MINUTES
CHARLESTOWN PLANNING BOARD
JULY 6, 2004
Members Present: Robert Frizzell – Chair; Sharon Francis – Vice-Chair; Steven Neill – Ex-Officio; Gail Fellows, David Sussman
Alternates Present: Eric Lutz, Roger Thibodeau
Staff Present: David Edkins – Planning & Zoning Administrator
Regina Borden – Recording Secretary
CALL TO ORDER & SEATING OF ALTERNATES: Robert Frizzell, Chair, called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. He noted the absence of regular members Robert Beaudry and Fred Poisson and alternate member Linda Stewart and called upon Eric Lutz to sit for Robert Beaudry and Roger Thibodeau to sit for Fred Poisson.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JUNE 15, 2004:
Sharon Francis moved to approve the Minutes of the June 15, 2004, meeting as printed. Roger Thibodeau seconded the motion. With five members in favor, the minutes were approved. Eric Lutz and Robert Frizzell abstained as they were not present.
MASTER PLAN PROGRESS – Vicky Boundy, UVLSRPC: Vicky Boundy from the Upper Valley Lake Sunapee Region Planning Commission noted that the Planning Board had received draft copies of the “Charlestown Community Goals Workshop – Summary”, “Visioning Chapter”, and “Population Chapter” of the Master Plan in their packets. She apologized for their lateness in providing these chapters to the Planning Board; in essence there was a lack of communication. Hopefully, we can move ahead in a timely manner from here.
Ms. Boundy advised that the Population and Housing chapters are usually combined and asked for input from the Board on how they would like to discuss them. She suggested talking about the larger concepts and goals, policies and recommendations. There was a consensus that any small editorial corrections or comments could be funneled through Dave Edkins who will pass them on to Ms. Boundy as this will generate a record of them. Ms. Boundy felt that the Workshop Summary would be the foundation for everything else. Mr. Sussman did not feel that the issue of mobile homes came out in the summary the way it was reflected during the workshop.
Ms. Boundy suggested dedicating a full meeting to “Housing”. When this chapter was put together they did not have the 1997 Housing up-date. Mr. Edkins is concerned that the next meeting on July 20th will have a fairly large agenda with three new applications, two of them being substantial. Ms. Boundy agreed to incorporate data from the 1997 Housing Chapter up-date and the 2000 Census and provide a draft chapter to Mr. Edkins prior to the day that the next Board packets will be mailed. This will allow time for the Board to review it prior to the August 3rd meeting.
Maps had been previously distributed to the Board in connection with the Natural Resources setion. Work has begun on the Natural Resources chapter and UVLSRPC is going to provide this chapter at no cost to the Town, through regular State funding that they receive, and they will move forward with that.
Ms. Boundy said they have made the assumptions for the Build-Out Study but now need to put it all together with the analysis and write it up. This is a time consuming part of the Master Plan.
The Planning Board and Vicky Boundy agreed that this was a good stopping point and moved back to the first item on the agenda – Lisa Shaw.
LISA SHAW – Boundary Adjustment Between Previously Subdivided Lots – River Road – Map 4, Lots 13-A & 13A-2 – Zone E (Mixed Use): Surveyor, Tom Dombrowski advised that he added the State Septic Approval Number to the new plans that were distributed. Each lot has a residence on it; Ms. Shaw lives in one of the residences and wants to sell the other lot. This adjustment will not change the road frontage. It is primarily backland that will be transferred from one lot to the other and the two lots are already developed.
The proposal is for two lots, 3.49 acres and 8.04 acres. The boundary line is different because there is a hill and wetland area. There is a common driveway for both lots as the State has allowed only one curb cut based upon this amount of road frontage. Mr. Frizzell said the Planning Board usually tries to stay away from common driveways as they cause problems in the future. Mr. Edkins said in terms of what is being proposed, Ms. Shaw can sell the other lot and there will still be the same configuration; the access is unchanged. This application involves transferring the back land from one to the other. Mr. Sussman asked if the sharing and maintenance is spelled out in the Deed. Mrs. Francis asked if a way to solve this would be to grant the driveway to one of the lots with a
right-of-way to the other property? Mr. Dombrowski advised that Ms. Shaw will own it, that is the way it is now. The new Deed wording includes ”shared and common”. If there was another solution it would have been done a few years ago. These are two taxable lots. Mr. Edkins noted that maintenance is an issue between the two owners. The original subdivision was approved in 2000; Mr. Edkins reviewed the Minutes – it was approved with little discussion other than stating that a State Driveway Permit would be necessary.
