Minutes Planning Board & Economic Development Committee
NEWMARKET PLANNING BOARD
&
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE (EDC) MEETING
AUGUST 3, 2015
MINUTES
Present:
Val Shelton (Vice Chairman of Planning Board and EDC), Gary Levy (Town Council ex officio on Planning Board, Town Council Representative to and Chairman of EDC), Diane Hardy (Town Planner), Janice Rosa (Planning Board), Rose-Anne Kwaks (Planning Board), Peter Nelson (Planning Board), Ezra Temko (Planning Board), Bill Arcieri (Member At Large EDC), and Jay Dugal (NCDC Representative EDC)
Called to order: 6:05 p.m.
Adjourned: 8:07 p.m.
Agenda Item #1 – Pledge of Allegiance
Agenda Item #2 – Introductions
The members introduced themselves.
Agenda Item #3
An overview was given by Gary Levy, Chair of the Economic Development Committee.
Gary Levy stated Planning Consultant Peter Kwass helped the EDC with a study of Newmarket’s potential, with respect to economic development. The focus of the study was to look at ways to increase commercial development and business growth in town. The goals agreed upon by the EDC were to:
- expand the property tax base
- increase the availability of local goods and services
- grow consumer markets to foster new business development and growth
- ensure adequate commercial space to accommodate desirable business development
- promote development that retains the town’s rural character and quality of life.
With respect to the recommendations to support these goals, for commercial development, the Kwass report recommends marketing development sites more aggressively to attract desirable forms of commercial and mixed-use development. The analysis identified several commercial uses that present market opportunities and are well-matched to the local environment, such as office, administrative, business, professional, technical, medical services, small technology start-ups, including potential UNH spinoffs, independent boutique retail and consumer services, a small grocery or specialty food store, food and beverage establishments, specialized custom made products and services, and internet sales. Within that realm, the goal is to increase transparency, efficiency and consistency of the development process and revise development regulations, as necessary, to promote desirable development consistent with the Town’s interests and values. The Planning Board should take a look at the goals and see how regulations could help to foster these types of businesses and promote their growth.
Regarding business development, the Kwass report suggested they target recruitment efforts to the firms identified in the analysis, as offering the most favorable business opportunity. It also recommended that the Town establish a business retention and expansion program with assistance from the UNH Cooperative Extension Service. The committee never reached a conclusion as to who would ultimately implement that goal. They did discuss the possibility of hiring an economic development person. Some thought the Town Administrator should perform this function, but they never decided how to implement this. He stated Town Planner Diane Hardy also gets a fair amount of phone calls from people asking about economic development opportunities in the Town.
The EDC also focused its discussions on visitor attraction to try to make Newmarket a destination. This would increase visitor spending in local businesses; support additional business development; and develop an infrastructure that supports visitation.
With respect to downtown revitalization, the report recommended they should establish a shared community vision for the downtown’s future. This could involve a public/private partnership with collaboration among businesses, property owners and the Town government. The role of the partnership would include branding, marketing, developing additional downtown events, promoting public realm improvements and advocating for improvements in maintenance and public services.
He stated Peter Kwass was specifically asked to weigh in on elderly housing. He talked about repurposing the B-2 and B-3 zones, which were originally targeted for industrial or heavier business uses. He suggested that the Town consider lower intensity uses in these areas more attuned to site limitations and the character of the surrounding area. This spurred discussion about the potential for 55+ aged housing on Route 152 and the concept of a Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC) at the Wilson property. The Town owns this property in conjunction with the Ham property, which is accessed off New Road, and is east of the industrial park.
That is an overview of Peter Kwass’ findings. It is not very different from what has been discussed at numerous EDC meetings. The types of desired businesses tend to be office, professional, medical, small technology start-ups, and other ventures that would be unique to Newmarket. Promoting these types of uses would allow the Town to grow and retain its current character and not create some of the negative externalities that go along with growth that sometimes people don’t take into consideration, when they open the floodgates.
