NEWTON PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF WORK SESSION
OCTOBER 26, 2010
1. Call to Order: Chairman Jim Doggett called the meeting to order at 7:03 pm. In attendance were: Chairman Jim Doggett, Vice Chairperson Barbara White, Planning Board member Frank Gibbs, and BOS ex officio Trisha McCarthy. Minutes were transcribed by Interim Administrative Assistant Rick Milner.
Also in attendance: Circuit Rider Planner Brian Groth and guest Raquelle Sprickman of Kenwood Drive.
2. Village District Zoning.
a. District borders. Doggett opened discussion stating his desire to obtain the board's consensus for the specific borders of the village districts in the Rowe's Corner, Central Main Street, and Newton Junction areas. Specific details were needed for warrant article language that will establish these zones.
Gibbs asked if the present police station property is within the business district. If the police station moves to a new location as proposed, the present site needs to be within the business district to facilitate the sale of the property.
Doggett confirmed that the present police station property will be within the mixed use village district in the Rowe's Corner area.
Doggett asked the board for opinions on which village border design they preferred - the original smaller borders or revised expanded borders of the districts.
White expressed her support of the smaller borders to eliminate spot development that may occur in a larger zone. The smaller borders would centralize the development into a more compact area. This would attain the desired look and feel of a village. If necessary, the zones could be enlarged at a later time.
Doggett agreed that the smaller borders suited the Rowe's Corner area. For Newton Junction, he expressed a desire to use more expanded borders. With the smaller borders, some properties that are relatively close to each other are within the zone and some are outside of the zone. A larger zone would bring a more logical and consistent connection between the properties.
Groth added that he agreed with White's opinion that smaller borders would accomplish the board's goal of establishing mixed use villages. However, the board should consider that there are some large parcels in the expanded borders that could be desirable areas for development in the future.
Doggett stated that there could be a problem with having too many options in the expanded zones. If the board adopts larger zones, it can never contract these areas. There will always be the ability to expand from smaller zones later.
The board came to a consensus to use the original smaller borders as drawn on the area map to define the village district zone around Rowe's Corner.
Doggett asked the board to give its opinions concerning the zone in the Newton Junction area. Doggett asked if the board wanted to include the large tract of land between the railroad tracks and the town line within the village district zone.
McCarthy stated that there was a significant amount of town and conservation property within this tract of land.
Groth stated that leaving this large tract out of the zone and undeveloped would provide a pleasing 'green' buffer for the district.
Doggett suggested eliminating this tract of land from the borders of the district.
Gibbs suggested extending the zone beyond the side of the school property opposite the Newton Junction intersection since the property on the other side of the school was within the zone.
Doggett stated that having a business located near a school entrance could create problems.
Gibbs agreed this situation could be a hindrance to school operations.
White and McCarthy suggested eliminating the property next to the school from the village district border.
The board came to a consensus to use larger version of borders as drawn on the area map to define the village district zone around Newton Junction with areas behind railroad tracks and near schools excluded from the zone.
Doggett asked the board to give its opinions concerning the zone in the Central Main Street/Town Hall area. Doggett asked if the properties on the northern end of the zone that have frontage on Main Street and large amounts of land extending back from the road and land behind town hall with no frontage on Main Street should be included in the zone.
White stated that the town of East Kingston drew the border of the zone a certain number of feet off the road in a similar situation.
Groth stated that running a zone line through parcels, effectively splitting the parcels between zones, is problematic.
Doggett suggested that the large areas of land behind the northern parcels be kept in the zone borders and the land behind town hall be excluded. He also suggested that a large amount of land on Highland Street be trimmed from the zone borders. The zone should only include the properties on the corner of Highland and Main Streets.
Groth expressed his concern that the large tracts of land behind Main Street included in the zone could be developed as a strip mall or other undesirable use in the future. The board needed to include restrictive language in the zoning ordinance to limit unwanted development.
Doggett explained that the owner/occupancy requirement will eliminate this concern. He agreed that all the proposed village districts will need extreme diligence by the board to prevent unwanted types of development.
McCarthy suggested placing Putnam property beside the Peanut Trail within the zone.
The board came to a consensus to use the borders as drawn on the area map to define the village district zone around Central Main Street/Town Hall with property behind town hall and properties on Highland Street not bordering Main Street excluded and Putnam property included.
