PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING

7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS JANUARY 24, 2002
RECONVENING OF JANUARY 17, 2002 MEETING

MEMBERS PRESENT: Kenneth Smith, Chairman; Richard A. Hopley, Building Inspector; John Sullivan; Paige Roberts; Bradley Lown, City Council Representative; Noele Clews; Donald Coker and George Savramis, alternates

MEMBERS ABSENT: Raymond Will; Thaddeus J. "Ted" Jankowski,

Deputy City Manager; and, Ernie Carrier


ALSO PRESENT: David M. Holden, Planning Director

Lucy E. Tillman, Planner I

````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

I. PUBLIC HEARINGS

Let the record show that the Board suspended its rules and took items I and J out of order.

I. The application of John Bosa for property located at 248 Peverly Hill Road wherein site plan approval is requested for the creation of a three lot subdivision with related paving, utilities, landscaping, drainage and associated site improvements. Said property is shown on Assessor Plan 243 as Lots 54 and 23 and lies within a Single Residence B district.

J. The application of John Bosa for property located at 248 Peverly Hill Road wherein Final Subdivision Approval is requested for the creation of three lots from an existing lot. Proposed Lot 1 would contain the existing buildings, have a lot area of 20,372 s.f. + and adequate continuous frontage off Peverly Hill Road and a proposed cul-de-sac. Proposed Lot 2 would

have a lot area of 51,207 s.f. + and adequate continuous frontage off a proposed cul-de-sac. Proposed Lot 3 would have a lot area of 110,164 s.f. + and adequate continuous frontage off a proposed cul-de-sac. Said property is shown on Assessor Plan 243 as Lots 54 and 23 and lies within a Single Residence B district.

As these applications are still being worked on, Mr. Sullivan moved to table them to the Board’s March 21, 2002, meeting. Ms. Clews seconded the motion. The motion passed on an 8-0 vote.

`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

D. City Council Referral -- The purpose of this hearing is to conduct a review of the property located at 175 Parrott Avenue and known as the JFK Recreational Center for the purpose of submitting an advisory recommendation to the City Council regarding the use of the property as a site for a new public library. Said property is shown on Assessor Plan 128 as Lot 14 and lies within a Municipal district.

 

SPEAKING TO THE REFERRAL:

John O’Leary, Chairman of the Library Building Committee, addressed the Board and spoke to the referral from the City Council to determine the suitability of the JFK site for the location of a new library. He identified the experts who were present and would speak to the matters encompassed in the decision; those being soil conditions, parking and traffic. The traffic and parking consultant was identified as Dave DeBaie of VHB. The soil consultant was identified as Charles Nickerson of R W Gillespie & Associates.

Mr. O’Leary went on to state that over the past 14 years he has worked with various City Councils to address the need for a new library. He referred to an eight-page chronology that he had with him outlining the stops along the way adding that a file exists a file a foot and a half high containing newspaper articles regarding a new library.

According to Mr. O’Leary in December of 1988, the City Council voted to accept the City Manager’s report on a new library. In 1994, members of the Library Building Committee met with the Portsmouth Advocates, the Historic District Commission, the Planning Board, and the Rotary Club to provide information about the library project.

Mr. O’Leary went on to stated that in 1996 a joint session of the Planning Board and the Historic District Commission was held to talk about a library pointing out that people were aware of the process the Committee was going through. In 1997, the Capital Improvement Program recommended that the library be built.

In 1999, Mayor Sirrell appointed a New Library Building Committee consisting of 17 members at the time. At a subsequent work session with the City Council, the Committee was given permission to continue moving the process along.

In November, 1999, the referendum question of "Do you believe the City of Portsmouth should build a new public library?" was voted favorably by 60% of those who voted.

In October, 2000, the New Library Building Committee re-examined various sites. The JFK site moved to the top of the list based on successful negotiations with Spinnaker Point. In July, 2001, the New Library Building Committee re-affirmed that vote. On January 8^th of this year the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) endorsed the project at this site.

Mr. O’Leary reiterated that the need for a new library was confirmed in the fall of 1999 by a positive referendum vote of the citizens of Portsmouth.

With regard to the selection of a site, Mr. O’Leary commented that during the past three years an invitation was extend to anyone or everyone to come forward reiterating that by two separate votes of the committee, the JFK site is the preferred site. It was his opinion that there would never be a perfect site; that there would be challenges to every possible site adding that a project of this magnitude in an urban area would always provide challenges. He stated that the committee is trying to meet its objective of providing citizens with a quality site.

Mr. O’Leary recognized that some citizens have concerns; that the same concerns were raised by committee members during the selection of the site and need to be addressed in the plans for the library. However, he did feel that some concerns were based on misconception and misinformation. He welcomed the opportunity to set the record straight concerning these matters.

David Holden, Planning Director, explained that a very narrow issue is being presented to the Board referring to the August 6, 2001, City Council referral to the Planing Board for a report back with recommendations. The information sought from the Board is on soils, parking and traffic upon which the retained consultants would report.

Mr. Holden went on to inform those present that the minutes of the January 8^th TAC meeting were available for the public at the back of the Council Chambers. He reported that TAC did not find any information regarding soils, traffic and parking that would adversely impact the site as a library.

