Sanbornton could get wind-power, Impact Fees

This small town would seriously consider becoming the first Lakes Region community to institute "impact fees" on new residential development, as well as the first to host a wind-powered electricity-generating plant, according to the results of a survey that were made public for the first time last night.

At the Planning Board gathering, Town Planner Bob Ward said the survey shows residents have not changed much regarding the goals for their town since the last Master Plan was completed in 1995. Most people still want Sanbornton to remain a “bedroom community” with a strong rural character, lots of open space and little commercial development.

But one industrial idea favored by a slight edge among the 436 respondents was creating some kind of wind- powered operation that would generate electricity. Ward says the idea may be doable.

The only operating such operation in New Hampshire at this time is along a ridge of the Monadnock Mountains in the western part of the state in Lempster, Ward said. “There’s a rather high ridge that runs from Mount Sunapee to Mount Monadnock and it’s along that ridge (where the windmills are set),” he said. “It’s pretty high and there’s some pretty good-sized winds up there, as you can imagine. And Sanbornton is a pretty high town as well so it has a lot of potential for wind generation… This may not be that farfetched a choice.”

Another question that received a relatively strong response in the survey was the idea of guiding residential growth by having developers pay impact fees to the town for their projects to help offset the increased costs of community services for the new residences.

“But shortly after this (survey) was tabulated the Sanbornton Planning Board went to a Lakes Region Planning Commission workshop,” Ward said, “and that’s where we heard there is the impression that impact fees are a good way to extract financial support for the costs of growth but the findings of the planning commission was that you need to be a little cautious because it’s not as simple and easy (to use it for growth management.) It may not work that effectively for that. It’s a lot of work for the municipality and it may not be the best tool in the toolbox.”

The Master Plan survey consisted of 23 questions that asked residents to rate several different ideas about Sanbornton, from the importance of different kinds of residential growth and affordable housing, to varied industrial and commercial growth ideas, from recreational facilities and the status of town roads to water quality for both recreation and drinking. The survey asked people to give their responses to various ideas by rating their reactions according to five grades: “very important,” which was rated at five points; “important” responses got four points; “somewhat important” was graded at 3 points; “less important” was given 2 points; and “not important” was given 1 point. The survey figures were then tabulated and averaged out to get a general sense of how Sanbornton would like to see itself in the coming decades.

Ward said a subject’s score had to be close to or above 3.50 to be considered significant.

The survey was mailed out in March and April to more than 2,000 property taxpayers, both local residents and those who may have their primary addresses in other communities, and the 436 responses are well within the 20-percent level to make the results reasonably reliable from a statistical point of view, Ward explained to the group of about 40 residents at the hearing.

From the initial questions, the town’s most important attributes were rated as “uncrowded living conditions” (4.51), “rural character” (4.5), “natural environment” (4.48), “scenic beauty” (4.43), and “outdoor recreation” (3.72).

The areas of greatest concern were “protecting the lakes and streams” (4.79), “protecting drinking water quality and supply” (4.79), “property taxes” (4.69), “preserving rural character” (4.48), and “road construction and resurfacing” (4.38.)

Ward said the last strong response might have been related to the fact that the survey was largely distributed during the spring when road problems were particularly noticeable in town.

Other notable replies was strong support for keeping Sanbornton a community of primary single-family homes — a 4.51 grade versus 2.61 for two-family housing, 2.04 for multi-family housing, and 1.63 for mobile homes — as well as strong opposition to any kind of “affordable housing”; the best response for that was for two-family affordable homes rated at only a 2.67.

However there was a 3.50 score for senior housing options. The town had a zoning ordinance that encouraged so-called senior housing several years ago but Town Meeting voters later rejected it. The survey seems to indicate such housing is favored if it is single-family and set on a town road.

Only the windmill power generation idea received more than a 3.50 rating among various commercial/industrial options suggested. Residents also said they supported “home-based businesses,” 3.84; “locally-owned restaurants,” 3.73; and “small retail shops,” 3.59.

Ward said the planners would be passing the entire survey results on to the Sanbornton Master Plan Advisory Committee that will use the information in its ongoing work of updating the Master Plan. Later the plan would be used as a guideline for establishing zoning and other town regulations, he said.

Master Plan Committee Chairman Liz Merry said her group would be holding several public meetings in the months ahead to get more specific input from residents who have particular concerns, such as those who own local bed-and-breakfasts or those working in agriculture.

Ward said a complete listing of the survey results would be posted on the town website as soon as possible.