[0:01] Welcome to the Town of Dairy Planning Board meeting
[0:03] for June 17th, 2026.
[0:06] We start our meetings with the Pledge of Allegiance,
[0:08] so if you would please join
[0:09] me. I pledge Allegiance.
[0:14] Allegiance to the flag
[0:15] of the United States of America in the Republic wishes
[0:19] stands, one Nation under God, indivisible,
[0:22] with liberty and justice.
[0:30] I think the staff
[0:31] and members are well aware of the emergency exit,
[0:33] so I will wave that.
[0:36] Notification of the planning board
[0:39] voluntarily continues to offer remote participation.
[0:42] Any member of the planning board participates remotely,
[0:45] vote shall be by roll call.
[0:47] In order to attend this meeting remotely using a computer
[0:51] or a smart device like a phone visit www
[0:55] zoom us.
[0:57] Enter our meeting ID
[0:59] seven five four six six three nine one two.
[1:03] Or you may call in on the phone for audio only
[1:07] by calling 6 4 6 5 5 8 8 6 5 6.
[1:12] Same meeting ID 7 5 4 6 6 3 9 1 2.
[1:17] And if you have technical difficulties getting in remotely,
[1:20] please call
[1:21] (603) 845-5585.
[1:26] If you're on the phone and you wish to speak, hit start nine
[1:30] to request to be recognized.
[1:32] And once you have been recognized, hit star six
[1:35] to unmute yourself.
[1:38] I'll now introduce the members
[1:39] and staff who are present tonight
[1:41] to my far right is alternate, Mr.
[1:44] Mousy, good evening, planning Director at Ms. Robo.
[1:47] Good evening Planning intern Ms.
[1:48] Bur Planning Clerk, Ms. Wilson
[1:53] Town Council Liaison, Mr. Chase.
[1:55] Good evening, member Worcester Wood.
[1:57] Good evening, member Mr. Menini.
[1:59] Good evening, Vice chair. Mr. O'Connor.
[2:02] Good evening to my far left is Mr.
[2:05] Preventer, who's coordinator for Dairy Cam
[2:07] and makes all the wonderful technology happen.
[2:10] Good evening Town Administrator Representative Mr. Ello.
[2:14] Good evening and member Mr. Pier. Good evening.
[2:19] We are missing a couple folks. So I'm gonna ask Mr.
[2:21] Moey to sit for Mr. Fishman and I'm gonna ask Mr.
[2:26] Pier if he would be willing to act as acting secretary.
[2:38] First item on our agenda is an item at escrow.
[2:42] Item number 26 dash 21 for Glenco Construction.
[2:47] Okay, so this is for the subdivision
[2:52] of 3 43 Island Pond Road.
[2:54] The developer is Glencoe Construction.
[2:56] This is a cash escrow. Parcel ID is map 17 lot two.
[3:01] The request is to approve a final release
[3:04] of cash escrow in the amount of $4,945.
[3:08] For the above noted project, the amount to retain is zero.
[3:12] Mr. Chairman, you Second
[3:15] Moved by O'Connor, second by Pier to accept
[3:19] the escrow as presented.
[3:21] Mr. Chase? Yes. Mr. Wood? Yes. Mr. Menini? Yes.
[3:25] Mr. O'Connor? Yes. Mr. Mousy? Yes. Mr. Ello? Yes. Mr. Pier?
[3:30] Yes. Chair votes? Yes.
[3:32] Next item is the approval of minutes for June 3rd, 2026.
[3:36] Has everyone had a chance to review them?
[3:39] Are there any errors or omissions?
[3:43] Mr. Chase, do you know formally
[3:45] or move to accept as written? Second.
[3:47] Okay. Move to accept. As written by O'Connor.
[3:49] Seconded by Pier. Mr. Chase? Yes. Mr. Wood? Yes. Mr.
[3:54] Menini? Yes. Mr. O'Connor?
[3:56] I'm abstain. Absent.
[3:58] Okay. Abstain. Mr. Zy? Yes. And Mr. Ello?
[4:03] I'll abstain as well. Abstain and Mr. Pier? Yes. Here.
[4:06] Votes Yes. Minutes were accepted.
[4:11] Next item is correspondence.
[4:14] All right, we had two pieces
[4:15] of correspondence in our packets this week.
[4:17] First one is from the town of Beau having a public hearing
[4:21] reference to a new communications
[4:22] tower that they're putting up.
[4:24] Public hearing is gonna be on June 18th,
[4:26] 7:00 PM at their town office building.
[4:30] The second piece that we had was from Wyndham.
[4:33] They met and declared a regional impact reference
[4:36] to the construction
[4:38] of a sports zone style bubble in Wyndham.
[4:43] Thank you. Under other business we have a first
[4:48] request for extension on approval
[4:51] for parcel ID 0 5 0 6 9 18 Cemetery Road.
[4:56] Sharon l Butterfield. Trustee.
[4:59] Okay. So for this one,
[5:01] the planning board approved a four lot subdivision
[5:03] for Sharon l Butterfield revocable trust on
[5:06] January 7th of this year.
[5:08] The conditions of approval allowed six months
[5:10] to meet the requirements.
[5:12] The applicant has been working diligently
[5:14] to secure the required state approvals
[5:16] and is currently working with DES
[5:18] to obtain the state subdivision approval.
[5:20] The applicant is requesting an additional six months
[5:23] to secure the necessary permits into
[5:25] establish construction escrow.
[5:27] Current approval expires July 7th.
[5:31] The recommendation would be to grant a six month extension
[5:33] and the new expiration date would be January 7th
[5:36] of 27th. Okay.
[5:37] I have one, I have one question.
[5:40] Yes, I should know this, but I
[5:43] maybe didn't listen well enough during all the training.
[5:47] Why does the state get involved in subdivision approval?
[5:51] If you subdivide a lot
[5:53] and it results in a lot with less than five acres
[5:57] the state needs, if it is going to involve a septic system,
[6:01] the state needs to approve it because
[6:03] It's, oh, I understand they need septic approvals,
[6:06] but they're not actually approving the
[6:07] subdivision of land. They
[6:09] Approve the, they don't approve the subdivision like we
[6:12] do, but they, they approve as part of that,
[6:16] they approved the subdivision to say
[6:18] that they agree there's enough acreage as proposed
[6:23] to sustain septic systems which have
[6:25] their own separate permits.
[6:27] Yeah. Okay. Mr. Mr. Mr. McConnell
[6:31] Over the past year, I think you noticed
[6:35] Is your, is your mic.
[6:36] Oh.
[6:39] If you notice over the past year, many of the people
[6:43] that come in front of us have basically said the same thing.
[6:47] That they're always waiting for DES. They're way behind.
[6:50] I know they're understaffed and everything,
[6:53] but I can concur with the fact away.
[6:55] So many people come back and ask for extensions.
[6:59] Wasn't there a an initiative to
[7:03] Expand That?
[7:04] Expand? Was that only for, for the
[7:09] alteration of terrain permits
[7:11] or was that for all DES approvals must be
[7:15] 60 days. Yeah.
[7:16] The, the primary, the primary one was the alteration
[7:19] of terrain permit to kind of amend that process.
[7:22] There was a lot of back and forth with fish and game
[7:25] and conservation.
[7:27] Yeah. In, yeah.
[7:28] So there, there was a lot of back
[7:30] and forth between the departments
[7:32] and they understood based on developer feedback
[7:35] that they needed to really streamline their process.
[7:38] So when Governor AOT came in,
[7:40] that was one of her directives.
[7:41] And so they did look at that.
[7:43] They're also looking at other departments.
[7:46] I haven't done a deep dive into some of the wetlands things,
[7:51] but I know wetlands permitting has changed.
[7:53] A OT has changed there.
[7:55] There's very, they're tightening up the requirements
[7:58] and the times that they have to approve things.
[8:02] Okay. Well hopefully this will get better. Yeah.
[8:04] Thank you Mr. Lenner. Anyone else have comments? Ions?
[8:08] Okay. Motion. Oh,
[8:13] Sorry Mr.
[8:14] Chair. I moved to Grant a six month extension of approval.
[8:18] The new EXP expiration date will be
[8:21] January 7th, 2027.
[8:26] Moved by O'Connor, a second by Pier
[8:28] to grant the requested extension. Mr. Chase?
[8:33] Yes. Mr. Wood? Yes. Mr. Menini? Yes. Mr. O'Connor? Yes.
[8:37] Mr. Mazi? Yes. Mr. Ello? Yes. Mr. Palantier? Yes.
[8:41] And chair votes? Yes. Next we have a fourth extension
[8:46] request on an approval for parcel id.
[8:48] 3 5 0 1 1 dash
[8:51] 0 1 14 Folsom Road.
[8:55] Stinson Hills. LLC.
[8:57] Okay, thank you. The planning board approved a 28,800
[9:01] square foot multi-building medical office site plan in
[9:05] February of 2020.
[9:07] The board has since granted three
[9:08] extensions of the approval.
[9:10] The current approval expires on July 15th of this year.
[9:14] The applicant has met all of the conditions of approval
[9:16] with the exception of establishing escrow.
[9:20] Historically, the board has not been asked
[9:22] to consider a fourth extension.
[9:23] However, in this particular case,
[9:25] there are some circumstances that are
[9:27] beyond the control of the applicant.
[9:29] The alteration of terrain permit is still in effect
[9:32] and won't expire until 2029.
[9:35] The property is subject to New Hampshire,
[9:37] DOT takings for the exit four.
[9:39] A project which we're all aware is under active construction
[9:41] right now for contract B.
[9:44] When the project was originally approved, it was expected
[9:47] that contract B would be completed
[9:50] and all construction along the frontage of the project
[9:55] Would be finalized so that they'd know exactly
[9:58] where their entrance would be
[10:00] and they could amend their plan accordingly.
[10:02] The DOT project was delayed.
[10:05] DOT also took a small portion of the property
[10:07] and secured temporary slope easements
[10:09] for construction purposes.
[10:11] And those easements will not expire until 2030 or one year
[10:15] after the completion of the four A project.
[10:18] Currently there's an active roadway construction occurring
[10:21] at the access to the property, which would make development
[10:23] of the project problematic.
[10:25] And for these extenuating circumstances,
[10:28] the applicant is asking the board to consider their request
[10:30] and we would recommend that you grant a 24 month extension
[10:34] to allow completion of the construction project. Four
[10:36] Months.
[10:37] Okay. Any comments, questions?
[10:40] Yeah, I'd like to make, like to make a comment
[10:42] and one is that DOT was also going through a lawsuit
[10:46] that took well over a year to resolve.
[10:48] Yes. And so that's put them behind.
[10:52] In addition to that, some of the acquisitions
[10:54] of when I was a state rep at the times, some of the issues
[10:57] with the delay in accumulating
[11:00] the property to be able to get in.
[11:01] So I think to actually almost two years
[11:03] behind schedule right now, if I try
[11:06] to go on their website today that it's not updated.
[11:10] Okay. So I would concur to go with the, the possibility
[11:14] of the 24 month extension for approval.
[11:19] No other comments, then let's have a motion.
[11:22] Okay. Mr. Chair, I recommend that
[11:24] to grant a 24 month extension of approval.
[11:28] The new expiration date will be
[11:30] July 15th, 2028.
