Planning Board Minutes

PB Minutes of 6-5-25

June 5th, 2025

Town of Carroll Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
June 5, 2025
5:00 PM
“These minutes of the Town of Carroll Planning Board have been recorded by its secretary. Though believed to be accurate and correct, they are subject to additions, deletions, and corrections by the Planning Board at its next meeting when the Board votes its final approval of the minutes. They are being made available at this time to conform to the requirements of New Hampshire RSA 91-A:2.”
Planning Board Members Present: Chair Alex Foti, Vice Chair Austin Alvarez, Paula Murphy, Rena Vecchio, Selectboard Rep. Brian Mycko, Don Jones
Public Present: Fire Chief Jeff Duncan, Carol Alvarez, Mark Vanderheyden, Kevin Smith
Minutes Taken By: Steffanie Apostle
Item #1: Call Meeting to Order
Meeting was called to order at 5:00pm
Item #2: Pledge of Allegiance
Item #3: Attendance / Quorum
Attendance taken and quorum met
Item #4: Approval of Minutes - March 6, 2025, April 3, 2025 and May 1, 2025
March 6, 2025 – Paula Murphy made a motion to approve the minutes as amended and Austin Alvarez seconded the motion. All were in favor, minutes approved as amended at the prior meeting.
April 3, 2025 - Minutes were tabled because there was not enough of a quorum with the present Board members.
May 1, 2025 – Brian Mycko made a motion to approve the minutes and Don Jones seconded the motion. Alex Foti abstained as he was not present for that meeting. All were in favor and minutes were approved.
Item #5: Review Rules & Procedure
Alex Foti asked if there was the possibility of adding into the Rules & Procedures something so that if a member is absent, they can email an approval or give proxy to Somone at the meeting to approve them?
Steffanie Apostle to look into that.
Rena Vecchio said that on the top of page 3 it says the meeting starts at 7:00pm.
Alex Foti said he had that same comment.
Steffanie Apostle said that the time was also wrong on the Rules & Procedures for the Zoning Board and they voted to correct the time to 6:30pm but to add the verbiage “or as noticed” because that will cover any time changes needed.
Steffanie Apostle to change time and add verbiage “as noticed”
Rena Vecchio asked about item #4 on page 4.
• The Boards approval of a final application shall lapse if all conditions of final approval have not been met within 90 days of the date of the final approval
Are we not doing that? We’ve had one group here for 5 years?
Alex Foti said they hadn’t been approved; this is for conditional approvals.
Rena Vecchio asked if we had given them a conditional approval for Phase II.
Alex Foti said yes but they have changed their plans. This is an interesting one because in a lot of cases you can’t really show that you have met the conditions until you finish your development which can take far more than 90 days.
Brian Mycko said he thought it was more on the conditions we put such as Fire Chief/Police Chief approval. The actual conditions of the building can’t be done until the project is completed.
Rena Vecchio asked if the condition is putting in a fire hydrant or completing a road before such and such. Rena Vecchio said she had to read it twice to understand it and she thinks it should be thought about.
Alex Foti said it did specify monuments but he felt it needed to be clarified to specify if all conditions for final approval relevant to additional permits required for development. Its not physical conditions.
Steffanie Apostle asked if they were looking to remove all of #4 and put that?
Alex Foti said where it says The Boards approval of final application shall laps if all conditions of final approval have not been met within 90 days to; if all conditions relevant to additional permits required for the application.
Rena Vecchio said that on page 5 under public hearings it says the chairman shall read the application. We need to read them all including the X’s & N/A’s.
Alex Foti asked if the applicant should be reading it to the Board?
Rena Vecchio said the way this reads the chairman should be reading it and then the applicant can explain it as necessary
Alex Foti said from a procedural perspective that would be horrendous because the application is like 15 pages. If we need to sit here for every application and read every line item.
Steffanie Apostle said they would be getting an application next month for Bayroot. They are giving some of their land to the Plage’s and Gardner Kellogg will be her representing them.
Brian Mycko said his opinion is the Board should go through and read the application so if someone from the public doesn’t have a copy of it.
Rena Vecchio said that back when she was the Secretary they were involved in a lawsuit and they were told they had to read the whole application.
Alex Foti asked if they could focus on what is not provided?
Brian Mycko said he thought the reason they need to read it was for the public who have not seen it.
Rena Vecchio said she thought the question should be sent to legal to see if we have to or not.
Alex Foti said the other element with our applications is it is incredibly long compared to other Towns.
Rena Vecchio said it all depended on the Town, some get right through but we are more careful.
Alex Foti said it wasn’t the application itself but the checklist and, in most cases, it is not applicable.
Brian Mycko said he would rather review the whole checklist to make sure everything is completed so we are not having to do continuations for every application.
Rena Vecchio mentioned in the Planning Board handbooks there are sample applications that the Board could use instead of the ones they are using.
Rena Vecchio made a motion to add the verbiage discussed to the document to be reviewed again; Austin Alvarez seconded the motion. All were in favor, motion passed to add the verbiage for another review.
Steffanie Apostle to make changes to the document for approval in July so everyone can see it in writing.

