From: RMower on behalf of RMower Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 2:13 PM To: Michael Behrendt Cc: Karen Edwards Subject: Site Plan Review Regulations | Part II: Article 5 Independent Studies Attachments: Concord Site Plan Regs 20130417.pdf Greetings, Michael -- Would you please forward this email to the Planning Board for consideration during the public hearing on the Overhaul of the Site Plan Review Regulations? In addition, since it will not have been included in the packet and is being sent late in the process, perhaps Karen could print copies for the Board to refer to at the meeting. Thank you. * Greetings, Members of the Planning Board -- As you have no doubt discovered yourselves, it is easy to overlook specific points in reviewing these lengthy proposed regulations. I am writing to ask that you review once again Article 5. Independent Studies and Investigations. Specifically, please refer to the analogous section in Concord's site plan regulations (approved April 17, 2013): Section 31: Special Investigative Studies–Third Party Review PLUS Section 32: Traffic Impacts and Traffic Studies. (See below: download link and attachment.) I believe that Concord's regulations reflect more thorough and current approaches to the challenges Durham has faced and might allow the Town to address concerns that others and I have raised, including those about requiring ongoing coordinated review and reconciliation of construction plans as I mentioned in a previous email that pointed to the City of Portsmouth's recent hire a Land Use Compliance Agent. Emphasis in bold added. ONE: TYPES OF STUDIES OR INVESTIGATIONS_________ Durham proposes: Section 5.1 Additional studies The Planning Board reserves the right to require additional studies to determine the potential impact of the proposed site development. Studies may include, but are not limited to, a(n) Traffic Impact Analysis, Fiscal Impact Analysis, and Environmental Impact Analysis. The applicant shall pay for all such studies. Concord requires: SECTION 31 Special Investigative Studies – Third Party Review 31.01 General Requirements: The Planning Board is empowered under RSA 676:4, I(g) and RSA 673.16, II to request special investigative studies and to impose reasonable fees to cover its administrative expenses and the costs of third party review of impact and investigative studies, the review of documents, site and construction plan drawings, and the review of other matters which may be required by a particular site plan application. 31.02 Types of Studies: Traffic studies and water system evaluations are the most common special investigative studies for site plan applications. Other types of studies may be required including, but not limited to, sanitary sewer study, flood hazard study, noise study, nuisance lighting study, parking study, radio frequency (RF) study, wildlife study and habitat evaluation, hydrological study, fiscal impact study, historic resource study, and school impact study. TWO: TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS_____________ Durham proposes: 5.1.1 All Traffic Impact Analyses shall be presented in accordance with the “Strafford Regional Planning Commission’s Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis 1986,” incorporated into these regulations by reference, or in accordance with other best practices for a traffic impact analysis. The Planning Board reserves the right to retain the services of an outside agency for the purposes of reviewing any traffic impact analysis submitted. COMMENT: First of all, 1986 is THIRTY YEAR AGO! Second, it does not address the intent of a traffic study nor alternative transportation or other concerns that might be a rationale for requiring said study. Concord requires: SECTION 32: Traffic Impacts and Traffic Studies. 32.05 Traffic Impacts: The intent of the study will be to address peak hour traffic and safety impacts on intersections, site driveways, and road way corridors applicable to the use and locations proposed and the impact of increased traffic in residential areas, as well as identifying mitigation measures to address any adverse impacts of a proposed development on the City’s transportation system and residential neighborhoods. The Board may require that alternative transportation modes such as pedestrian, bicycle, or transit be addressed as part of a traffic study, may require a travel speed study, or may require the traffic study to address the impact of increased traffic on the quality of life in residential areas. The Board, after review and comment by the Clerk and City Engineer, shall specify the extent of the required traffic improvements to mitigate the traffic, quality of life, and safety impacts of the increased traffic from the proposed application. Thank you for your consideration of these comments and requests. — Robin Robin Mower Durham, NH 03824 * * * CONCORD -- April 17, 2013 NOTE: The title page states that it was revised April 17, 2013, but the footer states that it is the 10/19/11 Public Hearing Draft. A Concord planner confirmed by email today that this version IS the current, approved version.