MINUTES REGULAR MEETING June 9, 2011
(UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED)
Chairman Scott Badger called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
ATTENDING:
Members - Bea Davis, Ray Abbott, Scott Badger, Frank Benesh, Betsey Harding, Sarah Kimball and David Treadwell. Alternates - George Howard, Daren Levitt, and Larry Siebert. Michael Mallett called to say he would not be able to attend.
The minutes of the May 12th meeting were reviewed. Scott had already made a correction in the copy of the minutes sent out regarding the ownership of one of the lots in the Willits subdivision. George Sawyer also contacted the Board to say that the comment that he doesn’t use a computer for his drafting is incorrect. Betsey Harding made a motion to accept the minutes as corrected; Larry Siebert seconded the motion and all voted favorably.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: None
CONTINUATION OF ROAD FRONTAGE DISCUSSION:
Scott asked if we should consider either changing the frontage requirement or moving the frontage requirement to the subdivision regulations so that the Planning Board has the ability to modify it in some situations. One concern regarding frontage modifications by the Planning Board for a development is that a precedent may be set that could then be applied more broadly than the Board intended. Sarah suggested that that issue could be mitigated, at least, by clearly stating the reasons for a modification wherever granted.
The purpose and usefulness of frontage requirements as a density control was then discussed. Scott pointed out that in some situations, where a new road needs to be constructed to provide the needed frontage, the frontage requirement can lead to greater density, not less. Though 200 feet is a common standard, it was unclear where that particular number comes from; it was noted that Jackson’s Zoning Ordinance mentions an exception on frontage at 4.3.1.3: “… except where a road cul-de-sac dictates a shorter Frontage of not less than 100 feet and satisfactory to the Planning Board.” George mentioned that Bartlett has a 50 foot requirement and Ray suggested that we contact the Bartlett Planning Board to see whether that lower requirement has resulted in any problems. It was also asked if frontage
was needed as a density control in Jackson, or whether our soils requirements alone sufficiently limit density.
For the next meeting, Sarah and Frank will use town maps to determine potential further development based only on soil types and also based on both soil types and frontage to determine what overall impact frontage has on density in Jackson. Scott will contact Bartlett, and any other towns with less than a 200 foot requirement, to see how lower frontage requirements have worked out.
OLD BUSINESS: None
NEW BUSINESS:
Building permits and inspections were brought up as a possible issue for the Planning Board to look into. Bea reported that the Board of Selectmen has already revised building permit application. The general concern is that the $10,000 threshold necessitating a building permit is somewhat arbitrary and that the valuation of a project can be subjective. Larry questioned the need for any inspections, stating that 70% of towns in NH don’t do inspections. Bea replied that lack of inspections can lead to higher insurance rates for property owners.
Larry suggested that we invite an attorney from the Local Government Center to our next meeting to advise us. It was also suggested that the Board of Selectmen let the Planning Board know what issues they’ve run into with the current process.
Ray Abbott made a motion to dissolve the meeting; David Treadwell seconded the motion and all voted favorably. Chairman Badger dissolved the meeting 8:30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Susan G. Way, Secretary
June 14th, 2011
| 
