STRATHAM PLANNING BOARD

PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES

January 17, 2007

 

Agenda:            The Town of Stratham, Planning Board conducted a Public Hearing on Wednesday, January 17, 2007, at 7:00 p.m., at the Stratham Town Hall, 10 Bunker Hill Avenue, Stratham, NH to consider the following:

 

Approval of Minutes:            December 6, 2006

 

Proposed Zoning Amendments:

 

Revised Definition of Agriculture, Farm, Farming: To revise Section 2.1.6 Agriculture, Farm, Farming to more comply with NH RSA 21:34-a Farm, Agriculture, Farming.  The Planning Board has found that the current definition has not been conducive to the establishment of new farms or farming activities within Stratham.

 

Historic Review for Demolition: To add a new Section 16.5 Historic Demolition Delay To require that prior to any demolition of any home, barn or other structure, which is assumed to be over 50 years in age, be reviewed by the Heritage Commission prior to any issuance of a permit to demolish such structure.  The new section would provide for and expedited review with an extended review period for structures within the town, which were found to be historic, or of significant importance to the heritage of the community. 

 

Expansion of Industrial Zone

 

To amend the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Stratham to correctly show the boundaries of Map 2 Lot 30 and to add Map 2 Lot 26 to the Industrial Zone.

 

                        Expansion of Retirement Planned Community Zone

 

            To amend the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Stratham to add Map 2 Lots 25, 41, 42 and 43 to the Retirement Planned Community Zone.

 

                  Other:

 

Members Present: Chair Janet Johnson; Joe Russell, Jeffrey Hyland, Gordon Barker, Martin Wool, Bruno Federico, Mary Jane Werner, and Charles (Chuck) Grassie, Town Planner. 

 

Ms. Johnson noted that the December 6, 2006 meeting minutes needed approval.  Ms. Werner made a motion to approve the minutes from the December 6, 2006 meeting as written.  Mr. Federico seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.

 

 

Proposed Zoning Amendments:

 

Revised Definition of Agriculture, Farm, Farming: To revise Section 2.1.6 Agriculture, Farm, Farming to more comply with NH RSA 21:34-a Farm, Agriculture, Farming.  The Planning Board has found that the current definition has not been conducive to the establishment of new farms or farming activities within Stratham:

 

Mr. Grassie noted that he had made one change from the last meeting, per the Board’s request.  The amount of product sale that must be produced on the farm went from at least 35% to at least 50%.  He said that this amendment was just the definition of farming.  There were a great deal of discussions on: the 35% minimum vs. 50% minimum; and whether or not this will help create more farms.  Mr. Federico asked if the percentage only applied to farm stands.  He was told yes.  There was further discussion on: whether or not farmers who lose their crop one year and sell purchased produce would be in violation of this amendment; some sections of the Zoning Ordinance that may be affected by the proposed changes to the farming definition; if the 50% minimum applies to farms or farm stands; types of farming operations that would be covered under this amendment; the differences between the current definition and the new definition; the State regulations on farming; and if leased land that is being farmed would be considered as meeting the 50% minimum.  Mr. Federico made a motion to table this proposed amendment on the Definition of Agriculture, Farm, Farming for further consideration in 2007 for the 2008 ballot.  Mr. Wool seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.  They will also work on an amendment to the Ordinance itself.

 

Historic Review for Demolition: To add a new Section 16.5 Historic Demolition Delay To require that prior to any demolition of any home, barn or other structure, which is assumed to be over 50 years in age, be reviewed by the Heritage Commission prior to any issuance of a permit to demolish such structure.  The new section would provide for an expedited review with an extended review period for structures within the town, which were found to be historic, or of significant importance to the heritage of the community:

 

Mr. Grassie noted that there had been a number of enforcement provisions, which put some teeth into the proposed ordinance.  As requested, he removed those provisions.  The proposed ordinance now only sets up a procedure where the Heritage Commission will have an opportunity to talk to property owners and to look at structures prior to demolition occurring.  Mr. Grassie stated that he received a letter from the Town’s Attorney, Lynn Morse, which indicates that the proposed ordinance is reasonable; is not in violation of any State Ordinances; and is part of the authority of the Heritage Commission to advise local Boards.  The only tooth left in the ordinance is that the demolition permit could be held up for up to 30 days to allow the Heritage Commission to contact property owners and/or go out to the property to take pictures (with permission) if the owners can not be persuaded to preserve the structure.  There was a discussion on the age of the structures that would be covered under this proposed ordinance; and the Heritage Commission’s proposed data base of historic structures.  Mr. Barker asked if there would be a paper trail of Heritage Commission Subcommittee’s recommendations, and how the Subcommittee would be notified of any demolition permits.  Mr. Grassie said there was no set procedure for notification of the Subcommittee of demolition permits.  Mark Sykas, from the audience, felt that this ordinance does too little too late.  Rebecca Mitchell from the Heritage Commission said this ordinance is a type of preservation planning tool.  She spoke in favor of the proposed ordinance.  There was a great deal of additional discussion on the pros and cons of this proposed ordinance.  Mr. Barker, Ms. Werner, and Ms. Johnson spoke in favor of this ordinance.  Town Administrator Paul Deschaine pointed out that this proposed ordinance would obligate the Heritage Commission to meet with property owners to try to persuade them not to demolish historic structures.  Mr. Wool expressed a concern about the meeting between property owners and the Heritage Committee being a public forum.  Nate Merrill and Mr. Sykas from the audience, agreed with Mr. Wool.  Bob Goodrich, from the audience, suggested moving some of the sections of the proposed ordinance around, so people will better understand it.  Ms. Mitchell suggested renaming the ordinance “Historic Demolition Review”.  Mr. Federico felt that all this ordinance does is create five extra pages in the Zoning Ordinance book.  He said an ordinance needs to have teeth, or it really isn’t an ordinance.  Barbara Mann, from the audience, spoke in favor of this proposed ordinance.  Peter Wiggin from the Heritage Commission stated that the Commission already had a partial inventory of historic homes in Stratham.  They are seeking more budget funds to continue the list.  Ms. Werner made a motion to recommend this proposed ordinance to the voters at Town Meeting.  Mr. Barker seconded the motion, which passed by a majority vote.