[11:33] And I so move
[11:35] Moved by O'Connor, seconded by Pier
[11:37] to grant the extension as requested.
[11:40] Mr. Chase? Yes. Mr. Wood? Yes. Mr. Menini? Yes.
[11:44] Mr. O'Connor? Yes. Mr. Mazi? Yes. Mr. Ello? Yes. Mr. Paler?
[11:49] Yes. And chair votes? Yes.
[11:52] And last item under administrative business is to review
[11:56] and prioritize set of planning board goals,
[12:00] which you have all seen before.
[12:03] And there's a,
[12:05] a large printout in package.
[12:09] So are we proposing that all
[12:13] of this fit in this current year?
[12:16] Well, I guess that that's what I was asking the board.
[12:19] Do you want to wanna do an aggressive schedule?
[12:21] We can do it.
[12:23] So the timeframe, does that mean
[12:26] how long you think it will take to complete from
[12:30] initial drafting to getting it to the council?
[12:34] Yeah, so short term would probably be
[12:36] about three to three.
[12:38] Three months or so.
[12:40] Okay. So members
[12:45] have reviewed this, I assumed have some
[12:48] thoughts and preferences?
[12:52] No. Okay. Take it over on the side.
[12:59] You guys like it as is?
[13:00] Well, I mean, first of all,
[13:04] did CBD amendments, didn't we actually complete that?
[13:07] We're do. Oh, we could delete that
[13:09] because we are taking care of those tonight.
[13:13] Right. With regard
[13:17] to number two, is this
[13:21] based on unexpected or, or even on enacted legislation?
[13:26] It is not. We, I had brought this to the attention
[13:30] of the board about a month or so ago.
[13:32] What we're finding is that on lots in areas
[13:37] where we did not have water
[13:39] or sewer available in the MDR
[13:42] or the LMDR, you know,
[13:46] we had our normal frontages and lot sizes.
[13:48] What we're finding is that water
[13:52] and sewer is now moving into those areas.
[13:54] And the ZBA is being asked to approve lot size
[13:59] reductions and frontage reductions
[14:01] because there's like services available normally
[14:05] lot size reductions
[14:07] because there's, especially with water going through,
[14:11] they don't need the room to maintain the well radius
[14:16] between the well and the septic.
[14:18] So in the ZBA has been approving a lot of those requests.
[14:22] So we're, it's probably a good time to look at the zoning
[14:27] and see if it makes sense to look at that again
[14:31] and, and see what
[14:34] Sure.
[14:35] Yeah. I mean off the top of my head, if, if if water
[14:39] and sewer triggers through a smaller
[14:44] area requirement for a lot than maybe some of those parcels
[14:48] where that service exists actually
[14:49] belong in a different district.
[14:51] That too. Yeah. Any, any other thoughts right
[14:54] Here, Mr. O'Connor?
[14:56] Yes. One of my thoughts is the fact that not to talk
[14:59] to made me Mr. Chase is that with the new development
[15:04] of expanding the water flow from here down through Windham
[15:07] and, and the location that
[15:10] we were also gonna now include sewer, I believe that's part
[15:13] of some of the future plans.
[15:16] That whole Ryan's Hill
[15:17] and then going off to another section.
[15:19] So I think if something would behoove us to
[15:22] add this area into the, the scope,
[15:27] Yeah, it would.
[15:28] And also in the second phase of that
[15:33] expanded water, we'll they'll also propose to add a
[15:38] through storage tank onto Warner Hill Road.
[15:40] So it would be adding some water out
[15:45] in that area also, plus enhancing what is already there.
[15:48] Some of the community wells and such. Yep.
[15:51] So I think all of those areas
[15:54] that are gonna be encumbered in
[15:55] that second phase should be looked at.
[16:01] And so that seems like a reasonable thing to look at is,
[16:05] is the proposal for that to be the second work item up
[16:09] for to be addressed?
[16:12] We could, we could do it.
[16:15] We could reprioritize any of these.
[16:17] That's really what I was looking for from the board.
[16:19] You know, did you agree these are things we should work on?
[16:22] Is this the right order for them?
[16:24] And then who wanted to take lead on it?
[16:27] Okay. That seems like it has
[16:31] potential impact.
[16:33] And if we're seeing a lot of variances,
[16:36] we probably should address that in the fairly short term.
[16:41] The other one that in number three
[16:46] state law requires that we have a, a chapter
[16:50] in our zoning ordinance for workforce housing.
[16:53] We don't, we have workforce housing terms
[16:55] and conditions sprinkled through out the entire document.
[16:58] And the planning director and I chatted about this
[17:02] and the thought was to create a non-normative,
[17:05] and by that I mean it doesn't actually change the ordinance.
[17:08] It's basically an index.
[17:09] A guide to where you find all the parts
[17:12] of the workforce housing puzzle in our ordinance
[17:16] by chapter in verse.
[17:18] So it, it at least complies with the spirit of the,
[17:22] the state law without having to do a lot
[17:26] of heavy lifting with redrafting.
[17:27] The, the zoning zoning ordinance itself.
[17:30] So first, is that a reasonable idea to do?
[17:36] Any thoughts on that? Can,
[17:39] Can the town still be held accountable
[17:41] for the way it is right now versus a,
[17:43] a solid ordinance just for work housing?
[17:47] Well, a court could answer that.
[17:52] We don't wanna do that. But I, I think that
[17:57] this would certainly be a, a first step if we, if we had
[18:01] to rewrite the zoning ordinance
[18:02] and create a separate chapter just for workforce housing,
[18:05] this would get our ducks in a row.
[18:08] Or it might be that, you know, the legal system says, well,
[18:12] you know, people can figure out what, what,
[18:15] what you've got from this guide.
[18:19] And that does not say that all of the opportunities
[18:23] that everyone would like to see
[18:24] for workforce housing are provided.
[18:27] But at least it's, it's clear what we have
[18:31] and it would not be, it would not be a lot of work.
[18:36] My only hesitancy is I have no idea how
[18:40] to create a non-normative, you know, appendix
[18:43] to the zoning ordinance.
[18:45] 'cause ordinances are usually local municipal law.
[18:50] This would be a guidebook.
[18:52] So I don't know where we'd put it. That's my only concern.
[18:57] But I think we may have, and I can remember
[18:59] and maybe Liz can help out, when Judge Sheros was here,
[19:03] they used to, every so many months he would tell us
[19:06] where we stood as far as the amount of workforce housing.
[19:10] 'cause if anybody was to ask is dairy in compliance
[19:13] and dairy would far exceeded the compliance back on then.
[19:17] But I don't have the math on
[19:18] how he had done that at the time.
[19:21] And I don't know whether lista,
[19:22] 'cause that was quite a few years
[19:23] Ago.
[19:24] He obtained the numbers from Southern
[19:25] New Hampshire Planning Commission.
[19:27] So it came from it.
[19:28] So we would, we would obtain those numbers now
[19:31] from American Community Survey.
[19:33] George used to pull them, I think from the census in
[19:36] Southern New Hampshire planning's estimates.
[19:39] But American Community Survey kind
[19:42] of tracks more up-to-date data annually.
[19:46] So we could, we could pull numbers from there.
[19:49] I think we're still, we're still on track
[19:53] and I think we're still trending a little bit higher than
[19:56] other communities with regard to affordable housing.
[20:02] Okay. Thank you. Yeah.
[20:04] So I guess
[20:05] before we launch this, maybe we should actually ask council,
[20:10] Hey, we're supposed
[20:11] to have a separate chapter in the zoning ordinance.
[20:14] All the issues are already covered in
[20:16] different pieces of it.
[20:17] Would, would an index guide be a sufficient substitute
[20:22] for rewriting it into a single chapter?
[20:26] See what, see what they say.
[20:27] Alright, I'll reach out
[20:29] Because I, I am still a little dubious as to
[20:33] how we would adopt it.
[20:35] 'cause it's not really part of the ordinance.
[20:38] It's, well, I guess you could put it as an appendix,
[20:40] but it basically just an index, this topic, this page,
[20:44] this section, this topic, this page,
[20:46] this section sort of thing.
[20:47] Okay. Okay. Is what we were thinking.
[20:52] All I will, I will do that.
[21:01] So we've talked about solar requirement
[21:04] and I guess we all agree it's a little outdated.
[21:12] It, it didn't cover ground mounted
[21:16] and it didn't, you know, give specific directions
[21:19] for roof mounted and the, the, the 15 K is
[21:23] what kilowatts Yes.
[21:25] Yes. It doesn't seem to me that the water output ought
[21:28] to be the threshold for, for land use planning.
[21:31] But hey, maybe square footage
[21:36] of footprint or something like that.
[21:38] We can, we can look at that.
[21:40] I think it, when we originally did our language,
[21:45] I think we drew that from John would remember.
[21:48] Do we draw that from state guidance
[21:51] when we wrote our solar ordinance?
[21:54] I think, I think that some of the language came from there.
[21:57] But we can definitely look at it.
[21:58] And so, and,
[21:59] and I agree that, you know, it should be something
[22:01] that is more dimensional.
[22:05] Well, there is one avenue we could take Mr.
[22:08] Chair is the fact that the original sole ordinance
[22:11] that we have, majority of it was taken from the state.
[22:15] And I was on that particular committee
[22:18] with a few other people from conservation so forth.
[22:23] There was a potential that we could have,
[22:26] have an organization in the state of New Hampshire
[22:30] that's looking at rewriting all the, so,
[22:32] and they had reviewed all of dairies last year.
[22:36] But at the time, the code enforcement, which is how
[22:40] that was leaning to it, didn't have the time to be able
[22:43] to review all of that.
[22:46] So it's an opportunity.
[22:47] 'cause I actually got a email from the woman
[22:51] that's in charge of the clean energy program.
[22:53] Yeah, I've seen those. She's trying to, so
[22:55] She's, I I don't, I don't know whether that it's, it's,
[23:00] she's trying to clean up a project, trying to make a sale.
[23:02] I don't, I don't know what she's trying to achieve.
[23:04] But if indeed it is
[23:09] split between land use and,
[23:11] and code enforcement, then we can't really, you know,
[23:17] Direct code Enforcement.
[23:18] We can't direct the, the, the,
[23:20] the code enforcement department as to their priorities.
[23:23] So I think the changes we were talking about were only those
[23:26] that, you know, for example, when we,
[23:31] when we had the solar farm on the roof of the,
[23:34] the parking structure at Abbott Court, we had no idea how
[23:37] to review it.
[23:38] We reviewed it as if it was a sign
[23:40] because we had no specific language for architectural
[23:45] features of solar farms.
[23:47] So that would be within our, our jurisdiction.
[23:56] And I'm not saying that the rest of it shouldn't be,
[23:59] we could encourage our, our brethren in,
[24:01] in code enforcement to take a look at it.
[24:03] But that's long term.
[24:06] Okay. And it's something I wouldn't think would take
[24:09] too long to review of maybe a couple of months.
[24:12] Three, two or three public hearings.
[24:16] Okay.
[24:23] So update the timeline on non-conforming use.
[24:26] Where did, where did that come from?
[24:29] That came from me. So the whole purpose of
[24:35] when we look at uses and we remove uses from zones, it's
[24:39] because we don't really want those uses
[24:43] in the zone anymore.
