Town of Sutton 2004 Master Plan
Future Land Use Chapter
10/25/04 Meeting Minutes, 7-9 pm
In attendance: Laura Scott, Carol Williams, Dan Sundquist, Sue Reel, Bill Hallahan, Ken
Uzdanovich, Jessie Cheney-Quinley, Bob Quackenboos, Pete Blakeman
Introductory items:
Participants were welcomed, and minutes from the last meeting and a draft version of
the Future Land Use chapter was distributed for review. Introductions were made.
First, Laura quickly reviewed the process. The Planning Board is holding public
hearings, chapter by chapter, to preliminarily approve the chapters of the Master Plan. In
February of 2005, the Planning board is planning to hold a final public hearing to review
and approve the entire master plan.
Laura reviewed the dates for the next 2 meetings of this subcommittee: November 15
and December 6. She suggested that we would need one additional meeting as well.
Given a choice between December 20 and December 27, the majority of the
subcommittee preferred December 27. So we will have our final subcommittee meeting
on 12/27. The public hearing for this chapter is scheduled for January 11, 2005. It will be
part of the planning board meeting.
We reviewed the minutes from the last meeting and with a couple of modifications, they
were accepted.
Review Draft Future Land Use Chapter:
We went through Laura’s draft for the Future Land Use Chapter. There were changes
suggested throughout the document and Laura will make those changes. Hitting some of
the high points, it was decided that we SHOULD include the “Overview of Master Plan
Chapter Recommendations” in a bulleted, concise way to “set the stage” for Future Land
Use. This chapter will make reference to the wealth of information available in the other
chapters.
Laura will revise theh 4 goals on page one, as directed by the subcommittee.
Other information that Laura said she would obtain for the “influences on Sutton from
Regional Development” included information on: I-93 expansion information (Dan
Sundquist said he could help with that), high-speed rail information, middle school
information, and Mt. Sunapee Expansion (Dan S. will help with that).
Information about other non-profit housing groups besides CATCH will be added.
There was discussion about Regionalism and that regional improvements/expansions
will undoubtedly impact Sutton.
Future Zoning:
Laura described the zoning district process. It is, to some degree, like “starting with a
clean slate”. What do you want Sutton to look like in the future? Specifically, since this is
a 10 year plan, what do you want it to look like, be like, in the next 10 years? Zoning can
help shape this.
Carol presented the composite overlay map that the commercial/industrial subcommittee
did in May of 2000. The purpose of this map was to show where new development might
be directed. The map took into account major transportation networks (I-89, exits 9,10,
and 11), and state roads route 114 and Kearsarge Valley Road, primarily) as potential
favorable corridors for development. A ½ mile and 1 mile radius was drawn around each
exit. Then, any existing curves in the road which adversely affected sight distance along
the state roads (according to Dept of Transportation standards) were eliminated from the
study. An offset distance, to either side of the remaining “developable” roads was shown
(100’? I do not recall).
The next step the 2000 Subcommittee did was to take the information that the Natural
Resources subcommittee had done and overlay that information (not developable/least
favorable/moderately favorable/unfavorable into those places where the transportation
network seemed to work. Finally, homes and home businesses were shown along the
relevant transportation corridors.
Laura advised against looking too closely at existing land parcel lines, houses, or current
land ownership. Houses can be sold, roads can be moved. She advised us to think Big
Picture. Some ideas that were discussed as possible zoning districts were:
• Residential – 2 acres
• Rural Residential – 5 acres
• Village Center – 0.5-1.0 acres with reduction is setback and frontage
• Heavy commercial/industrial – with design requirements, buffers, and natural
resource protection
• Retail Commercial – with design requirements, buffers, and natural resource
protection; community services
Dan Sundquist mentioned the possibility of a “new town center” like a “New Sutton”
similar to North Sutton, South Sutton, etc. where denser, mixed use development could
occur.
There was discussion again about existing land use….and not to let it cloud our vision.
For example, what if the gravel pit outlives its usefulness? It can be sold. What happens
when the golf course decides to go out of business and that land is sold? What would
our vision be for these pieces of land?
There was discussion about “conservation subdivisions”. This concept varies with details
but generally involves a larger tract of land, where housing is concentrated and the bulk
of the land is left as protected open space. Most often the open space is commonly
owned by the homeowners association, town, or land trust. There must be incentives for
this type of development.
Finally, we should all think about WHAT WE NEED as well as WHAT WE WANT.
The next meeting is scheduled for December 6, 2004 at 7 pm at the Town Hall.
Submitted by Carol Williams
| 
