Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Network topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
After Kincaid storage proposal, Milford board debates clearer developer contribution policy for sidewalks
Summary
A self-storage application prompted a wide discussion about whether the town should require or incentivize developer contributions for sidewalks and other off-site improvements, weighing impact fees, required setbacks for future sidewalks, and incentive tradeoffs.
A discussion about sidewalks and developer contributions dominated a large portion of the Feb. 3 Milford Planning Board work session after a recent Kincaid self-storage application raised questions about whether developers should be asked to fund or provide space for pedestrian infrastructure.
Board members agreed the topic touches land-use, finance and long-term planning and that the town currently lacks a clear ordinance to require sidewalk construction in many cases. “We can’t have that discussion now because, number one, we have all the power, and we don’t have any ordinance to back it up,” one committee member said, noting the current practice often amounts to voluntary contributions or case-by-case negotiations.
Members discussed a variety of approaches: adding trip-generation factors to any impact-analysis algorithm, revisiting impact fees (an RSA-defined process), creating a capital-improvement plan (CIP) for staged sidewalk construction, requiring setbacks for future sidewalks so the town can extend networks later, and offering density/green-space incentives in exchange for on-site or off-site pedestrian improvements.
State planning guidance was cited as allowing communities to charge new development for clearly delineated new infrastructure (for example, new roads or utilities tied to a development). Several board members said impact fees are technically possible but administratively complex and require strict RSA-driven formulas; others favored incentive-based approaches so expectations are clear to developers up front.
Why it matters: how the town allocates costs and responsibilities for sidewalks affects pedestrian safety, walkability and future connectivity—especially in growth corridors like South Street. Board members asked staff to research legal mechanisms and comparable municipal programs and to return with options prior to additional ordinance drafting.
Next steps: staff will research statutory options (including state RSA sections cited in discussion) and present pros and cons of impact fees, incentive mechanisms and setback/permit conditions at a future meeting. The Kincaid application was continued to Feb. 17 and the sidewalk question will be revisited when that application returns.