Mrs. Francis moved to approve this boundary adjustment as presented with the proviso that the Planning Board be presented with a copy of the Deed for Lot No. 2 that will indicate the right-of-way for the driveway from Lot #1. Ms. Fellows seconded the motion. With five members in favor, the motion was approved. Mr. Neill and Mr. Frizzell were opposed. Mr. Neill was opposed because of the requirement for the Deed language. Mr. Frizzell was opposed based on the shared driveway; he won’t vote for anything that has the word “right-of-way” in it because it leads to problems.
Mr. Dombrowski will provide a copy of the Deed to Mr. Edkins.
MASTER PLAN PROGRESS (Continued): Ms. Boundy asked for clarification on the attendees during the workshop meeting. It was noted that Eric Lutz is an alternate member on the Planning Board; David Sussman is an addition as a member of the Planning Board; Susan Laware is an addition as a member of the Finance Committee; and the spelling for John Miklaszewicz, a resident, is correct. Ms. Boundy fully documented the participant’s input during the workshop and pulled out the ones with the most dots. Mr. Sussman felt there are two areas that didn’t reflect what went on: 1) Strengthen Zone E (10 dots) and provide for mixed-uses, with limits, in Zone E (8 dots) – it was to strengthen the zoning regulations in Zone E – tighten it up somewhat; and 2) the issue of the mobile
homes. Mr. Edkins felt in the Chapter itself – Land Use– it states “Strengthen Zone E by adding use regulations. Consider evaluating alternative approaches such as splitting the broad area into smaller sub-areas that share common traits and interests”. It doesn’t appear in the summary of the workshop but the business community would find that important. Ms. Boundy didn’t remember it being on the flip chart but remembered the discussion.
Mrs. Francis asked Ms. Boundy if she plans to use bullets throughout the document or will repetition be eliminated? This is the summary of the workshop so we just have to be sure that it is clear; eliminate duplication, use judgment as to where an issue should be mentioned. Ms. Boundy said it is up for discussion – they built into the agreement that there would be two revisions to this document. This chapter is intended to replace the Goals, Policies and Recommendations section that they used to included in their master plan work. The state doesn’t require one format over the other.
Mrs. Francis noted on page 3 – “Balanced growth – matching pace of residential and commercial development”. “Pace” wasn’t the issue at the workshop but rather it was proportionality of tax contributing development to the Town and, therefore, using industrial or economic development might be more appropriate. Mr. Edkins suggested “commercial/industrial”; the idea was to have the volume of commercial/industrial be complimentary; the “economic benefit of”.
Mr. Lutz felt that the Board should concentrate on the most dots and maybe take off those with single dots, such as the by-pass around the Historic District issue and roadside litter. These are good ideas but not that feasible.
Mr. Edkins mentioned that there were only sixteen people at the workshop. The contract calls for two revisions after the original document. Maybe a revision should not be done until after the Community Attitude Survey. Ms. Boundy noted that this will be the basis for the survey. She suggested one revision after this meeting and another after the survey. Mr. Edkins would prefer that the second draft revision incorporate the comments made here tonight and the Community Attitude Survey results. Mrs. Francis suggested starting with the items that had the most dots and work down to the least. Mr. Lutz feels that the more readable the document is the more useable it will be; concentrate on the vision that works best and makes some sense. Don’t spend too much time on revising
the summary but more time on the chapter.
Mr. Sussman didn’t feel that “Choose one option for mobile homes – allow only on single lots; or mobile parks only” on page 7– Housing Key Issues - Mobile Homes was as discussed at the workshop. Mr. Edkins said State law requires that if a Town is going to regulate mobile homes you have one or the other but right now this Town has both. Our regulations are open for new mobile home parks. The discussion at the Workshop reflected this. Mrs. Francis noted that what hasn’t been explored is that 26% of the community is mobile homes and they are allowed in every zone but we would like to catch up with housing of higher valuation – is there anything the Town can do in terms of restricting new mobile home locations in Town in the next five or ten years? Mr.