Mr. Holden reminded the Board that they were not reviewing a site plan. The plan before the Board is a conceptual plan to define whether the JFK site is a suitable site for a new library. The City Council would then be faced with certain policy issues as to whether it would be appropriate to expend funds for architectural/engineering services.

Mr. Smith reiterated that the hearing would be limited to the issues of soils, parking and traffic with the Board ultimately making a recommendation to the City Council. He went on to explain that if the site is found to be feasible and the City Council chooses to go forward, then another round of meetings would follow pointing out that Site Review falls back to the Planning Board. He spoke to meetings before TAC, the Traffic/Safety Committee, and the Historic District Commission (advisory only). Mr. Smith informed those present that the City Council would be taking up the library issue at its February 4^th meeting. He reiterated that copies of the TAC minutes were available at the back of the Council Chambers.

At this point in the proceedings, Steve Parkinson, Public Works Director for the City, addressed the Board and informed them that the City had contracted with R. W. Gillespie & Associates, Inc. regarding the soils issue. Borings were performed and a report was created which would be explained by Charles Nickerson, PE. Mr. Parkinson spoke to Mr. Nickerson’s credentials.

Mr. Nickerson addressed the Board and stated that the investigation of the site included seven test borings. Five were done on the 27^th of September and two were done on the 16^th of November (2001). Fill materials were found which were probably placed to level and grade the site in the past. Some peat material was also found which was underlain with clay material indigenous to the southern New Hampshire area.

Mr. Nickerson explained that the anticipated loads for a library are very heavy structure loads. The presence of fill and peat would make the use of slab on grade prohibitive. A deep foundation system was recommended, typically, driven pilings which would support the first and second floors. The pilings would be driven down to bedrock, some 30’ to 35’ below ground surface.

With regard to the issue of groundwater in the area, Mr. Nickerson commented that at this point it had not been determined if the new library would have a basement. It was his opinion that if there was a basement level, the foundation could be designed to control moisture.

Mr. Sullivan inquired if Mr. Nickerson had determined, through the results of the borings, that the site was not adequate for a building of this magnitude. Mr. Nickerson’s response was in the negative indicating that it was his opinion that a ten-story building could be built on the JFK site adding that the site was very usable for the purposes of a library.

Ms. Roberts asked if Mr. Nickerson had a sense of the affect on the water table. Mr. Nickerson responded that by using a stormwater drainage system, the impact would be benign. A different

story might occur if the library was the first building going in; then, the area might see a noticeable impact.

Mr. Lown inquired as to how far the pilings would have to go with bedrock some 30’ down and clay on top. Mr. Nickerson reiterated that the pilings would have to go to bedrock. He pointed out that the parking garage has pilings going to 28’; that the hospital on Borthwick Avenue is built on pilings.

Ms. Clews inquired as to how much noise would be associated with the driving of the pilings. Mr. Nickerson indicated that a diesel pile driver could be somewhat noisy. Ms. Clews inquired as to how many pilings would be required. Mr. Nickerson spoke to clusters of pilings spread throughout the structure.

Mr. Coker inquired as to the length of time it would take to drive the pilings down. Mr. Nickerson felt that a minimum of six to eight pilings could be driven per day with a maximum of ten to twelve per day. Considering set up time, drive piling time and leaving the site, he thought it would take two to three weeks.

Mr. Sullivan inquired as to the life expectancy of the pilings. Mr. Nickerson responded that the pilings are designed for external loading conditions and should last for one hundred years easily; surely more than 50.

Mr. Lown inquired as to the likelihood of damaging foundations in the neighborhood with Mr. Nickerson responding that such would be very unlikely in that a buffer exists between the building and the adjoining properties adding that the driving of pilings is not like blasting. He stated that pile-driving vibrations are very hard to measure 15’ to 20’ away. He compared it to heavy equipment or a truck driving by one’s house.

John Burke, Parking and Transportation Engineer for the City, spoke to Dave DeBaie’s credentials. Mr. Burke informed those present that the City had conducted data collecting efforts and provided the information to VHB. He spoke to such data as 24 hour parking counts, peak hour counts, speed and accident data and a parking utilization survey. He stated that September 18, 2001 was chosen as a day when multiple activities were taking place on Parrott Avenue. The Middle School was in session. District Court was in session. Downtown employees were parking in the Parrott Avenue lot and the playing fields were being used to the maximum extent possible. On September 18^th, Leary Field was being used for children’s soccer. The soccer season extends over a period of 16 weekdays and is the largest recreational event that occurs in that area..

Mr. DeBaie addressed the Board and stated that Julie Tyson would be assisting him in a Power Point presentation. He further stated that 100 copies of the presentation were available in the Portsmouth Room. It was his opinion that the parking supply would be greater than the parking demand, be it only by three spaces. His chart indicated that the parking supply of 313 spaces would be greater than the parking demand of 310 spaces. He pointed out that there are 91 parking spaces available at the South Mill Pond parking area which is an area that is close to the center field or baseball diamond. The lot was observed at peak time and was found to be only 40% occupied.

It was determined that the peak condition (for the area in question) occurs on a weekday at

5:00 p.m. Mr. DeBaie pointed out that on street parking is a popular commodity for the soccer people. Demand for weekend parking; say on a Saturday at noon in October, is no where near the demand for a weekday.

