Applicants:
Gloria Mock and Trudy Von Ahnen, 22 Denny Hill Rd., Warner, NH
03278
Property location:
Map 19, Lot 1 R-3
Zoning
Purpose:
Subdivide 11.16 ac into 2 lots:
5.51 ac and 5.65 ac
Mr. Lennon and Mr.
Pershouse recused themselves because they are both abutters to the
property. Ms. Annis stated
that there are still four voting members present so they were ok to
continue with the application.
Jeff Evans,
Surveyor, Landmark Land Services represented Ms. Mock and Ms. Von Ahnen.
Ms. Annis asked the
Board members to divide the checklist among themselves and verify that
all required information had been provided.
Mr. Eigabroadt asked
a question regarding easements being shown on the plan.
Mr. Evans said that if there are no easements on the property,
there would be no notation regarding easements.
He stated that the ZBA had granted a variance for the road
frontage to the applicants. The
Board asked that that variance be noted on the plan.
Mr. Serell made
a motion to accept the application for a minor subdivision as complete
with the following conditions: The
year of the survey needs to be shown on the plan and a notation of the
ZBA variance need to be shown on the plan.
The motion was seconded.
Ms.
Annis called for a vote: Mr.
St.Pierre: Yes; Mr. Serell:
Yes; Mr. Eigabroadt: Yes; Mr. Reeder: Yes.
Ms Annis stated that
the Notice of Decision from the ZBA granting the variance is in the
file.
Ms. Annis closed the
Board meeting and opened the Public Hearing.
Mark Lennon,
abutter: I have no objection
to the subdivision.
Ms Annis stated that
there were a number of letters in the file in support of the minor
subdivision.
David Karrick,
abutter: I would like to
speak in support of the application.
Peter Wyman,
abutter: I also support the
application for a subdivision.
Derek Pershouse,
abutter: I also support the
application.
Martha Mical:
I would like to mention that there still a few days remaining in
the time limit for an appeal to the ZBA’s decision granting the waiver
necessary for this subdivision.
In explanation of
Ms. Mical’s comment, Ms. Annis stated that if anyone is unhappy with
the decision of the ZBA in regards to the road frontage, they have 30
days to appeal the decision of the ZBA.
Mr. Mock:
Then that planning board shouldn’t have accepted it until after
30 days of the approval.
Mr. Eigabroadt:
There are only a few days left and we haven’t received
anything.
The Secretary said
that the deadline would be May 12th.
Ms. Mock:
Did you receive any letters?
Ms. Annis: Yes, I
said that I received letters in support of the applications.
They were received from John and Beverly Heaton, Brackett Scheffy,
Lucinda McQueen, and Clark and Jan Lindley.
Mr. Evans asked that
the Board give them a conditional approval with the understanding that
the items mentioned previously would be added to the plan and that the
Mylar wouldn’t be recorded until after the 30-day appeal period had
passed.
Ms. Annis closed the
Public Hearing and reopened the Board meeting.
Mr. Eigabroadt made
a motion to approve the application for a minor subdivision with the
conditions that:
1.
The Zoning Board’s Variance decision be noted on the plan;
2.
The year of the survey be shown on the plan;
3.
The plan will not be recorded until the 30-day appeal deadline
has passed – May 12, 2006.
The
motion was seconded.
Ms.
Annis called for a vote: Mr.
St.Pierre: Yes; Mr. Serell:
Yes; Mr. Eigabroadt: Yes; Mr. Reeder: Yes.
Jim Fealtman of
Bohler Engineering for Irving Oil Corporation
Mr. Fealtman stated
that he was at the meeting to nail down what permitting process will be
required for Irving to change the image on their site [at Exit 9 on
Route 103, formerly the Mobil station].
Handed out color
photos of an Irving gas station located in Hooksett
Irving is currently
doing some tank work and replacing the gas dispensers
With dispensers,
they will add a shroud over the dispensers, as shown in the photos
A canopy cladding
will be added – a white flat panel that is 16 x 24 inches to cover the
existing I-beam
Replace the blue
illuminated banding with a blue ACM panel with a red LED light in the
center
This is a dull light
that will not be as bright as the existing internally illuminated light
Plan to add two
Irving canopy logos, each totaling 30 square feet, which includes the
entire panel.
He stated that the
Irving lettering itself is approximately 11 square feet, but didn’t
know how the town judge square footage of signs.
The diesel canopy
will be painted blue and one diesel logo will be added, approximately 19
sq.ft.
Change the color of
the building to a lemon drop yellow hardy board siding.