Val Shelton added a couple of items relative to Planning Board. When Peter Kwass did his analysis, he looked at all of the different zoning districts, including the M-2 and M-2A overlay districts. What they are looking for in these areas are more organic, unique type of businesses that will play on the character in town. Peter’s report discusses some of the hindrances posed by the current zoning, which make it difficult to promote these types of uses. It was suggested that to build out mixed uses in the M-2 zone we would need to provide density bonuses to developers. The idea is the density bonuses would tie to architectural controls, which define the character for the town that we are looking to see. There would have to be a finite set of criteria in order to achieve that goal.
Without density bonuses these areas will not be developed as we want them to be or they just will not be developed. It is her opinion that section of the Kwass report should be visited. Then the other part the Planning Board will need to delve into is on page 59 where it talks about the whole development process. It all goes back to what the town is looking for, what their interests and values are, and what we want developers to be bringing forth to the Planning Board. Also, we should look at how to provide the developer with the best tools to get them there, while making that process smooth and seamless relative to cost and time. One of the recommendations would be to review the development approval process with developer input to identify how to make this more efficient without sacrificing the essential regulatory oversight.
She stated the vision of the downtown is to think about zoning and design standards from a Planning Board perspective that they may want to enact in order to protect the investments that have been made downtown. Several years ago, everyone was opposed to design standards, because they thought it would impede the redevelopment of downtown. Now that so much investment has been made in infrastructure, the EDC believes it is important to make sure this vision for downtown will be maintained. It might be appropriate to start talking about design standards again for the downtown. Rose-Anne Kwaks stated that should be the first thing they do, before they do anything else.
Val Shelton stated they looked at key areas of town that have not seen development, because the zoning does not work. That is how they ended up focusing on the B-3 zone on Route 152 and the B-2 area along New Road, which has significant access issues. With that in mind, they wanted to figure out what types of developments were appropriate there. There is a growing demand for Continuing Care Retirement Communities (CCRC). A lot of towns around us have approvals before them for these developments. The B-2 and B-3 zones would be the best areas of town for that use. But, before moving forward with any re-zoning, they wanted to figure out the tax benefits or costs. That is when the EDC brought in John Connery.
John Connery stated the genesis of the Continuing Care Retirement Communities (CCRC) zoning proposal came out of the Kwass report and economic development framework. The idea was to allow uses that would meet local or regional needs; would be fiscally beneficial to the town and look for areas where that type of use would be appropriate. The B-3 zoning district is designed to be a very heavy-duty office/research park type of use. It became apparent that there is not a strong market here for major office parks. Even going down the Route 101 corridor to Stratham, there is still significant softness in the office market. It stretches from here to Providence, Rhode Island. It is not a big surprise particularly after the country came out of the 2008 recession and there was a major shift development toward residential uses and less to office. During that period, when we had a great commercial freeze, especially in the banking sector, technology began to make certain types of office space obsolete.
The committee then decided to focus on a continuing care residential district, which contains a mix of senior housing, independent housing, assisted living arrangements, and skilled nursing facilities. There is not a market here for major office parks. We looked at different locations in town, including north of the library on Route 108. In that area, you would have to put several parcels together to create a sizeable development tract. We looked at two sites owned by the Town of Newmarket that we control, as well as Route 152 B-3 zone.
We analyzed the fiscal implications of a range of senior housing types, from the least tax advantaged type such as over 55 age housing to the most lucrative type, which would include skilled nursing services and more intensive care for Alzheimer and memory impaired patients. We wanted to get a baseline for the analysis. We found that the fiscal analysis was very strong for these types of developments and because of the lack of school-aged children to educate. School costs represent between 50 to 60% of the total costs of municipal government throughout the country. We looked at and compared the costs of these projects in a number of communities. Not surprisingly, we found these facilities typically yield a positive net fiscal impact, when comparing the costs of municipal services versus the tax revenue they generate, especially for the high end developments with specialized services. There are reports that have been provided to the EDC to back that up.
Route 152/B-3 Zoning District
In conceptually thinking about zoning, we wanted some caps, some design controls, and master plan and phasing requirements. For example, let’s focus on the Route 152 site. It is a large area, which is zoned B-3 for business uses. The permitted uses for that zone include some very high end uses, which in his opinion won’t happen. It is a very remote area for office parks, and conference centers. It is ingenious to tell the property owner this is what you can do, when in reality it is not going to happen from a marketing standpoint. Without question, the commercial backbone of Newmarket is Route 108, not Route 152, which is supported by the Kwass Report.