 

Mr. DeBaie explained that doorway counts were done at the existing library in correlation with a recent parking survey. Also questions were asked about mode of transportation. It was interesting to note that about 30% of the traffic at the library are walkers and people riding bicycles. The peak hour activity at the library was determined to be at 3:30 p.m.

It was Mr. DeBaie’s opinion that fewer parents would have to drive children to the library at the JFK site as it would be located close to a residential neighborhood.

As far as options are concerned, Mr. DeBaie felt that the South Mill Pond parking lot could be reconfigured to provide 28 more spaces; that the present layout is inefficient; that the parking area could be squared with some additional pavement. It was his opinion that the existing playground equipment and trees could be "preserved".

Mr. DeBaie announced that the option of angle parking along Parrott Avenue, which could provide 30 additional spaces, would not be pursued as part of the library project.

He pointed out that at this time, they were working with a conceptual plan only. With regard to traffic, Mr. DeBaie reported that the intersections of Parrott and Rogers, Parrott and Richards and Richards and Middle were looked at. It was his opinion that any additional delay would be insignificant; that good operations would still be available at the Parrott and Rogers and Parrott and Richards intersections.

With regard to the Middle Street/ Richards Avenue intersection, there is difficulty in making left turns at the present time. A significant delay is considered to be 50 seconds or longer. He felt that fewer people would travel that way; that people would find another way to avoid that delay. It was his opinion that there would be no significant change to that intersection after the project is built.

He reiterated the option of a better use of the South Mill Pond parking lot adding that the use of gates and a walkway to Parrott Avenue could easily be accommodated.

Mr. Coker stated that the presentation was a very interesting one adding that he lives downtown and is very familiar with the parking areas. He made it clear that he believes that the City needs a new library; however, he expressed his concern with the realities of what was being presented. He went on to explain that he tries to find a parking space in the Parrott Avenue area at 8:15 a.m. when his leased parking space expires. There are many, many days when he can’t find a space in the Parrott Avenue lot, the Middle School lot, or the municipal parking lot between the Middle School and the JFK or on Parrott Avenue. It was Mr. Coker’s opinion that the South Mill Pond parking lot is not part of the equation.

Besides soccer activities, Mr. Coker stated that men’s and women’s softball, played during the spring and summer, fills every parking place. He also mentioned the Little League baseball activities.

Mr. Coker stated that he was confused with the determination that the worst case scenario occurs during 16 days of the soccer season. He stated that he had a hard time accepting that conclusion as he lives in the area. Mr. Coker asked for an explanation as to why the sampling was limited to only two days. He felt that men’s and women’s softball and Little League games had a greater impact on parking than children's soccer.

John Burke stated that an intensive parking survey was conducted some three or four years ago which has been periodically updated. He urged Mr. Coker to attend a soccer event; that there are

400 to 500 people on the fields. He pointed out that school is not in session during summer activities.

Russ Wilson, Recreation Director for the City of Portsmouth, re-affirmed Mr. Burke’s statement that it is not unusual to have 400 to 500 people in attendance on any given Tuesday or Thursday during the soccer season.

Ms. Clews commented that this is probably one of the more difficult decisions she has had to make. She did not feel that there was anyone who was against a new library. She pointed out that it is the Board’s role to determine whether it really makes sense to have a library at the JFK site.

Mr. DeBaie pointed out that the plan is a conceptual one. Ms. Clews wondered how many actual days would be looked at with a more formal report. Mr. DeBaie responded by stating that their eyes would be open to worst case conditions. Ms. Clews spoke to the 29 parking spaces where the school buses usually queue. She also asked about the thought that the buses might turn around in the library parking lot rather than exiting at the Richards Avenue/Parrott Avenue intersection. Mr. DeBaie felt that consideration would be given to circulating buses in a manner different that what presently exists.

John Burke commented that the Richards/Parrott Avenues intersection operates very efficiently and very quickly as far as the school buses are concerned; that crossing guards usually have the buses out in five minutes.

Ms. Clews inquired as to Mr. DeBaie’s comments that the playground equipment and trees would be preserved (South Mill Pond parking lot). It was Mr. DeBaie’s opinion that the trees would be saved; and, therefore, the trees would protect the equipment.

Mr. Lown referred to one of Mr. DeBaie’s charts which indicated that only 60% of the available spaces are occupied between the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. Mr. Lown inquired as to where the other 40% are located pointing out that he is a frequent visitor to the Portsmouth District Court in the morning and he can never find a space to park. The response was that spaces are available in the Middle School lot, the municipal lot between the school and the JFK and the JFK lot. John Burke pointed out that at 12 noon only 20% of the JFK parking lot is utilized. In other words, the spaces are available at the lower end of Parrott Avenue.

Mr. Sullivan inquired if consideration had been given to traffic on Parrott Avenue when the Middle School empties out. Mr. DeBaie responded by stating that the evening peak had been identified as being between the hours of 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Mr. Sullivan stated that he was just concerned about the time when the Middle School is being emptied out what with parents picking up youngsters and teachers coming and going. He wondered if Parrott Avenue was safe enough to handle the density of traffic on it. Mr. DeBaie felt that some Middle School students would walk to the library after school.

