Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hanover Street Vc1 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Steering committee scales back proposed Hanover Street rezoning after neighbor concerns over VC1 uses
Summary
Committee members agreed to revert much of a proposed business corridor (VC1/BC1) along Hanover Street back to residential zoning (R‑1B) or to limit mixed‑use (MX‑1) after residents raised concerns about congregate housing allowed by right and traffic.
The Zoning Ordinance Steering Committee narrowed a proposed rezoning along Hanover Street and the Candia Road corridor after residents and committee members flagged the change as potentially out of character and raised concerns about uses that would be allowed by right in the proposed district.
Staff presented a map showing the corridor east and west of I‑93 and said the initial proposal had merged several existing commercial and redevelopment zones into a broader BC/VC‑1 corridor. That merger would have permitted a larger mix of commercial and residential uses by right, including congregate housing uses. Staff told the committee they had selected BC‑1 as the district where congregate housing would be allowed by right but acknowledged BC‑1 “may not be the right target moving forward.”
Why it matters: Committee members said the section east of I‑93 is more residential in parcel makeup and that allowing the full BC‑1 use list there — including congregate housing by right — alarmed several neighborhood groups. The committee moved to keep much of the corridor at the status quo residential zoning and to limit new mixed‑use allowances to smaller form factors (MX‑1) where appropriate.
Committee discussion and outcome
- Staff said some parts of the corridor currently function as industrial or commercial and will remain so; other parts of the corridor, particularly parcels directly adjacent to residential neighborhoods, will remain or revert to R‑1B rather than being rezoned to BC/VC‑1.
- Committee members and staff specifically discussed congregate housing (the use category that includes some group living arrangements, including some sober‑living facilities). Staff said the redevelopment district had historically allowed congregate housing by right in some locations and that selecting BC‑1 for congregate housing was largely a drafting choice that could be revisited.
- After map review and discussion, commissioners indicated agreement — by voice in the meeting — to move most of the disputed corridor back to its existing residential zoning (R‑1B) and to leave other, smaller stretches as MX‑1 (a smaller‑scale mixed‑use district) rather than MX‑2 or BC‑1.
Staff comment and next steps
A staff member noted that many of the existing commercial uses in the corridor predate newer zoning and that future applicants for new commercial projects may still pursue variances or site‑specific approvals; the committee agreed that requiring applicants to make their case at public hearings in some areas was appropriate.
Ending: Committee members signaled they wanted to respect neighborhood concerns while preserving appropriate corridors for small‑scale commercial uses; staff will update maps to reflect the changes and return to the committee for further review.