McCarthy brought to the board's attention that the town is participating in a mapping test project conducted by UNH. Any work conducted during 2010 is free of charge. Work conducted after 2010 will require payment. Any types of overlays to the town maps that the board requires should be submitted to UNH. UNH has stated that any work that the town submits UNH will try to complete.
b. Road design study proposal. Doggett asked Groth about the feasibility of the proposed completion dates and deadlines.
Groth explained that the RPC expects to obtain the opinion of an experienced engineer to corroborate the feasibility of the proposed deadlines with regards to scope of work and budget constraints. If mapping work proposed in the study is completed by UNH, then more money and time could be spent on road design.
Groth reviewed the primary objective of the proposal to explore the feasibility of incorporating a roundabout or small traffic circle at the Rowe's Corner intersection. This objective was determined (during board meetings with Plan NH) to be necessary to support proposed village district concept and traffic safety concerns of this area. Groth also outlined the tasks and expectations of the chosen engineering consultant.
Doggett pointed out that the proposal required the consultant to present two alternative solutions to the primary plan. He asked if there was any flexibility in this requirement. Due to budget and time constraints, the board may not want to consider or have work done on additional alternatives that it deems unacceptable. The board needs to be specific about acceptable alternatives early in the process, not after work is done.
Gibbs stated that it was important that all the roads that enter the Rowe's Corner intersection be brought to the same grade (i.e. level) with retaining walls and sidewalks on both sides.
Groth explained that it would be possible to negotiate and communicate with the consultant throughout all stages of the design process.
In order to have a better control and understanding on pricing and timing, Doggett suggested that Groth and the board should assume two options (primary and one alternative) for the project.
Doggett expressed concern that the proposed timeline did not allow enough time between concept presentation and project completion. In order for the board to adequately review, discuss, and view possible public presentation of design proposal, the final design report should be delivered to the board by June 15, 2011. Doggett and Groth established specific dates of deadline for each step of the design process to accomplish this goal.
Doggett and Groth established dates for the design consultant selection process.
December 27, 2010 – Consultant submissions due
December 28, 2010 – Board meeting to review submissions
January 14, 2011 – Consultant selection
Groth released at 8:10 pm.
3. Other Board Business:
a. White moved to accept the minutes of September 28 and October 12 public meetings. Second by Gibbs.
Discussion of motion – Gibbs requested that wording in the October 12 minutes be changed. Original wording as follows: "Gibbs and Doggett stated that this situation will lead to excessive traffic near the homes of the Lot 27-3 condominium owners." Gibbs requested that the word homes be substituted with the word businesses. The board came to a consensus to change the wording.
Motion carried unanimously.
b. Gibbs moved to pay the NPREA manifest amount of $1389.23. Second by White. Motion carried unanimously.
c. Proposed 2011 Fiscal Budget. Gibbs recognized that the board had already overspent the postage budget for 2010 with three months still left in the fiscal year. He suggested that the board move funds from under spent lines into the postage line for 2011.
The board came to a consensus to revise the 2011 Fiscal Budget by subtracting $100.00 from the telephone and office supplies lines and adding $200.00 to the postage line.
McCarthy recognized some lines (i.e. telephone and equipment expenses) in the 2010 budget that had substantial positive balances. She asked the board for its justification for the large amount of funds in these lines that went unused.
Doggett explained that board business has declined in 2010. Therefore, the usage rates on telephone and copier lines are down. With more projects in the future, those usage rates may increase. Also, the board has no control over the telephone and equipment expenses lines. The budget for these funds is controlled by town government contracts.
McCarthy recognized that the board spent only $45.00 out of $5000.00 on the consultant fees line. She asked if it was necessary to allot $5000.00 for this budget line.
Doggett explained that, due to over expenditures of this budget line in previous years, the board made a concerted effort to control consultant expenses in 2010. However, the funds are still needed to avoid possible exposure to unforeseen incurred expenses in the future. Also, these funds will be used as matching funds for a targeted block grant before the end of 2010.
d. Board procedures. With regards to notice of decisions, White asked if there is a process in place to ensure that conditions on approvals are met by developers.
Doggett explained that he was working on drafting rules and procedures for board administrative functions with the previous administrative assistant. The board needs to authorize hours for the new administrative assistant to draft office rules and procedures.
White stated that she will provide rules and procedures from other towns as a guideline.
McCarthy explained that she cannot attend November 9 meeting. She will ask Selectman Raymond Thayer to attend as the ex-officio.
4. Adjourn: The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
Rick Milner
Interim Administrative Assistant
Newton Planning Board
| 