Mr. Coker commented that from personal experience, it would appear that there would be problems with parking and traffic. Mr. DeBaie pointed out that in terms of an overall deficit, there isn’t one, reiterating that there would be enough supply to cover a worst case demand.

Mr. Coker then referred to the intersection capacity summary which stated that the intersection would go from bad to worse; from a Level of Service E to a Level of Service F. Mr. DeBaie stated that one has to look at delay; sometimes a few seconds difference changes the Level of Service. Mr. Coker wondered if any thought had been given to the idea of closing off Parrott Avenue. Mr. DeBaie responded by stating that such a consideration was not part of the evaluation.

Ms. Roberts inquired if the surplus parking supply took into account the option of 28 extra spaces at the South Mill Pond parking lot with Mr. DeBaie responding in the negative. Ms. Roberts continued on by stating that she seems to have some sense of history of neighborhood residents having off-street parking privileges at the JFK site and she wondered if that situation had been taken into account. John Burke responded that such was taken into account; that the JFK site is not really used right now. He surmised that 13 spaces are used by the residents during the day.

Ms. Clews inquired as to how many people would use the new library. Mr. DeBaie responded by stating that it is estimated that there will be 100 vehicle trips in and 105 vehicle trips out during a peak hour. Factoring in walkers and those using bicycles, he estimated 100 to 150 people at a peak time. Ms. Clews asked if the numbers were based on the service at the existing library. Mr. DeBaie commented that ITE data is used as it relates to the square footage of a building.

Mr. Smith inquired as to whether or not a signal would be needed at the intersection of Middle Street and Richards Avenue or any other location to help traffic flow. Mr. DeBaie stated that they did not see a need for a traffic signal due to increased traffic from the proposed library. Mr. Smith wondered if a redesign of the school parking lot had been considered. Mr. DeBaie responded by stating that was something that could be looked at.

John Burke commented that there are a lot of municipal uses going on; that there is the ability to shift demand and to have shared uses. He informed the Chairman, Mr. Smith, that the School Department had agreed to look at the Middle School parking lot.

Mr. Smith stated that a one or two word response would suffice to the question as to whether the site would work with regard to traffic and parking. Mr. DeBaie responded with a "yes, sir".

John O’Leary returned to the podium and expressed his appreciation for the strong support for the library. He stated that criteria had been set up in looking at various sites; that there was a strong sentiment that the library remain in the downtown; that any downtown location will have some of the traffic problems that have been discussed; that there is no way around it; that there is no perfect site for a library in the City.

Having said that, Mr. O’Leary pointed out that the committee had looked at locations which would best meet objectives; that the committee and City staff feel that the Parrott Avenue location provides the best opportunity to do that. He stated that they believe the information presented by the experts indicates that the site is a suitable site for a library. The soil conditions will support a building at this site. He felt that traffic conditions were such that would allow the site to function as a library and also allow other functions to continue.

Mr. O’Leary continued on by stating that they knew if they received a positive vote from the Planning Board and the City Council, that the job was not done. However, they feel that the JFK site provides them with the best opportunity to provide Portsmouth with a library that the citizens have indicated they want. He expressed the hope that the Board would allow the committee to go forward with the site and to work with all concerned.

Bob Reynolds of Lafayette Road addressed the Board and stated that he had been a Security Officer at the Portsmouth District Court for a number of years. He referred to some photographs and wondered where the open parking spots were located. He spoke to the unloading of buses in

front of the Middle School and wondered why the spaces immediately in front of the school couldn’t be used for parking suggesting that Parrott Avenue could be blocked off during the times the buses are loading and unloading.

Teresa Garabedian of 80 Buckminster Way spoke in support of the Parrott Avenue site based on the testimony given and her own research. She stated that the proposed site is close to downtown pointing out that there will never ever be a site that would be perfect. She urged the Board not to dwell on the concerns of a handful of residents and urged those in support of the site to speak at the February 4^th City Council meeting and not remain silent.

Sherm Pridham, Director of the Portsmouth Public Library, addressed the committee and stated that he believed the library would be a wonderful neighbor; that the existing library is already dynamic; that they have an excellent staff. The thing that is missing is a building.

Cecily Hancock of 401 State Street spoke to her concern about any change in groundwater level.

Tom Decker of 182 Richards Avenue stated that he was intrigued by the prospect of a library close to home. However, he was concerned about some of the issues that had been presented. He didn’t understand the theory that people would not use the Richards Avenue/Middle Street intersection. He pointed out that Richards Avenue is a narrow street being 21’ wide in one section and 22’ wide in another. He wondered what an additional 100 cars would do to traffic. He questioned the value of data collected on September 18^th pointing out that people tended to stay home after the tragic events of September 11^th. He also expressed his concern as to drainage problems. He wondered if the project was receiving the same review as a 40,000 s.f. commercial building would receive. He warned against municipal sprawl.

Charlie Vaughan of 50 Pleasant Point Drive stated that a basement level would require pumps and a humidifier. He felt that the site was an appropriate site for a library and supported the site. It was his opinion that there are parking alternatives even daring to suggest turning the Little League ball park into a parking lot. He urged the Board to move the site along to the City Council.

