Zoning Board Considers Controversial Multifamily Housing Variance
June 06, 2024 | Milford Boards & Committees of Selectmen, Milford, Hillsborough County, New Hampshire
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
In a recent meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA), significant discussions centered around two key cases involving proposed expansions and variances for local industrial and residential developments.
The first case involved a request from Marm and Utilities LLC for a special exception to reduce the front setback for an industrial plant expansion. The board received a letter from attorney Quinn, representing the applicants, requesting a continuance of the hearing to the June 20 meeting, which was unanimously approved by the board.
The second case, identified as 2024-6, presented a variance request from 30 Mill Street LLC. The applicant seeks to transfer density from a residentially zoned portion of their 9.87-acre lot to the commercially zoned section along Mill Street. The proposal includes the construction of a multifamily apartment building with 34 rental units across three floors. The board discussed the implications of the density transfer, noting that the residential portion of the lot could yield approximately 20 units based on zoning regulations, while the commercial section allows for a maximum of 14 units.
The applicant's representatives, including attorney Emily Goering and land surveyor Sam Ingram, provided an overview of the project, emphasizing that the development would occur entirely within the commercial district, preserving the residential area, which contains wetlands. They highlighted that the proposal aligns with existing zoning ordinances and aims to enhance pedestrian connectivity with the addition of sidewalks.
The board engaged in a detailed discussion regarding the density calculations and the potential impact of the proposed development. Concerns were raised about the actual buildable area of the lot, given the presence of wetlands, and the need for a clear understanding of how many units could realistically be developed.
The meeting concluded with the board agreeing to further evaluate the variance request and the implications of the density transfer at the upcoming June 20 meeting, where both cases will be revisited.
The first case involved a request from Marm and Utilities LLC for a special exception to reduce the front setback for an industrial plant expansion. The board received a letter from attorney Quinn, representing the applicants, requesting a continuance of the hearing to the June 20 meeting, which was unanimously approved by the board.
The second case, identified as 2024-6, presented a variance request from 30 Mill Street LLC. The applicant seeks to transfer density from a residentially zoned portion of their 9.87-acre lot to the commercially zoned section along Mill Street. The proposal includes the construction of a multifamily apartment building with 34 rental units across three floors. The board discussed the implications of the density transfer, noting that the residential portion of the lot could yield approximately 20 units based on zoning regulations, while the commercial section allows for a maximum of 14 units.
The applicant's representatives, including attorney Emily Goering and land surveyor Sam Ingram, provided an overview of the project, emphasizing that the development would occur entirely within the commercial district, preserving the residential area, which contains wetlands. They highlighted that the proposal aligns with existing zoning ordinances and aims to enhance pedestrian connectivity with the addition of sidewalks.
The board engaged in a detailed discussion regarding the density calculations and the potential impact of the proposed development. Concerns were raised about the actual buildable area of the lot, given the presence of wetlands, and the need for a clear understanding of how many units could realistically be developed.
The meeting concluded with the board agreeing to further evaluate the variance request and the implications of the density transfer at the upcoming June 20 meeting, where both cases will be revisited.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