Add on large Blue
Canoe wall sign and two small Blue Canoe signs over each gable of the
entrance.
The gables will be
changed but will not be the bright yellow that is seen on some Irving
buildings. No yellow ACM
will be added.
Replace the existing
free standing sign, which is currently approximately 206 square feet.
Replace with a 165
square foot free standing sign, but the sign will be increased in height
by 3 feet
Mobil, the previous
operator at the site, had about 380 sq. ft. of building signage.
Irving is proposing
to add – not including dispenser logos or decals, etc. – 323 sq.ft.
total signage
Trying to nail down
the permit process and to see what permits will be required.
Ms. Annis said that
the first thing to discuss is the signage, because each one is important
to the Town of Warner:
Ms. Annis: If
you look at the proposed sign schedule, it comes up to 393.5 square
feet.
Mr. Fealtman:
That number includes the four snap lock building signs on the
bottom. They’re not adding
those signs.
Ms. Annis:
They’re not going to add those signs?
Mr. Fealtman:
I don’t believe so. Their
main concern now is to get the Blue Canoe logos on the building.
Mr. Reeder asked
what a snap lock sign is, and Mr. Fealtman said that it is the type of
sign that is seen that, for example, states that you get $15 off a
skiing lift ticket, etc. They’re
temporary signs that can be put on and taken off the building.
Ms. Annis:
What are the mobile Corrie A-frame signs that are already up
there at the ends of the islands?
Mr. Fealtman:
Those will remain. The
planters have been removed because of the work that they’re doing
there, but they will be replaced.
There was a
discussion about the location of the signs and where they are on the
drawing. Mr. Fealtman stated
again that the planters will be put back as they were before the
construction work. He
said that the planters will be on the middle two dispensers and the
A-frame signs will be at the two end dispensers.
Mr. Eigabroadt said that in that case, if the A-frame signs are
indeed going to be used, then they need to be included in the total
square footage of signage.
Ms. Annis:
The shrouds also have logos on them, and I don’t see where that
is counted in the square footage of signage.
I agree with the diesel sign out in back, but don’t see where
that is in the schedule for total square footage.
Mr. Fealtman: That
is included in the canopy number. There
should be a total of three Irving logos – two on the canopy and one
diesel logo.
Ms. Annis:
Ok.
Mr. Fealtman:
The total site signage, not including the Corrie A-frame signs,
not including the dispenser logos but with the snap lock signs is 439
square feet. Without the
snap lock signs, you have a total of 323 square feet.
Ms. Annis:
I’m looking at the numbers and I can’t tell where what is
coming from.
Mr. Fealtman:
When we did our initial take-off for the Irving canopy logos, we
just figured the square footage of the Irving lettering.
We didn’t take into consideration the chevron part so we did a
complete square about the complete panel, and that makes it 30.24 square
feet.
Mr. Fealtman said
that whatever the current process will be for Irving, they’d revise
their plans to reflect that.
Mr. St.Pierre asked
what the purpose was of the red stripe around the canopy.
Mr. Fealtman:
Irving has Chevron gas and that is to incorporate the chevron
symbol.
Mr. St.Pierre:
According to our sign regulations, that would be a part of the
signage also. Anything that
you do to draw attention to yourself we can consider a sign under our
rules.
Mr. Fealtman:
The building would be considered a sign?
Mr. St.Pierre:
I guess the point I’m trying to make is that you have a
building there that is pretty subdued right now, with a bright canopy in
front of it that I think detracts from the building.
I think that in conjunction with the site plan ordinance you
ought to be working the other way – bring the primary colors more in
tone with the existing building than trying to go the other way with
this primary color display out front.
I can understand that you want to draw attention to the fact that
you’re a gas station, but how many signs do you need?
The sign out front that says Irving identifies it as a gas
station. 16 more signs
aren’t going to make someone stop.
They’ll stop if the gas is cheaper or if the store looks good
to them because they’re hungry. I
think the number of signs proposed is excessive.
Mr. Serell:
I don’t have a problem with the numbers so much, but I don’t
see the reason for the white with the red line.
Technically, it is a sign. Personally,
I wouldn’t be in favor of that.
Mr. Fealtman:
Would you consider the canopy, when Mobil was in operation, a
sign?
Mr. St.Pierre:
I would. It has not
purpose other than to attract attention to what is already a
multi-colored lit area.
Mr. Serell:
But there is a distinction because it was one color.
Mr. Fealtman:
What if they were to paint the canopy?
Mr. St.Pierre:
You folks have done some stations that are more in keeping with
the style of the buildings. Even
one in Conway – the canopy is structured to be in keeping with the
design of the buildings rather than this rectangular slab up in the air.
