Council tables casino zoning amendment after planning department presentation

The Laconia City Council on Jan. 27, 2025, tabled a proposed zoning ordinance (2025‑235‑13) that would add definitions and performance standards for casinos and specify where they could operate in the city.

Planning staff presented the draft amendment and recommended adding two definitions — one for “casino” and one for “games of chance” — referencing the New Hampshire Lottery Commission and RSA 287‑D (as cited in the draft). Staff proposed locating casinos only in the Commercial Resort District and treating them as conditional‑use developments subject to planning-board review and additional performance standards.

Planning presentation and proposed standards Mr. Morris of the Planning Department told the council the proposed ordinance would add a definition of casino as “any room or structure used for conducting games of chance as defined and regulated by the New Hampshire Lottery Commission pursuant to RSA 287D,” and would allow lodging, restaurant and retail components at the same facility. He said staff also proposed a separate definition for “games of chance” and referred to state regulatory authority.

Performance standards proposed in the draft included: - Casinos would require a conditional‑use permit from the Planning Board and must be approved by the New Hampshire Lottery Commission. - Casinos would be limited to parcels in the Commercial Resort District. - Ingress and egress would be limited to primary arteries within that district (listed in the draft as Endicott Street East, North, or Weyers Boulevard). - Casinos could not be located adjacent to places of worship, preschools, schools, day‑care facilities or hospitals. - Gaming floors must be located entirely indoors; the draft also established a parking standard derived from a review of Las Vegas calculations, specifying 90 square feet of floor area per gaming space. - Applications would need to include a traffic‑management plan, a public‑safety plan, infrastructure development plans and architectural designs for council and departmental review.

Council action and reasoning After the presentation a councilor moved to table the ordinance until May so the city could gather more information. The motion to table passed with six votes in the affirmative. The council recorded the tabling motion as non‑debatable and set a return in May to allow additional review and materials from staff.

Public comment During the citizens’ comment period earlier in the meeting, resident Sean Flanagan urged the council to reconsider the timing of the scheduled public hearing on casino‑related zoning changes, saying a Feb. 10 winter hearing might draw fewer seasonal residents and that Lakeside Avenue is not an appropriate location for a casino in his view. Flanagan said he would attend the Feb. 10 hearing to register concerns.

What’s next Staff will prepare additional materials and return to the council in May. The tabling motion pauses ordinance consideration but does not withdraw the proposal; the council requested more time to evaluate zoning locations, traffic and safety implications before advancing the measure to a public hearing and any subsequent votes.