Item #6: Election Results
Rena Vecchio made a motion to re-elect Alex Foti as Chairperson of the Planning Board; Brian Mycko seconded the motion; all were in favor and motion passed to re-elect Alex Foti as Chairperson.
Rena Vecchio made a motion to re-elect Austin Alvarez as Vice Chair of the Planning Board. Bryan Mycko seconded the motion; all were in favor and motion passed to re-elect Austin Alvarez as Vice Chair of the Planning Board.
Item #7: New / Other Business
• Mark Vander-Heyden
Mark Vander-Heyden introduced himself to the Board as the Land Surveyor for Kevin Smith of Twin Mountain Plaza, LLC. Kevin Smith would like to break an acre off the rear of the property. The property is currently about 2.5 acres.
Alex Foti recused himself as he is an abutter.
Austin Alvarez asked if this was just a consult?
Mark Vander-Heyden said it was just a consult that he wanted to review with the board before they officially applied.
Mark Vander-Heyden said back in 1979 they were separate lots that they did a voluntary lot merger for to make one bigger lot. In 2000 the current building was built and in 2017 a Site Plan was approved by the Planning Board for restaurants & retail. This was run until 2023 when Kevin Smith purchased it and had some work done. This is under 5 acres so it does not affect the State Subdivision. Mark Vander-Heyden asked if the Board had any questions?
Brian Mycko asked if there was a septic.
Kevin Smith said there was and it was under the parking lot.
Brian Mycko asked if the 1-acre lot was going to be a house lot.
Mark Vander-Heyden said it was a house lot and it has to be zoned Residential per the deed. When the lots were combined for commercial use, it was deeded that if it was broken out again it could only be used as residential.
There was a brief discussion about the trail on the property because it states in the deed there is to be no use of ATV or snowmobiles. It is from 30 years ago but the expiration date was for 50 years so there is still about 20 years left. Kevin Smith said he would like to move the trail.
Brian Mycko asked about the driveway.
Mark Vander-Heyden said there is already a driveway on the property and they are going to share it so they don’t need another one.
Brian Mycko asked if they would be putting that in the deed?
Mark Vander-Heyden said yes it would go in the deed.
Rena Vecchio asked Kevin Smith how the brewery was going
Kevin Smith said they were doing well. They are there several times a week to transport to Littleton. Kevin Smith said they have talked about maybe doing some food or something for the summer.
Rena Vecchio asked if they were going to officially apply for a subdivision?
Mark Vander-Heyden said absolutely and they will make sure the check list is completely filled out. Mark Vander-Heyden asked what the process for this would be.
Austin Alvarez said for this one they may be able to do it all at one meeting. Austin Alvarez reminded Mark Vander-Heyden and Kevin Smith all documents need to be submitted 21 days prior to the meeting for review.
• Warrant Articles Review
The Board reviewed the following warrant articles they would like to put out to the public to vote on.
1.) Definition of Garage
• Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment #1 to add a definition for garage.
o A garage is defined as a building or portion of a building in which items and motor vehicles used by the owner or tenants of the building or buildings on the premises are stored or kept without provisions for repairing or serving such vehicles for profit. If at any time a portion of the garage is intended to be used as living space, a Special Use permit must be obtained from the Planning Board.