So we started to look at the types of uses that might fit for this area. There are some advantages to this site. One is it is on an east-west arterial, which has access to the downtown in one direction and to NH Route 101 in Lee and NH Route 4 in the other. Another advantage is it can be developed having two (2) points of access, obviously Route 152, but also there is the ability to loop back around to Route 108 via Ash Swamp Road. This is always a plus when looking at a development.
Originally, this whole area was zoned for low density residential R-1. One option that we looked at was leaving the underlying B-3 district as is and having an overlay district. However, you still have the same zoning conundrum, that the allowed uses are not real. The overlay district, as proposed, would allow a development with a cap of 150 units with an ability to go up to 250 units. We are not talking about large scale high rise apartment buildings or condos with three (3) or four (4) bedrooms. These would be small attached units for independent living, small cottages or duplexes, or double loaded corridor structures for assisted living with bedrooms set up for skilled nursing, or they could be a mix of all types of senior housing. The project will have to meet all regulations for infrastructure improvements and water resource protection.
The Town will still need to address the underlying zoning issue. There is a recommendation that once you reach this cap and don’t use all the underlying land, the remaining land would resort back to R-1. So, a policy decision will have to be made to change the B-3 zoning to R-1, at some later date, or maybe you may wish to address that now.
John Connery explained if there is skilled nursing provided in the assisted housing mix, there will be more assessed value for the Town to capture. Also he noted that assisted living component is not the type of development that can be easily flipped (turned over speculatively), because of the nature of the specialized equipment and facilities will require more of an upfront investment on the part of the developer.
Wilson-Ham Properties/B-2 District Recommendations
This area is zoned for B-2, which is a fairly heavy duty business and commercial zone. The southern portion is zoned for B-1. There are a lot of permitted uses in the zone. In thinking about its location, it abuts the railroad track to the east and extends to New Road, which is zoned for R-1, low density residential. The only way to develop the B-2 district is to provide access through R-1 Zoning district, which is poor planning. The B-2 zone consists of a very large area of over 200 acres. The only way to access the property is by way of residential areas on either side. So, it is really not suitable for any high intensity type of development. The bridge is very restrictive, with its weigh limitations and one-lane capacity. Also, the intersection of New Road and NH Route 108 is limited and has its problems from a traffic and access point of view.
In this area, the EDC is suggesting you put in a smaller zone here as an overlay district on the two (2) town-owned parcels of property. This area would be re-zoned as an overlay district for assisted living and memory care facilities only, with the skilled nursing. This type of facility creates the least amount of traffic. As a matter of fact, it produces the lowest parking needs of .25 -.5 cars per unit, because the majority of users are over age 85 and don’t drive. The larger of the two projects would be the CRCC on Route 152 and it would have a greater chance of success due to better accessibility and site conditions, but nothing of course is guaranteed.
One of the advantages of the Wilson-Ham site is that it is owned by the Town, so the Town will be at the negotiation table and will have more control with respect to land value and other things. The Town still has the problem with the underlying B-2 district, which extends beyond the Wilson and Ham property and includes the former Beaudet farm site. It is a very rough site. It is hilly, there are steep slopes, wetlands and streams. There are concerns by NHDES and EPA about run-off, in general, draining into Great Bay due to the potential heavy loading of nitrogen into the Bay.
The B-2 zone is not functioning as it should from a zoning perspective. It is essentially a taking of the property value away from those owners. It can’t be used for business and it can’t be used for residential use. It is something the Town needs to deal with. The EDC is recommending a proposal to remove the B-2 and re-zone it as a new residential zone, called the “Coastal Protection Residential District” (CPRD). This would be for low density residential use. We are suggesting a minimum lot size of three (3) acres for environmental reasons to protect Great Bay and minimize impacts associated with aquifers, steep slopes, water quality, flooding and non-point source pollution. Within that zone, we want to encourage cluster or open space residential zoning so the development is sited in the areas that are most suitable for development and away from the environmentally sensitive land.