[24:45] And I think allowing something,
[24:51] if the use lapses
[24:53] and then you have 365 days to reestablish it.
[24:58] Like we're just promoting the continuation
[25:00] of non-conforming uses by allowing that 12 month period.
[25:04] So I would ask that we reduce that down to, you know,
[25:09] maybe three to six months or
[25:12] Six months.
[25:13] Well, I mean it's the same period.
[25:14] If your, your house burns and it's a non-conforming house
[25:17] and you get to reconstructed on the same footprint,
[25:20] That would, that falls under a,
[25:22] a slightly different provision
[25:23] and not that's non-conforming structures
[25:27] as opposed to uses.
[25:29] You don't think a habit dasher
[25:31] is gonna come in anytime soon?
[25:33] We would probably no habit dasher,
[25:35] but I think, well we'd probably, we'd probably say that was
[25:39] retail sales at this point.
[25:41] Yeah. 'cause we've combined all those uses under that.
[25:43] I gotcha. That one thing.
[25:46] But say for example, you have a, in one
[25:50] of our residential, well no, that would be a bad example.
[26:01] Hmm. I'm trying to think of a specific use
[26:02] where we were like, nope, remove it.
[26:05] Well, I, I know that when we make changes
[26:08] to uses in districts, we,
[26:10] we think we are doing the right thing.
[26:12] Typically it's
[26:14] after some sort of public input could be just a public
[26:18] hearing or it could be the extensive, you know, charettes
[26:21] and whatnot that we did for the CBD
[26:25] or for the, the two four A zones, the industrial two
[26:29] and neighborhood commercial and whatnot.
[26:31] Right. But on the other hand,
[26:36] grandfathering and land use rates are kind
[26:38] of a sacro stat thing.
[26:41] So I'm a little
[26:45] anxious about remove, shortening the,
[26:50] the duration of grandfathering just for uses
[26:54] that we've decided to remove in a, in a zoning revision.
[26:57] I don't, I don't know whether that's
[27:02] I raising any constitutional issues,
[27:04] but that's kind of where my mind is going.
[27:08] Anyone else have thoughts pro or con?
[27:12] No. If we could take a look at the list
[27:14] and if it makes sense to, to purge him.
[27:16] We, we, we should. I mean, I get what you're saying.
[27:20] If it's a, if it's a use that we've got in place
[27:24] but we don't want any more of it, that's one thing.
[27:26] But if you are looking at the list of permitted uses,
[27:28] then it doesn't make sense.
[27:30] And I don't know, I haven't really looked at 'em.
[27:33] So, but if they're,
[27:36] and I'm just using it as an example video store.
[27:38] Well, they're on no more video stores.
[27:41] So you can purge that kind of stuff.
[27:43] No, no, I'm not talking about changing the ordinance
[27:45] because a use is no longer
[27:49] important or utilized.
[27:51] I'm, I'm talking about you got a video store,
[27:55] we zone it out, you're running it for six months
[27:59] and then you have a fire
[28:02] and then you, you're gonna rebuild it
[28:04] and you're gonna continue to run your store.
[28:06] Should you have a smaller grandfathering time
[28:10] to restore that business.
[28:11] Just because we had recently enacted to take it out
[28:15] of the allowed uses as opposed to other natural
[28:20] ways that that might happen.
[28:23] Okay. So, so I'm thinking more for an example,
[28:26] like say in our neighborhood commercial district,
[28:28] we had an auto sales use in neighborhood commercial
[28:32] when we redistrict
[28:34] and we created that district, we looked really hard at
[28:37] what we wanted the character to look like there.
[28:40] And if someone had that on their property
[28:45] and then they abandoned the use, anyone
[28:50] coming in could reestablish that use within a year.
[28:56] But that, I guess my point is that
[29:00] when we make zoning changes like that where we're trying to,
[29:05] to save or maintain a certain character
[29:09] or doing something like that and we specifically remove the
[29:12] use because it's contrary to what we're, what the vision was
[29:15] or what the town wanted or what the residents wanted.
[29:18] I think we need, it would just, it,
[29:22] it's hard because sometimes we have uses
[29:25] that are are coming in that are just not suitable
[29:28] and they are, you know, that wouldn't be suitable.
[29:32] Like to have someone come in on the 364th day
[29:35] and be like, yep, I'm, I'm,
[29:37] I'm bringing in my six used cars on this, you know,
[29:41] 0.25 acre lot
[29:42] because we wanted to, we specifically said, no,
[29:45] we don't want that there.
[29:48] So that, that's really what
[29:49] I'm kind of trying, trying to say. I understand
[29:50] That's the, that's the hand of government
[29:51] running enforce a vision.
[29:52] Yeah. I'm kind of think from the point of view of a,
[29:55] a businessman who maybe yeah, it's a sole proprietorship and
[30:00] and that's their retirement nest egg to sell their operating
[30:04] business and move into retirement in Florida, for example.
[30:08] Sure. And maybe they have some health issues so that the,
[30:11] the business is not actually operating
[30:14] but is, is actively listed for sale.
[30:18] Sometimes it may take a year to sell a business.
[30:21] If we decrease the time allowed
[30:26] to culminate that sale, we are effectively
[30:32] emptying that poor guy's retirement piggy bank. Okay.
[30:37] It, So I, I think we have to think about those,
[30:39] those potential side effects as well.
[30:41] Okay. It's just a, these are suggestions
[30:43] and the board doesn't have to take any of them.
[30:46] So we could take it off the list if
[30:47] there's a strong objection.
[30:49] I mean, now that you bring that up and,
[30:50] and we had some discussion about water
[30:52] and sew going up Ryan Hill.
[30:54] Now, one of the purposes that we brought water
[30:56] and sewer up there is to change
[30:58] that commercial landscape a little bit
[31:01] because everyone knows that's, if you run up Ryan's hill,
[31:05] you see a lot of these car lots
[31:06] because that's, that will go, that's probably the highest
[31:09] and best use there.
[31:11] But when you bring water
[31:12] and sewer in, that's a whole different ballgame.
[31:16] You know, and, and I mean I think it benefits those people,
[31:19] those business owners that they could resell
[31:21] that property into a higher and better use.
[31:24] Oh, absolutely. I mean I, I,
[31:27] I'm a hundred percent in favor of the carrot approach to
[31:31] incentivized folks to use more appropriate uses.
[31:35] I'm just a little leery of the stick.
[31:38] Especially in a case where there's a pending in retirement,
[31:42] maybe some health issues.
[31:43] They, they have it actively listed with a business broker
[31:45] to sell it as an operating business
[31:47] or at least a business with a book of customers.
[31:51] How long that should go on, I don't know,
[31:56] would be nice to get information from,
[31:58] from somebody in that industry.
[32:00] You know how Yeah. If, if you haven't sold your business
[32:02] after six months, is it never gonna
[32:04] sell? I don't know. Yeah,
[32:05] It, it, yeah.
[32:06] I guess it would depend on the market at the time.
[32:08] And I guess, you know, in that case, you know, if,
[32:11] if they were in a case like that, if they were trying
[32:14] to sell it and it was 13 months later as the,
[32:19] the way the ordinance reads now,
[32:21] we would send them for a variance.
[32:22] Yeah. Yeah. I mean they do have to be rules
[32:26] And that would be part of their hardship
[32:27] Case.
[32:30] So Yeah, I guess that's, we're just asking
[32:32] to shorten that a little bit.
[32:33] We can take it off the table.
[32:34] Well, let's put it at the bottom of the list
[32:36] and then maybe give it some more thought,
[32:39] a little more research on what other communities do.
[32:43] I don't want dairy to be the,
[32:45] the bad guys in, in the state, but,
[32:47] Okay.
[32:48] So I'll adjust it to the timeframe would be long term
[32:50] and a low priority.
[32:53] Okay. Okay. I I won't take it off.
[32:55] I wouldn't take it off the list, but we No,
[32:57] But we'll, we'll make it a lesser priority. You
[32:59] Should probably have a stronger
[33:00] consensus on it before we move forward.
[33:01] Well, I'm a little bit concerned you're moving it from
[33:03] short term to long term
[33:06] if you're gonna bump it out to study it more.
[33:08] Maybe midterm. Maybe midterm.
[33:10] Okay. Well it's not really, so I felt long term meant
[33:14] how long it took to execute it.
[33:17] Priority is when we, when we get to it, right?
[33:19] Yeah. Yeah. So we're not changing the timeframe,
[33:21] we're just changing the priority.
[33:23] Okay. We can do that. Okay.
[33:28] And if we, you know, get to the bottom
[33:29] of the list, we get to the bottom of the list.
[33:31] Yay. Okay. Yay us.
[33:38] The next one is, is Tiny home cottage court
[33:40] ordinance or requirements?
[33:45] Well, I mean, this is topical.
[33:49] Everyone in the state is champion championing
[33:53] housing opportunities.
[33:56] So it's probably time for us to take a look at this.
[33:58] Although there are probably some members of the board
[34:00] who remember when we tried to do cluster zoning
[34:03] and it got Yeah, we got pummeled.
[34:07] Yeah. So,
[34:09] But the interesting thing is, as time goes along,
[34:12] like back in the eighties, early nineties,
[34:15] everyone wanted a three acre wat they
[34:17] didn't wanna see their neighbor.
[34:18] Now you're looking at subdivisions
[34:19] because the cost of land is so expensive,
[34:22] you're seeing these new subdivisions with,
[34:24] you can see the homes closer, like the traditional seventies
[34:28] style of subdivision.
[34:32] So I think as time changes, you're gonna see that.
[34:35] The interesting thing about the tiny homes is that,
[34:36] you know, I'm interested in looking at, was it,
[34:40] is it Chester or Raymond
[34:42] Chester's having, having a little pushback
[34:45] Community, a lot of back, but I'm just curious as
[34:47] to why the whys of that.
[34:49] Is it because, and there's a lot of this
[34:52] that needs to get done at the,
[34:54] What they said is it was the location of it.
[34:56] It was in a, a historical agricultural district
[35:00] and it would disrupt the, the farming community.
[35:02] It's right near their center.
[35:04] Chester. Although the, the proponent
[35:05] of this is Chester's chance to shed itself of the,
[35:10] the title of poster boy for snob zoning.
[35:13] Yeah. Well, Chester got sued already time a
[35:16] While ago.
[35:17] Yeah. But I thought we were gonna look into maybe doing
[35:20] like a little field trip into a town
[35:23] or city that's actually doing these successfully.
[35:26] Yep. And we can, we can make that part of the,
[35:29] part of that whole process just
[35:30] So we can take a look at it.
[35:31] Because I think I, I,
[35:33] I mean being in the real estate business, I was kind
[35:37] of shocked to find out Rockingham County average home is
[35:39] like 750,000.
[35:41] It's getting crazy.
[35:44] And the younger generation just can't, they,
[35:46] they can't buy anything.
[35:48] And so something's gotta be done. I
[35:50] Do think that anything that is related to
[35:54] affordable homes, whether it's tiny homes
[35:56] or workforce housing or, you know, rent controlled housing
[36:00] or whatever it might be, probably is very topical.
[36:03] And, and we gotta look at it sometime this year, right?
[36:06] Yes. I think
[36:08] Mr.
[36:09] Chair. Yeah, Mr. Go O'Connor. I,
[36:10] I happen to get the copy of the
[36:12] New Hampshire Business Week and that's almost every month.
