The New Ipswich Planning Board’s continued public hearing on the proposed Silver Scone Teas on River Road Wednesday night included a discussion of the proposed 18-space gravel parking lot off Currier Road, which includes two additional spaces in the back parking lot.
Silver Scone owner Jane Elwell has received a variance from the Zoning Board allowing her to host tea party events no more than four days a month, serving a maximum of 50 people per day – either in a single sitting or over multiple events – between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. The Planning Board hearing is about the site plan for the business.
Attorney Bob Fasanella, representing Elwell, said there are 14 other gravel parking lots in the area and eight are larger. He claimed 11 out of the 14 are used year-round, while Silver Scone’s lot will be used four times a month at most.
“The parking area has been in existence for over 70 years,” he said.
Attorney Nancy Clark, representing a group of neighbors opposed to the project, said there is no proof the parking lot has been around that long. She responded to the list of lots Fasanella cited, saying most of the gravel lots were put in before a zoning ordinance passed in 1987, such as the Warwick Mills parking lot and the one at Windbown Camping, and therefore should not be used as a comparison.
Clark claimed other lots were made from “millings,” or recycled asphalt pavement, which is not the same as gravel – gravel is classified as a mixture of dirt and rock. She went on to speak on the “excellent stormwater management system” at Nix Gym, contrasting it to the one Silver Scone has planned.
Clark had been elected to the Planning Board as a write-in March 28, but resigned April 4 after learning that under the New Hampshire Rules of Professional Conduct, she could not represent her clients before the board while serving as a member. Two of Clark’s clients who are on the Planning Board, Richard Smeeth and alternate Elizabeth Freeman, and recused themselves, attending as members of the public. Nicole Talbot was appointed to the board as the write-in candidate who received the most votes and wanted to serve after Clark resigned.
Annmarie Fournier, a direct neighbor of Elwell, said, “I can see their parking lot, their shed, from my kitchen.” Her husband Robert said headlights leaving the parking lot would shine right into their house.
Smeeth said he can also see events going on at the house from his home.
“Right now, there’s not a single leaf on any of those trees where that parking lot is going to be,” he said, and expressed that he’s not sure a foliage barrier is going to provide an adequate visual screen.
After saying that they’d gone from talking safety to visual issues, Select Board Chairman and liaison to the Planning Board Shawn Talbot said, “There’s no way we’re going to put a bubble around this thing. We’re really running down a rabbit hole trying to come up with something to screen.”
In addition to the parking lot discussion, the Planning Board accepted four waivers, including more details surrounding and a mapped-out proposed parking lot, a stormwater drainage plan and a soil-and-sediment erosion-control plan, as complete from Silver Scone Teas.
Clark also argued that Elwell is not experiencing financial hardship, as she claimed on the waivers submitted.
“This is a completely manufactured argument that does not exist in reality,” said Clark, saying Elwell owns her home, that she was in New Zealand at the last meeting and in the United Kingdom Wednesday. “An applicant not wanting to pay for items doesn’t meet the standard for unnecessary hardship.”
Clark also requested that Talbot recuse himself from the remainder of the hearing. She argued that Talbot was not impartial because the Select Board had upheld the driveway permit for the business and he had made comments at the last meeting and Wednesday night that were grounds to reasonably question his impartiality.
Talbot said he felt he could act as an impartial judge and said, “I don’t feel that I need to [recuse myself] but I will honor an up-or-down vote.” The Planning Board took an advisory vote on whether Talbot should recuse himself, and voted 3-2 that he should not, with Chair Deirdre Daley and Lou Guarino, an alternate acting as a full member, voting that he should.
Talbot abstained, and decided not to recuse himself.
Talbot explained that in his three years with the Planning Board, the “view I’ve had is to try and get things going forward with applications,” which he said is an effort to honor the applications the board receives and everybody’s time.
The hearing will continue on Wednesday, April 19, and the board will continue to consider public comment, review design criteria and work through procedural objections brought up by Clark.