John Connery’s position is that both of these areas and the way they are zoned are hurting the Town from a fiscal point of view, because they are not providing any fiscal benefit to the Town. After studying this for four or five months, there is no question about that. Neither of these projects are going to be a huge windfall to the community in any substantial way. But they will “stabilize” your tax base and create value and opportunities for the community. Within the CRCC, 20-25% of the population will be local, not only from Newmarket, but you will bring new dollars to the community, you will create new jobs, and provide another level to support the retail uses that you have. Bill Arcieri noted that two (2) underlying districts, need to be addressed. He clarified that the Wilson property and those south to the Town line are in a B-1 zone. John Connery agreed and will correct that in the report. He said given the quiet and residential nature of New Road, the development of large scale retail uses in this area is inappropriate and just doesn’t make sense.
Continuing Care Retirement Communities
John Connery then reviewed the definition of a “Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC). It is defined as a retirement housing development whose purpose is to provide senior housing that allows “aging in place” for persons aged 55 and over. A wide variety of housing types are permitted, as long as deed restrictions, intended to maintain the senior housing are provided for all housing types. The district will have a development cap of 150 senior age restricted units. However, that development cap can be increased to 250 units, if the Planning Board determines that all utilities are in place to meet local and state regulations and if it is in the Town’s best interest. The Planning Board shall develop procedures and standards under which these developments will be built. There needs to be a Master Plan and at least fifty (50) units within the CCRC must be assisted living or memory care units in the initial phase of the plan. In order for the Planning Board to reach the cap, the project must meet the infrastructure and water and sewer requirements.
William Arcieri of the Economic Development Committee (EDC) noted the differences in assessed value per square foot of an industrial use, an office building and a CCRC. He recalled from earlier discussions, there was quite a bit of range from $50 per square foot to a $100 per square foot. John Connery agreed. CCRC values can go above $100 per square foot, which is one of the reasons the EDC is recommending this proposal as being in the best interest of the Town.
Also, the EDC talked about the permitted uses within the zone. It was explained that the EDC is recommending that the Planning Board look at some of the high intensity uses that are currently allowed in the B-3 zone with an eye to changing them in order that the other uses that developed are compatible with the CCRC concept to assure that the investment that has been made is protected against potential of de-valuing of property values. Currently, the following uses are permitted: Hotel, Conference Center, Indoor/Outdoor Recreation, Retail, Office, Health Club (definition needed), Wholesale, Warehousing Light Manufactoring, Manufacturing, and Research and Development. Educational Facility, Fraternal Organization and Flexible Use Development. The EDC looked at the permitted uses and pulled out the heavy intense uses, such as manufacturing, light manufacturing, wholesaling, warehousing, and outdoor recreation.
Val Shelton stated the following uses would remain in the B-3 zone, as recommended by the EDC: Conference Center, Indoor Recreation, Retail (by conditional use permit, no big box stores), Office, Educational Facilities, Health Clubs (although a definition is needed), and Fraternal Organizations. . The Flexible Use Development option is recommended for deletion or tightened up. This needs to be addressed by the Planning Board.
Noting that the votes were not unanimous, Ezra Temko asked what would the disadvantage to removing those. A detailed discussion is included in the tape of the meeting, which can be viewed on the Town’s website at Video On-Demand. Gary Levy stated that many of the uses are not marketable or compatible with the CRCC. Some of the uses would be grandfathered. Also, there is a commercial excavation on going in the area, which would be allowed to continue as a grandfathered, non-conforming use. The Planning Board should avail themselves of the minutes for the EDC and the reports which are on-line.
John Connery explained that the EDC is recommending an overlay district. Then after the CCRC is developed, you would want to re-zone the underlying zone to R-1 or some other kind of residential use. John Connery suggested we create definitions that are specific to the proposed overlay district. Val Shelton thought that could be achieved by having criteria that has to be met by the conditional use permit.
Rose-Anne Kwaks asked if after the CCRC is developed, if the plan that the R-1 zoning would kick in. This was discussed at the EDC. Val Shelton noted that if you look at 70% of the lots in that district, they currently are residential. Under the new zoning, you will continue to have property owners would have non-conforming lots. The idea is that after the CCRC is built and the cap is met, then the zoning would revert to single family, or some other type of residential housing. Rose-Anne Kwaks suggested that maybe residential use could be allowed by special use permit in the future.
