Pittsfield Planning Board
Town Hall, 85 Main Street
Pittsfield, NH 03263
Minutes of Public Meeting
NOVEMBER 15, 2007
ITEM 1. Call to Order at 7:07 P.M. by Bill Miskoe, Vice -Chairman
ITEM 2. Roll Call
Members Present: Bill Miskoe (BM), Vice-Chairman, Fred Hast (FH), Rich
Hunsberger (RH), John Lenaerts (JL), Selectman Ex Officio Alternate, Chris
Conlon (CC), Alternate.
Members Absent: Peter Newell (PN), Alternate, Daniel Greene (DG), and
Paul Metcalf, Jr. (PM).
ITEM 3. Approval of Minutes of November 1, 2007.
Approval of Minutes were accomplished after the Work Session.
(RH) Motion to approve Minutes of November 1, 2007. (FH) Second.
Carried 3-0. (JL) Abstain.
ITEM 4. Work Session
Open Special Public Input
(BM) Work Session is not normally open to the public, but I have a special
request by Jim Pritchard to offer some Public Input. Jim, we normally do
this at the end of the meeting just before Adjournment.
(FH) noted that before we do that, if I am going to listen to him, I want him
to make a donation to the Town of Pittsfield in the amount of $456, I’ll put
in the change for the disc we had to get printed up because I now understand
he has already put a petition in. We wasted $456 and change. (BM) noted
2
that we have not yet heard from him. (FH) indicated he wasn’t even a
resident at the time he submitted this. (BM) noted, “For the moment, I am
running the meeting. Jim, you have five minutes.”
Jim Pritchard noted, “Perhaps, Mr. Hast would like to excuse himself before
I begin.” (FH) noted, “I am, right now.” (FH) vacated conference room.
Mr. Pritchard noted, “Last July, I asked for help from PB for a citizen
petition to amend the Zoning Board Ordinances. The Planning Board
minutes show they understood my request. I expressly retained my property
rights by forbidding copy of the text. This afternoon, via a chance meeting
with Mr. Miskoe, I learned that the Planning Board was not honoring my
request but was instead using my work as a “template” for a Planning Board
proposal. If Board wants to use my work as a template for a Planning Board
proposal, then you must get my permission. In the meantime, please return
all my draft materials and any copies made from them.”
(BM) Statement noted. I am closing this special public input and there will
be more at the end of the meeting. Yes, Tom, quickly please.
Tom Hitchcock: I just suggest if he wants the documents back, he should
pay $456 for them, that’s all. That’s what they are worth.
Close Special Public Input
(BM) noted that what I say outside this Boardroom as a private citizen is not
relevant to this Board. Could somebody get (FH) back please?
(RH) I believe he left. I would like to make a motion we adjourn this Work
Session. (BM) related, “I think we have work to do to night.” (RH) In light
of the fact that Mr. Pritchard does not want us to work off of his stuff, we do
not have anything to do. (BM) I have another plan, Rich. (RH) OK.
(BM) My plan is to open the current Zoning Ordinance to the cluster
subdivision chapter and for us to try to formulate a better definition of it.
Are you willing to go along with that? Do you withdraw your motion?
(RH) I withdraw my Motion.
3
(BM) The plan ahead of us is to work on the cluster subdivision portion of
the Zoning Ordinance and whether or not we want to use any outside
material is moot at this point. It is Chapter 18. (RH) The criteria in here
under our Article 8 cluster is also simply the criteria in order for them to
grant an exception. This is Article 4, Special Exception because you cannot
do it without a Special Exception. (BM) First of all, we need to formulate a
sequence procedure. Right now, it says it comes to Planning Board but it
has to have a Special Exception. (RH) related that he proposed to eliminate
the Special Exception. If you want cluster subdivision, then we would make
a criteria for cluster subdivision, so we write a cluster ordinance. There
would be no Special Exception because it would eliminate this but there
would be criteria the PB would have to uphold in the Ordinance. (BM) So,
it would put the entire cluster subdivision into the Planning Board’s hands?
(RH) Right, and the criteria would be written by us. (BM) That would
essentially make it work in much the same way the subdivision works. It is
all written into the Planning Board’s Ordinance. Are there any statutory
requirements that a cluster subdivision be granted a Special Exception
before the PB can approve it? (RH) No, it would just have to meet the
criteria of our Ordinance. (BM) We cannot write a cluster ordinance that
violates the State RSA’s. (RH) Most towns do not require a Special
Exception for cluster subdivision. He related what other Towns do in these
instances. (BM) noted that he was not sensing a lot of density requir ements.
A conventional subdivision is worth more than a cluster subdivision. Board
discussed in detail the density issue. (RH) noted that the ZBA has no choice
but to grant a Special Exception as long it meets the criteria. (JL) noted that
the most impacted thing is density. It should have no more units than a
conventional subdivision. If you change the number of units, this is a huge
change. Board further discussed cluster versus conventional subdivision.
(RH) noted we can create a cluster ordinance.
(FH) returned and was seated on the Board.
