[0:00] September 16th, 2026.

[0:03] We start our meetings with the Pledge of Allegiance.

[0:05] If you would rise and join me,

[0:10] I pledge allegiance to the flag

[0:13] of United States of America

[0:14] and to the Republic for one Nation under our

[0:19] indigenous justice for role.

[0:32] So we'll start with some administrivia.

[0:36] The playing board continues to allow remote participation.

[0:43] If we have remote members,

[0:45] we will do vote roll call votes for the public.

[0:48] To attend the meeting, you go to www.zoom.us.

[0:54] Enter your meeting ID

[0:55] seven five four six six three nine one two.

[1:00] You may also call in by phone for audio only.

[1:03] You may call area code (646) 558-8656.

[1:08] Same meeting ID 7 5 4 6 6 3 9 1 2.

[1:14] If you are experiencing technical difficulties, please

[1:18] call our local number here in the room.

[1:20] 6 0 3 8 4 5 5 5 8 5.

[1:25] If you are on the phone and wish to speak, toggle star nine

[1:29] to raise your hand and then toggle star six

[1:32] to unmute yourself Once you have been recognized,

[1:36] I will introduce the members

[1:37] and staff who are present this evening.

[1:39] To my far right are our alternates. Mr. Mousy. Mr. Appleton.

[1:44] Good evening. And Mr. Young.

[1:45] Good evening, our planning director, Ms. Du.

[1:47] Good evening, our planning clerk. Ms. Wilson.

[1:50] Good evening town Council liaison, Mr. Chase.

[1:52] Good evening, member Mr. Wood. Evening member. Mr. Menini.

[1:56] Good evening. To my far left is Mr.

[1:59] Viner who does all the wonderful video for us.

[2:01] We thank you for that. Good evening member, Mr. Pier.

[2:04] Good evening Secretary. Mr. Maby. Hello.

[2:07] We are missing vice chair Mr. O'Connor.

[2:11] And I would like to sit Mr. Ey, for, for John, please.

[2:16] We're also missing Mr. Fishman.

[2:20] So we can seat Mr. Appleton.

[2:23] At least for the voting portion. Mr.

[2:26] Cella was absent, but he doesn't have not have an alternate.

[2:36] First item of business is escrow.

[2:41] We have item number 26 dash 33. Steven Marquee.

[2:46] Okay. This is for the proposed car wash at

[2:49] 10 Manchester Road.

[2:51] The escrow type is a performance bond.

[2:54] The request is to establish a performance bond number

[2:57] 0 2 7 8 1 3 8 issued by Berkeley

[3:02] Insurance Company in the amount

[3:03] of $262,928 81 cents.

[3:07] For the above noted project.

[3:09] There will be no expiration date on the bond.

[3:11] So moved And moved by Al.

[3:15] Be seconded by Pier to accept the bond as presented.

[3:19] Any questions? Mr. Chase? Yes. Mr. Wood? Yes. Mr. Mni?

[3:24] Yes. Mr. Ey? Yes. Mr.

[3:28] Appleton? Yes. Mr. Pier? Yes. Mr. Malvin? Yes.

[3:31] The chair of votes? Yes. Second item on the agenda is

[3:36] item number 26 dash 34 FW Holdings.

[3:40] Okay. This was for the subdivision

[3:42] of five Mount Pleasant Street.

[3:44] The escrow type was cash, escrow

[3:46] property location was five Mount Pleasant Street.

[3:49] The request is to approve a final release

[3:51] of cash escrow in the amount of $22,885.

[3:55] For the above noted project, the amount to retain is zero.

[3:59] So moved. Moved by ee, seconded by Pelletier to

[4:04] approve the escrow as presented.

[4:07] Mr. Chase? Yes. Mr. Wood? Yes. Mr. Menini? Yes. Mr. Mousey?

[4:11] Yes. Mr. Appleton? Yes. Mr. Peltier? Yes. Mr. Malam? Yes.

[4:16] Chair votes? Yes. And we then

[4:24] move on to the minutes of September 2nd.

[4:27] Has everyone had a chance to review them?

[4:30] Are there any errors or omissions?

[4:35] Motion to approve the minutes as written.

[4:37] Second. Motion by ee, seconded by Pier

[4:40] to approve the minutes of September 2nd, 2026 as written.

[4:44] Mr. Chase? Yes. Mr. Wood. I'll abstain as I was not here.

[4:47] Mr. Menini? Yes. Mr. Mousy? Yes. Mr. Appleton? Yes.

[4:52] Mr. Peltier? Yes. Mr. Mal? Yes.

[4:55] Chair votes Yes. Correspondence.

[4:58] Mr. Chair, we have one piece

[5:00] of correspondence today from the town of Salem.

[5:03] Jacob LaFontaine. They're planning director.

[5:05] It's a notice to the abutters just letting us know

[5:07] that there's gonna be a master plan update 3.0

[5:10] for the West Village project.

[5:13] And the next date it's on the agenda is, I believe

[5:15] that's Tuesday, 9 22 7 o'clock at the Salem Town Hall

[5:20] if you'd like to hear about it.

[5:22] Thank you very much. Under other business we

[5:27] just have planning director and chairman updates.

[5:30] Okay. So very quickly,

[5:35] I wanted to let you know we did receive,

[5:39] or the building department received an application

[5:42] for the installation of 15 EV chargers at 33 Chester Road,

[5:47] which is the first student busti.

[5:51] We permit EV chargers in any parking lot that has six

[5:56] or more parking spaces.

[5:58] So we're determining that so long as the

[6:02] electrical structures that need to be, you know,

[6:06] the box they need to build to put all the

[6:08] electrical things in.

[6:10] And then the chargers themselves would just require a

[6:13] building permit rather than planning board review.

[6:16] Okay. But I did wanna let you know,

[6:18] so when people see activity there, that's what's happening.

[6:23] Southern New Hampshire Planning Commission's annual meeting

[6:25] will be next Thursday the 24th at Bevan in London Dairy

[6:31] that starts at four o'clock.

[6:32] This is their, it's the 60th year I'm looking. Yeah. Okay.

[6:37] They're celebrating their 60th year planning board members.

[6:40] You are invited. We would just need to know if you wanted

[6:44] to attend or not so that we could secure a seat for you.

[6:48] We would need to know that probably no

[6:49] later than Monday or Tuesday.

[6:51] The very latest.

[6:53] Okay. Everyone got that? Great.

[6:57] I don't have any updates. So we now have a workshop.

[7:03] I'm gonna suggest that Mr. Young sit with us.

[7:07] He will not actually be seated as a voting member.

[7:09] I don't expect we'll actually take any votes.

[7:12] But if we do, we'll just skip over you.

[7:17] My proposal is that we actually do an old fashioned workshop

[7:21] where everyone contributes rather than just

[7:24] reviewing a draft and, and nodding.

[7:28] You have several reference items.

[7:34] Some from staff,

[7:35] some from the New Hampshire Municipal Association.

[7:38] We should look at each section of law.

[7:41] And you know, the NHMA legal staff has said,

[7:46] well, what must you do?

[7:48] What can you do and what you must not do?

[7:51] So I think it's important to review all of those pieces

[7:56] of guidance and then figure out what it is we propose to do.

[8:00] Does that work for everyone? Absolutely. Sweet.

[8:04] I'm just nodding that.

[8:07] Well, you know, I, I am capable of doing Anyone, anyone?

[8:10] Ler. Ler. Yeah. So, okay.

[8:14] Do you want to lead us through this?

[8:17] I noticed that we've got a markup. Yes. A couple.

[8:21] I have a couple of different markups. Okay.

[8:24] And at least mm, the ones I have begin with definitions.

[8:29] Yes. So do you want you, do you want me

[8:32] to skip the staff report?

[8:33] 'cause you've, you have all seen it in read it or do you

[8:36] Yeah, no, let's just, just get right

[8:37] into it and you can kind of Okay.

[8:38] Alright. Bring up the selling points as we get there. Okay.

[8:41] So attached to the staff report, you did have a draft.

[8:45] You all have a more red draft, which is the,

[8:50] the words are exactly the same.

[8:52] The more red draft is the one you wanna look at

[8:55] because it actually shows the changes that we had.

[8:58] We were suggesting. So starting with definitions,

[9:04] state law has changed with regard to

[9:06] how we look at accessory dwelling units.

[9:09] So we are suggesting it no longer has to be,

[9:14] they, they changed the definition of how it is

[9:16] or attached within the principal dwelling unit.

[9:19] And you can also have a detached.

[9:21] So we've adjusted the definition of accessory dwelling unit

[9:24] to capture those changes.

[9:28] We have also added, there's changes to the childcare laws.

[9:33] So we have added a definition of childcare center.

[9:37] And that is a, to clarify, that is a group

[9:43] childcare agency.

[9:47] It is not one that is in the, like

[9:49] that someone would have in their home with up

[9:52] to six kids or so.

[9:56] So what we also did was we updated our daycare definition,

[10:01] our current, it had previously referred you

[10:05] to the group daycare.

[10:08] We want to make sure that we capture that childcare centers

[10:11] as defined would also under group daycare

[10:16] include our adult daycare.

[10:18] 'cause that was something we had talked about

[10:20] having available previously.

[10:23] So we made those changes. So,

[10:25] Yep.

[10:26] I I think I'm gonna invite everyone to just jump in please.

[10:29] When you see something, rather than having group daycare,

[10:34] which includes childcare and adult daycare

[10:37] and then a separate childcare since we have a separate

[10:40] childcare, why don't we simply have a separate adult daycare

[10:44] and that way one's not kind

[10:46] of buried and nested in the other.

[10:50] That may mean that more words have to change. Okay.

[10:55] But I don't know whether one thinks nested definitions kind

[11:00] of are a little more confusing than

[11:02] standalone definitions, I thought.

[11:04] But I, I agree. Anyone feel the same way?

[11:09] Yeah, I I think it's, it's kind of unnecessary

[11:11] to have the group daycare that includes child and adult

[11:15] and then also have a single child definition rather than

[11:18] just having one child definition of one adult definition.

[11:21] Okay. Yeah. So let's, let's decide that,

[11:24] we'll, we'll do that.

[11:26] And, and we've had the adult daycare for a while, right?

[11:35] Or is that new?

[11:38] Lemme see. Well, we,

[11:42] we can get that answer, you know.

[11:43] Yeah. In a follow up look. Yeah.

[11:45] It sort of doesn't matter for the definitions. Yeah.

[11:48] I don't think, I'm not sure if we define,

[11:50] we may have defined at adult day care.

[11:51] Okay. Yeah. If we don't have a

[11:53] definition, we can create one.

[11:55] So we're gonna keep child care center

[12:01] and remove just daycare. 'cause it says see child,

[12:03] Well, a child care center and adult care center

[12:06] And Oh.

[12:07] Kinda make them symmetrical sounding

[12:14] and the, the definition

[12:16] and language can kind of mirror each other, I guess,

[12:18] other than child versus adult.

[12:20] Okay. And then group

[12:25] daycare care stays the same.

[12:27] I would or remove it. I would get rid of it.

[12:29] You have two kinds, child and and adult

[12:32] and I don't think there's a third kind.

[12:34] Right.

[12:35] Yeah. Family.

[12:38] Yeah, there's child, there's the child daycare centers,

[12:41] which are like the one on Shanita Road

[12:45] and then there's the family child centers,

[12:48] which are the more home occupation type.

[12:51] Alright. So group daycare as written does not

[12:54] have the word family in it. So

[12:57] Because family is, family is under a different,

[13:00] it's under a different set of laws under the state as, so

[13:05] they're, they've put, let me grab the,

[13:32] sorry.

[13:33] I am looking for the guidance from

[13:34] New Hampshire MA on that one.

[13:41] I didn't print that one out. They changed,

[13:44] they changed a whole bunch of state law definitions

[13:48] with regard to, they wanted to clarify what is,

[13:52] what do we consider family childcare so that those are the,

[13:58] you know, people who bring kids into their homes up

[14:01] to X number of STU students.

[14:03] I wanna say it used to be like six,

[14:05] but I think it may have gone up a little bit up to like 16.

[14:09] I think. Don't quote me on that.

[14:12] So that people had the ability to manage

[14:16] that in their homes, you know, kids on

[14:18] and off the bus, that type of thing.

[14:20] As opposed to the actual centers themselves

[14:23] where you would go and drop your kids off for the whole day.

[14:28] So is that a, a home occupation

[14:31] For the family childcare that's more of a home occupation?

[14:35] And is it something that the planning board reviews

[14:37] and has jurisdiction

[14:38] Over?

[14:39] We do, we do not, we don't review home occupations.

[14:42] The ZBA would.

[14:43] Okay. So that the, the definition is obviously shared

[14:48] between the planning board and the zoning board with regard

[14:50] to the zoning ordinance.

