Workforce Housing Section 619.
Add a new Overlay District to allow for Workforce Housing, in accordance
with NH RSA 674:58-674-61 and consistent with NH RSA 672:1(III-e), as an
innovative land use ordinance under 674:21. This Ordinance would be applicable in
the Rural, Residential B, Residential C, and Village Center Districts. The
Ordinance lays out the applicable definitions used in the Ordinance, the
procedure and requirements for Planning Board applications (conceptual, design
review, and final), the conditions of approval, the development standards
(density, dwelling units, frontage/setback/yard requirements, layout, roads,
water and wastewater treatment systems), when in the process Variances would
need to be obtained, and how appeal are made. As part of the Ordinance,
Conditional Use Permits are used by the Planning Board to authorize development
that would otherwise not be allowed under a particular site per the Zoning
Ordinance, Site Plan Review, or Subdivision regulations if certain criteria are
met. Provisions for continued affordability (minimum of 30 years) and ongoing
third party monitoring are outlined and a minimum of 50% Workforce Housing
units are required in such a development.
Vice-Chair Crisler read the notice into the minutes.
Ms. Scott
noted there were 2 minor points to address aside from the grammatical error on
page 2:
•
Attorney Campbell, referring to the 5
acre minimum, offered some suggested the Board should review and consider; and
•
He further suggested the Board consider
the Town’s obligation for multi-family housing.
Attorney
Campbell does encourage the Board to move the proposed Ordinance to the
Warrant. Ms. Scott informed the
Board that the numbering and reformatting corrections had been made.
Board
comments/questions included:
•
Vice-Chair Crisler,
as a member of the WFH subcommittee, reviewed some of the more significant
points the committee had worked on;
•
A question was raised regarding 619.7.1
and the reference to “this” ordinance, Appendix A-1. Appendix A-1 is not attached. The
language “of the Windham Zoning Ordinance” will be added after the
phrase “Appendix A-1.”
This is not a substantive change;
•
Regarding Attorney Campbell’s
suggestion to reduce the 5 acre minimum to 2.5 or 3 acres; The Board decided to
leave it at 5 acres;
•
Ms. Nysten had
a question about Section 619.3 and asked if the language meant that
manufactured housing is not allowed in Residential C as a WFH project; Vice-Chair Crisler
said it is allowed, if it is zoned appropriately with 7,500 sq ft lots
•
Ms. Webber expressed concern about the
term “Work Force Housing” and suggested the term “Affordable
Housing;” The Board
understood the perception concern and asked what the Board could do to
encourage voters to vote for this Ordinance; The Board will address this at a later
date;
Chairwoman
Post opened discussion to the Public.
Mr. Karl Dubay under Section 619.5.2 it says what Condition Use
Permits cannot be granted, but does not say what can be granted. He provided an example. Vice-Chair Crisler
explained that anything not listed under this Section could be considered.
Ms. Nancy Pendergast, 35 Sharon Rd, referenced Attorney
Campbell’s memo where he addressed “realistic opportunities for
multi-family homes.” She
asked the Board if they were satisfied that the Town offered that in
Residential B, Residential C, and the Village Center District. She asked if the Board wanted to add
language allowing WFH in the Rural District or did the Board want to go forward
with the Conditional Use Permit.
Board comments/questions
included:
•
Vice-Chair Crisler
explained that the sub-committee thought the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) would
give that opportunity, without being explicit in the Ordinance;
•
The
Committee also considered ways in which to encourage multi-family development;
they determined that they could only do it through zoning and possibly working
on re-zoning in the future;
•
Ms.
Nysten stated that the proposed WFH Ordinance allows
multi-family in the Res C.
According to Ms. Scott, multi family is not allowed in Res C in our
zoning Ordinance. Ms. Nysten noted Res B and Res C Districts on the zoning
map. She also noted multi-zoned
parcels containing Res B or Res C.
•
Vice-Chair
Crisler noted that she and Ms. Nysten
had a difference opinion about Residential C and the language is not
clear. The Vice-Chair clarified
what development was allowed in each District and stated that Residential C
does allow for multi-family; however, the intent was to allow for manufactured
homes and that is why a 7500 sq ft per lot size required. She thinks the Board ought to spend some
time next year clarifying the distinctions.
•
Ms.
Scott has placed on the 2012 agenda the task to clarify the intent of
Residential C.
•
Vice-Chair
Crisler noted that much of Residential C has already
been built out as single family and that’s why there is not much Res C
left.
•
Ms.
Pendergast stated that under this proposed Overlay
District, it would allow for WFH projects and multi-family, regardless what the
Town’s zoning says.
•
Ms.
Scott, in response to Vice-Chair Crisler’s
understanding of the various building allowed in the District’s, stated
that she would not interpret the actual written language in the same way. She explained the numbering was a bit
odd and concurred that Multi-family is not allowed in C; however, manufactured
housing is allowed.
•
Vice-Chair
Crisler noted that the sub-committee made it clear in
the WFH Ordinance that multifamily is allowed in Residential C District.
Chairwoman
Post closed discussion to the Public.
Chairwoman
Post highlighted the points of the WFH discussion:
•
Attorney Campbell’s concerns;
•
The zoning problems separated from the
WFH Ordinance;
•
The Grammatical correction;
•
The Board is OK with the 5 acre minimum.
Vice-Chair Crisler
motioned to move to the Warrant the Work Force Housing Overlay District
Ordinance as amended:
•
Changing the word “minimum”
to “minimal;” and
•
Adding the words, “of the Windham
Zoning Ordinance” after “Appendix A-1.”
Seconded by Ms. Webber. Motion passed: 7-0.