Maybe you should consider something like that.
I don’t even see a sign on this one now and people still manage
to get gas there.
Ms. Annis:
There is an Irving station by the high school in Concord, and
there is one sign out by the street that says Irving.
That’s it. It is a
brick building that is nice looking.
It is a gorgeous building; it is clean and simple.
Mr. St.Pierre:
In looking at the site plan review regulations, we’d like it to
be tuned to Warner and not just any other rest stop on the interstate.
Mr. Pershouse:
It seems to me that working from the signs to the ultimate design
of the overall structure is basically doing it backwards in terms of
what the Planning Board’s concern should be and the town’s concern.
Yes, you need to find out what you can and can’t do, but I
think that it is a much larger venue.
That’s what you’re hearing now – that we as a town are
concerned about the quality of the buildings and the structures that are
down there. Our site plan
review regulations for commercial structures are extensive. I don’t
know if your team has reviewed them or who is responsible for the entire
design package, but I would strongly advocate that either you or Irving
Oil come to us with something that responds to our concerns that we have
now documented and are in force. Because
to give you permits now for signs, yes you might meet the technical
requirement for square footage or whatever – it is only a small
increment of the total design area that we’re wanting to see.
Mr. Fealtman:
And that’s why we’re here tonight, is to get the Board’s
feeling about what Irving is proposing and then take that back to Irving
and say, “You know, there are some Board members that are very against
the LED lighting and they consider that a sign.”
That way, when and if we do come back for a site plan review –
or we will be required to go for a site plan review – we’ll be able
to come in here with a nice presentation with what the town wants and
what Irving wants and then hopefully get approval.
Mr. Reeder:
I have a number of things concerning the signs.
One is the back-lit signs that you’re proposing other than the
main one. I just don’t’
think that will fly at all. There
is adequate lighting there now that lights up the signs very nicely.
Secondly, the LED lighting that you’re planning to put around
there that you said won’t be as bright as what’s there now – I
would beg to differ from you. It
will be about 4 times as bright. It
won’t consume as much energy wattage-wise, but being a monochromatic
light source it will be extremely bright being LED.
I also lean to the side that it is a sign.
You say that there are some members of the Board here that might
disagree with that LED. I
think that just about everyone is against them. I
think that is a major drawback. The
blue band that is there now had a battle getting it in there.
I was on the approval side of that because it wasn’t going to
be bright or overwhelming or casting shadows either but you will be able
to see it from about 8 miles away.
Mr. Fealtman:
If they were to paint the canopy a red stripe around the building
and still have the blue ACM that they’re proposing, would that be
allowed?
Mr. Pershouse:
Their blue and not Mobil’s blue?
Mr. Fealtman:
Yes. If they were to
paint the canopy the blue and the red.
Is that something that would be allowed?
Mr. Reeder:
I think we’d have to see a little bit better detail of that.
Mr. Fealtman:
The same kind of process, but without the illumination?
Mr. Reeder:
I don’t think I’d have a problem with that.
Mr. Eigabroadt:
Have you been down there at night?
There’s not much down there that just jumps out at you.
The Town would like for it to be more subdued, but they are
willing to work with people. If
you look at the way that it was and you come in here now and want to
light that thing up and be the biggest brightest bulb down there,
that’s not going to happen. You
really need to start thinking subdued, low key.
Get your message out there, but not to bright.
Mr. Lennon:
The only other thing that I would add, having been to some of
your canopies at night with that reflective white plastic – it’s a
big light island. In
reference to other developments that have been proposed down there,
those that can see the that at night have been very, very concerned
about the glow, so I’d be very circumspect about something that is
going to create a big flow effect under the canopy.
Mr. Fealtman:
The reason that it is so bright under the canopy is for safety of
the customers.
Mr. Eigabroadt:
I live right by that, and I don’t need night lights.
I don’t say that as a joke – I seriously don’t need night
lights. It comes through the
house and if you get up at night, you don’t need night lights.
Mr. Lennon:
I think if you’ll look at our minutes, you’ll see that every
development or change of use that has been proposed down there has
raised that issue. I just
wanted you to be aware of that and to minimize the spread of light.
Mr. Pershouse:
That was a specific concern at the other station across the
street. Before you come in
with your application for site plan review, I would like to see an array
of designs that you have. If
you could bring something in that would give the Board some choices
rather than just up or down, yes or no.
That would be helpful.
Mr. Fealtman:
I can do that. Would
that be for another conceptual review or could we make that part of the
site plan package – to have different options.