[36:17] There's a huge article regarding this here.
[36:20] Especially a lot of them, like Dartmouth Hospital,
[36:24] they're building all these tiny houses for their workforce.
[36:28] Took them in Rochester about a year
[36:30] and a half ago, one of the nursing homes,
[36:32] private nursing homes, the guy
[36:34] and his wife developed 30 of the townhouses.
[36:38] In addition to that in the center.
[36:40] He also put in near a kindergarten. He had to, I
[36:45] Thought there was also happening in, in Dover.
[36:48] So those people are thinking outside the box
[36:50] because the, for instance, shortage of nurses, right?
[36:53] So how do you attract the nurses?
[36:55] Because there, there's not enough to go around.
[36:57] So these, these industries
[36:59] and these people are thinking outside the box, okay,
[37:01] we'll we'll actually pay for housing.
[37:03] That's a benefit. You wanna work over here,
[37:06] But the manufacturing, Then you get reduced housing.
[37:08] That's just smart thinking and outside the box thinking.
[37:11] I don't know how that applies to dairy
[37:13] unless Parkland does something.
[37:15] I don't know. And I don't know if
[37:16] there's a need over there, but,
[37:18] But that also includes manufacturing is also getting
[37:22] involved with that too.
[37:24] So you'll see a lot more of that coming forward.
[37:26] Yeah. And child, another, another issue.
[37:29] Yes. Okay.
[37:33] Okay. So I think, I think that and,
[37:35] and the, you know, number three
[37:36] and number six probably we call 'em medium.
[37:41] I would call 'em maybe medium high.
[37:43] That's what I did. Medium different mediums.
[37:46] And then the next one is add requirements
[37:50] for travel trailers and temporary storage
[37:52] to assist code enforcement. What is
[37:54] That?
[37:55] Oh, that was a request from our code enforcement officer.
[37:58] I can work, there are
[38:03] travel trailers that are staying for longer periods of time.
[38:07] People are using them as almost ADUs on the property. I've
[38:11] Seen them in Manchester.
[38:12] And there are also temporary storage containers
[38:15] that are becoming permanent storage containers.
[38:17] But there's no, there's nothing in our ordinance
[38:20] to help with enforcement
[38:22] Now.
[38:23] Hmm. Okay. I see a lot of these pods.
[38:26] And that's what's saying there's actually one
[38:28] off to route 28.
[38:29] You go right past it all the time.
[38:32] And it drives me crazy too.
[38:36] But this was also, I think balancing between us
[38:40] and the planning and also code enforcement.
[38:44] And I know that, that he was pretty busy at the time
[38:46] because there is a committee that's supposed
[38:49] to be established to review all these different locations,
[38:54] which may be distressed or, or have trailers. Because
[38:57] I know they disbanded the,
[38:58] they disbanded the property maintenance committee.
[39:01] Right. Because they had a deal with a couple places
[39:03] on the street parallel to my street.
[39:05] And it took them three years to get them
[39:09] to move that stuff out of there.
[39:11] So I, I guess I'm a little,
[39:15] it seems more like a permitting
[39:17] and code compliance issue than a use issue.
[39:20] 'cause the zoning ordinance is really about uses.
[39:23] I mean, I don't think we would be able to fix it
[39:25] with dimensional requirements.
[39:26] So what else would there be?
[39:29] I know that, if I remember,
[39:31] I'm gonna go back 20 years now in Auburn,
[39:33] but if I remember in Auburn zoning ordinance,
[39:36] we had provisions in there that said travel trailers could
[39:41] be on, you know,
[39:42] you could live in a travel trailer on a property
[39:45] for X number of months and then you couldn't,
[39:48] As long as they don't call it a shed.
[39:50] YY yeah. If you call it a shed now, you're
[39:52] No, no, like travel trailers, like RV's. Right.
[39:55] But the owners are gonna say, no, that's not travel.
[39:57] That's a shed. And then, yeah, so they had, there's
[40:01] that provision and then there was also for temporary storage
[40:05] or the, the pods I guess you wanna call them,
[40:09] or like those freight containers. They those
[40:14] Are everywhere now.
[40:15] Yeah. They could be on the property
[40:17] for like 150 days. They're kind
[40:19] Just pre pre-manufactured structures. Yep,
[40:22] Yep.
[40:23] So they had to be removed
[40:24] after, if they were, if they were on the property,
[40:27] I think it was for 120 days,
[40:29] you could do that without a permit.
[40:31] But anything over 120 days, you needed a building permit
[40:34] for it and it got taxed.
[40:35] But wouldn't that be in the building code?
[40:37] I mean, is that really in the
[40:38] zoning ordinance, is what I'm asking?
[40:39] It was in the zoning ordinance in Auburn.
[40:41] Yeah. Is that the right place to have put it?
[40:45] It's not really a use.
[40:47] Yeah, I mean
[40:49] Story, you're right. Yeah.
[40:50] Going back 20 years. So, you know, but,
[40:52] but this is something that Carrie had asked that we look at
[40:56] and, you know, maybe we could point this back to Carrie
[41:00] and she could come up with the draft language
[41:03] and do the research on it to make sure that it, it's,
[41:06] it's proper, it's constitutional and all of that.
[41:08] Yeah. And that the zoning ordinance is the right place.
[41:10] I I mean, if, if they want to make you take out a building
[41:13] permit in order to buy a storage container, that's fine.
[41:17] That, but that's, that's go, you know,
[41:19] enforcement that's not use
[41:21] Okay.
[41:22] As to using an RV for a
[41:27] permanent residence that's a little more gray,
[41:30] I guess. Yeah, I've seen,
[41:32] I've seen one of those in Manchester on Barwell Road
[41:35] that trailer's the, the travel trailer's been there
[41:38] for at least three years house.
[41:40] And then the travel trailer's right on the side
[41:42] and it's big, it sticks out like a sore thumb.
[41:45] If I was a neighbor, I would not be happy
[41:50] because then you got, then you got issues of septic
[41:53] and all that other stuff, you know?
[41:55] Yeah. But I mean, I don't wanna give people ideas,
[41:58] but supposing you claim, Hey, this rv that's my A DU,
[42:04] Who wants, if it has wheels, it's not an A DUI. Well
[42:08] There's the whole thing about, you know, mobile homes
[42:10] and manufactured housing and premium manufactured housing.
[42:12] In, in the old days you say, well, your home has wheels.
[42:16] It's a trailer. I think there's been some
[42:18] revisions in the laws around that.
[42:19] So
[42:21] By the way, even if you ask
[42:22] for an A DU, you have to have it approved.
[42:24] Right. And then it comes
[42:25] and we have to say it has to tie into septic.
[42:27] You, you, you're going through those processes anyway,
[42:30] side setbacks, all that other stuff.
[42:33] That's how we have control of that.
[42:35] Yes. Well, yeah. But those are,
[42:38] those are not discretionary.
[42:39] Those are, if you can hook up to the water, you can hook up
[42:43] to the sewer, you can hook up to all the utilities you want,
[42:46] then it's a use of, right.
[42:49] It's not a matter of, oh, it's a use of right.
[42:51] For 120 days and then it's gone. You see what I'm saying?
[42:56] I'm just thinking we need
[42:57] to tread carefully given the current legislative
[43:00] environment, given the current laws
[43:03] that have have changed recently,
[43:04] that dairy doesn't get itself in trouble again. Correct.
[43:07] Okay. All right.
[43:10] I'll refer that back to the code enforcement officer.
[43:13] Yeah. Let, Let her come back with something.
[43:14] Okay. We'll do that
[43:20] At a definition of town.
[43:21] We can do that. I mean, that would probably take 30 seconds.
[43:24] I think it's implicit because if it's in the town
[43:28] of dairy zoning ordinance, dairy only has the authority
[43:33] to invoke the town's permission for the town of Derry.
[43:37] So I think it's, it's a, it's a gimme,
[43:39] but I have no problem.
[43:40] But when we talk about front on a town road are in,
[43:43] and it's in our, our regulation, are we talking about
[43:47] IES Road or are we talking about Steads Road
[43:50] or Salems Road or Atkinson Road?
[43:51] Oh, yes, yes. That really needs some clarification.
[43:55] And I guess my question is, if there's access on a,
[44:00] on know a class five maintained highway,
[44:04] what do you care what town it's in?
[44:06] Maybe we don't, I mean,
[44:08] maybe we should actually look at Yeah.
[44:10] If that's the driver, maybe we should figure out what the,
[44:13] the valid public purpose is here, right?
[44:15] Yeah, yeah, maybe. Yeah.
[44:16] I, I think there needs to be some clarification on that
[44:19] because there, there's staff believes when it says town,
[44:23] it means town of Derry.
[44:25] And then we're getting pushback from developers and attorney
[44:29] and they're, and they're saying, no, it means any town,
[44:32] But we don't have jurisdiction of any town
[44:35] In, and this is this.
[44:36] So we go circles with this discussion. Well,
[44:40] This is only gonna be for, for parcels
[44:41] that are near town boundary.
[44:45] Right. For example, you have the house in Derry,
[44:49] but the curb cut is in Windham, for example.
[44:52] And we've had a few, Okay, well that, you know, if, if,
[44:55] if the, the road is sufficient to meet all
[44:58] of the public safety and all the other
[45:00] reasons why we have ordinances that says that you have
[45:03] to have a a, a driver
[45:06] that emps into a Class five highway.
[45:09] It's met no matter what town it's in.
[45:12] So that sounds more like a turf wharf thing than a, a safety
[45:16] and protection of the residents of, of the home.
[45:20] And so I, I think we need to think about
[45:22] what we're trying to regulate there.
[45:24] Yeah. We had those issues when, when them did
[45:26] that development, especially with the,
[45:28] who was gonna do the snowplow
[45:30] or the cul-de-sac, that one here
[45:32] and half of us went over the other side.
[45:38] Yeah. I mean I, I'm familiar with those things.
[45:42] My, my folks used to own a, a farmhouse at the end of the,
[45:45] a dirt road in, in, in Croydon.
[45:47] But it was only accessible through Sope.
[45:50] So Sope plowed the road.
[45:55] And was that, was, was,
[45:56] and they weren't obligated to, I don't know, of course
[45:59] that was back, once you do that, you, you take a,
[46:01] that was back when they had road agents.
[46:04] Yes. So what, what
[46:06] I understand where the, where the developers are coming
[46:09] from, if they, they have a large parcel of land,
[46:12] but it's landlocked in dairy,
[46:14] but it can be accessed from a neighboring town.
[46:17] But what that does then is it triggers the definition
[46:21] of a jurisdiction.
[46:24] So that town would have to be notified
[46:26] and they'd have input as to anything that goes on there
[46:28] besides the fact that it's on the town line.
[46:30] Oh, absolutely. Or you know, yeah. Regional impact.
[46:35] But I, I'm, I'm, I'm so,
[46:36] So they are right.
[46:37] I mean, just
[46:38] because the road isn't in dairy, why
[46:42] is it not viable?
[46:44] That seems overly punitive. Yes.
[46:48] So That's the sort
[46:49] of thing I I think a court could say what,
[46:51] Yeah, what are you talking about?
[46:52] It's, it's a, it's a Class five maintained
[46:54] road by a municipality.