Diane Hardy questioned whether we would want to lock ourselves into that at this time. It may be that after the CCRC is built the area would become attractive for some of the uses that are being eliminated now. There might be interest in spin-off development, such as a medical facility or small hotel that would support the CCRC. John Connery agreed a small hotel, medical office facility, a small convenience center, or other retail uses might work but that is a policy decision that would be made down the road to re-zone what is left.
Peter Nelson suggested maybe some light industrial use like a bio-medical research facility may not be a problem and would fit at that point. We shouldn’t just wholesale eliminate an entire category of uses. We want to provide some flexibility. Val Shelton suggested that we need to look at the definitions and come up with better (or more detailed) definitions and add to those our zoning. Peter Nelson thought we should look at other communities that have given this some thought and so we don’t have to re-invent the wheel. John Connery suggested that the Town may want to set up definitions that are specific to the overlay district. Val Shelton suggested that can also be achieved also by the Conditional Use Permit criteria, where you have certain thresholds for various uses.
Janice Rosa had a question about outdoor recreation/indoor recreation. She does not want to see some kinds of recreation precluded, such as a small playground, shuffle boards, walking trails, exercise facility or a swimming pool which may support the Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC). It was clarified that the discussion about outdoor recreation centered around uses such as race tracks, go-carts, shooting ranges, and community wide large playing fields with lights. It was the EDC’s sense that these uses would draw large crowds, resulting in high clean-up costs, traffic impacts and would conflict with the intent of the CCRC.
Public Comments
Val Shelton opened the meeting up for public comments to allow the only member of the public present, Joe Falzone, to provide comments and ask questions.
Joe Falzone who controls most of the land in the B-2 District came forward. He is a developer who has five or six developments that are ongoing in the seacoast area and is very familiar with the site. From what he has heard, it is his opinion that you can’t start the process by requiring that 50 units of assisted housing/skilled nursing facility be put in first before any other over 55 aged independent housing is built. It should be done in the reverse order. As you go along and have elderly housing there, a certain percent of people who have moved into the “over 55 aged” housing who will likely be in need of more specialized care as they age, including assisted living arrangements with skilled nursing. Therefore, you are “creating” the market for the next level of care: the assisted living/skilled nursing facility. He has talked to two (2) New Hampshire companies who have looked at this site for a possible Continuing Care Retirement Community (CRCC). They are not interested in pursuing that option right now, if the 50 units of assisted living has to happen first. These are experienced developers who make their decisions based on numbers and demographics. Initially, he is interested in building the housing for the over 55 group, especially since there is an upfront cost of a $1,000,000 to put the sewer in. They can’t make the figures work without having the flexibility of building the over 55 aged housing first. He believes there is a strong market for over 55 aged housing. Newmarket is rated in the Top 10 of NH communities for retirement housing because of the amenities we have here that create that type of housing demand. He indicated that he does projects with Eric Chinburg.
John Connery appreciates the market forces at play here. There will be a master plan of the site and you could make the site work, if the assisted living is part of a phasing plan, with an area set aside for that purpose. The market for a CCRC is not as strong as for an over 55 aged housing development. It does depend on the range of services that would be offered. For example, are we talking about a doctor who is on-site once a week or individualized medical and skilled specialized nursing services available 24/7. It was noted that in the CCRC with an assisted living component with specialized services, there would be more investment on the part of the developer and, hence, there would be more assessed value to the Town.
Gary Levy would like to look at how other communities have achieved this. If it is just a 55 and older development, he doesn’t see the same value as a full CCRD would have. He would be willing to work with a developer on this. He thought it would be useful for the Town to do some research and see how some of the local projects such as Riverwood and Sprucewood got started. It could be beneficial for the Town, but if it is just 55 and up, the Town needs to have a good rationale. He believes the Town would be willing to work with the developer to help get water and sewer to the site. Mr. Falzone indicated he would be interested in getting some kind relief on impact fees, or participate in the sharing of costs with other property owners though a betterment program, if they pay for water and sewer to be extended to the site. There is a provision in the zoning ordinance where, in those circumstances, impact fees can be waived. (It was noted that Riverwood may not be the appropriate model for Newmarket to strive for as it is a non-profit organization. However, they do make payments to the Town of Exeter in lieu of taxes.)