[14:51] So. Okay. Okay. Makes sense. Okay. Okay.

[14:56] Then there'll be a third one.

[15:07] And while you're taking that note,

[15:08] let me just go on Innovative housing structure,

[15:13] a unique single residential unit such as a tiny house,

[15:18] tiny house on wheels or a yurt.

[15:21] Does that come directly out of the statute?

[15:24] It it does, it does.

[15:29] Because innovative housing structure sounds a little,

[15:32] I don't know, meta

[15:37] Yeah.

[15:38] Meta description is opposed

[15:38] to an actual definition, but, okay.

[15:40] Yeah. So if it's in the statute, we better have it.

[15:42] It is in the statute. Let me just see if I,

[15:45] I'll pull out the actual words for you.

[15:51] Does the innovative housing structure

[15:54] exclusively include the tiny house,

[15:56] tiny house on wheels in yurt?

[15:58] Yes. So if you want to look at, I think it's HB 1681

[16:04] in your packet somewhere, you're gonna have to

[16:07] flip through and find that

[16:10] It's in that thick, It's in

[16:12] the, yeah, it's in the loss.

[16:14] Would it, would it be worth it then to in,

[16:17] in rather than saying such as a tiny house, just be like,

[16:21] No, they're, they're, That's

[16:22] the specific wording that they want.

[16:24] It's innovative.

[16:26] So chapter three 30, HB 1681,

[16:31] subsection two, innovative housing structure

[16:34] or IHS means a unique single residential unit

[16:38] such as tiny house Tiny.

[16:39] We took it right from the state definition.

[16:44] It's only those three. So innovative housing structure is

[16:46] those three at this time.

[16:48] Yeah. What what I kind of meant by that was it says

[16:52] a unique single residential unit such as a tiny house,

[16:55] tiny house on wheels or your, which kind of implies

[16:57] that there is more than those three things.

[16:59] Okay. And it's just giving examples.

[17:02] So does, I still can't follow the, the, the numbering.

[17:05] And there's no page numbers here. I

[17:08] Know. So

[17:09] Which, which HB is it in 1681? Eight numbers are at

[17:13] The top 16 Towards the back

[17:18] Six pages from the back.

[17:20] So 16 81, 81. Yep.

[17:22] All

[17:28] nor shall it include an innovative housing structure

[17:31] pursuant to 6 74 81.

[17:39] So 6 74 81 is where

[17:52] it's probably in this book.

[17:54] 6 74 81.

[18:00] It's not this right here. Is it 6 74

[18:03] 0.810, Okay.

[18:07] Is it? Yeah,

[18:09] Number four.

[18:10] So yeah, they're amending, they're amending 6 74

[18:14] and they're adding a new section in the RSA.

[18:17] So it's not in the blue book yet.

[18:24] Oh, I just didn't see that. This was 6 74 81. Okay.

[18:27] Innovative housing structure shall be treated.

[18:33] Yes. But that doesn't define them.

[18:36] The, the section that uses the language

[18:38] that we're looking at is line seven of this

[18:43] 1681 bill.

[18:48] Okay. Line seven.

[18:50] It's section Roman two

[18:55] innovating housing structure

[18:57] or IHS means a single unique single residential unit such

[19:00] as a tiny house, tiny house on wheels

[19:02] that were a yurt. Alright,

[19:03] So it's done on, It's the, so this is,

[19:07] this is the exact language from

[19:08] the bill is what we're pulling, which

[19:09] It's chapter three 30, HB

[19:13] 1681, page two.

[19:16] Index number what? Seven?

[19:19] It's line seven. Yes.

[19:20] Line seven

[19:25] mm Let's

[19:26] Stop.

[19:27] That's Exactly this innovative housing,

[19:32] This Red.

[19:33] Alright, so is exactly that.

[19:34] This is not the same page that I'm on

[19:39] Because That's

[19:42] What he's referring.

[19:44] Okay. Let's be, yeah, let's be innovative

[19:47] Housing.

[19:48] Yep. Right here. Line seven.

[19:51] I wish they put unique line numbers on all the pages.

[19:54] But anyway, so innovative housing structure

[19:59] or IHS means a single unique residential unit such

[20:03] as a tiny house, tiny house on wheels or a yurt.

[20:08] I suppose my complaint is more about the wording

[20:10] of the original bill then.

[20:12] 'cause this just seems to imply

[20:13] that there are more things than those three.

[20:15] Yeah, well they're just giving examples.

[20:17] Whereas there is not more than those three things.

[20:18] Those are the only three that are added.

[20:21] So we can always ponder

[20:23] what legislative services meant when they drafted it.

[20:28] Typically, when they say such as, or such as,

[20:33] but not limited to,

[20:34] it really means there could be other things.

[20:38] How do those other things get to come into play?

[20:42] Probably through a court proceeding would be my guess.

[20:45] So it's mainly more just them predicting

[20:47] that there will be additional items.

[20:49] But if it says such as in the statute, we probably need

[20:52] to follow that and include it.

[20:54] Even though we don't necessarily mean

[20:57] know exactly what they meant.

[20:58] Fair enough. Yeah.

[21:02] And the reason I couldn't find it in, in the

[21:04] statute book is it's a new, a new section.

[21:09] Okay. So that kind of explains where that came from.

[21:15] Given that we've copied it directly outta the statute.

[21:17] I assume there's no objection to any of that,

[21:22] even if there's potential confusion.

[21:26] I mean, my confusion is how, how,

[21:27] how do you grant a building permit for a yurt?

[21:34] I thought a yurt was just kind of a, a tent with,

[21:36] You know, it's like MRI tenting,

[21:38] I, you know, it's like A light wood structure

[21:40] with like Yeah.

[21:42] So hide Or flesh.

[21:44] I predict litigation on this one.

[21:45] But anyway, tiny house,

[21:50] does that come from the same?

[21:52] It does. Okay.

[21:54] That's on line 17 of

[21:55] that same on numbered page.

[21:59] The fir the first page of chapter three 30

[22:06] means a detached building used

[22:08] or intended to be used for human habitation providing

[22:12] permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking.

[22:20] I'm, I'm, as, I'm curious as to why,

[22:25] if the statute goes on at some length,

[22:30] why we didn't just copy it verbatim.

[22:33] We can be, as I'm reading ahead to the proposed,

[22:37] like the next page for innovative, we have a conflict

[22:41] because it says tiny houses can be 600 square feet or less.

[22:45] And then

[22:49] they must have changed that.

[22:51] 'cause I have like four, I had written 400.

[22:53] That might have been a typo.

[22:55] So we could do, I think

[23:06] yeah, we can, we can add that.

[23:08] I think putting dimensions in a definition can be

[23:12] problematic because if someone wants something larger,

[23:16] then they're asking for a variance from the definition.

[23:25] Well, yeah. I, at least to me though,

[23:29] this definition would seem to apply to any house

[23:32] because there's no specification

[23:34] that it needs to be of any size.

[23:36] Or why is it a tiny,

[23:38] any house built in dairy currently would be a living space

[23:40] permanently constructed on a stable surface designed

[23:43] for using his permanent living corners.

[23:45] That would, that would be every house endeavor.

[23:47] Well that's a very good And maybe the,

[23:49] the 600 feet square feet is the actual

[23:52] unique definition of tiny.

[23:54] Okay. So we can I can add those three items into the,

[23:59] into the definition then. Yeah.

[24:00] My, my feeling is that I know you want

[24:03] to make it sound simpler than it is.

[24:08] Maybe not a good idea.

[24:09] When the statute has potentially convoluted wording

[24:14] and, and we are asking our boards

[24:16] to work off a simplified version, that means at some level,

[24:20] even though it might be not

[24:24] meaningful in most cases, there's a disconnect.

[24:29] I would lean toward just cloning

[24:32] the statutory definition.

[24:35] And, and when they, they have it in, in a section

[24:39] 6 74, 81 definitions.

[24:41] Okay. So they're defining it. Okay.

[24:43] We'll edit In. I I would, I would not try

[24:46] to improve on the works of the general court.

[24:48] 'cause that's one of the ways you get yourself into trouble.

[24:51] Okay.

[24:54] I think the sanitation is important to include that too.

[25:01] See that at the end of 18,

[25:07] I mean if you want to,

[25:12] if you want to have a short definition in the zoning,

[25:15] you could have a short definition

[25:17] and then add at the end as further specified

[25:21] in RSA 6 74 81, you know,

[25:25] Roman four.

[25:28] That way someone can't just say, oh this is all there is.

[25:31] No, I have to go read the law. If you wanna save some,

[25:35] some characters do a reference.

[25:37] But I wouldn't just leave it

[25:38] Dangling.

[25:39] Yeah, no, especially where these are starting

[25:41] to become more popular.

[25:42] It's probably better to put the whole definition in there so

[25:45] that it's clear for the general public.

[25:49] 'cause it would be asking a lot for the,

[25:50] they'd be like, well I don't know where to find that law.

[25:52] Ask you a lot for the public to know how

[25:54] to use Google. Well,

[25:55] Well they could, I don't know.

[25:57] Sometimes Google doesn't, can be asking a lot.

[25:59] Give you the, give you the right answer.

[26:00] Okay. I I stand direct it. I'm sorry. Yeah.

[26:05] I think the safest thing

[26:06] to do is just clone the whole thing.

[26:08] Alright, we'll do that. And I think that would go for

[26:11] all of these definitions.

[26:15] For example, you yurt says a round freestanding structure,

[26:19] but the statute says a style of tiny house that is round

[26:24] or similar shape.

[26:28] So they don't really say the same thing.

[26:30] 'cause the similar shape could mean, you know, oval octagon

[26:34] or octagonal or ellipsoidal.

[26:37] I mean, so I think we wanna be careful Okay.

[26:40] That if the state is issuing a definition,

[26:44] we'd literally clone it.

[26:45] Okay. 'cause I think that, I don't wanna speak

[26:50] for the planning board, I don't wanna speak for the ZBA,

[26:52] but if someone is, is going solely by this

[26:54] and isn't aware what the definition says,

[26:57] and then the, the lawyer who's representing the applicant's,

[26:59] ah, but that's not what the state law says.

[27:02] That just gets us looking bad, so. Got it. Right. Yeah.

[27:06] Yep. Okay. Okay.

[27:09] And as she said too, these yurts

[27:11] and tiny houses are starting to become, starting

[27:14] to see them, they're starting to become

[27:15] Hard.

[27:16] Well, yeah, I mean tiny houses certainly.

[27:17] I I, again, I don't, I don't know how you put heating

[27:19] and plumbing in a yurt

[27:21] or maybe someone who is, is in, you know,

[27:24] construction trades can enlighten me.

[27:25] 'cause maybe I, maybe I'm,

[27:26] I'm thinking too simple there, but

[27:30] I think a yurts just basically a round

[27:32] tiny house at this point. Yeah,

[27:34] Yeah.

[27:35] Neither of these definitions specify, unlike the tiny house

[27:39] that this needs to be on a,

[27:41] a permanent foundation or anything.

[27:43] So that, so what we can just like drive stakes in your yard

[27:46] and call it a yurt.

[27:48] That's, that's an interesting addition.

[27:50] Well, yes, it's is a freestanding structure modeled

[27:54] after traditional nomadic dwellings, which to me means,

[27:59] you know, you can pick it up

[28:00] and put it on your pack horse and move it.

[28:02] Yeah. The only thing I can think of is

[28:04] that including the engineering for use as a permanent

[28:07] or long-term residence might imply that there needs

[28:09] to be some kind

[28:10] of concrete foundation or something. So I, I

[28:12] Think we, we do need to be a little bit careful about

[28:14] whether or not we think that we have statutory authority

[28:19] to require that the tiny houses

[28:21] and the, especially the yurts have self-contained

[28:24] sanitary facilities

[28:27] That would be under the building code.

[28:33] Oh, that's always interesting when land use

[28:37] and the building code collide.

[28:39] Although I usually wanna walk away from that, but Yeah.

[28:42] Although I, I did just notice that it, it seems the way

[28:45] that this is written is that

[28:47] tiny house is an overarching category

[28:49] and tiny house on wheels and u are within that category.

[28:53] So the, the well,

[28:54] because it says a style of tiny house for both of them

[28:58] implying that maybe they are also under the same constraints

[29:02] or requirements of the

[29:04] Previous tiny house.

[29:05] That's, that's true. Although the, at the roman numeral

[29:08] top level section number under colon 81 tiny house is four

[29:14] and your is six.

[29:15] So they, they appear to be on the same hierarchy level

[29:20] of the, of the law.

[29:21] So that's confusing.

[29:26] I would recommend just copy everything will do straight out

[29:28] of the state law and then if anyone is confused, say,

[29:32] oh, go ask a lawyer,

[29:35] We can do that.

[29:36] Okay.