[46:55] Why can't, you know, why do they have to access
[46:59] that land from your Class five road that
[47:01] You local control?
[47:02] That's what we're asking for clarification on. Yeah.
[47:03] So that, it's very clear when you read the ordinance,
[47:07] we are all on the same page right now.
[47:09] We are not all on the same page.
[47:11] We're not even in the same book in some instances.
[47:13] So, I mean, is it, is it, I I don't really know
[47:15] what the issue is and what would solve it.
[47:18] Would it, would it solve the
[47:23] problem in that particular case to have the requirement be
[47:28] a Class five road as opposed to a town road?
[47:32] We, we could, we can look at it and,
[47:34] and look at the wording
[47:35] and see if it, if it needs to say Town of Derry
[47:39] or if it needs to say Class five road accepted
[47:44] by any municipality or
[47:47] Municipal.
[47:48] Well it has to be accepted by somebody in order to be
[47:50] Less by, right, right, right.
[47:51] But, but just to make sure that we're,
[47:54] we're clarifying it does not mean just dairy.
[47:56] Yeah. It could be, let's,
[47:57] Let's look at it again.
[47:59] I agree with Mr. Chase that if,
[48:00] if you have a landlocked parcel in dairy,
[48:03] but it has good access for a subdivision road
[48:07] through Windham and we denied the application
[48:12] 'cause it didn't have street access in our town,
[48:16] I think the courts would slap us around Silly.
[48:19] Yeah. I guess what I said, or was trying to say,
[48:23] and I said it very poorly, is, is in that situation,
[48:29] clarifying that the town means town
[48:32] of Derry doesn't satisfy that.
[48:35] Just, just saying, okay, it's the town of Derry.
[48:38] How does that solve that issue?
[48:39] It doesn't, I think we need to look at it
[48:42] a little more in depth
[48:44] and come up with language that, like you had suggested that
[48:49] a class five road accepted by a municipality is sufficient.
[48:52] I, I don't think on its face what we have here,
[48:55] add definition to town is gonna solve that issue.
[48:58] I think it, it has to be looked at from a
[48:59] different perspective. Yeah.
[49:01] Okay. And
[49:04] unless there's some other context in which, you know,
[49:08] town appears in the ordinance that doesn't relate
[49:11] to this particular hypothetical we're talking about. Right,
[49:14] Right.
[49:15] Yeah. Okay, we'll look at it.
[49:21] Next one is review the sign ordinance for banner signs
[49:24] off-premise and permitting
[49:32] Right.
[49:32] Authority for the lease of off-premise signs.
[49:38] Alright, so is it,
[49:39] are you talking about like billboards on
[49:41] the, on the highways? What are you talking about?
[49:43] Off-premise sign. So for example, Walmart,
[49:46] their large pylon sign is an off-premise sign.
[49:50] It's not located on their property.
[49:51] They have a land lease with Wolf Meow.
[49:54] Okay. And there are, we have,
[50:00] we there, there are multiple off-premise signs in
[50:05] town, like the ones for the Journey Church
[50:08] and Palestra, those are not located on the premise.
[50:12] They're actually in the DOT right away.
[50:14] But, so, you know, things like that.
[50:19] So would most of these be part of a, a site plan approval
[50:25] Where A conditional rule would be execute a lease,
[50:29] you know, for this off-premise sign and it,
[50:31] and it can be here, that sort
[50:33] Of thing?
[50:34] Occasionally, yes. But we do have some provisions
[50:35] for off premise signs in the ordinance
[50:37] that I think need to be amended
[50:40] Where they kind of happen ad hoc a
[50:42] Little. Yeah.
[50:43] Okay. Mr. Chase.
[50:44] So would this also be in relation
[50:49] to off-premise signs that advertise
[50:51] for other businesses that are
[50:53] That too, That too.
[50:54] The electronic signs that advertise
[50:56] for a business that are is Yes.
[50:58] On the other side of town. Yes.
[50:59] So it's also part of that too. So there
[51:00] Are, there are, or in, there are, so for example,
[51:05] on Birch Street, our former,
[51:08] your fellow council member had brought that
[51:11] to our attention before Mr.
[51:12] Healy on Birch Street.
[51:14] There are multiple signs on commercial property
[51:17] that don't advertise the business that's on that sign.
[51:20] So, and I know that we, that we have
[51:24] to be d billboards similar.
[51:25] It is similar to a billboard That's a D Yeah. Yeah.
[51:28] That's a billboard. That's
[51:29] A Well, but, but what legally makes a billboard
[51:32] not an off premise sign.
[51:34] I think in our definition it might be the,
[51:36] it might be the definition
[51:38] If the billboard sign has nothing to do with the business
[51:41] that's on the, on the property.
[51:42] Yeah. I think that that's a billboard
[51:44] Side.
[51:45] Yeah. We would just, we'd just like a chance to look at
[51:47] It.
[51:48] I'm saying the one that we're talking about on Birt Street,
[51:50] why is that not just a small billboard?
[51:53] Well, le I, I think technically it probably
[51:55] is, but, so this is
[51:56] Where I think we get into legal.
[51:59] Yep. Mr Chair. Yeah. Mr.
[52:02] Connor, your statement that you just made
[52:03] is absolutely correct.
[52:05] When the Supreme Court ruled on signs,
[52:09] it would brought us all out crazy on trying
[52:12] to get proper audiences and so forth.
[52:15] But it is really in depth.
[52:17] So we have to make sure that whatever we do, we need
[52:20] to follow the federal laws as written.
[52:23] And when we were on that committee, I mean, we went
[52:27] through a lot, a lot of work trying
[52:29] to put everything in the right pocket.
[52:31] And so things have changed over a period of time.
[52:34] I just want to be, you know, be cautious
[52:35] and arbitrarily saying, we're gonna put this up there
[52:38] because we may maybe one of those little things
[52:41] that they just say, you can't
[52:43] Do that.
[52:44] Yeah. 'cause I, I guess what
[52:45] Like flags And I'm concerned that,
[52:46] that people use the defense, Hey, you know, there's,
[52:50] there's billboards on, on, you know,
[52:53] bypass 28, 1 of 'em for, you know, my optometrist,
[52:58] ophthalmologist, spin Associates.
[53:00] Right? So that's a billboard company.
[53:02] They rent it to them, they're in the, the, the business
[53:05] of advertising and and they either own
[53:07] or lease that, that land
[53:09] or have an an easement or something.
[53:10] Right. It's along the, its long the state
[53:11] highway been there 40 years, years.
[53:14] How is that fundamentally different than someone
[53:17] who has a business, say on Bird Street that decides
[53:21] to erect a mini billboard
[53:23] and rent it out for advertising as an adjunct
[53:25] to whatever their other business is?
[53:27] I think we get into a mire if we try
[53:29] to say, well that's a billboard.
[53:31] And, and that's not because it's, it's kinda like
[53:34] what the Supreme Court said about pornography.
[53:35] Well I can't define it, but I know it when I see it.
[53:39] Yeah, I know it.
[53:44] If we could look at it, make sure we're not, you know,
[53:47] if we do look at it, we're we're following the constitution.
[53:50] 'cause we can't, we can't comment on content
[53:55] because that would be unconstitutional.
[53:58] We could, we can comment on where it is permitted in
[54:02] what type of sign it is.
[54:04] And Liz, unless I can recall
[54:06] NHMA published those books
[54:10] and when that was one of the courses, you know, some
[54:12] of us attended and it was quite in depth in that.
[54:15] So yes. And it may have changed,
[54:17] but the, the gist
[54:18] of it may still be right there at the meat of it. Okay.
[54:22] So we well you have it as long term
[54:25] and I think it will take a long time to Yes.
[54:26] To sort it through. So, yes. Yeah.
[54:28] And well It took us a long time to get through that
[54:32] Lot of workshop. I just discuss that with Carrie as well.
[54:34] Number 10 was actually one that I suggested.
[54:37] 'cause we, we have a, a, a requirement in the LDCs for,
[54:42] for subdivisions that we have Underground electric
[54:46] and kind of carrying water for public service Eversource.
[54:51] 'cause there's really no public safety issue there.
[54:53] It just makes things easier for them.
[54:55] And I said, well if we're gonna worry about the public
[54:58] safety of individual homeowners,
[55:00] why don't we make 'em have turnarounds
[55:02] where they're not backing out into traffic.
[55:04] Now I think it would've been a good thing 20
[55:07] or 30 years ago now that there's not much
[55:09] development left to happen.
[55:11] It's probably low priority
[55:13] 'cause you're not gonna affect many subdivisions.
[55:17] But I, I always thought it was a good idea.
[55:23] Anyone else think it's even worth talking about?
[55:28] Well, ones
[55:30] The way you have it now, the onus is
[55:32] a driveway over so many feet.
[55:33] They have to have one anyway.
[55:35] Do they? Yeah. If it's over 150 feet, you do need
[55:40] to provide an a turnaround
[55:42] that can accommodate the fire apparatus.
[55:44] Oh well that's for fire. I don't care about
[55:45] the fire truck getting hit.
[55:47] I care about the poor guy backing out into traffic at, at,
[55:49] at commute hour getting hit.
[55:53] Okay. Okay. Nevermind. Yes.
[55:57] Okay.
[56:05] Revamp the zoning ordinance
[56:06] to make it easier to understand.
[56:08] All the lawyers are gonna come out
[56:10] and petition against that.
[56:13] Wow.
[56:14] That's a, that was a goal from the master plan.
[56:17] Yeah. I You could leave it at the bottom of the list.
[56:20] I, I, I, okay. I think that might take a year in of itself.
[56:23] You know, just getting through blacks dictionary.
[56:26] I tried once to kind of,
[56:29] not re like keep the words the same
[56:31] but you know, format it so it's a little different.
[56:34] And maybe you just
[56:36] add some things in like our quick reference
[56:38] guides to make it easier.
[56:40] So you've got your language
[56:41] but then you've also got the page
[56:42] with a quick reference cut. It's, it's a job.
[56:45] Well I mean it, it's an ordinance, right? It it's a law.
[56:48] It's without necessarily intentionally sliding
[56:53] legislative services.
[56:54] Have you seen any laws come outta concor? They easy to read
[56:57] And they had done that.
[56:59] Yeah.
[57:01] So some of it is inherent in the beast. Yes.
[57:06] I do think it is maybe exacerbated by the number
[57:10] of times you need to go flipping to the definitions.
[57:13] 'cause the words aren't necessarily
[57:14] what you might think they mean.
[57:15] They have special meanings
[57:18] and our level of Microsoft word, you know,
[57:21] paragraph indentation
[57:23] and numbering is a little,
[57:27] in some cases obnoxious.
[57:29] I think it could, could be. I think the
[57:30] text could be flattened.
[57:32] I don't know if that makes it easier to do.
[57:33] Run it through AI would be all set. Hmm.
[57:36] Run it through ai. Yeah.
[57:38] I got a claw account. I can fix it.
[57:42] Just throw our ordinance in chat
[57:44] GPT and see what comes back. Yeah.
[57:46] Alright. So that would be
[57:47] A-A-A-A-A, not a low hanging fruit.
[57:51] Okay. All
[57:57] Next one.
[57:58] 12. Create language
[57:59] for unscreened dumpsters in high visibility areas.