Joe Falzone suggested that maybe the project could be phased in. He agreed it would be helpful to talk to some individuals who have successfully developed these types of projects, elsewhere. He was told the demographics have to be there for the numbers to work. Maybe it would be useful to talk to some of these companies and find out how they made the projects work to get a sense of whether can we attract enough potential clients to fill up the units, so we can understand how quickly can they lease up the units so they can get a reasonable return on their investment. Maybe, one solution would to have a % of total units (say 15%, 18%) that fall into the higher value type of developments, rather than selecting an arbitrary number like 50 units. It is a great site, it is accessible.
John Connery stated there is going to be some market risk on the part of the developer. The key concept behind the CCRC is that of “aging in place”. People want to stay here their families and friends in a familiar area. The CCRC concept allows them to do this.
John Connery has some contacts in New Hampshire and Massachusetts - developers who have done this type of housing. Diane Hardy suggested that we have some kind of a Developer’s Forum, and invite developers with some experience to attend to help us fill in the details and share their perspectives. John would be happy to invite Bernie Plant who is based in the Nashua area. There might be others who would come in and talk to us as well.
Val Shelton stated we know there are other projects that developers are doing out there in the region, so the concept must be marketable. There is a proposal she is aware of in Dover and another in Durham that is moving forward. Bill Arcieri provided a zoning ordinance example from Alton, NH who is also interested in promoting this type of use. The economists feel there is a market here in New Hampshire to do this kind of thing.
John Connery compared the two potential projects. He felt the Wilson property is completely different. We are in a better position to negotiate because we own the property. Currently, the Wilson and the Ham properties are not bringing in any revenue to the Town. The goal is to put those properties back into the private sector to produce some kind of revenue. There will be a revenue either way because of the sale of the property and long term revenue from property taxes that will be generated. The optimum situation would be for the Town to sell the property and negotiate it in such a way to cause the development to happen, maybe through a reduction in price and other incentives, and, then over time, it will generate tax revenue and create fiscal value for the Town.
The main issue with those properties is they don’t have the accessibility and the development capacity that the site on Route 152 has. The Town may set up a similar overlay district in that area, but you may find that the underlying B-2 zone is problematic. In the end, you may want to re-zone those parcels for low density residential (one unit per three acres) and through a cluster or open space development option, it can be privately developed in the future and bring some fiscal value to the town.
Val Shelton has done some research on the Sprucewood Project in Durham. Initially, there were 121 bedrooms in one building on 16 acres of “assisted housing.” And, the second phase involve five (5) separate parcels for 50 units of independent housing, on 50 acres (at a density of 1 unit per acre). There were a total of 171 units at “build-out.” She explained that the Sprucewood project was developed as a cluster on Town water, with a community septic system and leach fields. The Newmarket scenario would envision the extension of town water and sewer lines.
Rose-Anne Kwaks asked how many units are in the elderly housing development at 278 Wadleigh Falls Road. (There are 67 units on 9 acres). How many of those residents are from Newmarket or have families who live in Newmarket? There are no skilled nursing services at that location. It is a subsidized project that was financed by the New Hampshire Housing Finance Authority. At some point, those residents will be looking for some kind of assisted living. It may be helpful to be able to obtain waiting lists from these facilities, including “The Pines” and evaluate the demand for the three different levels of services.
Ezra Temko inquired about differences between 55 plus housing and that for residents over 62. Val Shelton clarified that elderly housing development comes under the Federal Fair Housing Act which allows you to lawfully discriminate in favor of elderly residents for projects in which all residents have to be 62 years or older and for housing for households over 55 years or older where with at least one person living in the unit must fall into that age category. These are different than a CCRC where there is a mix of uses and where over 55 housing may be one component of the CCRC.
Ezra Temko was also interested in knowing more about the incremental municipal costs of adding school children to these developments. I imagine there are fixed costs that you have going into educating school children.