[29:37] I'll talk to your representative.

[29:39] Okay. So we can, we can then move on to the next page.

[29:44] So this, one of the changes was that they wanted to

[29:49] protect Existing single family structures

[29:54] in their existing setbacks.

[29:56] So, so that,

[29:59] I think municipalities couldn't come in afterwards

[30:01] and say, well, we're only gonna apply it

[30:05] to new single family dwellings

[30:06] or dwellings that, you know,

[30:08] meet the applicable setbacks now.

[30:11] So they have said that if you have a lot

[30:14] that has a single family detached dwelling

[30:16] that is in existence as of July 1st, 2025,

[30:21] you can have an A DU.

[30:23] The A DU of course would have to meet setbacks,

[30:25] but we wouldn't as, we wouldn't have to make

[30:30] them go for variances like setback variance in things.

[30:35] Especially if they were doing it internally

[30:39] because they're adding that internally.

[30:41] They don't want you to have to jump through a lot of hoops

[30:44] to have to get that permitted.

[30:46] So they're taking away some of the roadblocks.

[30:49] So it's just, and,

[30:50] And when we are, are looking at this section, this applies

[30:53] to both attached and detached.

[30:57] Yes. Because it doesn't say one way or the other. Correct.

[30:59] Okay. Yeah.

[31:05] And then so we add, so at the top, we just under,

[31:08] you know, the, the the top piece we say,

[31:10] so if you're existing as of July 1st, 2025, that's okay.

[31:14] And then we add on language that says if you don't comply

[31:19] with current dimensional, we are,

[31:21] we can issue the permit if,

[31:24] and then I believe that language follows the

[31:26] RSAI Can double check that.

[31:44] 6, 7, 4 6. So

[31:51] 6, 7, 4.

[31:53] I'm reading what our proposed zoning ordinance is

[31:56] as the creation and an accessory dwelling unit on a lot

[32:01] containing a single family detached, dwelling

[32:06] existing as of the enact mandate shall be subject

[32:09] to all the following conditions.

[32:15] What the NHMA summary says

[32:20] that additionally any legal preexisting structures built

[32:25] before the enactment date that violate the current

[32:29] and existing zoning ordinances for setbacks and

[32:33] or lot coverage shall be permitted to be converted

[32:36] to an A DU by Right.

[32:37] That's not the same concept.

[32:40] Is that what we were looking at when we wrote this?

[32:43] Lemme see 6 74.

[32:52] So it's, I

[32:58] We should probably add language.

[33:00] So if you have a new one.

[33:04] So any legal structure that's being converted is vested

[33:12] and if they're preexisting non-conforming with regard to

[33:15] setbacks or lock coverage, they retain the Right,

[33:19] they're grandfathered.

[33:20] That's what, that's what the law says.

[33:29] So

[33:29] Yeah, I'm, I'm just, We may need to lay add language

[33:32] with regard to conversions to cover that vesting.

[33:37] Yeah. This document from

[33:43] NHMA seems to talk about

[33:48] conversions and it seems like the language of our

[33:53] zoning order in section 1 6 5 25 is about the requirements

[33:59] for creating them prior to

[34:03] the current chapter law.

[34:08] And it talks about all these other things

[34:10] that just aren't mentioned here.

[34:13] So I'm wondering if it does need to be a,

[34:18] a whole separate section on,

[34:22] on conversion and, and grandfathering

[34:26] Because Yeah, I think we need to,

[34:28] I do think we need to add that.

[34:32] Just looking to see,

[34:41] So this is HB 10 79.

[34:45] I guess we should find that right?

[34:49] Anybody have any idea where that is in this package?

[34:57] Okay, I found 10 79.

[35:07] It's right in the middle.

[35:10] Yeah, but are there any,

[35:14] so there is a a 25 dash 2 5 9 4?

[35:18] I don't know. I don't know if

[35:19] that's No, that's not a page number.

[35:20] I don't know. It looks like this

[35:23] guys, oh.

[35:28] Although they are in numer, the,

[35:30] the bills are in numerical order.

[35:31] So, so it says the bill

[35:36] expands the definition of accessory dwelling in this

[35:38] to allow them to be built within non-conforming structures.

[35:51] So this seems to talk about existing structures. Gotcha.

[36:00] If the existing structure does not comply

[36:01] with the dimensional requirements for setbacks

[36:04] or lock cup coverage

[36:05] of municipality may determine eligibility for placement

[36:10] of an accessory dwelling within an existing structure

[36:13] by requiring applicant for the building

[36:15] to demonstrate either it qualifies

[36:19] as preexisting or the existing structure

[36:23] received prior zoning approval.

[36:24] So if I read 10 79, it doesn't to me

[36:30] read in anything like section 1 65 25.

[36:42] What we do say

[36:49] we do say that

[36:52] I, They can

[36:57] be converted from existing structures in existence as

[37:00] of July 1 25, including detached garages, regardless

[37:06] of whether they violate current dimensional

[37:08] for setbacks or lock coverage. And where

[37:10] Does it say that? Which,

[37:11] So on in our text on page two,

[37:15] section 1 65 25 A.

[37:26] Okay. So the overall

[37:32] section says, shall be subject to all

[37:34] of the following conditions.

[37:36] And the first itemized condition says Oh, except

[37:39] for, okay.

[37:43] So yeah,

[37:44] It's a little confusing.

[37:46] So it soon, if, if a is triggered, does

[37:49] that mean you ignore the rest of them?

[37:51] Maybe we should.

[37:55] I'm thinking ought be a separate section just

[37:58] because the, the if and else of of Yeah.

[38:02] Well if, if it hits a, then you skip the rest of the,

[38:06] the section is a bit confusing.

[38:09] I mean it's, it's, it's more like code than,

[38:11] than regulations.

[38:12] What if we, what if we started with a

[38:15] and said accessory dwelling units

[38:17] may be converted from existing structures existing as

[38:20] of included, but not limiting to detached garages

[38:23] and complete that section

[38:25] and then make new structures shall meet the appropriate.

[38:30] I I'm, I'm gonna suggest you, you, you leave

[38:32] 1 65 25 the way it is

[38:34] and create a 1 65 21 25 0.1 for

[38:40] conversion of accessory dwelling units.

[38:43] 25. Okay.

[38:44] And then we can make innovative housing structures 25.2.

[38:48] Okay.

[38:50] Okay. Or whatever the numbering works.

[38:52] All, all I'm saying is maybe leave what we have alone

[38:54] and then add a new section that basically describes

[38:58] what happens in 1 65 25 A in a,

[39:02] in a standalone section so that Okay.

[39:05] It literally can say if it's not a conversion,

[39:10] it shall be subject to all of these conditions.

[39:17] And then I think it'll be clearer to folks which set

[39:21] of conditions they should be reading.

[39:23] Okay.

[39:40] Okay. We can do that. And what is the,

[39:43] so on the other page there's a whole new MA and B.

[39:50] Oh, so maybe that m goes in the,

[39:55] the new.one?

[39:57] Yep. Okay.

[40:03] Okay. Yeah, I think

[40:07] that's cleaner. Okay.

[40:08] We can do that.

[40:14] Just one quick note on that.

[40:17] M reading through HSB

[40:22] 10 79, it looks like everything is, you know,

[40:25] at shall receive,

[40:26] we're essentially grandfathering all these existing dwellings.

[40:30] Right? So I'm thinking m should that be,

[40:33] if an existing structure does not comply

[40:35] with current dimensional requirements for setbacks

[40:37] and lock coverage, a building permit shall be issued.

[40:44] Well there it would be a shall there might be other

[40:46] reasons why a building permit wouldn't be issued.

[40:53] So here's just a, a medic question.

[40:58] Building permits are really under the, the police powers

[41:02] of the governing and legislative body, the council.

[41:05] Right. They're not controlled by the ZBA

[41:07] and they're not controlled by the planning board

[41:10] other than I guess the ZBA is an appellate agency.

[41:13] They are. Right. So

[41:18] let me ask a silly question.

[41:19] Why is the zoning ordinance talking about

[41:22] issuing building permits at all?

[41:27] Lemme see.

[41:37] Good question. I'm my, I'm, I'm thinking about this

[41:40] because up until recently,

[41:44] The, The, the law allowed up until recently,

[41:49] some of the powers of the building official was

[41:52] captured under 6 74.

[41:53] Six 70. Like the six seventies.

[41:56] So there it was in the land use regulations,

[41:58] which is why we, we have some building permit things

[42:01] in the zoning ordinance.

[42:02] Okay. The recent law change under 2 44

[42:06] just removed all of that and moved everything to 1 55.

[42:10] Ah, okay. So we haven't caught up with that part

[42:13] Either.

[42:14] No, we're still catching up.

[42:14] So we are, we're used to being able to say,

[42:17] well we can issue a building permit if you meet X, Y, and Z.

[42:20] But now everything is defaulting to 1 55

[42:23] and it's removed from the six seventies. And I presume

[42:26] That exists in some other complete chapter

[42:28] With the town code.

[42:29] It does whole, yeah. That 20, the 28 pages at the beginning

[42:32] of your packet is that removal.

[42:35] Yeah. Now I know that there are times

[42:38] Mr. Chase will remember that sometimes we talk about,

[42:42] you know, NFPA and fire code as it interacts with land use

[42:45] if it becomes one of those overlapping jurisdiction things.

[42:51] But I had typically tried to not specify in, in zoning

[42:56] anything that isn't deriving its power from the land

[42:59] use authority of statute.

[43:01] So otherwise it can get like, well who gets

[43:04] to have the final say? Yeah.

[43:06] Yep. So I'll look at, I'll look at that wording

[43:10] with regard to building permit may be issued

[43:12] and that whole new section will really more mimic

[43:15] what the law says and then we can go from there.

[43:18] Yeah. I think Mr. Melby is right.

[43:19] I think the law intends like Yeah, if if existing structure

[43:23] and they wanna make it a a amen to you,

[43:26] you gotta let 'em period.

[43:28] So do we, alright, do we want it to say shall

[43:33] Well, I guess the question is if we don't talk about

[43:36] building permits, we don't have to worry about

[43:37] the the verb do we?

[43:39] Okay. But my understanding is

[43:44] that,

[43:58] so it it says if an existing structure does not comply

[44:01] with current dimensional requirements for setbacks

[44:04] and lot coverage, a municipality may determine eligibility

[44:08] for placement of an accessory dwelling

[44:12] unit within an existing structure by requiring the applicant

[44:16] or building permit or for the building permit

[44:18] to demonstrate either one or two.

[44:21] Okay.

[44:29] So I think that's what you've done with,

[44:31] with A and B, right?

[44:33] Yeah. We'll we'll put that in the,

[44:35] So maybe just say,

[44:37] if the existing structure does not comply

[44:39] with current dimensional requirements or setbacks

[44:41] and coverage, the applicant shall demonstrate either a

[44:47] b that kind of mirrors the state law.

[44:55] Anyone have any other ideas on that?

[44:58] That makes sense.

[45:03] Okay. Okay. Okay.

[45:07] And then innovative housing structures,

[45:12] which is the ordinance that deals with the new definition.

[45:16] Innovative housing structures are tiny houses,

[45:19] tiny houses on wheels and yurts.

[45:23] The purpose of innovative housing structures,

[45:27] That's great English. Okay.

[45:28] Is Our to bring,

[45:30] I think it is.

[45:31] I I think it's single 'cause the purpose is

[45:34] Oh, Yep.

[45:35] To bring more housing opportunities into dairy.

[45:38] These shall be subject to the same in inspections

[45:42] as any single family dwelling under construction provided.

[45:50] Alright. So which chapter do we find

[45:56] the regulation for?

[45:59] Tiny houses.

[46:01] So this seems to be covering

[46:02] what was changed in the definition.

[46:04] 1681. 1681. So let's find 1681 that's

[46:08] Towards the back.

[46:09] It's like six pages from the

[46:11] Back.

[46:12] Alright. 1681. Okay. Found it.

[46:16] So the bulk of it starts with

[46:22] that 3 31 new,

[46:26] new new section innovative housing.

[46:31] And then it's under 6 74 81 definitions.

[46:34] We've talked about the definitions

[46:36] and then I think we were moving on to 6 74 82.

[46:40] Location and use, which should be tracking

[46:46] what's in 1 65 25 dot something.

[46:54] Well, Do we wanna say innovative housing structures are

[46:57] tiny houses, tiny houses on wheels and yurts?

[47:00] Or should we say they,

[47:02] or should we say unique single

[47:06] residential units such as a tiny house,

[47:08] tiny house on wheel or a yurt?

[47:10] It, it seems like the state law definition

[47:14] could include other types.

[47:16] I, you know, I'm gonna, I'm going to

[47:20] give you two separate conflicting opinions on this.