Paul Elkins of 45 Rogers Street commented on the size of the proposed library – a huge building. He spoke to what he sees as an increase in traffic and referred to the Senior Citizens van and the arrival of the school buses at 7:30 a.m. (which he indicated is short term); then the arrival of commuters who work downtown. He felt it was only common sense that more people would be using the library what with the meeting rooms and the computer stations. He felt that traffic would be coming down three inadequate routes.

Frank Getman of 410 Richards Avenue spoke in favor of a new library and in favor of the JFK location. He stated that he had come to the meeting with an open slate; however, he was leaving with some concerns. He thought that the parking analysis was lacking in thoroughness and expressed his concern that a proper analysis was not done. He thought that the option of additional parking at the South Mill Pond playground was a bad idea; that the playground is used extensively and he wondered what "protecting equipment" meant.

Paul McEachern of Dennett Street stated that he felt that he had more history with the new library than any one in the room pointing out that in the late ‘60s he was Chairman of the New Library Committee (laughter); that it had been determined in 1969 that Portsmouth needed a new library.

Attorney McEachern went on to state that in public life it is sometimes easier to defer a decision. An example of that is the Portsmouth Public Library. It was his opinion that a library is the soul

and spirit of a community adding that a library is an asset to any neighborhood in the country. He remarked that he would love to have it on Dennett Street; that he would love to have it within walking distance for the children. It was his opinion that the JFK site was a wonderful site.

He went on to state that one could look at traffic studies and intersections all day and all night. He felt that Portsmouth had a wonderful opportunity to make a new library happen and to do it now. It was his opinion that property values within walking distance of the new library would go up.

In concluding his statements, he felt that Middle School students would walk to the library after school and their parents would pick them up later.

Lee Lorusso of 380 Greeenside Avenue, a member of the library trustees, stated that she is the mother of three small children and spoke to the difficulty of getting to the current library adding that she would love to have a library in her back yard.

Ruth Griffin of 479 Richards Avenue addressed the Board and stated that she has lived in the area since January 2, 1938. She stated that she is not a geologist. However, she knows that when it rains, the rain goes into the ground and on Richards Avenue the runoff goes into most every basement of the houses on Richards Avenue. She stated that her house is one of three in a high location and she has a sump pump in her basement (which was working on the day of the meeting much to the delight of her geese).

She went on to state that Ms. Clews' house on South Street sits on top of a hill; that it used to be an ideal spot to slide in the winter. At the bottom of that hill, is Spring Street and Willow Lane. She wondered why the streets were named that way (laughter) adding that water will meet its own level.

She then spoke to pilings going down 30' to 35' to hold a library on land that has been manmade. She mentioned the land that had been filled in to accommodate a handball court. She referred to a tree line of swamp maples on the site in question that grow very fast as there is plenty of water to keep the trees going. It was her opinion that Alumni Field is like a wet meadow.

She felt that the site was problematic for a library and that water would be going through as it did with the Middle School. She did not feel that the land was stable enough.

Ms. Griffin stated that she was in favor of a new library in the City of Portsmouth.

She then discussed the parking problems on Parrott Avenue and felt it would be a shame to take away the playground. She expressed her concern that the playground and tennis courts would be gone because of expansion.

She concluded by stating that she did not know the solution. She urged the Board to look seriously at the siting of the library.

Claudia Morner of 304 Sagamore Avenue, a member of the New Library Building Committee, stated that the Wisconsin Study was used in choosing a site for the library; that the decision was not something that was made quick and dirty. It was her opinion that the JFK site would be a wonderful site for a library and further felt that it would be used at different times than some other uses in the neighborhood. She concluded by stating that the library would be a great neighbor.

Esther Kennedy of 122 Richards Avenue stated that she had come to the meeting with an open slate. She stated that she was an educator; and that she has spent a lot of hours in the Portsmouth library.

She went on to state that she did not have a lot of faith in the traffic information that had been presented and suggested that a formal study might look at other nights.

Her other concern was with groundwater and how the siting of the library would affect her basement.

She stated that she needs more answers; that she was leaving the meeting with questions. She stated that she does want to see a new library. She felt there was very little parking available during the summer months and she expressed her concern as to the safety of the children. She concluded by stating that the community of Richards Avenue needed more answers.

Meg Gilman of 272 New Castle Avenue stated that she has a special affinity for the current library as it used to be her great-aunt's house. She appreciated the concerns of the neighborhood about traffic patterns; however, she could not foresee a lot of people driving down Rogers Street to get to the library. She felt that the idea of closing off Parrott Avenue was an interesting suggestion.

She reiterated that she understood the concern of the residents of Richards Avenue regarding traffic; that with a municipal building there will always be traffic. However, she felt that library traffic was not constant and steady. It ebbs and flows.

Ms. Gilman stated that she supported the JFK site as a location for the library. She felt it was time.

As far as the problem with the water table is concerned, she pointed out that it is not clear that there will be a basement.

Harold Ecker of 422 Banfield Road informed the Board that he voted for a new library. He spoke to any encumbrance on any green space and any infringement upon softball fields. He wanted to be sure that there would be parking for the softball fields.

