January 19, 2005

Agenda: The Town of Stratham, Planning Board conducted a Public Hearing on Wednesday, January 19, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., at the Stratham Town Hall, 10 Bunker Hill Avenue, Stratham, NH to consider the following:

Approval of Minutes: December 15, 2004 and January 5, 2005

New Business:

Public Hearing on 2005 Zoning Questions

1. Affordable Senior Housing

2. Preliminary Plan Review

3. Accessory Apartments

4. Elderly and/or Workforce Affordable – Multi-Family Housing

5. Zoning Bounds

Members Present: Chairman Ken Cornwell, Frank Catapano, Kirk Scamman, Bruno Federico, Janet Johnson, and Town Planner, Charles (Chuck) Grassie. Mary Jane Werner arrived late to the meeting.

Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Catapano and Mr. Federico to act as voting members this evening. He stated that the December 15, 2004 and January 5, 2005 meeting minutes needed approval. Mr. Federico made a motion to approve the December 15, 2004 and January 5, 2005 meeting minutes as written. Mr. Catapano seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.

Public Hearing on 2005 Zoning Questions:

Mr. Grassie indicated that the first proposed zoning amendment would add a new section, Section 5.7 - Affordable Senior Housing, to the Zoning Ordinance. It would amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow affordable senior housing within the Residential/Agricultural Zone by Conditional Use Permit. He read the proposed amendment aloud, and explained it in more detail. Gerald Batchelder from the audience was opposed to having the minimum age set at 55 years. He felt that it should be set at 60 years. Mr. Grassie stated that it needs to be either 55 or 62. Lucy Cushman was concerned that this amendment might allow a 40 unit apartment building in the middle of a residential subdivision, which does not fit into what Stratham is use to. Bob Goodrich spoke in favor of this amendment. There was a great deal of discussion on this amendment, the concerns expressed, and how this amendment would work in practice. Mr. Scamman made a motion to approve the first proposed amendment to add Section 5.7 – Affordable Senior Housing to the Zoning Ordinance as written, and to recommend it be put on the ballot for Town Meeting. Ms. Johnson seconded the motion. The motion passed with a majority vote.

Mr. Grassie read aloud the second proposed zoning amendment to add a new section to the Zoning Ordinance that would authorize the Planning Board to require preliminary subdivision review. He explained the amendment in detail. Mr. Catapano asked if a preliminary would be open to the public and if abutters would need to be noticed. Mr. Grassie said yes to both questions. John Hutton, from the audience, asked how many preliminary hearings an applicant can have. He was told that it was unlimited. Mr. Hutton was opposed to unlimited preliminary hearings. Mr. Federico had mentioned at a previous meeting that if the Board did not like the project that was presented at a preliminary hearing, the Board could change the zoning to prohibit that type of project. After further discussion on the pros and cons of requiring a preliminary hearing and the consequences of trying to prevent a project with zoning changes, Mr. Federico made a motion to approve the second proposed amendment to add a section to the Zoning Ordinance that would authorize the Planning Board to require a preliminary subdivision review, and to recommend it be put on the ballot for Town Meeting. Ms. Johnson seconded the motion, which passed with a majority vote.

Mr. Grassie read aloud the third proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, which makes changes to Section 5.4 – Accessory Apartments of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed changes are to remove 1) the requirement that the property must have been owned for 24 months, and 2) that there must be a personal hardship situation to grant the special exception. He explained the reasons behind the proposed changes. There was a brief discussion about enforcement, and the proposed changes. Ms. Johnson made a motion to approve the third proposed amendment to Section 5.4 – Accessory Apartments of the Zoning Ordinance, and to recommend it be put on the ballot for Town Meeting. Mr. Catapano seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.