Ms. Annis:
That’s up to you.
Mr. Annis:
Your proposed monument sign –it’s less square footage than
what is currently up there; however, you have about 5 panels at the
bottom that are empty. What
is going on there later?
Mr. Fealtman:
I don’t know what they would add in those panels other than if
they had any specials. But
those panels are all calculated into the square footage.
Ms. Annis:
But we want to know –
Mr. Lennon:
At least two of those will be taken up with two more grades of
gasoline.
Mr. Fealtman:
I can ask the questions of Irving.
Ms. Annis:
Now to the color. How
does the Board feel about that?
Mr. Fealtman:
As I stated, they’re not going to have the bright ACM.
They will be proposing to add a flat lemon drop yellow hardy
board siding.
Mr. Pershouse:
Our regulations state that colors for buildings are recommended
to be low key – not necessarily earth tones, but not a primary color
that stands out and grabs the attention.
The goal is to get the structure to blend into the site rather
than to stick out like a light bulb.
I think that should be clearly stated to Irving.
They need to look at the site plan regulations and see what
we’re trying to work toward and so far have been able to achieve in
most cases. It bothers me
because you’re coming in with a specific color and saying, “What do
you think?” I don’t
think that is a constructive approach to get what everyone wants down
there. The color of the
building isn’t going to shout at people; it is the number and quality
of signs that we approve. It
should be understated, not overstated.
Ms. Annis:
The Blue Canoe – how do you feel about that?
The signage on this building in the picture; it is blue with just
white. What is being
proposed is a little bit more. If
you take a look at the one in Bow, there are four different colors
there.
Mr. Fealtman:
The sign that is being proposed is a blue background with white
lettering.
Mr. Reeder:
I don’t have a problem with that because that is their logo.
I do have a problem if it is backlit.
That’s an area that we should not be telling them how to make
the sign or the logo.
Ms. Annis:
I do. I’d rather it
be know as, “I’m going down to Irving” and not “I’m going down
to the Blue Canoe”.
Mr. Reeder:
But that is their corporate identity along with Irving.
I don’t have a problem other than the sign isn’t back lit.
Mr. Pershouse
reiterated Mr. Reeder’s sentiment about the corporate image, stating
that the number and size of signs is different than trying to tell an
applicant that they can’t use their corporate logo.
Mr. Eigabroadt also agreed.
Mr. Fealtman said
that the interior changes won’t change anything structurally.
The only upgrade is to rearrange existing structures and add a
soda machine. They will pull
the required trade permits, but asked if they need any other permits.
Ms. Annis:
What is happening to the boards that are up on the slope in front
of the building? Is it a
retaining wall, or is it going to be planters?
Mr. Fealtman:
I would have to talk to the folks at Irving to see if that is
their scope of work right now. The
only thing going on now at the site is the tanks, pipes and the
dispensers. I don’t know
if they’re planning on doing any landscaping.
Ms. Annis:
There are propane tanks and an ice machine out front.
Mr. Reeder:
I don’t recall seeing an ice machine and propane tanks when
Mobil was there. They need
to come to us.
Ms. Annis:
They’re already there, with the Blue Canoe logo on them.
Mr. Reeder:
When Cabochon moved in, they have a lot of stuff out there but
that was seasonal only. Now
this stuff is not seasonal.
Mr. Pershouse asked
if the dispensers are being changed at this time, and if so, whether or
not the shrouds would be in place at the same time.
Mr. Fealtman said that the shrouds are not part of the dispenser
installations.
Mr. Eigabroadt:
Are the old tanks coming out as part of the change?
Mr. Fealtman:
I’m not sure because we weren’t a part of that process.
Mr. Eigabroadt:
I’ll check with our code enforcement officer.
Peter Wyman, Code
Enforcement Officer: The
tanks will be removed and the dirt that is there will be used to fill in
the holes.
Mr. Eigabroadt:
The reason I was asking is that one of the reasons that the tanks
are being replaced is that one of them was leaking, but it didn’t get
into the ground because they are the dual walled tanks.
Mr. Fealtman:
Yes, that’s what triggered the tank upgrade.
Ms. Annis:
Peter, are they going to be required to put a lip on the pavement
so that if there ever was a gas spill, it would be contained on the
pavement.
Mr. Wyman:
When I talked with them, they told me that they were going to
return the pavement and parking areas to the way that they were.
There was a lip there, so I would assume the answer is yes.
On their original plan there was parking at the end of it, so I
asked him if they were going to add that and he told me no.
Ms. Mical:
Going way back, the gentleman stated that they weren’t going to
put the
AMC
up.
