Some Republicans argued the carrot works well: Cities and towns should be incentivized to pass zoning ordinances that make housing construction easier, but they shouldn’t be forced to do so, they argued.
“Every zoning change proposed in this bill can already be done at the municipality level, just as towns and cities have done hundreds of times in the past,” said Sen. Denise Ricciardi, a Bedford Republican. “… Each town or city knows what is best for them. A few politicians that want authoritarian central planning initiated out of Concord do not and cannot know.”
A larger group, comprising Democrats and Republicans, argued the state was not going to expand housing to levels needed by voluntary action alone, and that the state should require that they do so — the stick.
“Some communities, in southern New Hampshire especially, have used every trick they can come up with to discourage building,” said Sen. Keith Murphy, a Manchester Republican. “Every single inspection, every permit, every hearing, every redraft, every appeal, every impact fee, every meeting, every single delay, and every single penny a builder needs to put towards a project must be recouped through the sale of the property.” Those barriers increase housing costs, either causing the projects to die or requiring the housing to be prohibitively expensive.
“And that’s why we are where we are,” Murphy said.
On Thursday, a majority of the Senate chose to pass legislation adhering to the stick approach, in a notable shift for the chamber that comes amid high voter demand for housing action.
The debate came to a head over Senate Bill 84, which would restrict the minimum lot size for single-family homes to 88,000 square feet — or about two acres — for at least 50 percent of zoned land that is not served by municipal water and sewer lines. For lots that are served by those lines, a municipality could pass lot size requirements no greater than 22,000 square feet, or about half an acre.
Cities and towns would be required to change their ordinances to comply with those restrictions by July 2026.
The Senate passed the bill, 13-10, Thursday, with a mix of Democratic and Republican support, but not before extensive discussion.
The bill could force a rewrite of zoning codes in a number of towns that have minimum lot sizes much higher than two acres. Supporters say it would allow for much more subdivision of land by property owners and remove persistent barriers for developers looking to increase housing stock.
But opponents said the bill would be taking away the power for towns to decide how much density they want within their borders. And they argued there are better ways to encourage housing in New Hampshire than by forcing zoning code changes on towns.
Sen. Regina Birdsell, a Hampstead Republican, said the main barrier to housing development in New Hampshire is the price of construction materials, not zoning codes.
Sen. Bill Gannon argued the overhaul would just encourage large-scale developers to build “McMansion” homes on smaller lots.
“I don’t see it helping your starter house, because the builder is going to want to maximize his returns and get the biggest house,” he said.
And Sen. James Gray, a Rochester Republican, referred to the comic strip “Peanuts,” arguing that the state limiting zoning abilities after originally delegating them was akin to the character Lucy pulling away the football from Charlie Brown.
Though Republicans were split on whether to support or oppose the bill, Democrats were largely united in favor of it, with one exception: Sen. Debra Altschiller, a Stratham Democrat, voted against the bill. Altschiller said she had heard from planning and zoning committee members in the towns she represents, all of them imploring her to vote against the bill and let the towns pass their own zoning changes to encourage more housing.
Altschiller argued the state should support incentive-based programs, such as the Housing Champions program, the 2023 law allowing towns to access infrastructure funding from the state if they choose to pass pro-housing zoning codes.
“Once you throw a blanket zoning ordinance on the entire state, if it doesn’t work out for one particular town it’s impossible for that town to get exceptions or to be relieved of that,” Altschiller said in an interview. “… I felt like this was a cudgel. It was: You’re gonna do it and you’re gonna do it this way.”
Murphy pushed back at many of the concerns raised.
“It’s absolutely undeniable that building cost and the cost of building materials is up, and unfortunately, we in the state Legislature — we don’t do a lot to control that,” he said. Overhauling local zoning barriers is one lever the Legislature does have, he argued.
“There’s still responsible local control options in the zoning ordinances allowed by this bill,” Murphy said.
The approval Thursday came as the Senate passed a raft of legislation intended to remove regulatory barriers to housing. The actions stood in contrast to the chamber’s behavior in 2024, when senators voted to kill several bills intended to force towns to allow for more housing development.
Among the bills Thursday, the Senate approved Senate Bill 282, which allows residential buildings between four and six stories tall to have only one stairwell if they meet certain fire safety requirements such as sprinklers. It passed Senate Bill 284, which bars municipalities from requiring any more than one parking space per unit for many housing developments with fewer than 10 units.
And the Senate passed Senate Bill 81, which would double the amount of money sent to the state’s affordable housing fund from the real estate transfer tax. Currently, the state sends $5 million per year; SB 81 would increase that to $10 million.
After passing it, the Senate laid SB 81 on the table, a typical maneuver during a budget year that allows the chamber to add it into the budget bills when they receive them in April.
The House, meanwhile, passed a bill Thursday that would usher in major changes to zoning. House Bill 631, which passed 204-134, would require that municipalities allow multi-family residential developments in commercial zones.
After an amendment added Thursday, the bill would allow municipalities to require that all ground floors of the buildings be dedicated to retail “or similar uses.” And the bill would allow cities and towns to bar residential developments in areas where industrial and manufacturing activity “may result in impacts that are incompatible with residential use, such as air, noise, odor, or transportation impacts.”
That bill is heading now to the Senate.
This story first published the New Hampshire Bulletin. Read the original here.
