Flood Insurance Program and Insurance: The Board discussed the presentation made to the Board of Selectmen regarding flood insurance. Jack Sapia and Russell McAllister were to set up a presentation for the Planning Board. Sue Killam would like to have a well-rounded discussion of the pros and cons of flood plain management. Ted Stewart asks if the Board should have professionals review the issue before any model ordinance is enacted. Sue Killam asks how the flood plain insurance affects homeowners insurance in a flood plain area. Her concern is what will be forced upon the property owner if the land is designated as a flood zone. Ted Stewart says that the ordinance is specific to where your building falls in the flood zone, but Sue Killam says that refinancing may be affected even if your land has water frontage. Ted Stewart says that if the land has not been flooded within the past two years’ floods, then the land should be safe from insurance increases. Eric Steltzer says it depends upon where your building is, not whether your building has been flooded in the past. If your property is NIFP, subsidized, government insurance is available, where flood insurance in the private sector is much more expensive. Sue asks what the flood insurance exactly covers, since there were no actual loss of homes in the recent flooding. Ted Stewart informs the Board that if your property is not in the flood plain and you choose to get flood insurance, the insurance is a lot less. Paul DiMaggio said he thinks if your property is in the flood plain, you must have flood insurance in order to get a mortgage if you are signed on with NIFP. The NIFP program can provide residents with a much less expensive flood insurance. Flood plain plans/mapping are now showing buildings in the flood plain. Ted Stewart says the sills of your home can make or break you as to whether you are in the flood plain. Sue Killam asks if the Town adopts the program and a bank determines that a property is in the flood zone, will it matter and how do you prove the home is above elevation. Cheaper flood insurance is the benefit of the program. The Town-wide benefit is more eligibility for FEMA recovery and federal assistance. Eric Steltzer will find out if this is in fact true. Ted Stewart says there were people who were not in the flood plain who could have benefited from this program due to water damage and the inability of receiving flood insurance. The program provides an ordinance to prevent development within the flood plain. Jennifer Gilbert from DEP should be invited down to present to the Planning Board.

Unfinished Commercial Site Plans: Jim Kirsch, Code Enforcement, appears before the Board to discuss the following unfinished commercial site plans: Eastern Seaboard – Site plan was approved in 1995 and still not completed. Harold Morse wrote a letter in 1995 for Eastern Seaboard to come to the Planning Board workshop meeting, but Eastern Seaboard never came. Town Counsel said to hold a public hearing regarding Eastern Seaboard’s intentions, and Eastern Seaboard did not come. Eastern Seaboard started a building which it claims is 95% complete, but apparently only a frame inspection has been done. No other inspections have been done on the site. The building permit has run out, and a new one needs to be applied for in order to finish the remaining work. The RSAs say that a town can legally revoke a site plan if no work has occurred in four years. All site plans should have a completion date. The outside work was to be completed in 2001, but it still has not been completed. The Planning Board feels the site plan should be revoked. Mr. Kirsch says Eastern Seaboard needs to come in for a workshop meeting or public hearing first. Presently, the area is being used to store materials and heavy equipment. If there is a violation, the site plan cannot be revoked unless Eastern Seaboard is notified of the violation and the Board of Selectmen stands behind the code enforcement. Ted Stewart says the owner needs be told he is being considered for revocation and why. Paul DiMaggio says the Board should send a notice that they are considering revocation and then hold a public hearing to revoke the application. Eastern Seaboard was told in 2001 that they were being considered for revocation, but they never showed up at the meeting and the Board never proceeded. The Board must discuss and decide their systematic approach to this issue and how the Board should proceed forward. They must decide the process of incomplete site plans and when time has run out on submitted site plans. Ted says the Building Inspector needs to review the site plans and keep them current, but Sue Killam does not agree because the process is not complete. Ted Stewart thought that site plans ran out in four years. Eric Steltzer informed the Board that anything after four years needs to be reviewed. Some questions the Planning Board has regarding this issue are: (1) With a current site plan, how does the Board address those that are out-of-bounds. This question should be discussed with Town Counsel. (2) With regard to future site plans, the Board should add amendments regarding this issue. Loren Realty Trust – This site still has road work and landscaping to be finished. Loren Realty Trust has a $10,000 bond with the Town. The Town cannot spend private people’s money on private property. Loren Realty Trust received a certificate of occupancy before the site plan was finished. The money was originally put up by Beaver Brook who then sold the property to Loren Realty Trust. The Board must speak with Town Counsel on how to proceed with revocation of incomplete site plans. Legally, something needs to be done to tie the building permit and the site plan. Sue Killam feels that in a larger town, the gap would be filled. Chuck Earley says the Selectmen gave a Certificate of Occupancy for the site plan. Paul DiMaggio does not believe this is a lost cause, and there are other alternatives to revoke a site plan. Ted Stewart feels that the threat of a revocation will get developers to move on their developments. The Board discussed another building between these two sites that is half completed and will receive a Certificate of Occupancy, but all the work will not be complete. How does the Board fix this problem? The owner needs to know that no Certificate of Occupancy will be issued without all the site plan conditions (landscaping, road work, etc.) being met. This site plan has a four year exemption, and they are only one year into the site plan. The Board can put pressure on the owners to comply with a letter of intent to revoke the site plan. Town Counsel says the Board can set timeframes on the site plans, and they should have to do so as part of the approval process.