John Connery responded that if you add one or two students to the schools, there are not real marginal costs. In conducting a fiscal impact analysis for schools, we look at the actual net school spending/student, which vary from state to state. We go back to the school department and look at comparables. For example, in this particular development how many students have been generated? You can then do a cost relationship analysis. Typically, the costs are conservative if there is capacity in the schools because of fixed costs, like janitorial services or heating costs, that don’t vary when you add additional students, you need to build a new 30 student classroom or bring in additional teachers to serve the aggregate of new students.
The reality with this type of housing (CCRC), it does not create any of that according to John Connery. So, there is not cost push at all on your education budget. That is why they (CCRC) are being sought after by communities. That is why communities are looking at these from a public policy standpoint and saying there are people who have lived here in this community for a long time, wouldn’t it be nice to provide some kind of housing that will serve them for the rest of their lives. It is not going to work for everybody, but it is way to broaden your housing stock in a way where the cost/revenue ratios are like an office or industrial park. This is the value of the CCRC. We are only talking about a couple of hundred units. It will help the Town from a fiscal perspective, it is not going to hurt the Town or drastically change the character of the community.
Ezra Temko also had some questions about the Town owned sites. Are there any conservation issues with this site? There are some, but of all the sites in the B2 zone, these are the flattest and most developable. The land in the rest of the zone is physically challenged. There are wetlands, surface waters, and steep slopes. It was a working farm, at one point. Bill Arcieri clarified that the Wilson property is in the B-1. It is a more general business/retail zone. It was clarified that it would be an overlay for those two properties. It could be achieved as a deed restriction or zoning change.
There was discussion about the Master Plan. Diane Hardy clarified that John Connery was talking about a site development plan for the specific CCRC which would show how the development and all its integral parts would be laid out. That is different from the Municipal Master Plan, which is a more general policy guide. Diane Hardy noted that the zoning changes that are being suggested would dovetail with the work that the Strafford Regional Planning Commission is doing with the Future Land Use Chapter this fall. It is important that any zoning changes be consistent with the Future Land Use Chapter of the Master Plan.
Val Shelton indicated that the goal was to have this joint meeting with the Economic Development Committee and then have the Planning Board move this forward for further discussion and refinement of the concept and vision. The Planning Board would then craft specific zoning language to implement the recommendations.
Based on the discussion tonight, Gary Levy thought we should continue to look at the pros and cons of this before making any zoning changes. He thought we should look at the Sprucewood (Brookdale) project in Durham, NH as being most similar to what we would like to see in Newmarket. It offers a range of housing types from independent units to assisting living. From the developers that Joe has worked with he would like to see their research and get more information and share that with the Planning Board. Since the EDC has made the recommendations, it would be beneficial for them to do more research and forward the results to the Planning Board. Then this information can presented at a joint meeting of the Planning Board and the Economic Development Committee (ECD). He thinks Newmarket is a desirable place for this type of development, according the report that he has provided. The report was put out by SmartAsset and identified the top 10 ranking communities in New Hampshire as the “Best Cities to Retire in the US”. The ratings looked at variables such as taxes, doctor offices per 1,000 people, recreation centers per 1,000 people, % of seniors, and a recreation and social index. Newmarket ranked 10th in New Hampshire. This article will be forwarded to the committee members.
It was clarified that “Assisted Living” and “Nursing Homes” are not the same. “Assisted Living” is for individual who can still live independently but may need some assistance with basic life needs, like dressing, but for the most part can carry on a regular daily routine. A nursing home provides skilled nursing care for individuals who health care needs are such that they require constant attention of medical staff. It would be helpful if John Connery to get some information together on definitions so everyone understands what the terms mean and uses them correctly.
Peter Nelson thought it would be helpful to understand what the numbers are that are driving this? For example, what is the rational for the cap? John Connery explained that the cap is driven by what is going on in the marketplace. It is based on traffic reports and economic fiscal reports, copies of which can be made available to the Planning Board.
Ezra Temko asked what the sites are available in the downtown. All of the sites within the downtown are candidates for redevelopment. The only vacant lot is the Elm Street property, but the rest of the downtown is available for redevelopment. Gary Levy gave an overview of the recent re-zoning effort to encourage mixed-use development adjacent to the downtown in the M2-A zone.
A motion to adjourn was made by at 8:07 p.m. Janice Rosa, seconded by Rose-Anne Kwaks. So voted.