Thibodeau asked how other towns get around this. Mr. Sussman felt it could be done through requiring foundations for mobile homes. Mr. Edkins noted that sometimes it is the economics in terms of the price of lots. He read from the RSA. Charlestown has its fair share of lower cost housing. Mrs. Francis asked how our Master Plan can restrict, prohibit or stop the addition of new mobile homes in the Town. Mr. Thibodeau felt the Town has its share, we’ve reached our limit. Ms. Boundy said this issue raised quite a few dots. Mrs. Francis felt that “encourage higher-end” housing (i.e. not mobile homes) and improve quality of house lots” and “Choose one option for mobile homes – allow only on single lots or mobile parks only” should be combined. Ms. Boundy advised that after the chapters are completed, we can go back and fine tune them. Mrs. Francis said this is a good starting place.
Relative to the Visioning Chapter, Ms. Boundy discussed the Core Principles on page 2. Mr. Sussman said as a general principle we should hit the main ideas that came out of the workshop meeting. Mr. Thibodeau questioned how do we modify “strengthen Zone E by adding use regulations”. There was discussion relative to splitting Zone E into sub-zones. Mrs. Francis said on page 3 –Land Use- an addition might be “to preclude industries with a high potential for adverse impacts” – such as pollution, nuclear plants or solid waste incinerators. Ms. Boundy suggested that the survey could include a question such as “of the following types of industries which type do you think that Charlestown should encourage or discourage”.
Mrs. Francis noted that on page 2 –Core Principles– we need to encourage “diverse housing especially for the elderly”. Encourage the investment of high quality housing to get the balance back again. Mr. Edkins said it was noted that there is a need for more affordable housing but that doesn’t seem to be an issue in Charlestown; it doesn’t need to be emphasized. Mr. Lutz said there was discussion on higher quality housing where natural beauty could be used as a view such as along the river. Mr. Edkins asked if we could come to a conclusion in the Housing Chapter that Charlestown has its fair share of the region’s affordable housing so we don’t want to allow that trend to continue. Ms. Boundy said this could be emphasized that the main goal is to
upgrade the housing; add this as a core principle.
Mrs. Francis said that on page 4 –Natural Resources- we may want to review whether or not the Planning Board should “Investigate and develop noise and lighting regulations to guard against noise and light pollution”. Maybe say that the Board will “review” rather than “investigate” to see if they are sufficient. Mr. Edkins indicated that there are some things that shouldn’t be in the Site Plan Review regulations but should be in the Zoning regulations.
The Planning Board agreed to set aside time during their meeting on Tuesday, August 3rd to meet with Ms. Boundy to discuss the Population and Housing Chapter. Comments, suggestions, recommendations, etc. should be submitted to Mr. Edkins prior to the next meeting so they can be submitted to Ms. Boundy who will have time to work with them before the meeting on August 3rd. Ms. Boundy will bring the first revision of the Visioning Workshop to the meeting on August 3rd. Mr. Edkins mentioned that the survey is in next years work so we will have to work that out as it seems the survey should be started soon; Ms. Boundy will look into the timing for the survey. A draft survey will be submitted to the Planning Board for their review before mailing. Having a raffle to
generate a good return of the surveys will be explored. She requested that the Planning Board set estimated dates for meetings and indicate what will be done in advance.
ADMINISTRATION & CORRESPONDENCE:
Mr. Edkins advised that the following correspondence was received:
· A letter from Robert Weaver, Interim Executive Director, of the Western Region Development Corporation inviting the Planning Board to attend the second public meeting for the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) on Thursday, July 15th from 6:30 pm to 8:30 pm in Claremont at the Claremont Savings Bank. The “Vision Statement” for the CEDS, which was developed at the first public meeting, will be discussed. Mr. Edkins agreed to serve on this committee but will be unable to attend the meeting next week.
· Copies of a letter, dated July 1, 2004, from Attorney Adele Fulton, regarding the Hill, et al v. Town of Charlestown (Morningside Flight Park) up-date were enclosed in the Board’s packets.
There being no other business, Mr. Thibodeau moved for adjournment. Mr. Sussman seconded the motion and, with seven members in favor, the meeting adjourned at 9:12 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Regina Borden, Recording Secretary Minutes Filed: 7-9-04
(Note: These are unapproved minutes. Corrections, if necessary, may be found in the minutes of the July 20, 2004, meeting.)
| 