Bert Cohen of 28 Mark Street expressed his strong support for the Parrott Avenue lot. It was his opinion that people would be able to walk to the site and that the parking and water flow issues could be resolved.

Karin Scott of 377 Richards Avenue was not sure she could support the JFK site for a new library. She urged the Board to look at the issues closely and to not take away green space for children to play.

Christine Duffy, a resident of Richards Avenue, stated that she agreed with Ruth Griffin. Parking is pretty tough. Ms. Duffy commented that she was against any infringement on open space. She felt that the South Playground area is a gem in the City of Portsmouth. She stated that she worries about children and traffic on Parrott Avenue. She concluded her statements by stating that she supports a new library; however, she wondered what would be lost if the JFK site was chosen.

Diane Kelly Tefft of 69 Richards Avenue stated that she is in favor of a new library; however, she is not comfortable with the JFK site. She did not feel that activities could be staggered. She argued that the site is not downtown; that the site is bordered by residential properties.

It was her opinion that people would not walk to the site. She felt that parking would intrude into the neighborhoods; that there would be an increase in traffic created by parents picking up children at peak times.

She inquired as to any parking resolution for Richards Avenue; that she disagreed that there are available spaces at the JFK site. The Chair indicated that such an issue was not before the Board at the present time; that the site review process would include a more in depth site plan and review by the Traffic/Safety Committee.

Ms. Tefft wondered about the revamping of school buses and how many parking spaces would be lost. She asked if senior buses and vans had been factored into the equation. It was her opinion that the parking utilization chart was flawed.

She referred to the '72 Open Space Plan, the Master Plan and a Household Census Survey regarding the importance of recreation to the citizens of Portsmouth .

Ms. Tefft spoke to further paving around the South Mill Pond. She felt that the Board would probably deny a commercial development with the same traffic issues and loss of open space. The Chair assured Ms. Tefft that the City must follow the same rules as any commercial developer.

John Robertson of 139 Sherburne Avenue stated that he appreciated the concerns of the opponents to the site. However, it was his feeling that there is no perfect site. He expressed his appreciation for the work that the New Library Building Committee had done and felt that the issues could be resolved. He pointed out that the committee overwhelmingly thought the site to be the best site adding that the library is usually closed on Friday and Saturday evenings and on holidays.

Rachel Hamilton of 135 Richards Avenue pointed out that a section of Richards Avenue used to be known as Joshua Street; that some of the houses date from 1806 to 1813 and are included in the Architectural History of the Piscataqua. The Chair interjected that the Board had received her letter regarding the Historic District Commission.

She spoke to her personal experience with traffic having lived on Richards Avenue for the past eight years. She also spoke to foundation and plaster damage due to current traffic vibrations. She felt that traffic was a significant issue what with her home being located at the corner of Richards and Parrott Avenues. She spoke to flooding issues, the loss of green space, and the consideration of any historical impact on the neighborhood.

Doug Roberts of 247 Richards Avenue spoke in favor of a new library. However, he felt that the traffic analysis was a little lacking. He stated that his concern was where people would go if not to exit onto Richards Avenue and Middle Street. He felt there were a lot of issues that had not been resolved.

Boyd Morrison of 210 Broad Street inquired as to any comprehensive master plan for the South Mill Pond and the projected traffic impact associated with the construction of a large public building. The Planning Director, David Holden, interjected that there are rules and regulations that apply; however, it was premature at this time to go into that detail. Mr. Morrison indicated that he had not heard a lot about street capacity.

A resident of 79 Richards Avenue agreed with many of the concerns that had been expressed; especially the safety (or lack thereof) of the Richards Avenue/Middle Street intersection.

There being no further speakers, the Chair declared the Public Hearing closed.

DISCUSSION AND DECISION OF THE BOARD:

The Chair noted that a lot of questions had arisen from the traffic study. He indicated that the site review process would dictate an intensive traffic study. The issue of the playground equipment would also be part of the site review process as well as the drainage issue.

Mr. Gillespie remarked that the area in question is all manmade ground, pretty much wetland. It was his opinion that if the library building had no basement, then the pilings would not impact the flow of water from the upland areas to the South Mill Pond. If there is a basement level, there would be a need for pumps. The pumping within that immediate area would draw the water down to the South Mill Pond.

Mr. Parkinson stated that the current site sheet flows with the only catch basin structure being located in the parking lot by the Middle School which drains towards the Mill Pond. If the site were to be used for a library, then drainage collection would be placed at various spots throughout the lot in a similar manner as a parking lot.

Mr. Sullivan spoke to the City's long-range plans to alleviate underground water flooding levels along Richards Avenue. He felt that the plan to separate stormwater runoff from the sewer system for that entire area should really help people on Richards Avenue.

Dave Allen, the City's Deputy Public Works Director, indicated that the time frame for such a separation would be within a year's time.

Mr. Sullivan referred to Ruth Griffin's comment about Spring Street commenting that the springs are still working. It was his feeling that under present regulations, none of the houses in that area would be developed.

Ms. Clews spoke to the presence of clay 4' down. She spoke to the existing trees. The removal of the trees would result in more water on that site which she felt would not be a real good thing. She hoped that the City could do something to provide relief whether or not the JFK site is used as a library site.

