Allan Herschlag lives in Concord.
Recently, two opinion pieces in the Monitor on the city’s proposed form-based zoning (to replace and update our current zoning ordinances) took opposite sides in discussing its potential impact on single-family residential neighborhoods.
The first said, “As proposed the new zoning ordinance abolishes single-family residential neighborhoods and substitutes a multiple unit approach that allows the conversion of existing single-family homes to duplexes, triplexes, and other types of residences.” (“The impact of Concord’s new zoning ordinance,” Monitor, 8/24)
The second responded in part by writing, “To suggest that the new zoning ordinance would eliminate single-family homes is patently false and mischaracterizes the intent of the new ordinance.” (“Response to ‘zoning ordinance,’” Monitor, 9/2).
The proposed zoning has two distinct residential districts, the first is Rural Residential (RR) with three zoning districts and the second is Residential (R) where I will be referring to the first four districts (R-10, R-7.5, R-5, R-2.5).
Both districts RR and R are required by state statute to allow an attached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) to the existing residential structure if the residential structure is in conformance with zoning ordinances. The city can limit the livable space inside the ADU and has proposed a maximum of 900 square feet. In simple terms, any existing residential single-family home that is in compliance with the city’s zoning code would be allowed by right to construct an attached ADU. While municipalities can impose design standards on ADUs, they cannot deny them if the above conditions are met.
In our city’s proposed RR district only a primary residence and an ADU would be allowed.
The city’s other single-family residential district R has proposed standards that can allow up to four residential units on each homeowner’s property. They could potentially have four units in one building or four separate units on the property or any combination of the above that would add up to four residential units.
The fine print. While up to four units would be allowed in the R district, there are requirements that would have to be met to allow these additional units. Lot frontage, percentage of lot coverage, setbacks, and building separation, among other requirements would need to be met. Not all properties would meet these requirements but all properties in the R single-family residential districts would have the potential to apply for additional residential units on their property.
So which writer got it right? The first was pretty much on the mark. While not all properties in single-family residential districts would meet the requirements for additional units, properties in all residential districts would be eligible for an ADU, if the properties are conforming with zoning codes. Properties outside of the RR districts would be eligible for up to four units, should they meet the requirements in the proposed zoning.
Some additional notes. The last few legislative sessions have seen proposed legislation that would require all municipalities in the state to allow four units on single-family residential lots. Also included in the legislation, new residential development above street level in downtowns would allow for the expansion of tax abatements (RSA 79-E) with property tax waivers for up to 16 years.
And while it is the state that dictates what municipalities can and can’t do, our state’s constitution doesn’t allow for unfunded mandates. If the proposed legislation passed and resulted in additional costs to communities, wouldn’t the state be required to reimburse those municipalities?