[58:01] Yeah, this was my request. Okay.
[58:04] So that, that's Like my turnaround thing.
[58:07] Exactly. But I don't know I'm anyone else seen,
[58:12] seen some of these examples.
[58:14] Yeah, you could see it on Elm Street on a residential
[58:17] property where the dumpster is like almost in the road.
[58:19] You can drive into crowd. It just looks
[58:21] like crap to be honest. So
[58:22] Here's here's the thing.
[58:25] Our, we, we can't do site review on,
[58:27] on residential properties unless they're multifamily.
[58:32] Which case they're really treated as commercial.
[58:36] If, if a single
[58:37] or duplex home has a dumpster sitting in the front yard,
[58:42] I don't think we're allowed to
[58:43] Regulate that.
[58:44] I don't think we, I don't think I've seen
[58:45] That. Not the planning board. I
[58:46] Haven't seen any examples of that.
[58:47] Oh, I've seen is is commercial If you, if you drive up
[58:50] by the five guys Yes.
[58:53] Behind there you got three, three dumpsters
[58:55] and you got an oil grease container there.
[58:57] Yep. So here it's like in plain
[58:58] sight that should be screened.
[59:00] Here's the thing. We get one bite of the apple to enforce
[59:03] that when they come for approval.
[59:05] I understand. I'm just saying as it comes in front of us,
[59:09] we should be more cognizant of these businesses.
[59:12] We do, I've not seen any plans
[59:14] where there were notes about screening of the dumpsters.
[59:16] It's probably all the ones that happened 20 years ago.
[59:19] Well, I don't think there's anybody looking,
[59:20] pulling out plans for five guys
[59:23] to see if originally the plan came out and it was screened.
[59:26] Well we're not doing that. I don't think. Building,
[59:29] If you wanted to enforce
[59:30] it, that's kind of what you'd have to do. Well
[59:31] That's code enforcement.
[59:32] But I, we're a town, I mean we're so big
[59:35] and that's one of the reasons why I, you know,
[59:37] I lobbied the, the council to get an extra person
[59:40] for code enforcement, which they, they did.
[59:42] Which is great. But you know, a town of 35,000,
[59:46] you know, to get that stuff kind.
[59:48] If you look at the LDCs for, for site plan review
[59:51] for commercial, they, there probably is already language
[59:54] about screening of dumpsters.
[59:55] And so all the new ones have it, all the ones
[59:59] that didn't have it.
[1:00:01] 'cause it wasn't in the language back then.
[1:00:03] But how do we know is what my point is.
[1:00:06] Well that's a, that's not the planning board's job, Brian.
[1:00:09] That's cool. We don't actually have jurisdiction to go
[1:00:12] and tell someone, Hey, you should screen your dumpster.
[1:00:16] Well where does it say that in my plan approval?
[1:00:19] Well it doesn't, but it should have.
[1:00:21] Well, well, I mean I'm going, I'm a way back person.
[1:00:24] I I remember when we had Victory Supermarket
[1:00:27] back in the day on planning board, right?
[1:00:28] Yeah. And we were doing, we were screening
[1:00:30] those things back then.
[1:00:32] I'm just saying people aren't following,
[1:00:35] possibly not following plans.
[1:00:37] Well, okay, if that, and if that's the case, then
[1:00:39] don't we have, don't we have something to go away?
[1:00:41] That would be a, so that would be a request to code enfor
[1:00:45] because once it leaves us
[1:00:47] and it's constructed, it is,
[1:00:49] it falls under code enforcement.
[1:00:52] So that would be a request to code enforcement
[1:00:55] to review the site plan.
[1:00:57] Yeah. Which planning obviously would help with to see if
[1:01:00] that was something on the original site plan.
[1:01:02] And then in those cases we go back
[1:01:04] and we say, you need to do this.
[1:01:05] Right. For example, trees that were taken down on a street
[1:01:09] between Applebee's in the building, behind
[1:01:12] that screening was put in intentionally the trees were cut
[1:01:15] down, they need to go back.
[1:01:17] Right. You know, so those types of things.
[1:01:18] And I also recognize that that's a time consuming thing.
[1:01:21] It is a very time consuming compliance.
[1:01:23] Not, I mean that's not the town's focus right now
[1:01:25] because we just don't have Yeah.
[1:01:27] So that, I think the existing mechanisms to enforce that
[1:01:32] where it's on the plan already exists.
[1:01:34] It starts with code enforcement.
[1:01:36] They go look at it, they look at the plan, they,
[1:01:38] they send 'em a letter, send 'em a nice letter,
[1:01:41] and then they get ignored
[1:01:42] and then they send 'em a slightly less nice letter.
[1:01:45] And about the third
[1:01:46] or fourth letter, they actually get fairly intimidating.
[1:01:50] However, number one, maybe having more staff will help them
[1:01:55] get to Yes.
[1:01:57] Quicker is
[1:01:58] There a fiscal Penalty.
[1:02:00] But the planning board actually does have
[1:02:01] what I call the nuclear option.
[1:02:04] If all else fails
[1:02:06] and it's a substantial non-compliance, we have the authority
[1:02:10] to hold a condition compliance hearing
[1:02:12] and say you will comply with this
[1:02:15] or we will revoke your site plan approval.
[1:02:18] And the silly guy from,
[1:02:21] was it NHMA said you can't do that.
[1:02:25] And then I showed him, the statute says, oh yes we can.
[1:02:28] Yeah. And I'm not, I'm not saying we should be the,
[1:02:30] the dumpster police, but when there are areas
[1:02:33] that are like really obvious that looks doesn't look good,
[1:02:38] but what if there Yeah, we could pull a plan.
[1:02:40] We, we could. So later this summer there'll be an option
[1:02:44] for through the new permitting portal
[1:02:47] to enter service requests like that once that goes live.
[1:02:51] That would be, that would probably be a good one
[1:02:53] to maybe test the, test our process, enter that in
[1:02:56] as a service request
[1:02:57] and then we can pull the site plan, we can go
[1:03:00] through the process and, and look at that. Yeah.
[1:03:02] 'cause I'm, I'm pretty sure that we never approve plans
[1:03:07] of what's currently there.
[1:03:08] Yeah. I mean, come on. I mean the,
[1:03:10] and I don't know who the
[1:03:12] landlord is or the owner of the building.
[1:03:13] It was a video show. You could,
[1:03:14] you could screen that in easy.
[1:03:16] So it doesn't look like,
[1:03:18] I, I think I agree with you
[1:03:20] and I think it's a, it starts out
[1:03:22] as a code enforcement issue,
[1:03:25] but I don't think we need to actually change the
[1:03:27] ordinances or regulations.
[1:03:29] 'cause I think they already provide for it all.
[1:03:31] You're probably right. And when people ignore the law,
[1:03:33] writing our laws doesn't really help.
[1:03:36] Right. But we should check it just to make sure
[1:03:38] that going forward.
[1:03:40] Yeah. But the planning board doesn't have that
[1:03:43] Don We have the, we have the jurisdiction when there's a
[1:03:46] new building, a new, a new
[1:03:47] Building.
[1:03:48] Sure. But we don't have the
[1:03:49] jurisdiction to be the dumpster police. No.
[1:03:52] I'll, I'll look at the Crystal Plaza.
[1:03:54] I'm just looking, I mean, just the obvious stuff.
[1:03:57] I'll, I'll look at it. Okay.
[1:04:04] On that. Expand uses in general commercial two.
[1:04:13] Yeah. I mean we have a lot of
[1:04:15] use lists in our zoning ordinance
[1:04:17] that are based on the old days.
[1:04:19] We've cleaned up some of 'em,
[1:04:20] but some of 'em are still very specific.
[1:04:24] Yes. You know, descriptions of hat stores
[1:04:28] and shoe stores and stuff.
[1:04:31] So, yes. So this request came from Beth Donovan,
[1:04:34] our economic development director,
[1:04:36] who's actually online listening.
[1:04:38] There has been, there's some properties in the GC two
[1:04:43] district that are vacant or keep going on and off market.
[1:04:47] And every time someone goes to
[1:04:52] expresses interest in it, the things that they want
[1:04:55] to do there are not permitted.
[1:04:56] Because this is, we, when you guys originally set up
[1:05:00] that zone, it was more medical, like, it was more medical
[1:05:04] centric heading, even heading up the bypass up
[1:05:08] to the cell tower.
[1:05:10] So she's asking if we could take a look at the, you know,
[1:05:15] look at that zone, how it is now,
[1:05:17] take into consideration what's gonna happen like four a's
[1:05:20] gonna do some, a little bit of work there.
[1:05:22] Not a lot, but there'll be some work done there.
[1:05:24] And look at opportunities to maybe expand economic
[1:05:28] opportunity in that area.
[1:05:30] So you said Bev's listening, which is great.
[1:05:32] Maybe she needs to come in
[1:05:35] and let us know, like what kind of inquiries, types
[1:05:37] of business inquiries are asking about those things that
[1:05:40] We can look at.
[1:05:41] There's there, well, I, I can say that there,
[1:05:42] there's been several to put,
[1:05:45] like contractor Bay type uses
[1:05:48] more commercial uses than medical uses.
[1:05:52] But, but Bev has a better idea of, you know,
[1:05:54] the inquiries that have come in for that.
[1:05:55] Some warehouse. Warehouse with small retail in the front.
[1:06:00] But those are things that are not permitted currently in
[1:06:03] that zone or to the size that people would want.
[1:06:06] So I, I assume that the people who are coming in
[1:06:10] with these business proposals are not finding
[1:06:15] lots available in the zones where those things are allowed.
[1:06:19] Is that the problem?
[1:06:21] Potentially, Yeah.
[1:06:23] So it's like, oh, I can't find a lot for sale in industrial
[1:06:27] district where I could do this.
[1:06:29] But I can find a lot available in a commercial district
[1:06:31] where we wanted it not to be industrial.
[1:06:35] 'cause you know, zoning is kind
[1:06:37] of like the old blue plate dinner
[1:06:39] where you had the little ridges
[1:06:40] and you kept all your vegetables separate from your
[1:06:41] meat, separate from your potatoes.
[1:06:42] That's kind of what zoning was all, all about to begin with.
[1:06:46] And I know that the, the new thing is,
[1:06:49] is the form-based zoning's.
[1:06:51] Like I don't care what you do, as long as it looks pretty.
[1:06:53] I don't know that we're ready to go all the way there
[1:06:55] yet. No, I don't, no,
[1:06:57] Not yet.
[1:06:58] So yeah, this is a challenge when you've segregated uses
[1:07:02] in order to make people sort of happy with
[1:07:07] folks are doing similar things in their neighborhood.
[1:07:10] And then you get someone that's like, oh,
[1:07:12] well I can't find a, an industrial lot
[1:07:14] so I wanna plop my thing here.
[1:07:17] We should look at it. Okay.
[1:07:19] But just my opinion has always been, well the fact
[1:07:23] that you can't find a lot
[1:07:24] that allows it doesn't mean we should change
[1:07:26] the zoning just for you.
[1:07:27] No. Yeah. But it'd be nice to know people are looking
[1:07:32] for certain things.
[1:07:34] Well, I can, I can work with Bev
[1:07:36] and we can come up with, you know, maybe a draft.
[1:07:41] How many versions of GC do we have?
