and CZP mapping, the spring OEP meeting, and NFIP which a representative of OEP will be presenting to the Board of Selectmen meeting on Monday, April 23, 2007.

This hearing will be continued to the next Board meeting to be held on May 16, 2007.

The meeting was closed at 10:00 PM.

Next scheduled workshop meeting is May 2, 2007.

APPROVED________________________

Respectfully submitted,

Raelene McBride