Purpose Sections for Neighborhood Business District (Section 604), Business Commercial District A & B (Section 605), Gateway Commercial District (Section 605.3.1), Limited Industrial District (Section 606), Professional, Business & Technology District (Section 614.1), & Village Center District (Section 612.1).

• Amend the Neighborhood Business District (Section 604) Purpose to be “intended for businesses that complement the neighborhood in character and scale, have minimal impact on the existing municipal infrastructure, and do not detract from the cultural, historic or natural resources within the area.”;

Ms. Skinner read Section 604 the Neighborhood Business District into the record.

Ms. Scott reviewed Attorney Campbell’s legal review which noted that the Board is only intending to change the purpose sections, which does not change the uses allowed. In which case, he has no problem with the proposed changes.

Chairwoman Post underscored that the proposed changes to the purpose section are not substantive, regulatory changes to the Zoning Ordinance. The purpose section does not contain any regulatory language, but it does set the tone, spirit and intent of the Ordinance that follows. The purpose section helps the ZBA reach a decision.

Ms. Scott explained that the Board is attempting to make sure the purpose section actually matches the uses allowed. The intent is to avoid conflict.

Chairwoman Post opened the Hearing to the Public.

Mr. John Mangon of 1 Depot Road thinks this purpose section is well written. His concern is that the NBD that he lives in is in the Historic Depot area and not all NBD are in Historic areas. His hope is that the Board will take into consideration their intent to allow and examine businesses that come into the NBD that“complements the neighborhood and the existing character and scale; and have a minimum impact.” He knows this is subject to opinion, but would like the Board to consider these intents of the Ordinance as they consider which businesses to allow enter. He is concerned with the cultural and historic nature of the particular NBD that he lives in.

Mr. Bob Young of 115 Haverhill Road is confused over the introduction of the process and purposes and the statement of purpose of the NBD. He is unclear what “Character and Scale” means. Chairwoman Post explained that they are general terms that would help the Board work toward consistency of business size and appearance within a District. He sees little tie-in between the purpose and the balance of this Ordinance. He noted specifically Sections 604.1.1.1 through Section 604.1.3.

Ms. Scott replied that the Board was looking at uses and where the Town has the NBD’s, and trying to describe what the purpose of the Districts are and matching them with the uses. Because this District is surrounded by Neighborhoods, a large business would not be a good fit; in scale and character, it would be too big.

Mr. Young noted that the Master Plan makes a reference to the NBD and the response by residents for more local, convenient shopping opportunities. The consensus and vision at the time of the Master Plan was that the NBD would be the place for these shopping opportunities. He sees no reference to retail or service uses. Chairwoman Post sees no conflict. She thinks the language captures the spirit and intent of this District different from the other Districts. Mr. Young thinks the scale and type of retail should be described in the uses section. Ms. Scott clarified that the Board is not editing the uses section this year. The Uses and Purpose sections should complement each other. Mr. Young thinks the Purpose Section should clarify Scale and Character in the Ordinance. Ms. Laurent noted that the Board’s intent is to not allow businesses in the NBD that overpowers the residents; and therefore, the term “scale.” Mr. Young emphasized that he would like to have convenient retail services available in the NBD. Chairwoman Post said that the Board may revisit the Uses Section for clarification.

Mr. Ken Eyring questioned the removal of the word “primarily” from the proposed wording of NBD and asked if there were residents in the current NBD. Ms. Scott replied that there are some homes in all of the Town’s NBD’s; that single and duplex homes are only allowed as accessory uses; this is the language of the current Uses Section. The current homes in the NBD pre-date this Ordinance. If someone wanted to build a residential home in the NBD, they would have to get a variance. Mr. Eyring is concerned that the description of the spirit and intent puts a lot of power into subjective viewpoints.

Mr. Karl Dubay of The Dubay Group at 87 Indian Rock Road noted that the Board is raising the bar, adding subjectivity, and this will make it more difficult for developers. He noted several areas of confusion and is disturbed by an emerging pattern – the Board removed “goods and services” and is overtly changing the spirit and intent. He thinks by the time the Board finishes overlaying controls and changes, there will be little left for developers to do.

Chairwoman Post explained that the reason the Board removed “goods and services” was because it restricted goods and services to residents of the District. In truth, it serves a much broader area. Goods and services are also developed in the Uses Section; it is not being removed.

Chairwoman Post closed the Public Hearing. .

Ms. Nysten motioned to move to Town Warrant the proposed language for Section 604 Neighborhood Business District. Seconded by Mr. McLeod. Motion passed: 7-0. Mr. McLeod noted that by restricting “goods and services to the residents of the area” the Town would be preventing businesses from succeeding. It was necessary to remove that phrase to allow for businesses to succeed.