[1:07:44] We have four. Yeah.
[1:07:45] Alright, so it is probably a good time to just Yes.
[1:07:48] That probably wandered and evolved over time.
[1:07:51] It has, yeah. So maybe just a
[1:07:53] whole look at all of them.
[1:07:55] Okay.
[1:07:57] JC two was the last one because of the gas stations.
[1:08:04] Okay. And then, you know, maybe,
[1:08:08] maybe if we get a big grant, we'll hire a, a,
[1:08:11] a national consulting firm to rewrite our, our zoning and,
[1:08:14] and you know, have them do it over two years.
[1:08:17] Oh, we can look at that.
[1:08:22] Okay. So is everyone kind of happy with what's on here?
[1:08:26] There's nothing that seems outta sorts to anyone.
[1:08:32] No. And then how do we propose to work on these?
[1:08:37] Well, that's what, that was the responsibility
[1:08:40] oversight section.
[1:08:42] So some of 'em you might, we might want to again,
[1:08:46] form small committees.
[1:08:47] 'cause I think expecting staff to, to work on all
[1:08:51] of these is tough.
[1:08:53] And the ones that impact uses
[1:08:56] and might draw either bouquets
[1:09:00] or brick, brick bats from abutters
[1:09:02] probably should have more, you know, outreach.
[1:09:06] Okay. So some of 'em, these are pretty technical.
[1:09:11] So those are, those are simple.
[1:09:12] But the ones that are more impactful to people,
[1:09:18] I think, I think for the, the, you know, the four a thing,
[1:09:22] the the committee thing worked.
[1:09:25] It did, it worked well. And,
[1:09:26] and there was a lot of moving parts there.
[1:09:29] Right. And we had, you know, four
[1:09:31] or five different civic profile kind
[1:09:35] of things. So yeah.
[1:09:38] Okay. We can do that. So I'll,
[1:09:40] So at some point when we get ready to do this,
[1:09:44] and if it's a big enough thing, I will probably solicit two
[1:09:47] or three people to volunteer.
[1:09:51] Okay. All right.
[1:09:52] I will revise this and get it back to you guys for review.
[1:09:56] We don't need to do an in-depth thing like this,
[1:09:57] but if you see something that looks out of line,
[1:10:00] let me know and I'll amend it.
[1:10:03] Thank you. Okay. Thank you for indulging me in that.
[1:10:05] I appreciate it.
[1:10:08] All right. Now
[1:10:12] that we've done all the administrative business, we have a
[1:10:16] one or two, three public hearings to conduct. Do
[1:10:19] We wanna do updates?
[1:10:21] Oh yeah, updates. Okay. Just short.
[1:10:25] So just a reminder,
[1:10:28] I know we've gave you information about NI Kappa in October,
[1:10:31] and I know we still have a lot of time to register,
[1:10:34] but if we could take advantage of our training budget
[1:10:36] before July, so let us know.
[1:10:38] I know that Mr.
[1:10:40] Pier has been signed up
[1:10:42] and then I know that Randy had expressed interest in some,
[1:10:45] so if anyone's interested in attending all three sessions
[1:10:49] or just one day of ni Kappa, let Caroline or I know
[1:10:52] and we can register you.
[1:10:55] Just a reminder, our next meeting will be July 8th,
[1:10:58] which is a little off schedule.
[1:10:59] So just remember July 8th, not July 1st, the comments
[1:11:04] for if you guys would like
[1:11:06] to take a look at the information sent
[1:11:07] by the town of Windham.
[1:11:08] And if you have any comments on that, we need
[1:11:11] to get those back to them before their next public hearing.
[1:11:14] So, and I unfortunately don't recall the exact
[1:11:19] date of their public hearing.
[1:11:20] So sometime in the next couple of weeks,
[1:11:22] if you could just get me any comments
[1:11:23] or concerns that you would like to see addressed by the town
[1:11:26] of Wyndham for that project, I can compile a memo
[1:11:29] and get that to Mr.
[1:11:31] Meow. And then in your packets,
[1:11:36] I think you all have a copy of our little survey.
[1:11:42] So Abby has actually been taking the lead on this
[1:11:45] with Southern New Hampshire Planning Commission.
[1:11:48] So I, and she
[1:11:50] and Liliana from the commission,
[1:11:52] were down at the farmer's market today.
[1:11:54] And I'll just let her give you a quick re just explain
[1:11:57] what this is and give a quick report out on the activities
[1:12:02] today and the reception that we had for it.
[1:12:09] All right. Yeah, so the survey
[1:12:14] is basically, I'm trying to think of my little speech
[1:12:17] that I gave a million times.
[1:12:19] But basically the survey is for residents,
[1:12:24] people working in dairy,
[1:12:26] and then the surrounding communities too.
[1:12:29] And the surveys basically like an area,
[1:12:34] what it's proposed to look like and if you like it or not.
[1:12:37] And you can give a little five star rating
[1:12:39] or zero star rating or somewhere in between.
[1:12:42] And basically the, it was working, yeah,
[1:12:46] the Southern New Hampshire Planning Commission is going
[1:12:49] to take all these survey results and combine 'em all
[1:12:53] and see what people like, what people don't like.
[1:12:56] And possibly they'll be implemented
[1:12:58] and if they work out, then add it to their
[1:13:03] like regional long-term plans for other communities.
[1:13:08] And I got a, got like pretty good feedback
[1:13:12] and like reception from it.
[1:13:14] I don't know if they were just being nice to my face
[1:13:15] and we'll throw out the paper right after they walk past me,
[1:13:21] but I didn't see any on the ground, so that's good.
[1:13:25] And a lot
[1:13:26] of people actually seemed very interested in the topic
[1:13:29] and I told them to tell their friends,
[1:13:30] tell the fa tell their families, put it on their fridge.
[1:13:33] So fingers crossed we'll get a good response.
[1:13:38] Okay. Thank you. So please take the survey. Yeah.
[1:13:43] So lemme just ask a quick question if you don't mind.
[1:13:46] Does the survey have a component
[1:13:51] of like a, an age bracket range?
[1:13:54] Okay, good. Because yes,
[1:13:57] I'm really interested in hearing the younger generation of
[1:14:00] what they're, what they're looking for
[1:14:01] because they're the ones that are getting kind
[1:14:03] of squeezed out of the market, you know,
[1:14:05] but I, I didn't know, but yeah. Yeah,
[1:14:07] That's the question.
[1:14:08] Well, yeah, that's one of the questions.
[1:14:09] So we're gonna collect that type of demographic data,
[1:14:12] you know, do you live work or other in dairy?
[1:14:16] So we'll, we'll have that.
[1:14:18] And then we're also capturing data.
[1:14:20] Are you a homeowner or a renter?
[1:14:22] Because I think that's important to know, you know,
[1:14:24] where people are, where, where people are trending,
[1:14:27] you know, do you, do you wanna go from a homeowner to rent?
[1:14:30] Do you wanna go from rent to homeowner?
[1:14:32] That would be good data to capture. Yeah.
[1:14:34] So we,
[1:14:36] there were three particular areas picked just in, not
[1:14:41] because, and I wanna make this clear to everybody, not
[1:14:43] because we're anticipating
[1:14:45] that we're gonna do zoning changes
[1:14:47] or anything in those areas.
[1:14:49] It was more because the data that comes out of this needs
[1:14:53] to be transferable to the other 13 communities within
[1:14:57] the Southern New Hampshire Planning Commission region.
[1:14:59] And so we picked our downtown, we picked Ryan's Hill
[1:15:03] and we also picked heading up Chester,
[1:15:07] like heading up towards Chester
[1:15:09] because it's still more rural there.
[1:15:11] And we wanted to capture some of like the rural aspects.
[1:15:14] Like if you were going
[1:15:16] to do like a tiny court development in a rural area,
[1:15:18] what's that gonna look like?
[1:15:20] Or what could it look like potentially?
[1:15:22] And how do you feel about it when you see that
[1:15:24] where you've used, you've been used to seeing fields like,
[1:15:27] so how does that look?
[1:15:28] So we would like to get that kind of data from people.
[1:15:31] Yeah. I also, I'm also highly interested in
[1:15:36] senior citizens that may, if there's like, you know,
[1:15:39] the children are grown, they're out of the house.
[1:15:40] They own a four bedroom home, but they're not moving
[1:15:44] because there's not the type of home
[1:15:46] that they wanna downsize to. Correct.
[1:15:49] Abby had a conversation this afternoon with a couple
[1:15:52] of people who are looking for affordable senior housing.
[1:15:55] Yeah. And, you know, potentially looking at things like
[1:15:59] cottage court or,
[1:16:00] or tiny home developments
[1:16:02] where things could be on one level,
[1:16:04] but you still have that sense of community
[1:16:06] because you don't wanna lose that. So.
[1:16:07] Okay, good. So thank you.
[1:16:11] Okay. Now public hearing.
[1:16:15] Now public hearing. Alright.
[1:16:21] So we have I think three public
[1:16:25] hearings all related.
[1:16:29] One is for changes to the zoning ordinance, you,
[1:16:33] you word uses and definitions, one to the actual
[1:16:39] body of the zoning ordinance with regard to
[1:16:42] district provisions for the central business district.
[1:16:47] And then another public hearing to discuss companion changes
[1:16:51] to the land development control regulations
[1:16:54] to specifically add some architectural design review
[1:16:59] specific to those uses in the central business district.
[1:17:03] Okay. So, Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion
[1:17:05] that we open public hearing for the first one.
[1:17:08] Okay. We have a second mo moved by chair Charles second
[1:17:12] by pier to open a public hearing on the
[1:17:16] definitions amendments.
[1:17:19] All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed?
[1:17:23] Say our public hearing is open. There's no one in the room.
[1:17:26] So unless we have someone online,
[1:17:28] Mr.
[1:17:29] Chair, we're seeing none rise online.
[1:17:32] Move to Close the public hearing.
[1:17:35] Move by George Charles to close the public hearing.
[1:17:38] Seconded by PE in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye.
[1:17:42] The public hearing is closed now.
[1:17:48] Are we disposing of them tonight as well?
[1:17:50] So tonight the request would be
[1:17:53] to accept the proposed changes
[1:17:55] and move them forward to
[1:17:56] town council for their public hearing. Hearing
[1:17:57] A motion maker for that.
[1:17:58] I move There is one on the, so at the bottom
[1:18:01] of this motion staff report.
[1:18:02] Yeah. There are suggested motions
[1:18:04] because you should also do findings of fact.
[1:18:07] Oh yeah. Where are we here?
[1:18:12] So for the proposed changes in the central business
[1:18:16] district, that first one on page?
[1:18:19] Yeah. The second page of the staff report.
[1:18:22] Okay. So Mr.
[1:18:24] Chairman, I'll move to find the proposed changes.
[1:18:26] Recognize the changing landscape of Southern New Hampshire
[1:18:29] where increased housing density, height of buildings
[1:18:32] and commercial market trends require some form of adaption
[1:18:36] to create opportunities for economic growth
[1:18:38] and development in the core area of the downtown.
[1:18:41] While maintaining the historical character
[1:18:43] of the central business district.
[1:18:45] The changes recognize the smaller watt sizes
[1:18:48] and land use patterns that have emerged in the district.