John Burke wanted to assure the public that an intensive traffic study would be done and would include the intersection of Richards Avenue and Middle Street. It was his opinion that a traffic signal would only increase the amount of vehicles passing through that intersection. He felt there were other alternatives to going south; specifically, South Street and Junkins Avenue.

Mr. Burke reiterated that the playground parking lot is tremendously inefficient. It was his opinion that with a small amount of additional paving, some valuable spaces could be provided. He stated that there would be no impact to trees or playground equipment.

Discussion continued on the expanded use of the South Mill Pond parking lot; especially for athletic events with the proper alignment of the gate. Mr. Burke commented that by using the South Mill Pond parking lot, people would be no streets to cross.

John O'Leary returned to the podium pointing out that the spaces at the JFK site are not being used to the fullest extent possible due Spinnaker Point. He spoke to the comments that had been made about green space and recreation space. He pointed out that he had spent 10 years on the Recreation Board and was chairman of the committee involved with the athletic fields at the High School so he recognizes the value of green space.

In conclusion, Mr. O'Leary informed those present that Leary Field was named after his father's cousin so nothing would ever be done to harm Leary Field.

Mr. Coker commented that the decision was a difficult one for him; that he is a library user. The knowledge that the City has to follow its own zoning rules is a comfort to him adding that a lot of cities do not do that. He stated that there is no question that there is no perfect site; that public benefit has to outweigh any individual or neighborhood impact.

He went on to state that he was not comfortable with the traffic and parking studies reiterating that he lives in the area; that he knows how tough it is to find a parking space. On the other hand, he (Mr. Coker) is in the business of doing reports and he knows how tough it is to have a report taken apart.

Mr. Coker felt that the site failed on the parking and traffic issue; that sufficient information had not been presented on the traffic impact to the neighborhood and on parking issues.

Mr. Savramis stated that he saw the need for and supported a new library. He went on to state that he liked the site; that no site is perfect. He felt that the JFK site was the best site that the City had for a library. However, having said that, he stated that he did have a problem with the parking. He felt that it was insufficient. He concluded by stating that he just did not feel comfortable with it.

The Chair stated that the issue here is whether the site is an appropriate site; that more details of the actual parking study will come under Site Review.

Mr. Holden interjected that if there is a sentiment that the site is appropriate, the Board could cite its reservations for the City Council's awareness. If the Board finds no interest in the site, then the motion could be far simpler.

The Chair commented that the charge back to the City Council could include issues with parking. He reminded those present that the Council would be taking up the library issue at its December 4^th meeting. He reiterated that the site review process would require an intensive traffic study and commented that the site might fail then. He repeated that the Traffic/Safety Committee would also review the project.

Ms. Clews moved that the Board give a "qualified" approval of the site to the City Council listing the following conditions/reservations: parking, traffic, water problems (drainage) that neighborhood residents feel may be an issue; and, erosion of green space. Mr. Sullivan seconded the motion.

In speaking to her motion, Ms. Clews stated that the site may work. However, she didn't feel comfortable with the information as presented.

In speaking to his second, Mr. Sullivan remarked that he had listened very carefully to the experts; that he took them at their word; that they are far more knowledgeable in traffic studies, soils and parking situations than he certainly is. It was his opinion that the parking and traffic issues were solvable and workable.

As far as soils are concerned, he felt that a water tight building could be built and that the City's long-range plan would alleviate the flooding problem on Richards Avenue problem and would come together pretty much at the same time as the new library building would be constructed.

He went on to state that he was satisfied because the site would be back before the Board and the Board would have another whack at it.

He went on to wonder if the library would require extra spaces. He spoke to the spaces behind the armory which the residents of Richards Avenue are using. He thought there were a lot of "ifies". He suggested having a certain area for the Middle School teachers to park and give them a pass to park there.

He concluded by stating that there were no insurmountable problems or stumbling blocks; that the Board should let the City Council know that the Board has some misgivings, some problems that needed to be worked out. Otherwise, he gave the site his stamp of approval.

Mr. Lown commented that he had great respect for those opposing the project; such as, Ruth Griffin and Diane Kelly Tefft. However, he went on to state that the Board is voting on the suitability of a site. He stated that six different downtown sites were considered; that all of those six sites would have problems with parking and traffic.

He went on to state that what the Board is doing is passing the site onto the City Council for further consideration. He stated that he was not in a position to stop that process pointing out that the process may be stopped at any point along the way.

He agreed that the recommendation should be a "qualified" one; that by so doing, the Board would be allowing the public and the City Council to have more input on the issues; such as, cost, open space, design.

He stated that he was opposed to any angled parking on Parrott Avenue; to any increase in the South Playground parking lot; that he was in favor of allowing the residents of Richards Avenue to park in the JFK lot; that he would suggest making Richards Avenue one-way from Middle Street to Parrott Avenue.

In concluding, he stated that at the minimum, the site meets a minimum threshold.

Ms. Roberts thanked all the citizens who came out for the meeting and who listed a lot of important issues. She concurred with Mr. Sullivan that these are issues that can be addressed. She pointed out that the City is already addressing the problem of stormwater separation. She felt that such issues as water runoff, playground equipment, intrusion along the green space along the South Mill Pond were critical issues to be considered in a more comprehensive plan.

