Planning Commission
Monday August 14, 2023
Commission members present: Megan Amundsen, Chris Glabach, Phil Peterson, Wilbur Rice, Leon Ward
Resident attendees: Debbie Frost Douglass, Lana Hauben, Steve Nichols, Curan Vanderwielen
Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM
Minutes from July 10, 2023
Minutes were approved.
Annual Organizational Matters
The Commission approved the continued use of the Rules of Procedure without amendment. Rice suggested inclusion of the Planning Commission’s (PC) operating period. Peterson thought it was the same as the Town’s fiscal year (July 1 to June 30) but will confirm.
Officer nominations/elections: Phil Peterson – Chairman, Megan Amundsen – Vice Chair, Chris Glabach – Secretary
Public Hearing – Review of 2022/23 Proposed Zoning Revisions
Ward proposed to add a new amendment to the Forest Conservation District to limit color pallet for homes on hillsides visible from long distances away to more natural color tones to fit better into the landscape. Amundsen advised against adding this to tonight's discussion based on public meeting law as all items discussed need to be forewarned. The PC agreed.
· Peterson summarized and explained proposed revisions to the Manchester Land Use Development Ordinance as listed in the PC report.
· Steve Nichols voiced concern over not requiring accessory dwelling units that are owner-occupied and their impact on community services such as rescue, fire, and policing with the added population increase we may see as a result. Various PC members communicated that providing these community services is not a primary concern of the PC, and the real intent is to increase the housing base within a community that has a prevailing lack of housing. The PC reassured the public this revision will not change setback and road frontage minimums.
· Steve Nichols later questioned the timing of the Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Depot Street project in comparison to other RFPs for other projects throughout town. Peterson stated the reason was based mainly on the fact that infrastructure of water and sewer is present on Depot Street opposed to other sites. It is also town-owned property, making it easier to proceed with a town-planned project.
· Revision #5 - A vote was required of the PC to table discussion of revision #5 which allowed administrative approval of multi-unit residential buildings. Glabach made a motion to support to table this discussion on the basis that the DRB is best to address these issues at this time with the new transition of the Zoning Administrator. Peterson seconded the motion with the additional comments that various protections for the town may be greater having a town committee/board make the decision rather than a single town employee. The vote resulted in three PC members supporting tabling revision #5 with one opposed and one abstaining. The motion passed.
· Rice stated he does not support 10 feet of additional height for multi-unit residential structures in the downtown. Amundsen reassured Rice and the public that there is conditional review by the Development Review Board (DRB) and Selectboard (SB) of all character issues with any proposal.
· Revision #19 – This revision was to add two words: “new structures”, into the ordinance to bring it into compliance with state statute for our Neighborhood Development Area (NDA) in the Flood Hazard Overlay (FHO). It was further explained that adding this new language would allow the Town of Manchester to expand the NDA at a future date if the town so desires. Rice and Steve Nichols wanted in writing from the state explicitly expressing that this would expedite housing development while still meeting Act 250 requirements before such changes were voted on. The PC reassured this change only brings our ordinances into compliance with state requirements. Protections provided by Act 250 review would not be bypassed; only that it would allow the town to avoid added costs of permit fees and the time costs associated with a full extensive review. Rice made a motion to table item #19, seconded by Leon. The vote resulted in two members in support of the motion with three opposed. The motion failed.
· All revisions - A motion was proposed by Peterson to pass all items up for revisions other than those tabled (item #5). The motion was seconded by Ward. The vote resulted in three in support, one opposed, one abstaining. The motion passed. This means that the set of revisions can be sent to the SB for their approval and a public hearing.
A motion to adjourn at 8:38 PM was proposed by Ward, seconded by Peterson.