[1:18:52] Is that the one for the definitions?
[1:18:55] I'm Sorry, is that the motion
[1:18:56] for the hearing on the definitions?
[1:18:58] This is just the finding.
[1:18:59] There should be a finding of that's, that's
[1:19:01] The fact.
[1:19:02] It covers all Of it. Okay. Yeah. So finding a fact.
[1:19:04] And then the motion, which is
[1:19:06] I just read the Finding of fact.
[1:19:07] Okay. Okay.
[1:19:10] So I, a motion by Ello, seconded by Palantir
[1:19:13] to make findings of fact regarding the need
[1:19:16] for these changes.
[1:19:19] Any discussion Mr. Chase? Yes.
[1:19:24] Mr. Wood? Yes. Mr. Menini? Yes. Mr. O'Connor? Yes. Mr.
[1:19:29] Mazi? Yes. Mr. Ello? Yes. Palantir? Yes.
[1:19:32] And the chair votes? Yes. And
[1:19:34] Mr.
[1:19:35] Chairman, I make a motion to accept the proposed changes
[1:19:38] to the town of dairy zoning ordinance.
[1:19:40] Article two word uses
[1:19:42] and definitions sections 1 65 dash five definitions
[1:19:46] to amend the definition of quote, front lot line
[1:19:51] and parking facility.
[1:19:52] And to add a definition for our multi-level parking facility
[1:19:57] and to move these changes forward to town Council
[1:20:00] for review and approval.
[1:20:01] Second, moved by Ello, seconded by Pelletier to approve
[1:20:06] the amendments as presented at this hearing
[1:20:10] and forward it to the town council.
[1:20:12] Mr. Chase? Yes. Mr. Wood? Yes. Mr. Menini? Yes.
[1:20:16] Mr. O'Connor? Yes. Mr. Mousy? Yes. Mr. Yes. Mr. Pier? Yes.
[1:20:21] Chair votes? Yes.
[1:20:22] So the next one actually makes the changes
[1:20:26] to the uses.
[1:20:29] And, and maybe we could have just a,
[1:20:34] is there an executive summary in the, in the staff report
[1:20:36] that you could read for us?
[1:20:38] Maybe the, the last paragraph, the move move
[1:20:43] to accept the proposed changes?
[1:20:45] No, no, no. Just, oh. Describe the changes a little bit more
[1:20:47] than in this legal description.
[1:20:51] Okay. What, what were, what were we doing and why?
[1:20:56] So that would be the second
[1:20:57] and third paragraphs of the staff report.
[1:21:00] Okay. If you could someone wanna read that?
[1:21:02] I don't care who Just for the public hearing.
[1:21:05] You want me to read it? I can read
[1:21:06] It.
[1:21:07] So should we open the public hearing on this one first?
[1:21:09] Yeah. Make a motion to open the public hearing. Second.
[1:21:11] Alright, so we have a motion by Ello, seconded by Peir
[1:21:15] to open the public hearing on the second set
[1:21:19] of amendments in the zoning ordinance.
[1:21:21] All those gonna say in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay.
[1:21:25] Public hearing is open.
[1:21:26] So maybe someone would read those, that description so that
[1:21:30] for the record,
[1:21:37] I don't care. I
[1:21:38] Shall, I shall so.
[1:21:40] So the proposed changes, they include an amendment
[1:21:43] to the purpose of the requirements, which you just did.
[1:21:46] An increase in density for multi-unit mixed use
[1:21:49] from 12 units per acre to 24.
[1:21:52] A decrease in minimum unit size from 800 square feet to 400
[1:21:57] removes the limit on the number of bedrooms required.
[1:21:59] Removes restriction on
[1:22:01] where the commercial space shall be located in a mixed use
[1:22:04] building, while also defining the percentage
[1:22:06] of commercial space that's required.
[1:22:08] Adds medical office as a permitted use
[1:22:10] and removes the prior term parking facilities
[1:22:13] and replaces it with multi-level parking facility.
[1:22:16] It also adds a requirement to connect to municipal sewer
[1:22:19] for conversions and new developments.
[1:22:22] There were also changes to enhance
[1:22:24] and protect the street scape,
[1:22:26] which included amending the maximum front yard depth
[1:22:29] to vary in terms of the lot width.
[1:22:31] So for lots that are 75 feet
[1:22:33] or less, the front yard depth will be eight feet
[1:22:38] or the average going in a hundred feet in every direction.
[1:22:41] For lots that are 76 feet or wider.
[1:22:43] Minimum yard depth is 25 feet
[1:22:45] or the average of existing yard depths for 200 feet.
[1:22:49] Structure height is increased from a maximum of 350 feet
[1:22:52] to 425 feet above sea level.
[1:22:56] The prohibit, the prohibited use section was amended
[1:22:59] to delete the list of prohibited uses
[1:23:01] because we're a permissive zoning ordinance.
[1:23:04] So that means if the use isn't listed,
[1:23:05] it's not permitted off street parking was clarified
[1:23:08] to ensure that parking's not situated in a manner
[1:23:11] that requires a vehicle to back out into a roadway
[1:23:14] and to prohibit parking
[1:23:15] or storage of vehicles in the front setback.
[1:23:18] We also removed special exception uses.
[1:23:21] Okay, so again, seeing no one in the audience,
[1:23:26] is there anyone online who wishes
[1:23:27] to comment on this amendment? Seeing none
[1:23:30] Rise, move to close the public hearing.
[1:23:33] So motion to close the public hearing
[1:23:35] by chair shall second by peir.
[1:23:38] All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any nay? Okay.
[1:23:42] Public hearing is closed. So now let's have some
[1:23:45] motion from the motion maker in the staff report.
[1:23:52] Page two again the last paragraph. Yes.
[1:23:55] Move to propo, I'm sorry.
[1:23:56] Move to accept the proposed changes to the town
[1:23:59] of DER zoning ordinance article was that four
[1:24:03] Six, I'm sorry.
[1:24:04] Article six, district provisions section 1 65 dash 33
[1:24:10] Central Business District to amend subsection A purpose.
[1:24:14] Subsection B permitted uses subsection C one
[1:24:19] through six area
[1:24:20] and dimensional requirements
[1:24:21] to include minimal minimum allot area, front yard depth
[1:24:26] and building height to amend SEC subsection F
[1:24:30] prohibitive uses subsection G parking
[1:24:32] and to delete subsection H special except uses.
[1:24:37] And to move these changes forward to the town council
[1:24:39] for their review and approval.
[1:24:42] It has been moved by Ello, seconded by Callier
[1:24:45] to approve the amendments as presented at this hearing.
[1:24:48] And forward to the town Council for review and acceptance.
[1:24:52] Mr. Chase? Yes. Mr. Wood? Yes. Mr. Menini? Yes.
[1:24:55] Mr. O'Connor? Yes. Mr. Mousy? Yes. Mr. Chair. Cello. Yes.
[1:24:59] Mr. Pier? Yes. Chair votes? Yes.
[1:25:02] And then the last one is regarding the LDCR.
[1:25:06] Basically to include some
[1:25:09] specific guidance on architectural design
[1:25:10] with regard to this section.
[1:25:12] So can I have a motion to open public
[1:25:14] Hearing?
[1:25:15] Make a motion to open the public hearing
[1:25:16] to discuss the proposed changes to the town
[1:25:18] of dairy land development control regulations,
[1:25:20] architectural design review regulations
[1:25:22] to delete sections one 70 dash 84 A two C.
[1:25:26] And to add subsection 1 70 86 dash
[1:25:31] three design elements specific
[1:25:33] to the central business district. Second,
[1:25:36] Moved by church, seconded by Peir
[1:25:37] to open the public hearing on the LDCR amendments.
[1:25:41] All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Say nay.
[1:25:43] Public hearing is open and no one in the room.
[1:25:46] Anyone online? Seeing none, Mr. Chair? Okay. Motion
[1:25:49] To close. Second
[1:25:50] Motion by Churchill, seconded by app Palantier
[1:25:53] to close the public hearing.
[1:25:54] All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Nay.
[1:25:57] Public hearing is closed. And
[1:25:59] Mr.
[1:26:00] Chairman, I have a finding of fact. Okay.
[1:26:02] Move to find the proposed changes cor, correct
[1:26:05] and oversight during creation
[1:26:07] of the neighborhood commercial district in 2 20 25.
[1:26:11] And the changes preserve the streetscape in the
[1:26:13] central business district.
[1:26:15] Second. Okay.
[1:26:17] Motion to make findings of fact by Ello, second by pier.
[1:26:22] Are we ready for a vote? Mr. Chase? Yes.
[1:26:26] Mr. Wood? Yes. Mr. Menini? Yes. Mr. O'Connor? Yes. Mr. Mazi?
[1:26:30] Yes. Mr. Ello? Yes. Pier? Yes. Chair votes? Yes.
[1:26:36] Now, now move to approve the proposed changes to the town
[1:26:40] of Dairy Land Development Control Regulations article.
[1:26:43] What's the number? I'm not good at Roman numbers.
[1:26:46] Oh, that is Article
[1:26:49] 1414.
[1:26:51] Architectural design review regulations
[1:26:53] to delete sections one 70 dash 84 A
[1:26:58] two C.
[1:27:00] And to add subsections.
[1:27:02] One 70 dash 86.3 Design elements specific
[1:27:06] to the central business district as presented this evening.
[1:27:09] The changes become effective immediately.
[1:27:12] So we have a motion by Mr. Church Cello
[1:27:14] to approve the LDCR amendments seconded by App Pier
[1:27:19] becomes effective this evening.
[1:27:22] Do we want
[1:27:23] to condition this in any way on the council actually
[1:27:25] approving the zoning changes?
[1:27:33] 'cause otherwise this doesn't really make sense.
[1:27:34] If, if that doesn't happen,
[1:27:38] You could.
[1:27:39] And then the changes would become, you would have
[1:27:42] to amend the motion to say the changes would become
[1:27:44] effective immediately.
[1:27:46] Concurrent. Concurrent with the zoning changes. Yeah.
[1:27:50] So move. Okay.
[1:27:52] So we have a amendment to change the effectivity date
[1:27:56] by Ello and seconded by Pier to make it concurrent
[1:27:59] with the town council's effectivity date on the
[1:28:02] underlying zoning changes.
[1:28:05] Any discussion on that? Mr. Chase? Yes. Mr. Wood? Yes. Mr.
[1:28:10] Menini? Yes. Mr. O'Connor? Yes. Mr. Mazi? Yes. Mr. Ello?
[1:28:14] Yes. Mr. Pier? Yes. And the chair votes? Yes.
[1:28:17] Now on the amended motion. Mr. Chase? Yes. Mr. Wood?
[1:28:22] Yes. Mr. Menini? Yes. Mr. O'Connor? Yes. Mr. Mazi? Yes. Mr.
[1:28:27] Ello? Yes. Pier? Yes. Chair votes? Yes.
[1:28:32] I think that finishes our public hearing business. Yes.
[1:28:39] Is there any board member comments?
[1:28:45] Make a motion to adjourn. Second,
[1:28:47] Move by chair.
[1:28:48] Second by Palantir to adjourn. All those in favor say aye.
[1:28:51] Aye. Aye. Stand adjourned. Thank you very much gentlemen.
[1:28:55] Okay, I see you door and lady.