CONCORD, NH – Three bills that would nudge multi-family housing development forward in the state, helping to make inroads in the housing crisis, got final approval by the House and Senate last week and moved to the governor’s desk.
A compromise that allows residential housing in commercial zones, another that sets clear standards for limiting development on dead-end roads, and a third that allows municipalities to create special assessment districts for multi-family housing have moved forward.
The bills were approved and amended by both the House and Senate before going to Committees on Conference to reach a final agreement before being voted on by both chambers Thursday, the last day the Legislature could act on bills. Gov. Kelly Ayotte has five days after passage, excluding Sundays, to sign or veto the bills. If she does neither, they automatically become law.
All three walk the sensitive New Hampshire line between state and local control, always a sticking point in the Legislature. Advocates for housing development say that local zoning is one of the big barriers to housing development, and the state has to take more control. All three bills make inroads to that.
HB 1010 originally sought to repeal last year’s new law allowing multi-family residential development above retail or office space in commercial zones, but was amended early on by the House to clarify how towns and cities may evaluate road, water and sewer infrastructure when considering such developments.
One of the most important provisions is the fact it “addresses the potential inadequacy of aquifer supply to support existing wells,” said Rep. Joe Alexander, R-Goffstown, summarizing the House conference agreement in the May 29 House Calendar.
Last year’s law included scrutiny of water and other issues, but didn’t clearly define them, “leading to potential frustration and unnecessary legal expenses for both developers and municipalities,” Alexander said in the House calendar. The new version gives precise definitions of adequate infrastructure, “which will be beneficial to both towns and developers.”
HB 1588 addresses what many see as the biggest barrier to developing housing – infrastructure.
The bill allows towns and cities to create special assessment districts to finance infrastructure like roads, water and sewer with a two-thirds vote of their governing body, and a majority of their legislative body (the town’s voters in most cases). The town or city may issue bonds to pay upfront for the upgrades, with tax revenue from the development going to pay off the bond. Only properties directly benefiting from the improvements would be assessed for the infrastructure costs.
“The bill safeguards existing taxpayers by ensuring that the cost of new infrastructure is covered by the benefiting development, rather than the general property tax base,” Alexander said.
The bill also expands the state’s infrastructure grant program to allow funding for road, sewer and water upgrades, and makes an appropriation of $1 for FY 26-27 to support the expansion.
The bill protects residential projects proposed for commercial zones from “over-regulation” municipalities, Housing New Hampshire said in its May 29 newsletter. Under the bill, municipalities may conduct site plan review and impose frontage, setback, and height restrictions, but can’t impose extra requirements for multifamily housing.
“It clarifies that local implementation must align with the intent of state law,” Housing NH said.
It also allows municipalities to set accessory parking requirements, but can’t require that accessory parking be in a garage.
HB 564 ties maximum dead-end road length allowed to standards set by state fire code and the National Fire Protection Association Standard 1141, keeping towns and cities from setting arbitrary maximums on road lengths or number of housing units on one.
The move is expected to help increase development on dead-end roads, which is often denied by towns because of concerns about safety of residents in the case of a fire or other emergency that would require evacuation.
Municipalities that set limits on dead-end road length and housing units allowed argue that they’re protecting road residents as well as preventing a greater impact on public services, particularly fire response. Housing advocates say that road maximums are often arbitrary and that creating them without specific parameters limits needed housing development.
NFPA Standard 1141 sets requirements for road widths, fire lanes, and parking lots that allow heavy fire apparatus to safely navigate, ives water supply standards that make sure it’s adequate to fight fires, outlines minimum distances between buildings to keep house fires from spreading, and more.
The Committee on Conference tied the NFPA standard to the bill to add more clarity to determining what a safe number of homes on the road would be, giving a guideline for local and state review boards on best land use practices as far as safety goes.
“The bill will drastically reduce development costs and timelines while improving consistency across projects,” Alexander said. “By providing property owners and municipalities with a clear, predictable path forward, SB 564 incentivizes responsible development while preserving essential local and state oversight.”