[47:24] We Could remove the number one,

[47:27] if you have a definition, it's always better

[47:29] to refer back to the definition.

[47:31] That way you only have to change it one place.

[47:32] You don't have to find all the places

[47:34] that say the same thing.

[47:37] The contrary opinion is that, well

[47:39] that makes people flip back and forth in the book

[47:41] and they have to go find the definition

[47:42] and then they find that inconvenient so

[47:44] that there's pros and cons. Right.

[47:47] So maybe we just remove that first sentence

[47:49] because we've already defined it.

[47:51] That would be one solution. Yeah.

[47:53] What do people think on that?

[47:55] Yeah, I think that makes sense.

[47:56] Seems okay.

[48:06] Alright.

[48:07] Do we have something that's tracking 6 74 83? No,

[48:13] 6 7 4 83.

[48:23] Seeing, does that really apply?

[48:25] That's Not really, I, I'm, I'm, there's really not much

[48:28] to 6 74 82.

[48:33] There's just Roman one, Roman two and it doesn't say much.

[48:38] Yeah. And,

[48:39] And we've got a lot of stuff.

[48:40] So where do we get that?

[48:45] 6 7, 4 8 2

[48:52] Oh right here. Gotcha.

[48:53] So we talk about, so setbacks, they would have

[48:56] to meet the setbacks.

[48:58] And I think that's in the,

[49:02] Is that in another section of the statute?

[49:05] No, but any, I think any

[49:08] new location and

[49:12] Use, well, so it, it is just hand wavy.

[49:15] Right. So I'll, I'll, I'll read these 'cause they're short.

[49:20] It's subject To anything is allowed to be used

[49:22] as an accessory dwelling unit pursuant to 6 74 72.

[49:26] Subject to all applicable, applicable land use requirements.

[49:30] So you have to Meet subject, what

[49:32] what do we think is applicable in this sense.

[49:34] So that, that to me, I interpreted that to mean

[49:38] when you're talking about a structure, you're talking about

[49:41] what is its location on the lot.

[49:43] So it needs to meet the setbacks.

[49:46] Alright, so you're expanding all applicable land use

[49:49] requirements to, to this list of things that,

[49:52] that we would require traditionally?

[49:54] Yes. Okay. And then the second paragraph says,

[50:00] shall meet all applicable regulations

[50:03] regarding drinking water supply

[50:05] and wastewater treatment and disposal.

[50:09] And that is, we pulled that from,

[50:13] if you look at line 36 on page two

[50:17] of HB 6 81 Oh

[50:21] that's adopting rules regarding that.

[50:23] So,

[50:26] So, you know, scanning down one,

[50:29] the innovative housing structures subject

[50:32] to the same inspections,

[50:36] providing the structure shall meet building setbacks

[50:38] of the zone, adequate provisions

[50:41] for sewer discharge and disposal.

[50:43] Yes. One additional off street parking

[50:48] provided for the innovative housing structure.

[50:49] Now is that Yes. Is that under the all applicable land use?

[50:55] I think we took a lot of this from the A DU section.

[51:02] Okay. They need, you need

[51:04] to have at least one parking spot.

[51:06] I mean, we, we don't have public transportation.

[51:08] The, the general court has said you could

[51:10] build stuff without parking.

[51:12] So I wouldn't put it past them.

[51:14] They haven't, they haven't done it yet though. So Well

[51:19] Total living space shall not exceed

[51:23] And that should likely be 600.

[51:25] That's gonna be 600. 600. Yep. According

[51:27] To line 19.

[51:28] Yep.

[51:30] 19 says 600

[51:31] Square feet on us.

[51:32] Yep, yep, yep. Shall be composed

[51:37] of a kitchen, living room, bathroom and bedroom.

[51:40] That, That was again from the A DU.

[51:43] Yes.

[51:49] Room sizes and innovative hunting structure must conform

[51:52] to the minimum requirements

[51:54] of the India International Res Residential code.

[51:56] Well, unless it ex, you know, exceeds 600 square feet.

[52:02] I think they, This is where I, you know,

[52:07] that we may be introducing an inherent turf war conflict

[52:11] between different authorities.

[52:13] The International Residential Code is not under

[52:15] the control of the General Court.

[52:17] General Court has said that these things are 600 and under.

[52:21] And if International Residential Code requires a total

[52:24] for all those rooms of more than that,

[52:26] then we've got a, a court

[52:28] Case we can take that out.

[52:29] And then that would be when they apply

[52:31] for the building permit, it would be under that, the purview

[52:35] of the building official to ensure that room size is met.

[52:39] Code

[52:42] Structure is not a trailer, semi trailer camp trailer

[52:45] or recreational vehicle.

[52:47] I think that kind of meets the definition of,

[52:53] although did we sort out what the difference between a,

[53:01] a mobile home and a tiny House on Wheels is,

[53:06] Wasn't that a point of discussion a few weeks

[53:08] Ago?

[53:09] It was. And have we resolved it? I don't,

[53:11] I think we tabled that.

[53:14] I'm guessing it's just space.

[53:17] So I I I kind of know that the code enforcement folks want

[53:23] I item G because that's, that's been a problem.

[53:27] My only concern is that the new statute, including

[53:32] a tiny House on Wheels

[53:36] without much further discussion, it it

[53:38] Does say built on a trailer chassis in

[53:41] that definition too.

[53:43] Yep. Yeah. I'm wondering if,

[53:44] if G is at least partially obsoleted by this new statute.

[53:49] Well, it, the statute itself says it,

[53:53] nor shall it include any recreational vehicle

[53:56] or park trailer as defined in the

[54:00] American Standard Institute for Recreational Vehicle

[54:03] or NC a 19 standard for park trillion

[54:08] Trailers.

[54:09] Okay. So that means that a, somebody help me

[54:12] on, on the lingo here.

[54:13] There's a, there's a mobile home

[54:16] and then there's a pre-manufactured home.

[54:18] There's Yes. So there's yeah.

[54:21] Mr. Chase, you help. So

[54:22] The difference, the difference between a modular

[54:25] and a mobile home is a modular home is constructed

[54:29] set on a frame towed to the building site,

[54:32] lifted off the frame and set on a foundation.

[54:35] A mobile home is constructed on a frame

[54:38] that is permanent to that structure.

[54:40] You cannot remove the frame from the structure.

[54:42] So it's towed to the site.

[54:43] Either set on a concrete slab on concrete blocks,

[54:47] or it can be put on a foundation

[54:49] and the axles and tunnel removes.

[54:51] So That's the difference between the two.

[54:53] Then other than that, they're identical. So

[54:55] A mobile home, according to

[54:56] that definition, is not a trailer?

[54:59] No. No. Okay.

[55:01] I think this is where we just have

[55:02] to be careful about words about art.

[55:04] I think we're probably okay then.

[55:06] 'cause I think that tiny home probably means a,

[55:10] a mobile home among other things.

[55:13] A mobile home would likely be larger than 600 square feet.

[55:16] Yeah. I'd also, not to circle back

[55:19] to the same thing we were talking about earlier,

[55:20] but it really does seem like the tiny house on Wheels five

[55:25] and Yurt six are definitionally referential

[55:29] to four tiny house.

[55:31] So the implication is that the reason why it can't be

[55:35] a mobile home or, or,

[55:36] or a trailer that can just leave easily is

[55:40] because it's within the definition of Tiny House is the,

[55:44] the caveat of, of permanent provisions.

[55:47] Like, it, it is hooked up in a permanent fashion

[55:49] to the spot that it is in.

[55:51] Well, so a a a mobile

[55:56] home, which is a, a House on Wheels

[56:00] is parked typically jacked up

[56:02] and they put a, a block wall under it

[56:04] and it is hooked up to utilities permanently.

[56:06] You can't drive it off without disconnecting them,

[56:09] at least not without much damage. So I think

[56:12] That would fit in the definition, but something like a

[56:14] camper wouldn't because Correct.

[56:15] It has a tank and it's not connected into the

[56:17] Infrastructure.

[56:18] So I, I think based on on that clarification,

[56:20] we're probably okay with G.

[56:22] Okay.

[56:27] Now, innovative housing, does that include,

[56:29] that includes yurts?

[56:30] So each structure has heating, cooking

[56:33] and sanitary facilities.

[56:35] I guess I'm gonna leave that up to code to figure out how a

[56:39] a yurt contains all of that.

[56:42] Okay. I mean, hey, the Native Americans had

[56:47] heating, cooking and sanitary facilities in their lodges.

[56:51] In their yurts. Yes they did. Yes they did.

[56:52] They probably don't necess meet current code though. No.

[56:56] Yeah, I don't think they had, they had plumbing.

[57:00] They were going outside to do their business.

[57:03] Yeah. Mr. Mr. Chase. So

[57:05] A a little off subject, but the, it's sooner

[57:09] or later it's gonna come.

[57:11] Somebody's gonna put in a tiny home on a house lot

[57:14] and then wanna put in a second tiny home for an A DU.

[57:20] Somebody's gonna come up with that someday.

[57:21] So be ready for that.

[57:27] A tiny home park. Yep.

[57:30] Yeah. Wasn't that one of the proposed developments

[57:33] that they were wanting to do was these kind

[57:34] of like cottage community type things? That's

[57:37] In Chesta.

[57:38] Yeah. Cottage. Yeah. Dover

[57:39] Has one too.

[57:40] Yeah. Cottage court. Yeah.

[57:41] Yeah, yeah. I mean Probably an intentional,

[57:44] We, we, we could either see it legislated or,

[57:46] or somebody request us to have, that's sort of the

[57:51] new millennium version of cluster development,

[57:52] right? It is.

[57:54] Yep. It is. It is.

[57:56] And the real side track, the,

[58:01] the survey that went out

[58:02] for the housing needs needs assessment that we did in Derry,

[58:06] the cottage court concept scored very

[58:10] high. So

[58:12] I'm gonna guess though, if we had a one

[58:14] of those high density tiny home parks,

[58:18] it's gonna require, you know, pound water and sewer.

[58:21] Yeah. We would likely look

[58:22] For that.

[58:23] Or at least community water and sewer. Yeah.

[58:26] Depends on the amount of land.

[58:28] If you've got 10 acres of land, you're gonna use two

[58:33] for your cottage development.

[58:35] That leaves eight acres for your wastewater disposal. Yeah.

[58:39] Which in look at the size of the units

[58:44] as some of our neighboring

[58:45] communities have put in without, well

[58:46] There was a bill, I, I think it did not pass.

[58:48] I actually went to the hearing on it that said

[58:52] municipalities are prohibited from creating any

[58:56] dimensional requirements for residential

[59:00] construction beyond that, that the DES would require

[59:04] for approved septic designs.

[59:06] Yep. Yeah. So yeah.

[59:08] Yeah, that'll probably come back.

[59:17] Okay. So I I, I'm okay with leaving that in there.

[59:22] I think some of this stuff, based on what HB

[59:27] 1681 actually says

[59:29] is probably gonna be sorted out in the courts, sadly,

[59:33] because it's just not all that specific

[59:36] and each town's gonna do something a little different.

[59:39] Right. Is there specific recommendations in

[59:42] the NHMA?

[59:47] I didn't see one about tiny homes.

[59:52] See one about ADUs.

[59:57] Oh, the innovative housing structures are in the,

[1:00:03] they're in the, the guidance

[1:00:05] that talks about HB 2 44 16 81

[1:00:09] in SB 94.

[1:00:11] And

[1:00:16] Is that not one of the ones I printed?

[1:00:18] They're, they're, they're treated innovative housing

[1:00:21] structures shall be treated as single family dwellings

[1:00:24] or accessory dwelling units for zoning purposes, which is

[1:00:27] where we pulled that information from subject

[1:00:30] to all applicable land use requirements and state laws

[1:00:32] and regulations regarding drinking water supply

[1:00:35] and wastewater treatment and disposal.

[1:00:38] RSA 1 55 A 3D provides a pathway for construction

[1:00:43] and inspections to ensure

[1:00:44] that they meet building code requirements.

[1:00:47] It includes offsite construction elements

[1:00:49] that must undergo review

[1:00:50] and inspection either by local building officials

[1:00:52] or the state fire marshal to ensure compliance

[1:00:55] with the state building code.

[1:00:58] So I, I think the A DU law as it stands,

[1:01:02] makes an A DU either detached or,

[1:01:04] or detached a use of Right.

[1:01:06] But I don't think it grants you two or three.

[1:01:09] No, Today,

[1:01:12] Today it does not.

[1:01:13] No. You can have you

[1:01:15] and you can have your structure, your single family home,

[1:01:19] you can turn your garage into an A DU

[1:01:21] or you can build an A DU.

[1:01:22] We have had a couple of applications to the zoning board

[1:01:26] to permit to ADUs on a lot.

