STRATHAM PLANNING BOARD
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
Agenda: The
Town of Stratham, Planning Board conducted a Public Hearing on
Approval of Minutes:
Application Acceptance & Public Hearing:
1. Map 4
2. Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) Presentation
and Consideration.
Old Business:
1. Proposed
Zoning Questions:
To amend section 7.5 Senior Housing to
include Workforce Housing
Other:
1.
Planning Board
Policies and Procedures.
2.
Site Review and
Subdivision Regulation review.
Members Present: Chair Janet Johnson, Jeffrey Hyland, Mary Jane Werner, Bruno Federico, Marty Wool, Frank Catapano and Town Planner, Charles (Chuck) Grassie.
Ms. Johnson asked Ms. Werner was asked to act as a voting
member this evening. Ms. Johnson noted
that the
Mr. Grassie indicated that he would like to adjust the agenda. The Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) would go first. He noted that application acceptance and public hearing on the Fat Cod application would be moved until after the zoning question.
Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) Presentation and Consideration:
Town Administrator
Ms. Johnson introduced the amendment to Section 7.5 Senior Housing to include Workforce Housing. Mr. Grassie indicated that there were two changes that were made to the proposed amendment. Those changes were: in Section 5.7.1 to change 10 acres to 20 acres on the last line, and in line four of Section 5.7.9 to change the wording “perpetual” continuation of affordability to “long term” continuation of affordability. Ms. Johnson asked if everyone had a chance to read Mark Sykas’ comments to the Planning Board members (see file). Everyone had read the comments. Mr. Wool asked if a condominium project could be built under the proposed zoning, but without the long term affordability clause. Mr. Grassie said that 20% of the units could be sold at market value. Mr. Wool asked if the percentage could go higher. He was told no. There was a further discussion on condominiums and zoning conditions that make it so they are not currently feasible. Mr. Wool expressed a concern about homeowners of affordable housing not being able to make money on the equity of their house.
Lissa Ham, from the audience, expressed a concern about this zone being allowed all over town, especially near the bay and river. Mark Sykas talked about some of the comments he had submitted to the Board. He was concerned that affordable workforce housing would make it so that people with more expensive houses would foot a greater amount of the tax bill for municipal costs. Mr. Sykas suggested that a subcommittee be formed to work on zoning. Lucy Cushman pointed out an error in the Section # for the proposed Senior/Workforce Housing ordinance. It is shown as 7.5 and it should be 5.7. There was a brief discussion on this error. She asked if the error negated the proposed amendment. She was told no, because the substance is the same. Ms. Ham pointed out that the fact that the Senior Housing ordinance was not in the Table of Uses to show which zones it is allowed in. Mr. Grassie said it will be put in the Table of Uses. Ms. Ham asked if the Subdivision Regulations had been written for the Senior Housing and Multiple Family Housing yet. Mr. Grassie said not yet. Ms. Ham was not happy with Mr. Grassie’s answer. Jeff Wilson, from the audience, said that the Town’s Zoning Ordinance requires that a yearly study be done on Indicator’s of Growth Impact that are due by January 31st. He stated that the best information he could get was that it hasn’t been done since 2000. He spoke against the proposed affordable Workforce housing amendment. There was discussions on: zoning for elderly and workforce housing already on the books; lot size requirements in the RA and MAH zones; how the pricing for the affordable housing would be determined; whether people buying affordable housing can get market value if they sell; the definition of “Long-term” relating to how long the units must remain affordable in the proposed amendment. Mr. Grassie said the pricing is set by HUD and the New Hampshire Finance Authority, and the definition of long-term is being worked on. There were additional discussions on: homeowners of affordable housing not being able to build equity for the future; the property size needed to build affordable senior/workforce housing; a suggestion that the Town build affordable housing; if there is anything to prevent these houses from becoming rental housing; and possible phasing of any workforce housing to mitigate infrastructure impact. Mr. Wilson indicated that he was willing to serve on a committee to work on a workforce housing ordinance. Nate Merrill also indicated that he was willing to serve on a workforce housing ordinance, if this one does not pass.
Ms. Johnson
stated that it has become apparent that there is a flaw in the process in how
the Planning Board proposes amendments.
She said that proposed amendments are posted but no one shows up for the
meetings. She stated that people have
brought up some valid points. She said
that the lack of workforce housing is a regional problem that Stratham need to
address. Ms. Johnson expressed a concern
about the animosity shown at the meetings dealing with proposed zoning amendments. She suggested holding specific workshops
during the year on proposed amendments, and possibly creating a
subcommittee. After all the discussions
at the last few meetings, Ms. Johnson said she is not comfortable recommending
this amendment to the voters. Ms. Werner
was in favor of forming a subcommittee to work on proposed zoning
amendments. Mr. Catapano said that, to
him, building workforce housing is a moral issue. Mr. Federico gave the reasons why the Board
has been working on affordable workforce housing. Mr. Wool had concerns about the loop holes
that have been pointed out in the proposed amendment. Mr. Hyland was not comfortable with putting
this amendment before the voters. Ms.