Mr. Coker thanked his fellow Board members for their comments and felt that Mr. Sullivan was right on the money in stating that the problems are solvable. He felt that the site could be moved forward as a "qualified" site.

The Chair commented that the Board had received some letters; that they had been read by the Board members and were on file. He stated that the minutes of the meeting would be attached to the motion to the City Council.

The motion passed on an 8-0 vote.

`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

At this point in the proceedings, the Planning Director, David Holden, reminded the Board of the section in their Rules and Procedures regarding the length of a meeting; namely, if a meeting continues past 10:00 p.m. a decision shall be made whether to remain past 10:30 p.m. to complete an Agenda or to table the remaining items to a date and time certain. It was Mr. Holden's opinion that there were no time sensitive items remaining on the Agenda.

Mr. Sullivan commented that the Public Hearing on the library went longer than anyone thought it would, and in fairness to those interested in the remaining items, he moved to stay and finish the Agenda. Mr. Coker seconded the motion. On a roll call vote, the motion failed on a 2-6 vote with Messrs. Sullivan and Coker voting in the affirmative, and Ms. Clews, Ms. Roberts, and Messrs. Lown, Savramis, Hopley, and the Chair voting in the negative.

It was the consensus of the Board that one item would be taken up before adjourning for the evening.

`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

E. The application of Joseph Arnstein for property located off Foch Avenue wherein Preliminary Approval is requested for a lot line relocation which would result in the following: Property known as 25 Foch Avenue would have a lot area of 12,886 s.f. The adjacent vacant lot would have a lot area of 44,428 s.f. Said property is shown on Assessor Plan 233 as Lots 140 and 144 and lies within a Single Residence B district.

Let the record show that the Chair stepped down from sitting on this application and handed the gavel over to Ms. Clews.

SPEAKING TO THE APPLICATION:

John Chagnon of Ambit Engineering expressed his appreciation for the Board hearing the petition at a late hour. The request is for Preliminary Approval to relocate a lot line situated between two lots owned by Mr. Arnstein; one lot has been developed with the other proposed for development. The vacant lot recently received a Conditional Use Permit for a driveway in the buffer zone in order to minimize any impact to the wetlands. The relocated lot line would allow the driveway to be on the property of the lot that it serves and to allow future users of the lot to live in harmony. The proposal requires Board of Adjustment approval for the creation of a non-conforming lot as to area. Mr. Chagnon stated that he would like to go to the Board of Adjustment with the Board's Preliminary Approval.

There being no further speakers, the Chair declared the Public Hearing closed.

DECISION AND DISCUSSION OF THE BOARD:

Mr. Sullivan moved approval subject to the following three stipulations mentioned in the department's memo:

1. That Board of Adjustment Approval be secured to allow lot 140 to decrease in area from 14,996 s.f. to 12,886 s.f.;
2. That permanent boundary markers be established per the requirements of the Department of Public Works; and,
3. That when all the aforementioned are satisfactorily completed, that application be made to this Board for Final Subdivision Approval.

Mr. Lown seconded the motion. The motion passed on an 8-0 vote.

`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

Mr. Hopley moved that the remaining items on the Agenda be tabled to the Board's February 21<sup>st</sup>, meeting with the items to be at the top of the Agenda. Mr. Sullivan seconded the motion. The motion passed on an 8-0 vote.

F. The application of the Estate of Mary Yager for property located at 2200 Lafayette Road and 2236 Lafayette Road wherein Preliminary Approval is requested for a lot line relocation which would result in the following: Property at 2200 Lafayette Road would have a lot area of 36,446 s.f. Property at 2236 Lafayette Road, being used as a Meineke Muffler facility, would have a lot area of 22,453 s.f. Said property is shown on Assessor Plan 267 as Lots 1 and 2 and lies within a General Business district.

G. The application of Kevin Ravenelle for property located at 2859 Lafayette Road wherein a Conditional Use Permit is requested as allowed in Article VI, Section 10-608(B) of the Zoning Ordinance for the construction of a 60’ x 40’ car washing facility with related paving and parking within an Inland Wetlands Protection District. Said property is shown on Assessor Plan 286 as Lot 20 and lies within a General Business district.

H The application of Raymond Ramsey for property located off Kearsarge Way wherein a Conditional Use Permit is requested as allowed in Article VI, Section 10-608(A) of the Zoning Ordinance for the treatment of stormwater runoff associated with the proposed construction of a 100 room hotel which would involve the placement of a V-notch weir and some stone riprap in an existing drainage swale within an Inland Wetlands Protection District. Said property is shown on Assessor Plan 218 as Lot 22 and lies within a General Business district.

K. City Council Referral – Request of George Rogers of Deer Street Associates to rezone property located at 157 and 165 Deer Street from the Office Research district to the General Business district. Said property is shown on Assessor Plan 125 as Lots 17 and 18.

III. NEW BUSINESS

A. Stephen Little License Request re: Moebus Terrace

`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

4. ADJOURNMENT was had at 10:30 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Barbara B. Driscoll

Acting Secretary for the Planning Board

These minutes were approved by the Planning Board at its February 21, 2002, meeting.