Mr. Grassie indicated that the fourth proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance was one that was proposed last year. It is to amend Section 3.6-A – Table of Uses to allow Elderly and/or Workforce Affordable – Multi-Family Housing by Conditional Use Permit in certain zones, and to add a new Section 5.7 – Multi-Family Housing to the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Grassie read the proposed ordinance aloud and explained it in detail. Mr. Scamman was not in favor of this amendment because of possible problems with enforcement. Mr. Grassie said enforcement would be by an outside agency that would regulate the affordability of the units. Mr. Federico pointed out a typographical error that needs to be corrected. Ms. Johnson had some concerns about this proposed ordinance. There was a discussion about the Board’s reasons for bringing this amendment before the voters again, when it did not pass last year. Mr. Cornwell indicated that it came close to passing, and the Board felt that possibly the Town’s people did not fully understand the amendment. Marty Wool from the audience said that if the Board wanted to put this proposed amendment before the voters again after being voted down, they should have expended more effort to educate the Town’s people, and/or make some changes to it. Mr. Cornwell said that title of the proposed amendment was changed to better reflect the content of the amendment. Mr. Grassie stated that he had gotten feedback from people indicating that they did not realize the amendment dealt with elderly affordable housing. There was a great deal of discussion regarding: using commercial land for residential uses; raising the height of commercial buildings; possible enforcement problems; proposing this amendment again; how this proposed amendment could work to promote affordable housing; identifying the different zones for the voters; and educating the public about the amendments. There were many people who spoke in favor of and against this proposed amendment. Mr. Grassie noted that if the Board votes to recommend this proposed amendment to the voters, the section number would need to be changed to 5.8 because the previous amendment is designated as 5.7. Mr. Scamman made a motion to not recommend this proposed amendment. There was further discussion on this amendment. Not hearing a second on Mr. Scamman’s motion, the motion did not pass. Mr. Federico made a motion to approve the fourth proposed amendment to amend Section 3.6-A - Table of Uses to allow Elderly and/or Workforce Affordable – Multi-Family Housing by Conditional Use Permit in certain zones, and to add a new Section 5.7 – Multi-Family Housing to the Zoning Ordinance, and to recommend it be put on the ballot for Town Meeting. Mr. Catapano seconded the motion. Ms. Johnson and Mr. Cornwell wanted to make sure that the Board makes a concerted effort to educate the public about the proposed amendments. The motion to recommend this proposed amendment to the voters at Town Meeting passed with a majority vote.

Mr. Grassie read the fifth proposed amendment aloud, which was to amend Section 3.3.6(1) – District Bounds to increase the depth of the General Commercial Zone (GCM) from 800 feet to 1600 feet from the edge of right-of-way of Portsmouth Avenue. He pointed out that there is a small sliver of one parcel next to the Dreher Holloway parcel that is shown as blue but should be white for residential. He said the map would be corrected. Mr. Cornwell pointed out that he was the one who brought this proposed change to the Board. He said he would be chairing a committee on a master road system in Stratham. Mr. Scamman indicated that he owns two of the parcels that would be affected by the change, and stepped down because of the conflict of interest. Mr. Grassie said the Board had talked about either going up Route 33 (Portsmouth Avenue) towards Greenland or along Portsmouth Avenue towards Exeter. They decided to concentrate on going towards Exeter. Mr. Federico stated that the Board has been discussing expanding the GCM Zone for several years, because the majority of the GCM Zone is exhausted. The Board members explained the difficult job it is to trying to plan for the future of Stratham, and that they had many discussions on expanding the GCM. Mr. Cornwell said the Board had checked into the possibility of expanding the Industrial Zone, but there is nowhere for it to go. He said the only way to expand the tax base is to expand the GCM Zone.