Werner suggested the possibility of mandating some affordable housing for each
subdivision being built. There was
further discussion on what to do about this proposed amendment, and the process
of drafting amendments. Ms. Johnson
asked if someone could pass around paper so that anyone who is interested in
being on a subcommittee to draft proposed zoning changes can put their name and
contact information down. Mr. Deschaine
explained how subcommittees are usually created. He stated that a Board would recommend people
to the Selectmen to on a specific subcommittee, which gives that committee
official status. Mr. Federico made a
motion to recommend the amendment to Section 5.7 Affordable Senior Housing to
include Workforce Housing to the voters at Town Meeting. Hearing no second on Mr. Federico’s motion,
Mr. Catapano made a motion to not recommend the amendment to Section 5.7
Affordable Senior Housing to include Workforce Housing to the voters at Town
Meeting. Mr. Wool seconded the motion,
which passed with a vote of three in favor and Mr. Federico against. Mr. Wool made a motion that the Planning
Board recommend to the Selectmen that a Zoning Study Subcommittee be appointed
to report to the Planning Board with their recommendations. Mr. Catapano seconded the motion. Mr. Wool’s motion passed unanimously.
Map 4
Jennifer Gunn was present representing herself and her husband. She stated that they were before the Board because they were denied by the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA), who sent them to the Planning Board for a site review. She indicated that they hope to operate their landscaping company at this location, which is also their home. She said one concern brought up was that the business can be seen from the road. She stated that they were working on screening the front. She said they are working with Aquarian Water Company on one particular section where there is a well easement.
Mr. Grassie indicated that this application was complete enough to be taken under jurisdiction. Mr. Federico made a motion to take this application under jurisdiction. Ms. Werner seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Mr. Grassie stated that Mr. & Mrs. Gunn were sent to the ZBA because it was thought that this could be considered a home occupation. The ZBA felt that this applicant needed to have a Site Plan Review by the Planning Board before further action can be taken by the ZBA. The application was continued for 180 days so the Gunns could pursue a Site Plan Review. Mr. Grassie went over the layout of the property. Mr. Grassie noted that the applicant may still have to go back to the ZBA for a variance. He went over the outstanding issues that need to be addressed for this application (see Planner’s Review in file), possible variances that applicant may need, and why they might need them.
Mr. Wool said there are two different uses that would be going on. Growing trees, shrubs, etc. and the
landscaping business. He felt that the
landscaping business would be the primary use, which is not allowed in the RA
Zone. That would require a
variance. Mr. Grassie noted that Mr.
Gunn is out of town tonight and could not make the meeting. He asked if the Board would like to continue
the public hearing until Mr. Gunn can be in attendance. Mr. Catapano asked if customers would be
coming to the Gunns property. Ms. Gunn
said no. They are not seeking to have a
retail operation. She noted that in the
future, they may want to be able to sell Christmas trees or pumpkins. She stated that their company does landscape
design, installation, and property maintenance.
There was a discussion on: whether or not this would qualify as a home
occupation; the size of the office space they use; the amount of area they
would use for growing plants, trees, etc.; how they would obtain additional
plants they need for their landscaping designs and installations; the vehicles
they use for their business; the number of employees they anticipate employing;
the composting they will be doing; what type of variances the applicant may
need; and what the ZBA may be looking for from the Planning Board. Town Administrator
Other:
Planning Board Policies and Procedures:
Mr. Grassie handed out copies of a proposed Minimum Lot Configuration Requirement. He noted that he had presented this to the Board quite a while ago, which was rejected at the time. He said that this basically defines a buildable area that will be required on every lot. He read the proposed requirement aloud. There was a great deal of discussion on this proposed requirement. Ms. Ham noted that she was going to be getting information on lot shape ordinances for surrounding towns from the Rockingham Planning Commission. She was willing to serve on a subcommittee to look into a lot shape ordinance. Ms. Johnson asked Ms. Ham if she would forward that information to Mr. Grassie. Ms. Ham said she would do so.
Ms. Johnson made reference to a letter submitted by Ms. Ham regarding the
recently approved 4-lot subdivision on
Mr. Grassie informed the Board that there is a meeting at the Exeter Town Offices at 7:00 p.m. next Wednesday, February 8, 2006 on Groundwater Resources if anyone wants to attend.
Mr. Federico made a motion to adjourn at 9:40 p.m. Mr. Catapano seconded the motion, which carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda A. Beaudoin
Secretary Stratham Planning Board