[1:01:29] Hmm. Well just

[1:01:32] because it's not in the zoning doesn't mean you can't

[1:01:34] get a variance to do it.

[1:01:35] That is correct. Yeah.

[1:01:42] So hope hopefully our, our regs do talk about proper

[1:01:48] utilities for however many they're granted by a variance.

[1:01:54] One of the things that we might do is

[1:01:59] put something in the land development control regulations

[1:02:02] regarding septic and,

[1:02:07] and water and other utilities for, or ADUs

[1:02:12] or innovative housing structures

[1:02:17] as a defensive move.

[1:02:18] 'cause the DBA cannot grant a variance to the LDCs.

[1:02:25] Okay. Yeah, I know that for the ADUs currently,

[1:02:28] they've been asking them to, if water's available,

[1:02:31] they've been asking them to connect

[1:02:32] to the public water supply.

[1:02:34] And I know that the, if it's septic, it's same rule

[1:02:39] that it's always been, you know, you need

[1:02:41] to have a replacement septic plan approved

[1:02:43] by the state on file in case you know if and when the

[1:02:47] Existing money does.

[1:02:48] Right. So where, where is that written?

[1:02:53] It's not in our LDCR.

[1:02:59] Is that not part of our A DU

[1:03:02] or is that, that might be building code.

[1:03:05] My suggestion is that we put it in the,

[1:03:08] into the LDCR maybe even if it's duplicative.

[1:03:11] Okay. Because then when summon comes to the ZZBA says,

[1:03:15] I want five ADUs,

[1:03:17] and we say, fine, we'll get, we'll grant you approval

[1:03:21] as long as they all have proper septic hookup

[1:03:24] and the ZBA can't just waive or,

[1:03:28] or give a variance to that septic requirement.

[1:03:31] Does anyone else think I'm being too Machia Valley in there?

[1:03:38] Are we No, I think that, I think that makes sense.

[1:03:42] Are we okay under state law to do, to do that?

[1:03:46] Well, my understanding is that the state law for

[1:03:49] idiots does require that they have approved septic.

[1:03:53] Okay. And I don't think such a thing as approved

[1:03:57] drinking water, but certainly the approved septic.

[1:04:00] Now it could be that you built a, an oversized

[1:04:04] septic system on your lot and,

[1:04:05] and the existing design could support the primary dwelling

[1:04:09] and an IDU, in which case you just need

[1:04:13] a subject designer to sign off on it.

[1:04:16] Okay. I just don't think we ought allow that to be

[1:04:22] subject to a variance.

[1:04:25] Okay. I will, I'll come up with wording

[1:04:28] and I'll work with the building inspector on that.

[1:04:34] Now if it's, if it's in the building code, then who, who,

[1:04:36] who gets to control that

[1:04:40] Would fall under the, the building official

[1:04:43] to make the final determinations.

[1:04:46] How we've been handling it is when we get applications like

[1:04:49] that and the building permit comes through Fire

[1:04:54] and public works sign off on the, the building permits.

[1:04:57] So that's how we check those boxes for code compliance.

[1:05:03] And technically the planning board doesn't review

[1:05:09] two one and two families.

[1:05:11] So if it's, if it's, we don't a primary

[1:05:13] and an A DU, it doesn't fall under our jurisdiction.

[1:05:16] It doesn't. Okay. I guess that's the best we can do then.

[1:05:20] Okay. Alright. Okay.

[1:05:31] So there's a list of zones in which they are permitted.

[1:05:34] What does the state statute say about

[1:05:37] where they're permitted?

[1:05:40] Let's see,

[1:05:45] I guess what it says is it may be

[1:05:50] on an individual house lot

[1:05:52] where single family dwellings are allowed.

[1:05:55] So is this the listing of all Yes.

[1:05:58] Districts that allow, okay. Yep.

[1:06:08] Alright. Anything else on

[1:06:11] Native Housing?

[1:06:12] Yeah, I just want to bring up one thing.

[1:06:14] We're saying the housing structure is composed

[1:06:16] of a kitchen living room, a bathroom and a bedroom.

[1:06:19] If we're limiting it to 600 square

[1:06:22] or if it's limited to 600 square feet, do we really want

[1:06:25] to tell people they can't have a studio layout?

[1:06:29] Well, I guess the question is, is that a,

[1:06:33] a functional requirement

[1:06:34] or a, a structural requirement if you have a, a kitchen area

[1:06:40] and a sleeping area

[1:06:43] and then you probably want walls

[1:06:44] around your bathroom. I'm thinking, but

[1:06:46] Probably, yeah, But I, I I, I would not presume it

[1:06:51] to preclude studios.

[1:06:55] Okay. Yeah, I think it is interesting to note that in,

[1:07:00] what is this

[1:07:05] in E one six?

[1:07:07] 5 2 5 1 E It, like you said, it mentions

[1:07:12] kitchen, living room, bathroom, bedroom as if those are

[1:07:16] necessity separate rooms

[1:07:18] because in, in, in h it mentions the requirement

[1:07:22] for the actual functional things like the fact

[1:07:24] that there's cooking facilities, sanitary facilities.

[1:07:27] If those are both there,

[1:07:28] it does make it seem like e

[1:07:30] is implying that you need support.

[1:07:31] Right. That's, that's how I read it at first.

[1:07:34] Well maybe we could go back to those more generic terms

[1:07:36] about areas dedicated to cooking, you know,

[1:07:40] sleeping and,

[1:07:42] Yeah.

[1:07:43] 'cause 'cause h if that's san,

[1:07:45] How do you, how you describe your bathroom things

[1:07:48] politely in the zoning ordinance?

[1:07:50] Because if that's the only thing

[1:07:51] that we're requiring is this, the fact

[1:07:53] that those facilities are present in the building

[1:07:55] then h covers that, that has heating, cooking, sanitary,

[1:08:00] I guess we could add sleeping and whatever. Yeah,

[1:08:03] Probably add sleeping.

[1:08:04] Good

[1:08:05] Think that's how, how it says it in here.

[1:08:07] Okay. Yeah, because here it says provisions for living,

[1:08:10] sleeping, cooking, and sanitation. That's

[1:08:12] A very good catch because I think the thing we wanna avoid

[1:08:15] is words that when we're thinking about it,

[1:08:19] oh yeah, that makes sense.

[1:08:20] But someone else trying to apply it, oh no,

[1:08:22] it means our room, you gotta have walls.

[1:08:25] And I don't know that that's justified

[1:08:30] in the state statute itself. Yep.

[1:08:32] Okay. So we, we can, I think that's the intent.

[1:08:34] Delete e and then on and we will renumber these

[1:08:37] and then h would structure contains heating, cooking,

[1:08:42] sanitary facilities in a sleeping area.

[1:08:45] Yeah. Yeah. I think taking the wording,

[1:08:47] maybe not the wording but the, the contents of

[1:08:51] the description of Tiny House

[1:08:52] where it says providing permanent provisions for living,

[1:08:56] sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation.

[1:08:58] So just something that encompasses each of those things.

[1:09:02] Okay. Okay. Alright. Yeah, good catch.

[1:09:06] Anything else on innovative housing?

[1:09:12] Do we wanna list the zones

[1:09:13] that it is allowed in in case there's nonconform?

[1:09:16] Well, I mean there, I'm assuming there are single family

[1:09:19] houses in other zones that are preexisting.

[1:09:24] I don't know if we wanna,

[1:09:29] I don't know if it makes sense to list the zones innovative

[1:09:32] Housing.

[1:09:33] This is not the same

[1:09:35] as an accessory dwelling unit. Right,

[1:09:38] Right, right.

[1:09:39] Alright. Yeah, I I take that back.

[1:09:41] So you you you're putting it on a, some sort of lot

[1:09:45] of record where it can fit,

[1:09:46] whereas ADUs can pretty much go anywhere

[1:09:52] and the town has less control over compliance.

[1:09:57] Yeah. Oh okay. I take that back.

[1:09:59] Especially for conversions. Right? Yep. Alright.

[1:10:02] Yeah, I agree. It makes sense to list them.

[1:10:05] My, my only thing is when we list them, if,

[1:10:08] if we then change the zoning so that some other residential

[1:10:14] is created, we have to come back here

[1:10:16] and then add it to the list.

[1:10:17] So you might say all districts, which allow

[1:10:22] single family residential uses that way you don't have

[1:10:25] to come back and revisit it.

[1:10:26] But that's just, I don't feel strongly about that.

[1:10:28] It's just, just a suggestion.

[1:10:34] I mean, as, as long as you guys, you know, when

[1:10:38] whenever we revise something, you find all the things

[1:10:40] that are dependencies,

[1:10:45] that would be fine.

[1:10:47] So make that change. So all districts which permits single

[1:10:50] family dwelling units.

[1:10:53] Yeah, I mean, back to, again, it just means

[1:10:58] that it's lower maintenance for future revisions,

[1:11:01] but Okay. Not a big deal.

[1:11:03] Okay. Anything else?

[1:11:09] All right, let's move on to general commercial. Oh

[1:11:13] Actually hold on.

[1:11:14] I do have one thing. Oh no.

[1:11:15] If we do end up adding, if we do end up adding the,

[1:11:18] the separate definition for adult care center.

[1:11:21] Yeah, that'll, we'll have to modify the types of uses

[1:11:26] page 'cause it has childcare center

[1:11:28] and group day care in that list. Oh,

[1:11:31] You're, you're already onto the next page.

[1:11:33] Oh, that's okay. I thought this was part

[1:11:35] of the section we were about to leave

[1:11:36] When you said Oh, before I I thought you were

[1:11:38] Yes.

[1:11:39] I I thought that, I thought we were moving

[1:11:40] past this to something else. No, no.

[1:11:42] So I wanna make sure we No, no, you're looking at changes

[1:11:45] to general commercial, which adds

[1:11:49] childcare removes daycare,

[1:11:55] so we should probably add adult care.

[1:11:58] And then family care. Is family care allowed?

[1:12:02] No, No,

[1:12:04] No.

[1:12:05] Family Family care is not permitted in commercial districts.

[1:12:09] That's, That's, they wanted to separate those out.

[1:12:13] So suppose I, I live in a townhouse,

[1:12:18] in a multiunit residential structure

[1:12:22] and I want to have a family daycare.

[1:12:27] Multi-unit residential is allowed in any business district.

[1:12:33] That's, that's all a change we haven't gotten to yet. But

[1:12:37] If, if the townhouse was located in the general,

[1:12:42] in the general commercial, industrial

[1:12:45] or manufacturing district by state law, family

[1:12:51] daycare is not permitted.

[1:12:54] Oh. So they, they they carve that out in the statute.

[1:12:56] That's, that's why they

[1:12:57] separated those two out. Okay, great.

[1:12:59] Alright, we're good. Yep. So we're adding

[1:13:03] adult daycare here.

[1:13:05] Child day child care center stays

[1:13:08] and then, I'm sorry, remind me what we're doing

[1:13:10] with group daycare that goes well I

[1:13:12] Thought we, you know, either had child adult care

[1:13:16] or family care.

[1:13:17] We had three flavors. Okay.

[1:13:19] So group daycare probably becomes

[1:13:23] adult care center. Okay.

[1:13:24] Alright. I'm thinking.

[1:13:26] Okay. And then

[1:13:31] the next biggest change is f all

[1:13:36] of the other sections

[1:13:37] for multifamily will re refer back to this section.

[1:13:41] So this is where we'll want

[1:13:42] to make sure we capture everything.

[1:13:44] This will need to be amended

[1:13:46] because the state guidance says we cannot

[1:13:51] permit these through a conditional use permit.

[1:13:53] They're permitted as a matter of, right. So my state, so do

[1:13:57] I have one without sufficient read on it?

[1:14:03] You should, because this one includes Shelby approved

[1:14:06] for a conditional use permit. Right.

[1:14:08] This, so when I drafted the proposed changes,

[1:14:12] I did not have the state guidance that reiterated

[1:14:15] that we can't do conditional use permit.

[1:14:17] Yeah. So that's, so I'm suggesting changes

[1:14:20] Wells also because my understanding is

[1:14:22] it is a use of, right.

[1:14:23] Yes.

[1:14:28] I would suggest that f be amended to say,

[1:14:33] so f would just say multi-family residential uses

[1:14:37] and then get rid of the rest of the language in

[1:14:41] that paragraph.

[1:14:43] And then

[1:14:46] You've gotta get rid of the whole number.

[1:14:49] 'cause those are the, the, the findings of fact in order

[1:14:52] to issue a conditional use permit.

[1:14:54] Right. So I would suggest deleting.

[1:14:59] So just have it say multi-family residential uses

[1:15:03] or multi-family residential period in period, get rid

[1:15:07] of our, our permitted as a blah blah,

[1:15:10] and then get rid of the rest of that paragraph.