The Board, while trying to determine a definition of cluster subdivision,
discussed in detail density, open spaces including green spaces, ratios,
setbacks, establishment of roads, criteria or guidelines and how it should be
noted in Table of Uses in Rural and Suburban Zones. The Board also
discussed current established clusters and what they felt were the pros and
cons and how criteria could have been different to make them more
appealing to developers and residents.
4
Board members noted that possible goal would be:
1. To eliminate the ZBA granting Special Exception.
2. Put Cluster into Table I of Uses as by right in the Suburban and
Rural Zones.
3. Table II to be modified to include details of cluster subdivision.
What they are attempting to achieve:
1. Make clusters development attractive.
2. Optimize use of land so that land character provides a benefit to
the Town and the cluster residents.
(RH) noted that financially, it has to make sense. Maybe, even ne stling a
cluster subdivision further back with green land in front that one might not
even see from the road/highway making it discreet and desirable. The
developer would want that also to make it more saleable. We need to look at
the “money aspect” of it, the impact on the neighbors and perhaps include
unconventional setbacks. (CC) related that in essence, all of these minor
changes to the land are recreating structures, and recreating how we are
clustering. (RH) noted that clusters in other Towns are appealing and unless
we change, we will never get to that point. We need to make changes.
(CC) People want to be close to amenities and services especially particular
age groups. (RH) You might want to allow some doctor offices or other
amenities in a cluster setting. (BM) related this would be pretty ambitious to
create intentional residential communities.
Larry Konopka noted that there are developers, such as Joe Spain, who
would be willing to come in to relay to Board, what would encourage
developers to come into Pittsfield. He has done this for other Towns such as
Chichester, Concord and Bow to name a few. (BM) related that he knew
this individual and that he had been very successful in doing this. We need
to do what the Town wants. Dan Schroth noted, The Town wants change
and the Town needs change.”
5
(RH) noted that he would get a couple of cluster ordinances from several
towns and then perhaps, PB could site visit them and see how they were
done. If we want to present something to the voters, we need to get the
“nuts and bolts” for this into our Ordinance. (He agreed that he would try to
present this at the next PB meeting) (BM) noted he would discuss with
Regional people if their successful cluster had occurred without a density
bump. (RH) noted that location, location was important and also to consider
what we have for property and the values. (CC) noted that he purposely
moved to Pittsfield so that he could live in a town where one knows
everyone’s name and where there was a sense of comm unity and knowing
your neighbors.
(JL) noted that his impression included the fact that places like Hopkinton
and Bow, which are desirable locations, have professional planners and
power on Boards when they negotiate. (RH) noted it still comes down to the
Planning Board. We can gain some of these assets from other towns without
have them in our employ. Development, whatever it is, involves the
numbers.
(BM) related he was unsure as to whether this Town wants more single –
family housing. (FH) noted that he could not see five or six children in
some of these house noting that the Deer Meadow houses, which sold for
about $300,000 and their impact on schools. (JL) noted that area school
populations are going down. (FH) noted that it takes time for things t o
change. (RH) noted Board needs to take the time and go through the
Ordinances and loosen up some of them so what we want in Pittsfield is
allowed to happen. He noted that whenever you write something for Special
Exception there needs to be a criteria for it. We have requested harder
criteria for clusters for some people.
(BM) related that though the Board had not been able to make the jump to a
definition of cluster, the members have aired out a lot of information. If we
can “borrow, steal or whatever” and revise, it accordingly, then we can
present a subdivision ordinance for the ballot in March. (FH) pointed out
that the cluster ordinance has not worked well for us. I would like to see it
work better.
ITEM 5. Selectman’s Report
None.
6
ITEM 6. Members Concerns
Larry Konopka discussed briefly with Board the need for an Alternate,
though now that (CC) has been appointed as a regular member, they are not
short any regular members. (BM) noted that anyone appointed will only be
appointed for a three month period now that the PB will be an elected Board
come March. (JL) related that all seats will be vacant as of March. The
Board will be wiped out entirely and a new Board will be voted in. (BM)
noted that instead of the way it was related to the Board by Art Morse during
the last PB meeting, the actual voting schedule will include six people: two
elected for three years, two elected for two years and two elected for one
year. (JL) noted that he believed that term of office would have to be
specified on the ballot and that alternates would be appointed by the elected
Planning Board. Board discussed what would happen if an elected member
chose to resign, how replacement takes place and whether appointed by
sitting Planning Board or if member is elected via special election. (CC)
questioned whether it was known if six to eight people would be running.
Board member noted that this is unknown at this time.
ITEM 3: Approval of Minutes of November 1, 2007
Board discussed the possibility of not approving the Minutes of November
1, 2007 at this time because not all members of the Board were present
tonight as were on November 1st. It was determined that Minutes should be
approved tonight.
After Motion and Second were made, (FH) related that he thought that the
paragraph indicating what the election process entails as depicted by Art
Morse at the November 1st meeting should be stricken. However, after
discussion, it was noted that this should remain in the Minutes as comments
were actually made and clarification of the voting process was further
discussed tonight which would be recorded in these Minutes.
7
ITEM 7. Adjournment
(RH) Motion to adjourn. (JL) Second. Carried 3-0. Meeting adjourned at
9:00 P.M.
Approved:_December 6, 2007
______________________________ _________________________
Bill Miskoe, Vice-Chairman Date