General Discussion of the Board: Sue Killam suggests that Shirley Galvin’s position be filled with someone who has more experience with the Planning Board. It is suggested that Eric Steltzer write a job description to be presented to the Board of Selectmen for Ms. Galvin’s replacement. The Board would like to have someone in that position who can review site plans and check the sites. The position would be more of a management/clerical position, possibly filled by a college graduate or undergraduate in a planning program.

RPC, Eric Steltzer Regarding Master Plan Chapters: Eric Steltzer of Rockingham Planning Commission presented to the Board his memorandum regarding substantial improvements to two chapters of the Master Plan. The two chapters are the community profile and the housing chapters. The community profile chapter consists of background data broken down into eight sections. Page 19, Table 7, in the community profile shows the median household income compared to mortgage and rent. The rent number is lower than other towns, but there are only two rental complexes in Town. Rents are much higher in surrounding communities. Mr. Steltzer received his statistics from the US Census Bureau, but will try to get further information from other resources which may be more comparable. The rental pool in Town is only in one area, is studio apartments and are smaller rental units compared to surrounding communities. The Town has the lowest rent in the highest median market. Joe Guischard requests an explanation of the 36% turnover in residents questioned. Mr. Steltzer informs him that this figure shows that 63% of residents were in their present residences and 36% were in some other residence, whether it be a different county, state or internationally. Mr. Steltzer has provided the hard data for all the figures he has produced with graphs, etc. The housing chapter is broken down into four sections. Page 8E.7-8 shows a building permit spike between 1999-2002. Mr. Steltzer asks the Board why there was such a spike during this period. The Board informs him that Settlers Ridge (condos and single-family homes), Centerview Hollow (condos), Cogswell Farm (condos and single-family homes) and Millstream Crossing (single-family units) were built during that time period and resulted in the spike in building permits. The median rent of $509 from 2000 will be meaningless by the time the Master Plan is complete. More recent data needs to be found, but it would cost the Board a substantial amount to obtain this information. Mr. Steltzer will make a notation in the chapter of the current rentals in Town. The paragraph regarding affordable housing is discussed. The only affordable housing in Town is the elderly housing. The condos in Town are very expensive and not affordable housing or geared to low-income housing. The only affordable housing in Town is 30 years old. The current contract for the Master Plan goes until the end of June. The Board needs to approve the two chapters presented and move on to the next contract. Mr. Steltzer would like the Board to review the chapters and come back to discuss any recommendations or comments.

Amendments were made to meeting minutes of 2/21/07 as follows:

Amendments were made to meeting minutes of 3/21/07 as follows:

p.1 – First paragraph, add at beginning "Discussion of."
p.1 – Last line on page, after fits delete "the."
p.3 – Line 10, change "Date" to "Data."

Amendments were made to meeting minutes of 4/4/07 as follows:

p.1 – Fifth paragraph, line 3, change "Willow" to "Winslow."
p.2 – Eighth paragraph, line 1, change "vacated" to "violated.
p.2 – Eighth paragraph, line 2, after structure delete "not" and after being delete "of."

Old Business: Chuck Earley feels the Planning Board should have a site walk of the golf teaching facility. He is informed that it would be considered Planning Board meeting, and it must be announced to let abutters know the site walk is taking place.

The meeting was closed at 10:20 PM.

Next scheduled Public Hearing meeting is May 16, 2007.

Respectfully submitted,

Raelene McBride