John Hutton, from the audience, asked if the Planning Board had a subcommittee that worked on this proposal. He was told that there was no specifically designated subcommittee; that discussions started with the Master Plan Committee. He suggested that the Board table this proposal and appoint a subcommittee to work on it for next year. Lucy Cushman spoke against the way the proposed expansion was done. She felt that the Board should have taken into consideration how the expansion would affect specific parcels. Mark Sykes agreed with Mr. Hutton regarding appointing a subcommittee to work on the amendment for next year. He also suggested that the Board might what to try to work on a cooperative agreement with Exeter regarding water and sewer so the GCM Zone can be developed more intensely. Mr. Cornwell said discussions with Exeter regarding water and sewer have been going on for years, without much luck. He said that the two areas where a sewage treatment plant for Stratham would have gone are no longer available. The land in the Commercial/Light Industrial/Office (CLIO) Zone was given to St. Michaels Church and the piece behind the old Shaw’s building has a conservation easement on it. Bob Goodrich from the audience asked if the Board knew how many acres were currently in the GCM Zone; how many acres would be added by the expansion; how many of those acres are already being used; and how many lots would be affected. The Board did not have that information readily available. Other issued raised were: how the affected properties would be taxed; and how the change would affect these properties. Town Administrator Paul Deschaine said even though the properties would be zoned commercial, there would be offsets given for the fact that the properties are being used residentially. He noted that there is a State law that allows property owners in that situation to petition the Selectmen to put the property into a current use type standard, as long as the property remains a residential use.

Jerry Batchelder, from the Conservation Commission, informed the Board that the Commission was opposed to this zoning change. There were additional discussions on: the possibility of following boundary lines for the expansion; the definition of an abutter; who can file a protest petition and a timetable for filing a protest petition; the view shed that would be lost; the lack of communication between the Town’s various boards/commissions/committees; and tabling this amendment and creating a subcommittee to research and discuss any changes to the GCM Zone. Many people strongly spoke against the proposed expansion and/or the way it was proposed. Mr. Deschaine explained to the public that one of the intents of the Planning Board for expanding the GCM Zone is to allow room to create service roads that would allow people to travel from the various shopping plazas, businesses, etc. without having to go out onto Portsmouth Avenue. He said another reason is to allow the developers to put the parking lots in the back, so they won’t have to create a strip mall/development.

Mr. Cornwell indicated that he was pleased with the turnout for tonight’s meeting, but noted that typically at Planning Board meetings there are only the applicants and maybe one or two interested parties. He stated that the Board needs more interested parties to provide their input and help with subcommittees. The Board members agreed with Mr. Cornwell. Mr. Grassie stated that anyone interested in serving on a subcommittee to work on expanding the GCM Zone should get their e-mail address to him, so they can be put on a list. Mark Sykas said he would be willing to be on a subcommittee to work on expanding the GCM Zone. There was further discussion regarding setting up a subcommittee to work on expanding the GCM Zone. Gordon Barker from the Conservation Commission said they would like to have a Planning Board representative attend the Conservation Commission meetings, and suggested Mr. Grassie. Mr. Cornwell said that it would be a good idea to have a Planning Board representative attend Conservation Commission meetings, but felt that Mr. Grassie had enough to do as Town Planner. Mr. Cornwell indicated that he was willing to chair a subcommittee to work on expanding the GCM Zone. Mr. Catapano made a motion to not recommend the fifth amendment to Section 3.3.6(1) – District Bounds to increase the depth of the General Commercial Zone (GCM) from 800 feet to 1600 feet from the edge of right-of-way of Portsmouth Avenue to the voters at Town Meeting. Ms. Johnson seconded the motion, which passed with a majority vote. This amendment will not be on the ballot. Mr. Scamman resumed his seat on the Board.

Other:

Mr. Grassie informed the Board about a watershed program, “After the Storm”, that was shown on the Weather Channel on January 16, 2005 at 7:30 p.m. There will be additional showings at various times throughout this week. He stated that the Planning Board’s Budget Hearing is scheduled for Thursday, January 20, 2005. He noted he would be posting for a Public Hearing on February 2, 2005 for a NH Coastal Program grant for the development and completion of digital parcel and features mapping within the Town of Stratham. He said that the Board of Selectmen would have to vote on it on February 7, 2005 for submittal by February 14, 2005. He briefly explained the grant. Mr. Grassie indicated that he was trying to set up a date to have Regional Planning do a presentation on the build-out analysis. There was a brief discussion regarding the ongoing discussions with Exeter about co-operating with Stratham on water and sewage treatment. Mr. Scamman made a motion to adjourn at 9:30 p.m. Ms. Johnson seconded the motion, which carried.

Respectfully submitted,

Linda A. Beaudoin,

Secretary Stratham Planning Board