 

Expansion of Industrial Zone To amend the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Stratham to correctly show the boundaries of Map 2 Lot 30 and to add Map 2 Lot 26 to the Industrial Zone:

 

Mr. Grassie gave a brief description of the proposed changes to the Zoning Map, as discussed at the last meeting.  He said the changes move the former Breslin property into the Industrial Zone, and take the Co-op Middle School out of the Industrial Zone and put it into the Residential/Agricultural Zone.  There was a discussion on the proposed change to the Zoning Map.  Mr. Federico made a motion to recommend the amendment to the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Stratham, to correctly show the boundaries of Map 2 Lot 30 and to add Map 2 Lot 26 to the Industrial Zone, to the voters at Town Meeting.  Mr. Gordon seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.

 

Expansion of Retirement Planned Community Zone To amend the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Stratham to add Map 2 Lots 25, 41, 42 and 43 to the Retirement Planned Community Zone:

 

Mr. Grassie noted that the map he had projected on the wall was not completely accurate, because Regional Planning had not yet returned the data received from Mark Stevens showing his property.  Ms. Werner asked why the owner does not want to include his property, which borders the Industrial Zone, in the Industrial Zone considering that the Town is trying to expand the Industrial Zone.  Mr. Federico stated that it was presented to the Board as a lot that is wet and not suitable for industrial use, because it lays in the water shed area for the Exeter water service.  He said they felt the best use would be for planned retirement where a cluster development could be done.  Mr. Grassie put a wetlands inventory map up on the wall.  Mr. Stevens said this property is located next to the existing retirement community, and would act as a buffer between residential and industrial uses.  He feels that a planned retirement community would generate more tax revenue to the Town than an industrial use.   There was further discussion on industrial use vs. retirement planned community use; concerns regarding mosquitoes and pesticide runoff from spraying the wetland areas, because of the retirement planned community use; if there was a possibility of putting some of this land under conservation easement; and putting in mixed housing instead of retirement.  Mr. Grassie indicated that this property is no in the aquifer protection zone.  Mr. Stevens stated that in the past they donated land to conservation, and he sees no reason why they wouldn’t be doing the same thing.  He hinted that there may be a possibility of some affordable housing in the development under the 80/20 Rule.  There was additional discussion on: ownership of the parcels that would be rezoned to Retirement Planned Community; the fact that some of the lots are raw, landlocked parcels; the location of the floating parcel; and the zoning designation of the individual parcels.  Mr. Wool made a motion to recommend the amendment to the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Stratham, to add Map 2 Lots 25, 41, 42 and 43 to the Retirement Planned Community Zone, to the voters at Town Meeting.  Mr. Federico seconded the motion, which passed with a vote of 4 in favor and Ms. Werner voting against.

 

Other:

 

Ms. Johnson stated that she would like to get all the Boards, Committees, and Commissions together again sometime in March.  She would like each Board, Committee, and Commission to think about what possible zoning changes they might like to work on for the year.

 

Mr. Grassie noted that the Board members had copies of the proposed Zoning Amendments that will be going into the Town Report.  He asked the members to review the amendments and let him know if there are any typographical errors he needs to correct.  Town Administrator Paul Deschaine stated that he would like to go over the proposed amendments, page by page, to see if that is what the Board wants to have on the ballot.  The Board went over the proposed amendments.  Mr. Deschaine was concerned about the presentation of the amendments, particularly the Sign Ordinance.  He said that it is unclear as to what is being changed and what isn’t being changed.  He recommended that Mr. Grassie either edit the Sign Ordinance down to just the changes that are being made, or the Board could recommend that the entire Sign Ordinance be replaced with the new Sign Ordinance.  There was a discussion on Mr. Deschaine’s suggestions.  The Board members decided that they want to rescind the old Sign Ordinance, adopt the new Sign Ordinance, and italicize the changes.  Mr. Grassie will get the Sign Ordinance changed as requested.

 

Ms. Werner made a motion to adjourn at 9:22 p.m.  Mr. Federico seconded the motion, which carried.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

Linda A. Beaudoin

Secretary Stratham Planning Board