Last week, the Senate Commerce Committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 84, which seeks to set limitations on minimum lot sizes.
If the bill is enacted, a municipality could not require a lot size greater than 66,000 square feet for single-family residential uses if the lot is not served by either municipal water or sewer. If the lot is served by municipal water and sewer, the lot cannot be greater than 22,000 square feet.
All other municipal zoning ordinances not related to minimum lot sizes, such as frontage or setbacks, still must be met by the developer. In the case of a septic system, nothing in the bill overrides NH DES septic or well requirements, which could result in lot sizes greater than 66,000 square feet.
NHAR was joined by the NH Business and Industry Association and the Homebuilders in support of the bill.
Advocates argued that NH Zoning Statute (RSA 674) authorizes municipalities to create zoning ordinances to protect the "health and safety" of the community, and large lot minimums, such as those towns with two- or three-acre minimums, serve no such health or safety function. The large lots artificially increase the cost of housing while creating sprawl and wasting undeveloped land.
The Commerce Committee is expected to take action on the bill later this month.
A more reasonable appeal period
Currently, an applicant or abutter can appeal decisions by a local land use board or legislative body to the Zoning Board of Adjustment "within a reasonable period of time." The majority of New Hampshire municipalities have defined "a reasonable period of time" as 30 days or less. However, some communities continue to leave the time period undefined. An applicant has no ability to know when the appeal time has expired and construction can begin.
Senate Bill 78 was put forward by NHAR to set a statewide definition of reasonable to mean "within 30 days," providing applicants and abutters with clear deadlines. The New Hampshire Municipal Association testified in opposition, claiming that towns may want to allow "summer residents and snowbirds" plenty of opportunity to appeal their own town official’s decisions. It was a head-scratcher for advocates, as well as the Senators, who pressed NHMA to explain what they might think is a reasonable timeframe. Is 120 days? Six months? NHMA said it could not answer.
The Senate Commerce Committee is expected to act on the bill later this month.
Discrimination against housing vouchers
House Bill 628 would make it unlawful discriminatory practice to refuse to rent or otherwise make unavailable to any person, or deny a dwelling to any prospective tenant, on the basis that he or she is a participant in the Housing Choice Voucher Program. NHAR testified in opposition.
HUD requires an inspection of the property prior to the tenant with a voucher taking occupancy. Rent increases also need approval. Some landlords may choose not to participate in the program and should not be compelled to do so. The most efficient way to ensure voucher recipients have access to adequate housing is to build more housing units.
The House Housing Committee is expected to take action later this month.
Quote of the Week
“New Hampshire is missing out on jobs and opportunities because of our anti-housing policies. ... The single biggest reason for this is unreasonably large lot size requirements. Large lot sizes are intended to exclude others ... and is making housing less affordable.”
Sen. Keith Murphy (R-District 16), introducing Senate Bill 84 to the Senate Commerce Committee, which sets minimum lot size requirements.
For more information, contact New Hampshire Realtors CEO Bob Quinn: bob@nhar.com