This is just to clarify you can’t live in a garage

2.) Add to the definition of warehouse
• Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment #2 to add to the definition of warehouse
o Warehouse includes warehouse, wholesale establishment, bulk storage and bulk sales outlet. A warehouse is also defined as a building or space within a building for the storage of manufactured goods prior to their export or distribution for sale

This one should be added because currently there is no definition. Planning Board had mixed reviews on if they wanted to allow these or not. To go to voters to decide

3.) Amend Zoning ordinance
• Are you in favor of changing setbacks only of 403.3 Residential; RES 2 from:
o Residential Use Area Limitations: The minimum lot size for a single family or two-family dwelling shall be one acre. Minimum frontage shall be 100 feet. The maximum building height shall be 3 stories or 33 feet; whichever is less. The minimum setback requirements are as follows:
Front Setback – 30 feet
Side Setback – 20 feet
Rear Setback – 25 feet

To

The minimum lot size for a single family or two family shall be one acre. Minimum frontage shall be 100 feet. The maximum building height shall be 3 stories or 33 feet; whichever is less. The minimum setback requirements are as follows:
Front Setback – 30 feet
Side Setback – 15 feet
Rear Setback – 15 feet

(The remainder of this Ordinance is unchanged)


4.) Amend Zoning Ordinance
• Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment #4 to change the setbacks for Residential Business

403.4 – Residential Business RB

The minimum lot size in this district shall be one acre. Multi-family buildings in this district shall have and additional area of 10,000 square feet for every 1,000 square foot of livable space in addition to the minimum lot area required for a single-family dwelling. Minimum frontage shall be 100 feet. The minimum yard setback requirements are as follows:

Front Setback: Commercial – 40 feet
Residential – 30 feet
Side Setback from 20 feet to 15 feet
Rear Setback from 25 feet to 15 feet

(The remainder of this Ordinance is unchanged)

There was a discussion between the Planning Board in regards to changing the setbacks. Some members felt strongly that setbacks should be changed, some members felt the setbacks should not be changed as it could affect where their neighbors chose to build things on their property making objects closer to the neighbors, some members didn’t feel strongly one way or another. The Planning Board decided to let the voters decide



5.) Add Zoning Ordinance
• Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment #5 to add section 403.4A

403.4A Residential Business RB-Campgrounds

To more accurately identify what is the front of the building lot: For campgrounds over 5 acres with roads within the campground, the front of buildings will be the road first responders will use to access the building unless the Town or State Road is within 100 feet of the building.

This is in relation to how they face roads. The little roads in the campground won’t matter. This has never been an issue for the Town



6.) Amendment to Uses Table
• Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 6

403.1 Uses
A person shall not use any lot in any zoning district in the Town of Carroll except as hereinafter specifically allowed. Those uses designated with a “P” are permitted and allowed by right. Those uses designated “SE” are allowed only with a Special Exception granted by the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Those uses designated “CU” are allowed only with a Conditional Use Permit granted by the Planning Board. Those uses designated “a” are allowed only as an accessory use to a lawfully existing principal use. “X” indicates not allowed


USES Res 1 Res 2 RB IND RU
31. Warehouses for storage and distribution X X SE P X
33. Pet boarding and day care facilities X X SE X P



1. To allow warehouses for storage and distribution in Zone RB by special exception
2. To allow pet boarding and day care facilities as permitted in Zones RU and by Special Exception in Zone RB

Currently the Town has allowed these without them being in the Ordinance. Planning Board was looking to have the ordinances align with what we have in Town. The Planning Board had mixed reviews. Should go to the voters to decide



There was a brief discussion about manufactured homes vs. modular home vs. mobile home. Town doesn’t have real clarity on these and needs to work with someone to review zoning ordinances

There was a brief discussion about bridge ordinances. The Town of Carroll doesn’t really have one. The Town has run into a few issues with residents putting in bridges on their property and blocking water, changing water flow or not being built to an engineered spec. Town to look into adding some ordinances about bridges

There was a brief discussion about the last Master Planning Meeting on 6/18. This will be the last Master Planning Meeting before the Planning Board approves final draft. Once the Master Plan is complete, the master Plan committee will still meet to make sure they are taking steps to implement the master plan

Item #8: Adjourn
Brian Mycko made a motion to end meeting, Rena Vecchio seconded the motion and meeting was adjourned at 6:41pm