Is that the yellow that is on the peak?
Mr. Fealtman:
Yes. Everything will
be a flat lemon drop yellow.
Mr. Mento:
For the record, I want to know that ACM stands for.
Mr. Fealtman:
I’m not sure. It’s
like a plastic material.
Ms. Annis:
Tony, did you find out any additional information about any
awards that that building has gotten?
Mr. Mento:
The building was originally designed by Randall Marsh and
Associates, which I think is a fine example of what can be a store and a
gas station and is what communities ask for.
It was submitted for an
AIA
award; it was highly regarded but unfortunately it did not win
anything. I misspoke at the
Selectmen’s meeting – I thought that it had won.
But it was one of the People’s Choice awards.
Mr. Fealtman:
The other option than the hardy board siding would be to paint
the existing siding.
Mr. Lennon:
I think you might want to take some of the photos that Russ has
here as examples of what might be done.
Mr. Mento:
In regards to the building color and painting the wood siding –
Either painting it the lemon drop yellow or replacing it with the hardy
plant cement material. I
would ask that the Board realize that the lemon drop yellow with white
and blue accents is a color scheme which is an identity of what Blue
Canoe is and it’s not a far step from looking at this whole color
scheme as a sign itself. It
is an identity and it is what Blue Canoe is.
So I would caution you on the use of the colors.
Secretary:
ACM stands for aluminum composite material.
Ms. Annis reiterated
that she doesn’t like the three color Blue Canoe sign.
Mr. Fealtman asked
if he needs to come in for a site plan review.
Ms. Annis said that she didn’t think it needs to be a full site
plan. Mr. Lennon said that
he thought it should be a full site plan because there is a lot
involved. Mr. Reeder agreed.
Mr. Fealtman:
As far as the landscaping, I don’t know if they plan on
changing anything that was there when Mobil.
Ms. Annis:
The planters were removed for the construction, which I
understand. There were
shrubs and flowers were planted on the I-89 side.
Mr. Fealtman:
Anything that was there will be replaced.
Mr. Serell:
Do you have a plan showing all of this?
Ms. Annis provided a
plan from Johnson and Dix/Mobil. Mr.
Fealtman asked if he could have a copy faxed to him by the Secretary,
and she agreed. Ms. Annis
said that the town now has a Code Enforcement Officer and the plans
requirements will be enforced.
Mr. Mento:
Are the canopies being increased in footprint at all?
Mr. Fealtman:
No. The only changes
are he painting of the canopies.
Mr. Fealtman thanked
the Board for letting him come in with the proposal and he said that he
would come in with the Site Plan Review application.
Approval of the
Minutes: March 20th and
April 3rd Planning Board meetings
The
minutes of the April 3, 2006 meeting were approved as amended.
Mr. Pershouse asked
if Dan Eubanks had resigned and if they were in the process of seeking
new members. Ms. Annis said
that he would have to ask the Selectmen.
Mr. Pershouse said that he asked because it had been decided
earlier to hold off on the election of officers until the matter had
been settled.
Mr. Eigabroadt:
The Selectmen did accept Mr. Eubanks’ resignation, and there
are a couple of people that they wanted to interview before making any
decisions about appointments.
There was discussion
about the
RSA
regarding a member of the Planning Board
being a member of another Board.
Ms. Annis:
I have some comments about the minutes of March 20th.
That was the evening that Mark Feenstra came in and talked to us
about plans and everything, but I don’t remember attorney McGrath
being at that meeting.
Mr. Pershouse:
He wasn’t here.
Ms. Annis:
The other thing was that on page 3 we had been talking about the
Park and Ride entrance being opposite each other and I thought I put it
to a vote that there had to be continuity there – whichever one moved,
they had to be opposite each other.
Mr. Pershouse:
I don’t think so.
Ms. Annis: But I
know that I did say, because he was having all of the parking in the
front, I did say that has been a problem.
If we say we like your plan and he comes back in again with the
parking in the front, we’re going to have a problem because we told
him, “OK, go ahead.” And
I did put it to a vote – would we accept parking in the front of the
building up there.
Mr. St.Pierre:
You took a straw vote.
Ms. Annis:
I thought everyone voted for it except you.
Secretary:
I’ll listen to the tape again.
Mr. Serell:
I don’t think that is something we would vote on.
Secretary:
It was a conceptual – I don’t think there was a vote.
I’ll listen to the tape again.
The
minutes of the
March
20, 2006
were approved as submitted, with the understanding that the Secretary
will listen to the tape again for Ms. Annis’s questions.