[1:15:13] And then just start with one, when you're converting it,

[1:15:16] you get an exemption for your setbacks.

[1:15:19] We cover our density.

[1:15:22] We talk about the, we talk about the non-residential

[1:15:27] use portion and then delete what is currently four

[1:15:30] and five, talking about applications and appeals.

[1:15:34] And then so Then adding site, suitability

[1:15:37] and availability of services.

[1:15:39] So density, where's is that?

[1:15:42] We pulled that, that was ex, that was,

[1:15:46] that was the density we had determined when we put it into

[1:15:48] industrial two, you can

[1:15:52] do whatever density you want.

[1:15:57] Okay.

[1:16:03] But we're getting rid of

[1:16:05] three, right?

[1:16:08] 'cause we can't specify that.

[1:16:11] So, Or we or do you think we can

[1:16:14] We, in certain districts, you,

[1:16:16] you can let me find that guidance.

[1:16:19] I, I'm, I'm having a hard time.

[1:16:21] If the state says a multifamily

[1:16:24] residential is a use of, right.

[1:16:26] That we can say, wow, it's a use of, right.

[1:16:28] If you have some non-residential in it.

[1:16:30] I'm, I'm not thinking that works. No, there's,

[1:16:32] I, I apologize if I'm not understanding here,

[1:16:34] but it's in 10 79.

[1:16:39] It not, I'm sorry, not 10 79. 10 10.

[1:16:47] What does it say, Randy? It says in four,

[1:16:52] a municipality may require all available ground

[1:16:54] for floor space

[1:16:56] or a percentage thereof to be dedicated

[1:16:58] to retail or similar uses.

[1:17:00] And that's under the, That's under the state law.

[1:17:03] That's under the state law.

[1:17:05] Okay. 10 10. This is, yep.

[1:17:09] Chapter 3, 1 9, house bill 10 10.

[1:17:11] And it's on the second page on the top. Yep.

[1:17:15] So we can Yeah.

[1:17:20] So we, we can, yeah, we can,

[1:17:22] we can require the mixed use piece of it.

[1:17:25] Okay.

[1:17:28] Interesting. So, so that's a, a use of quasi. Right. Got

[1:17:32] It.

[1:17:33] In 10 10, it does specify the ground floor

[1:17:35] where ours doesn't our

[1:17:38] Does it say shall, May.

[1:17:41] May, yeah. And we were, we were trying

[1:17:44] to be a little bit more flexible,

[1:17:45] especially when we're converting structures.

[1:17:47] So, and, and if you look at the next paragraph down,

[1:17:49] it says the municipality may provide an exemption

[1:17:51] to any requirements regarding setback, height, blah, blah,

[1:17:54] blah, of a building being converted to multifamily

[1:17:56] or mixed use through adaptive reuse.

[1:17:58] But, but I, I I, I would kind of backtrack on our, oh,

[1:18:02] the, the 25% can be anywhere in the building

[1:18:04] that we did previously.

[1:18:06] 'cause it, this is a municipality may require

[1:18:09] all available ground floor space or a percentage thereof.

[1:18:14] It doesn't say percentage of the building space. Okay.

[1:18:17] So I think, I think they've kind

[1:18:18] of pushed our hand in that regard.

[1:18:31] So,

[1:18:32] Well, I think to play devil's advocate, I think on

[1:18:36] that is yes, we can do that and put it in.

[1:18:41] But as an adaptive use, it doesn't prohibit us from saying,

[1:18:47] if an applicant comes to us

[1:18:49] and says, yes, we understand we have to have, you require us

[1:18:53] to have a certain percentage.

[1:18:55] And the state law says ground floor space.

[1:18:57] But what is

[1:18:58] to prevent you from letting us do this on the second floor

[1:19:02] or the third floor there, there's nothing here

[1:19:04] that says we can't change it.

[1:19:05] It says,

[1:19:07] Yeah, If somebody comes in

[1:19:08] and fights us, we have this to fall back on

[1:19:10] and say, yes, you have to have a percentage

[1:19:13] or the whole ground floor.

[1:19:15] But if you would like to, we will allow you

[1:19:17] by conditional use whatever to use the second floor or the

[1:19:21] Third floor.

[1:19:22] So I, I'm gonna go back to New Hampshire is a di state.

[1:19:25] The fact that the state statute doesn't say you can't do

[1:19:29] something doesn't mean you can, you can only do things

[1:19:32] that they explicitly say you can.

[1:19:42] I mean, I don't, it, it doesn't matter to me.

[1:19:44] I was just thinking of, you know, being innovative

[1:19:47] and like we had talked about when we did

[1:19:50] our sidewalks downtown.

[1:19:52] Yeah, I know. And, and I think trying

[1:19:54] To be more innovative and, and adapted

[1:19:55] It made sense.

[1:19:56] But I'm just reading what the Yeah.

[1:19:58] The statute says and yeah,

[1:19:59] I'm not arguing with what you say either.

[1:20:01] And I'm, I don't feel strongly as long

[1:20:03] as the retail component, retail

[1:20:06] or commercial component is somewhere in the

[1:20:08] Building.

[1:20:09] Well, it's in the zoning ordinance.

[1:20:09] So if they want to put it somewhere else,

[1:20:11] they can get a variance.

[1:20:14] I'm all for trying to clone the state law to minimize our,

[1:20:17] our, our legal bills.

[1:20:18] Yeah. I think Mr. Fowler would appreciate that.

[1:20:26] Okay, so we're gonna change that to mimic

[1:20:29] and say ground floor, is that?

[1:20:31] Yeah. Yeah. I I would say 25% of the ground floor, if

[1:20:34] that's the, the number we want.

[1:20:36] Okay. I would just limit it to the ground floor.

[1:20:37] So it kind of matches the state statute.

[1:20:39] Okay. We,

[1:20:45] I would suggest that we not change

[1:20:47] that in the industrial two district, the language there,

[1:20:52] because we're not required to allow,

[1:20:57] we're not required to permit multifamily in an industrial

[1:21:01] or manufacturing district.

[1:21:03] Well, but industrial two is not really

[1:21:05] an industrial district.

[1:21:06] I think the law says you have to allow them in any district

[1:21:10] that allows commercial or business uses

[1:21:12] Retailer office.

[1:21:14] Does it say retailer

[1:21:15] office? I thought it was more general.

[1:21:18] Yeah. See if I can find it.

[1:21:26] Commercially zoned land as defined.

[1:21:29] I'm looking at the guidance. RSA

[1:21:33] 6 74 43 1 defines multifamily dwelling.

[1:21:36] Is any structures containing more than two dwelling units,

[1:21:40] commercially zoned land in 6 74, 79 is land zoned

[1:21:44] for such commercial activities as retail and office.

[1:21:47] Where are you reading That? In the,

[1:21:49] the guidance document.

[1:21:52] So there, New Hampshire MA is saying that,

[1:21:55] or BEA is saying that under

[1:21:58] the definitions in 6 74, 79

[1:22:01] commercial ac commercially zoned land is

[1:22:04] land zone for retail.

[1:22:06] So I, I was reading the front page here where it says

[1:22:11] RSA 6 74 80 has been significantly amended

[1:22:14] to expand requirements regarding mixed use

[1:22:18] and multifamily developments.

[1:22:20] The current law requires municipalities to permit

[1:22:23] multifamily residential on commercially zoned land,

[1:22:27] where an existing building is being repurposed

[1:22:29] for adaptive use for residential purposes.

[1:22:33] Municipalities are required

[1:22:34] to afford exemptions, blah, blah, blah, blah.

[1:22:37] Law has been primarily amended

[1:22:40] to limit municipality's authority

[1:22:42] to regulate multifamily residential development on

[1:22:46] commercially zoned land

[1:22:49] and repurposing of existing buildings for adaptive reuse

[1:22:54] for residential purposes in their ordinances.

[1:22:57] Yep. So the question is,

[1:23:00] what is commercially zoned land?

[1:23:02] That's on page two of the guidance document.

[1:23:05] Under what you must do

[1:23:16] Commercially zoned land is defined in 6 3 4 79

[1:23:19] as land zone for such commercial activities as retail

[1:23:23] and office spacing.

[1:23:24] They're gonna, such as,

[1:23:29] do we allow retail in industrial two?

[1:23:33] We do. So I'm gonna say that's commercially zoned.

[1:23:36] Okay.

[1:23:38] All right. So then we'll have to amend,

[1:23:43] all right, we'll have to do an amendment

[1:23:44] to industrial too as well.

[1:23:57] Okay. Where were we?

[1:24:01] So we're keeping one, two, and three.

[1:24:05] Get rid of four and five.

[1:24:07] Get rid of four and five 'cause we can't have those

[1:24:09] get rid of G.

[1:24:11] However, I think you should retain that subsection one

[1:24:15] and two and add them to that above so

[1:24:19] that they talk about the site suitability

[1:24:21] and the availability of the appropriate services.

[1:24:24] Yeah, I would keep one

[1:24:25] and two then make g you know,

[1:24:32] site suitability requirements

[1:24:33] or some other general topic

[1:24:34] that would cover the one and two.

[1:24:37] I don't know. Okay.

[1:24:39] Leave it up to your editorial discretion.

[1:24:41] What would be a good title?

[1:24:48] Or you could make one and two.

[1:24:54] You know, g and HI don't care.

[1:25:05] And I think that we need to make it clear in here that

[1:25:08] we're talking about public sewer

[1:25:12] or municipal sewer.

[1:25:20] And that was one thing I wanted to ask the board about.

[1:25:24] It's, it's the, the, the guidance

[1:25:26] and the law was clear that it needed, you needed to have

[1:25:30] that, that the, the town

[1:25:34] could deny an application if there was not

[1:25:37] public sewer available.

[1:25:40] So my question and then I guess it would kind

[1:25:44] of depend on how we interpret the law.

[1:25:46] So it says you can deny it if they don't have public sewer.

[1:25:50] We have commercial zones

[1:25:53] where we do not have public sewer available yet.

[1:25:57] So that includes the GC district out near the Atkinson

[1:26:01] Townline where LaBelle is located.

[1:26:04] It includes a portion of GC three near the Robert Frost farm

[1:26:08] because sewer stops at Berry

[1:26:11] and then our entire GC four district, Ryans Hill South

[1:26:15] does not have sewer available.

[1:26:18] So,

[1:26:20] So one of the other things is in

[1:26:24] that if there is no public water and or sewer

[1:26:29] and the developer's willing to extend to provide it,

[1:26:32] then you have to let that be okay.

[1:26:35] Correct? Correct. But if someone wanted to develop,

[1:26:37] if someone wanted

[1:26:38] to put in a multifamily development on Ryan's Hill,

[1:26:42] let's say south, you know, a little bit more south,

[1:26:46] like say south of Fody,

[1:26:50] they're not by right.

[1:26:52] They're allowed to do multifamily,

[1:26:54] but they are not going to run the, they're not gonna pay

[1:26:57] to have the sewer come all the way down 28 from Berry.

[1:27:01] So I guess what I'm asking is, do we want

[1:27:05] to contemplate if they can make the, if they can make

[1:27:10] septics work for it, is that something we want

[1:27:12] to contemplate or do we wanna just say, Nope, sorry.

[1:27:16] State law says if you don't have public sewer,

[1:27:19] you're, that's where you're at.

[1:27:23] Lemme sort of free associate here.

[1:27:24] I'm, I'm thinking that in most commercial districts,

[1:27:29] the maintenance of private septic systems is

[1:27:35] gonna be the responsibility of who the the owner,

[1:27:39] the building owner what, whatever.

[1:27:40] It's a multiple tenant building. Yeah.

[1:27:45] I don't know what, what are,

[1:27:47] I'm just, I'm just throwing it out there for contemplation

[1:27:50] Specifically. Any thoughts on this?

[1:27:51] Specifically for Ryan's Hill? I thought sewer was already

[1:27:53] in the works of being expanded to Ryans Hill and beyond.

[1:27:56] That is gonna be years

[1:27:57] before we, we've got the funding to do the, the design,

[1:28:01] like the engineering design.

[1:28:02] That's what we have money for right now.

[1:28:04] And then we'll put that out to bid.

[1:28:05] But it's gonna be years before it gets that far down.

[1:28:10] Yeah. My feeling is we,

[1:28:13] we have a housing shortage in New Hampshire.

[1:28:16] We, we should be allowing multifamily on septic

[1:28:21] if, if there's adequate space for it.

[1:28:24] I I don't think it makes sense to require

[1:28:27] public sewer when public sewer's not available.

[1:28:36] So yeah, I think the key word is

[1:28:42] if, if if there's space on the, the parcel to, to do a,

[1:28:46] a compliant subject is on given, you know,

[1:28:50] where the, the general court, especially the,

[1:28:56] the housing board, the housing committee

[1:28:58] and the house was, was gone with that.

