The Plymouth Planning Board on April 17 reviewed the implementation section of the town’s 2018 master plan and gave early direction to consultant Judy Barrett and Barrett Planning Group as they prepare a work plan for a funded housing master plan chapter.

Board members and planning staff said the housing chapter should reflect what was accomplished since 2018, identify priorities that were not completed, and test alternative scenarios — including lower university enrollment and different development paths for Tenney Mountain — as the town updates planning guidance.

Joseph (Planning Department staff) told the board the housing chapter work — funded through an InvestNH planning grant and led by Barrett Planning Group — should connect the new housing material to the broader 2018 plan. “You write it perhaps with an eye to the past, to what we’ve done well, and also to the future,” Joseph said. He reported that Barrett asked the board for feedback on the existing implementation section so the consultant can prepare a community engagement plan and project timeline.

Board members identified priorities they want the housing chapter and master plan update to address. Several members urged revisiting policies for downtown housing, advocating a form-based approach that defines building form, height and streetscape rather than only unit counts. One member described how some downtown buildings were converted to more units “without actually changing what the building looks like,” arguing that the town could allow more units while protecting downtown character.

Parking rules downtown drew extensive comment. Joseph summarized the current zoning: in Plymouth’s village commercial zone, most uses do not require parking minimums, but residential uses on a building’s ground floor require a special exception that includes additional criteria touching on parking. Board members called the arrangement “strange” and inconsistent and asked staff to clarify the language and whether the board wants parking minimums or managed shared parking approaches downtown.

Members and staff also raised non-housing but related issues they want reflected in the housing chapter: continued work on multiuse trails and sidewalks (particularly along Tenney Mountain Highway and the corridor between Main Street and the amphitheater), the town’s brownfields assessment for the former Plymouth Inn site, and the possibility of a standing economic development committee to help attract and coordinate redevelopment.

The board discussed redevelopment incentives and statutory tools. Joseph summarized state programs the town could adopt, including RSA 79‑E tax-exemption options for property revitalization and newer state categories for housing opportunity zones and office-to-residential conversions. The board asked staff to share Barrett Planning Group’s guide to those programs so members could evaluate local adoption and criteria.

Environmental protection and regulation also were raised. Members noted the town’s environmentally sensitive areas (ISE) remain imperfect and that a recently funded Natural Resources Inventory (NRI) being run through the conservation commission and consultant could inform rewrites. Joseph mentioned a new model ordinance some towns are considering to reduce PFAS risks to groundwater and suggested Plymouth could incorporate tailored language if the board wants that protection.

Several members highlighted the town’s relationship with Plymouth State University (PSU). They asked for better, ongoing engagement (annual meetings or similar) because changing university enrollment affects downtown demand for housing, parking and services. Board members recommended scenario planning that models different enrollment trends and their impacts on housing needs and municipal services.

Members asked Barrett Planning Group for a work plan, community engagement schedule and milestones. Joseph said the consultant will return with a proposed timeline and outreach plan for the housing chapter and related downtown materials.

The discussion produced no formal vote; board members agreed the comments should guide the consultant’s work plan and prioritized downtown form, parking rules, trail/connectivity projects, brownfields visioning and outreach to PSU.

The planning board will expect Barrett Planning Group’s work plan and a proposed engagement calendar in coming weeks.