Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Board 9 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission keeps Board 9 neighborhood R1B after residents raise concerns about upzoning
Summary
Manchester planning commissioners decided by group consensus to retain R1B zoning in the Board 9 area after residents and an alderman raised concerns that changing lots to R2 would alter neighborhood character and could be perceived as lowering property values.
The Manchester City Commissions continued their review of proposed zoning map updates and, after extended discussion, agreed by commission consensus to leave the Board 9 neighborhood zoned R1B rather than reclassify it to R2.
Commissioners and staff reopened a conversation about a section running down to Gold Street after an alderman and several residents submitted concerns. Planning staff presented lot-count data showing the area has a large majority of single‑family homes and a small number of vacant lots that could accommodate duplexes under R2. Staff noted the proposed change would reduce required lot size only modestly in most parcels and that any immediate market effect was unlikely.
The exchange focused on two practical concerns: whether R2 would materially change the neighborhood’s character and whether the modest number of vacant lots would enable a developer to alter the area’s housing mix quickly. Residents who circulated a petition and an alderman told commissioners they feared reduced property values and an erosion of single‑family character. Commissioners weighed that local input against survey data staff shared showing many respondents said duplexes can fit in some neighborhoods. Several commissioners said they were reluctant to impose an upzone over clear neighborhood opposition and preferred to let property owners pursue variances or future petitions for rezoning.
After discussion around compatibility, setbacks and lot frontage, the commission took a consensus poll. Multiple members said they preferred leaving the zoning as R1B; none asked for a formal roll-call vote. The commission noted property owners retain the option to pursue variances or a formal rezoning petition to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen in the future.
The commission also flagged that accessory dwelling units (ADUs) remain governed by state law and are permitted where the state requires, separate from this zoning decision. Staff said the petition, the lot-count analysis, and the community survey results will be added to the public record for this neighborhood.
The commission moved on to other map areas after recording the consensus to keep Board 9 R1B, with the caveat that property owners could seek future changes through the standard rezoning or variance processes.