[1:29:01] We might be getting ahead of the curve if, if we do that.

[1:29:05] 'cause that may be coming next.

[1:29:08] Yeah. So

[1:29:13] now I'm gonna do devil's.

[1:29:14] I agree with, I agree

[1:29:16] with your statement, that's why I brought it up.

[1:29:17] So I'm gonna do devil's advocate on like the

[1:29:21] economic development side of it.

[1:29:23] We have very little commercially zoned land left

[1:29:29] if we're only requiring 25% of the building to have

[1:29:35] some sort of commercially use use.

[1:29:41] I wonder, I guess I don't wanna see all of,

[1:29:49] all of our commercially zoned land in areas that

[1:29:53] we are looking forward to redevelopment once we have water

[1:29:57] and sewer available to be all a

[1:30:02] mixed use like all apartments.

[1:30:04] Well, so I'm like, I'm like trying to, I'm like

[1:30:07] What is our, might wanna get some, what does

[1:30:08] Our master plan say?

[1:30:09] We might need legal advice on that. Yeah.

[1:30:13] My reading of the tea leaves is

[1:30:16] that the general court doesn't care about our tax base.

[1:30:20] They're way more concerned about housing people.

[1:30:23] Okay. And, and is it,

[1:30:25] but are we, are we permitted to do something that's contrary

[1:30:29] to our master plan if our master plan envisioned that as a,

[1:30:33] or has that set out as a different use or whatever?

[1:30:40] Let me answer that differently. Okay.

[1:30:43] If the master, if, if complying

[1:30:44] with a master plan requires us to violate state law, we need

[1:30:48] to violate the master plan.

[1:30:49] Correct? I, I, I agree. Okay.

[1:30:51] I just wanna like make sure we line up all of our ducks.

[1:30:54] Okay. Okay.

[1:30:57] Now Should we

[1:31:02] increase the amount of commercial space we're

[1:31:05] requiring on the ground floor?

[1:31:08] The 'cause we said 25% of the entire structure and then

[1:31:13] because we realized we, we possibly can't do that.

[1:31:16] We're saying 25% of the ground floor. Yep.

[1:31:19] May maybe we should up it to 50% of the ground floor.

[1:31:24] 33%. I don't know.

[1:31:28] Well, state law allows us to a hundred percent

[1:31:29] of ground floor if we want.

[1:31:31] I don't personally want

[1:31:33] to do a hundred percent of the ground floor.

[1:31:35] Is there, if we're concerned about using up all the

[1:31:38] commercial zoned area, maybe we, we differentiate between,

[1:31:43] you know, if it's in one

[1:31:44] of those areas we're concerned about overdeveloping into

[1:31:47] apartments, maybe in those areas it has to be 100%

[1:31:50] of the bottom floor or a higher number of some sort.

[1:31:55] Well, I mean we do have a number of zones

[1:31:58] that fall under the general definition

[1:32:01] of commercially zoned.

[1:32:03] And I think we could have differing percentages for

[1:32:08] those different districts, I think.

[1:32:12] Yep, we could. So this is for,

[1:32:15] we're we're talking about general commercial right now.

[1:32:18] So general commercial district currently is Crystal Ave

[1:32:23] mostly developed.

[1:32:25] There's a couple of places if someone wanted

[1:32:28] to, they could add this.

[1:32:31] Then the other remaining portion of general commercial is

[1:32:34] that small section.

[1:32:36] That is where LaBelle Winery is.

[1:32:40] There's a very, there's a small section.

[1:32:42] It kind of hits that, you know, 14,

[1:32:46] 16 route one 11 area.

[1:32:48] Well de depending on the density that can be obtained,

[1:32:55] I think we have to also envision the possibility of

[1:33:00] redevelopment to tear down and,

[1:33:02] and building a high rise in an existing commercial,

[1:33:07] general commercial district.

[1:33:08] Especially if, if there's a, a property

[1:33:11] that isn't performing or is kind of

[1:33:14] slightly less valuable than others.

[1:33:16] So when we, when we say, oh, all the lions built, yeah,

[1:33:20] it can be rebuilt if, if the economics work

[1:33:23] True.

[1:33:24] Yeah.

[1:33:31] So for gc, what do we want to change?

[1:33:34] Do we wanna change the percentage?

[1:33:42] Again, I've seen in the past where we come up with

[1:33:49] aspirational things to, you know, protect our,

[1:33:53] our ability to grow the tax base.

[1:33:55] Right. But no one wants to use them.

[1:34:00] We do say a minimum.

[1:34:02] So I mean someone could come in

[1:34:03] and say, well I'm gonna put a restaurant,

[1:34:05] which is, you know Yeah.

[1:34:07] The entire ground floor with apartments above.

[1:34:13] So I do understand that the town has

[1:34:18] a parochial interest in maintaining our ability

[1:34:22] to expand our commercial tax base.

[1:34:26] 'cause property taxes are expensive everywhere.

[1:34:33] We just need to be careful that we don't put in requirements

[1:34:36] that cause developers to have a lot

[1:34:39] of unrented space going begging.

[1:34:42] And that's kind of like predicting

[1:34:44] where the market's going in future years,

[1:34:46] which is I don't have a crystal ball.

[1:34:48] Yeah.

[1:34:50] Okay. So I don't know what this is gonna,

[1:34:54] this is gonna be a judgment call.

[1:34:56] I don't know that we have, I mean,

[1:34:58] unless we, you know, Brian's not here.

[1:35:01] Where's Brian? He's our, he's our realtor.

[1:35:03] You could tell us, right? Yeah.

[1:35:05] But, but, but by my opinion is I've seen a lot of

[1:35:10] storefronts, you know, with

[1:35:11] for lease signs on them recently.

[1:35:15] Yeah. I I think a small minimum gets a

[1:35:19] foothold in there for commercial.

[1:35:20] And I, I would much rather have an apartment than

[1:35:23] a empty storefront.

[1:35:27] Do we wanna just leave it for now

[1:35:29] and we can highlight it for the next workshop?

[1:35:32] We can do that. We could, we could

[1:35:33] kick the can down the road.

[1:35:34] Yep. 'cause I'm sure this will not be the last workshop.

[1:35:38] No, no, No.

[1:35:40] So, alright. We can, we can do that. All right.

[1:35:45] So we will do that. And then so GC two,

[1:35:48] the general commercial two district, which is

[1:35:53] that is, that is our,

[1:35:57] that's the Shanita road district.

[1:36:00] So Shanita Road and then it goes north up the bypass

[1:36:03] and stops right at the cell tower.

[1:36:08] So, and that was intended to be more

[1:36:11] of a medical area.

[1:36:15] So in this one we mimic the requirements

[1:36:19] that are in the general commercial district

[1:36:21] and we also add childcare center since we need

[1:36:24] to permit those in commercial zones.

[1:36:29] Anyone have any issues with that?

[1:36:32] Okay. Seems

[1:36:34] Reasonable to me.

[1:36:35] Okay. GC three, same changes.

[1:36:40] GC three is the area right around the Robert Frost Farm,

[1:36:51] which that one actually gives me angst if the state ever

[1:36:54] decided to sell property, I'm like, oh,

[1:36:56] multifamily right next to the farm. But

[1:37:00] Yeah, I mean, as written

[1:37:05] you six may come into conflict with a purpose about Yes.

[1:37:10] Size, height, and architecture.

[1:37:14] So in, perhaps we come up with our own like a, a different

[1:37:19] density and maybe

[1:37:24] this district, because it's so special,

[1:37:26] might need a different density requirement in an

[1:37:30] retaining maybe the 25 minimum 25% of commercial.

[1:37:35] But,

[1:37:39] Well, I mean, on the face of it,

[1:37:43] making it a general commercial three

[1:37:45] and then trying to protect protect the historic neighborhood

[1:37:49] is kind of oxymoronic.

[1:37:51] It is. I know.

[1:37:53] And I, I will tell you that from, you know, case law,

[1:37:56] you cannot enforce purposes

[1:38:00] unless there's specific requirements that

[1:38:03] You have to have a purpose though

[1:38:05] hooks it lost. You have to have

[1:38:06] A purpose.

[1:38:07] But the purpose is not sufficient to limit what goes in,

[1:38:18] I guess I would not like

[1:38:19] to see a big apartment building right next

[1:38:21] to the Robert Foster Farm.

[1:38:23] But how would we deal with that?

[1:38:32] Change the density requirement

[1:38:40] And something is going into

[1:38:41] that Robert Frost Farm eventually

[1:38:43] You mean this, you think the

[1:38:44] state's gonna sell the property?

[1:38:47] The, the land that abuts the Robert Frost farm, between

[1:38:52] that and the trailer park where I'm talking, coming down

[1:38:55] to the dead proof of the old clam haven,

[1:38:59] something will be in there eventually.

[1:39:03] So where the Robert Frost farm is, is if you were to go,

[1:39:06] Oh, that's West Running Brook though.

[1:39:07] Okay. So that empty lot,

[1:39:09] the Smith lot is the West Running Brook district.

[1:39:13] So the GC three starts after that.

[1:39:16] After that. Okay.

[1:39:24] Yeah, I'm gonna guess that West Running Brook,

[1:39:28] because of its allowed uses is probably also

[1:39:30] considered commercially zoned.

[1:39:36] We do permit multifamily in there. So with it's zoned.

[1:39:38] Yep. So that's already, we're

[1:39:40] Good there.

[1:39:41] I don't know, maybe we can put a, a pin in this

[1:39:43] because Okay.

[1:39:45] If we really wanna have a buffer of

[1:39:51] neighborhood compatibility around that property,

[1:39:55] we're gonna have to do something more than we've got here.

[1:39:58] I think we've just been lucky. I mean, high love Brook

[1:40:02] waiting facilities just down the road for that.

[1:40:04] And that's very nice and it sit back,

[1:40:07] but it, Mr.

[1:40:11] Ey says at some point something's going to come before us.

[1:40:15] We have a very limited list of permitted uses in

[1:40:18] that district, which helps.

[1:40:25] So maybe we would need to put

[1:40:27] a different density restriction on,

[1:40:30] on the multifamily use in that district.

[1:40:33] Yeah, there's that.

[1:40:34] And then I'm also, as I'm looking at,

[1:40:39] as I'm looking at the list of permitted uses,

[1:40:41] we're talking about, we're, we're talking about like

[1:40:46] 5,000 gross square feet

[1:40:50] or 2,500, you know, 5,000.

[1:40:54] Like we, we, we put

[1:40:57] square foot limits on our uses.

[1:41:00] So if, if I want to build a multi-family there

[1:41:05] and I wanna put in a retail store,

[1:41:12] the ordinance in this section says my retail store has

[1:41:15] to be 5,000 square feet, which defeats the purpose

[1:41:18] of not having a huge multifamily.

[1:41:21] So we may, you know,

[1:41:23] this the general commercial three district, we,

[1:41:26] we may wanna take a look at that

[1:41:29] and look at, like, look at that

[1:41:32] as a whole and

[1:41:38] Amend it.

[1:41:39] Well I'll, I'll be honest with you,

[1:41:41] I haven't really given this a look,

[1:41:42] but reading the permitted uses

[1:41:44] and reading the purpose, they are repeat it oxymoronic.

[1:41:50] So we gotta change one or the other.

[1:41:52] Yeah. So let's,

[1:41:54] I'm just gonna highlight this whole section

[1:41:56] and maybe we can, we can come back to this.

[1:42:08] Okay. Okay.

[1:42:09] And then GC four were the same changes that we made

[1:42:13] for general commercial and GC two.

[1:42:17] So where is GC four General commercial four starts?

[1:42:23] I think It's, it's that just south? No, no,

[1:42:25] I, I, I geographically where Is that? I'm so sorry.

[1:42:28] Oh yeah, so it's, it's south of

[1:42:33] it starts just below, I wanna say it's

[1:42:38] FO and GC four.

[1:42:39] That's, I was Wondering too.

[1:42:40] I should have brought in my laptop with a GIS

[1:42:42] so we can project it,

[1:42:44] Put it up.

[1:42:45] So yeah, so it runs as you're looking at the,

[1:42:50] as you're looking at like the zoning map, it starts at,

[1:42:54] I don't know the exact spot,

[1:42:55] but it starts like right in the general area of like fody

[1:42:59] and it runs, it's the rest of it

[1:43:01] and it runs all the way to the townline.

[1:43:03] Can you bring up the founds website GS and find out

[1:43:07] For us maybe the zoning, the zoning map.

[1:43:09] You can find it on the, if you go

[1:43:11] to the planning board page under forms and

[1:43:14] or ordinances, it should be a link right there.

[1:43:17] Thanks. Thank you.

[1:43:19] So are you saying from fody down to ACE Paving

[1:43:23] and Vincent's Auto Sale all the way down to

[1:43:25] The town? That's all the way down to the,

[1:43:26] That's all g that's all this GC four.

[1:43:30] Yep. It goes right to the town

[1:43:31] Line.

[1:43:32] It's not GC two or any of that stuff? No,

[1:43:34] It's GC four.

[1:43:35] Okay, Well that's pretty

[1:43:39] diverse and pretty businesslike.

[1:43:41] It is.

[1:43:53] I guess I don't have a a,

[1:43:55] So if an assisted living place were

[1:43:58] to go in across the street from Legis, hypothetically,

[1:44:03] if an assisted living place was

[1:44:04] to go in across the street from ACEs paving,

[1:44:08] which is Vincent's, which was one of those car places,

[1:44:13] how would the septic and water,

[1:44:17] They would have to, they would have to, they'd have

[1:44:19] to make the septic work.

[1:44:21] We have waters available.

[1:44:22] They'd have to bring it under, under 28 across the street.

[1:44:27] 'cause water's on water's on the

[1:44:30] West Side.

[1:44:31] West side, yeah. Okay.

[1:44:34] I was just curious. Well, and,

[1:44:35] and I, I think that's why in the long term capital

[1:44:37] improvement plan, you know, sewers going down there

[1:44:39] because there is any limitation on

[1:44:42] what folks will build based on availability

[1:44:46] of those utilities.

[1:44:49] So just because you haven't allowed use

[1:44:51] doesn't mean anyone's gonna build something

[1:44:54] until economic sense.

[1:44:57] And that may mean town silver.

[1:45:01] Yeah.

[1:45:06] So unless anyone thinks that

[1:45:09] allowing those developments in there, assuming that anyone

[1:45:13] could make that work is, is a bad thing,

[1:45:16] then I don't see a, I don't see a problem.

[1:45:21] Okay.

[1:45:23] Okay. On to OBD

[1:45:26] And then,

[1:45:31] so office, business district,

[1:45:35] what we did, oh, there we go.

[1:45:37] Oh, here's our map. So,

[1:45:42] so the, the red section is, the

[1:45:51] Red section is the fairways. Fairways,

[1:45:53] Yeah.

[1:45:54] So that's West running Brook.

[1:45:55] And then, and then, so the,

[1:45:58] the red section's west running Brook.

[1:46:01] And then we go to,

[1:46:07] Oh, the, the tan stuff south of the red section is west

[1:46:11] Running Brook is west running Brook.

[1:46:12] Okay. And then the orange is oranges is

[1:46:16] GC Three, GC three, and then the pink is GC four.

[1:46:19] So it starts at GC four,

[1:46:23] Lawrence Road goes south.

[1:46:29] Is OBD like Shani?

[1:46:31] No. So, so we're looking at that pink section

[1:46:34] that's GC four

[1:46:36] and I think that is, that looks like Lawrence Road.

[1:46:39] Yeah, it is. Yeah. Well I think we moved on

[1:46:42] to, okay. OBD.

[1:46:44] Okay. So OBD office business district is on the London

[1:46:49] dairy town line on West Broadway.

[1:46:57] So you're talking about, no, yeah,

[1:47:00] scroll up just a little bit Owen

[1:47:05] up a little bit more

[1:47:11] and it, oh, sorry.

[1:47:12] No, you're right. So yeah, go up just a little bit more. Be

[1:47:15] That white Area.

[1:47:16] Yeah. OBD is that whitish color?

[1:47:17] Oh yeah, right along the street. Yep. Yeah. Yep.

[1:47:22] Okay. Got it.

[1:47:29] So currently in the OBD multifamily dwellings are

[1:47:33] permitted as per the section 1 65 49 B

[1:47:38] one, which is the TBOD.

[1:47:40] The TBOD allows 45 units an acre.

[1:47:43] I was thinking the board

[1:47:48] didn't wanna refer back to the TBOD

[1:47:53] when we had originally done the zoning for the OBD,

[1:47:57] the density requirement was much less in the TBOD.

[1:48:12] All right. Anything else on OBD?

[1:48:15] Okay, So neighborhood commercial,

[1:48:17] that's the one we fairly recently created.

[1:48:19] Yeah. And we tried to make sure that everything

[1:48:22] that goes in there is kind of like a bed and breakfast

[1:48:24] and has a a, a residential look to it, at least on,

[1:48:29] on the one side of the street.

[1:48:31] So I, I think you will need to

[1:48:37] make it subject to the dimensional requirements

[1:48:40] in subsection C.

[1:48:47] So we have those and then

[1:49:02] The red is MFR.

[1:49:04] Hmm. The red is MFR

[1:49:06] 49.

[1:49:08] And I, I think there's,

[1:49:09] unless there's tear downs, there's not a lot of

[1:49:13] new bill opportunity in that district.

[1:49:15] Right?

[1:49:17] I don't think. Yeah, I don't think so.

[1:49:20] It wouldn't be a lot.

[1:49:24] Okay. Fairways, that's MFR

[1:49:31] on page one 17.

[1:49:47] And so it's five Shanita Road,

[1:49:59] huh?

[1:50:05] Right. But we were looking at the red on the map.

[1:50:07] Oh, okay. All right. Sorry. Okay. Okay.

[1:50:14] Are we on to,

[1:50:16] We're trying to figure out what

[1:50:17] you, what you guys are doing.

[1:50:18] Oh yeah, no, we were, we, were we looking at

[1:50:22] where we were on the zoning map and I got confused

[1:50:26] and thought he was, I got confused.

[1:50:29] So it's after eight 30.

[1:50:31] Alright, so we're, are we moving on

[1:50:33] to industrial two now please?

[1:50:36] Alright. Yep. So that one we're gonna have to get rid

[1:50:39] of under H subsection one.

[1:50:44] And then I think we could just renumber that as,

[1:50:49] so two would become one, three would become two,

[1:50:54] and then four would become three.

[1:50:59] And then I guess if we, if we wanted,

[1:51:03] do we wanna make the same change there

[1:51:05] and say it has to be on the first floor?

[1:51:09] Yeah, I think we could mirror this. Okay.

[1:51:14] The other place we had a conditional use permit

[1:51:15] and we just got rid of it.

[1:51:17] Okay. And then we would get rid

[1:51:22] of five and six.

[1:51:24] Yep. Okay.

[1:51:27] And then for the rest of the changes,

[1:51:34] medium high density residential two,

[1:51:38] we'd add in the innovative housing structures

[1:51:41] because we permit single family detached dwellings.

[1:51:44] Okay. The same is for medium density residential.

[1:51:48] Yep. And also low medium density residential

[1:51:53] and low density residential.

[1:51:58] Okay. And

[1:51:59] Then that make sense to everyone?

[1:52:01] Yeah. Is that good? Yeah.

[1:52:04] This last section changes to the powers

[1:52:07] of the zoning board of adjustment.

[1:52:09] I will be completely honest, these came out of

[1:52:11] that house bill 2 44

[1:52:14] and there's a whole section towards the back of that.

[1:52:17] I don't understand what the state is trying to do.

[1:52:21] Bless you. Thank you. I'd like to hold off on this

[1:52:25] until we get a little bit more guidance.

[1:52:29] I,

[1:52:30] Yeah, Yeah.

[1:52:32] I think,

[1:52:33] Oh my god, this is a big, I

[1:52:35] Think what they're trying to say is

[1:52:36] 6 74 13.

[1:52:37] That, that's, that, that's an, a new one.

[1:52:41] I won't find it in the book.

[1:52:42] Yeah, yeah. So what I think they're trying to say is

[1:52:45] that when you have, it's, it's related

[1:52:48] to the change last year when you have

[1:52:54] like, they're roads that are not on the pub,

[1:52:56] on the official map of the town.

[1:52:58] So they're not roads that are accepted by the town of Derry.

[1:53:02] So when it, I think it relates to how,

[1:53:06] how you can permit structures.

[1:53:11] So if you have, have a lot

[1:53:16] that doesn't have access on a town road,

[1:53:18] and maybe it's a big lot

[1:53:20] and you, you wanna like build out in the middle of nowhere.

[1:53:25] I mean it doesn't really apply to us as much

[1:53:27] because we don't have a lot of

[1:53:29] Large track.

[1:53:30] Is this, is this related to like building on

[1:53:34] Yeah. Like the

[1:53:35] Dead end roads and things Discontinued,

[1:53:37] not the dead end ones.

[1:53:38] Those take that, that's a different one

[1:53:40] that takes effect next year.

[1:53:42] We didn't touch that yet.

[1:53:44] The this is, these are roads

[1:53:46] that are not on the official town map

[1:53:49] and how if the building official denies a permit,

[1:53:54] the zoning board can under the, how I read it

[1:53:59] and, and I need to get clarification, I understood it to say

[1:54:03] that the zoning board upon appeal could issue the building

[1:54:06] or grant permission to issue the building permit if,

[1:54:11] if the structure

[1:54:15] was placed a certain way.

[1:54:17] I don't under it's very confusing language.

[1:54:20] Well, so there is an existing

[1:54:27] 6 74 13

[1:54:32] and it starts on page 4 0 7,

[1:54:37] goes on to 4 0 8 in the book.

[1:54:40] And it does say,

[1:54:45] where do I wanna start?

[1:54:48] I shall have further power in specific cases by a vote

[1:54:53] of the majority of its members upon appeal filed to it

[1:54:57] by the owner of any such land to grant a permit

[1:55:01] based on considerations of justice and equity for a building

[1:55:05] or structure on

[1:55:06] or part thereof in a map, in a map street location

[1:55:12] shown on the official map.

[1:55:15] In any case in which the Board

[1:55:18] of Adjustment finds upon evide the evidence

[1:55:21] and arguments presented to it upon appeal, A,

[1:55:25] that the property of the appellant, which

[1:55:30] such map street location forms a part of,

[1:55:33] will not yield a reasonable return to the owner

[1:55:35] unless the permit is granted.

[1:55:37] Or b, that balancing the interest

[1:55:39] of the municipality in preserving the integrity

[1:55:41] of the official map and not increasing to greatly the cost

[1:55:46] of later opening such a street and the interest of the owner

[1:55:49] and the use of and benefits of the owner's property.

[1:55:52] The grant of such permit is required

[1:55:54] by considerations of justice and equity.

[1:55:56] So it it sounds like it's following that. Yep.

[1:55:59] Now the language there is a little obtuse

[1:56:01] It, it it is and I was not sure how to word this

[1:56:06] and I'm, I'm almost,

[1:56:11] I'm almost tempted

[1:56:12] because it's, it's a, it's a power

[1:56:14] that's granted in the RSA Do we have to do we have

[1:56:17] to specify it in in our zoning ordinance?

[1:56:20] No, Thank you.

[1:56:22] I mean, otherwise the don,

[1:56:23] we'd have to add everything in here.

[1:56:24] Yeah. So can we, we can just not amend that section.

[1:56:27] I, I'm, I I would say yeah, thank you that way that

[1:56:32] if, I like that the zoning ordinance, I like that a lot.

[1:56:34] The zoning board wants to interpret this good look

[1:56:37] and God speed.

[1:56:39] Thank you. That totally makes my night. I can't even begin

[1:56:42] To see you.

[1:56:43] Anything else disagree? Okay,

[1:56:46] Cool.

[1:56:47] Alright.

[1:56:49] So is that it for things that we think we need to change

[1:56:52] For now?

[1:56:53] For now, for now, for now.

[1:56:54] There there was the change

[1:56:56] that will be coming up in effective in 2027.

[1:56:59] I don't think we need to address it right at the moment

[1:57:02] that talks about, we can't put a, we can't

[1:57:07] put a cap on how long a dead end street will be

[1:57:11] and we can't, I think it's,

[1:57:16] we can't say you can only have X number

[1:57:19] of houses on a street.

[1:57:20] So there's, there's things like that Okay.

[1:57:22] That we can, that will be addressed in the LDCR

[1:57:25] and we can take care of

[1:57:26] that maybe once we're done with this.

[1:57:30] Okay. It's a July, July 1 27 effective date.

[1:57:35] Okay. And, and some of these are already in effect,

[1:57:36] so we're kind of playing catch up.

[1:57:38] Much of these are, much of these are in effect.

[1:57:40] Okay. Yeah. Alright.

[1:57:43] Well I thank everyone for, you know,

[1:57:46] pitching in and being interactive and helping.

[1:57:51] I think we've got a good first review.

[1:57:54] Any other closing comments?

[1:58:00] Okay, so going back to our

[1:58:05] agenda, do we have any board member comments?

[1:58:07] I Can. I fish for a motion to adjourn. So moved.

[1:58:12] Second. Moved by a second to adjourn.

[1:58:16] All those and chair say aye. Aye. Aye.

[1:58:18] Please stand adjourned.

Planning Board - 09/16/26

Agenda

Transcript