Bedford council outlines nine zoning amendments and forwards citizen petition to planning board

The Bedford Town Council spent a lengthy portion of its Dec. 17 meeting on a package of zoning amendments and a citizen petition that could appear on the March 10, 2026 ballot.

Becky Hebert, the town’s director of planning, told the council the packet includes eight staff‑proposed amendments and one citizen petition. She said amendments 1–3 respond to state law changes and therefore were placed at the top of the ballot so voters understand those are required updates. Amendment 1 revises definitions for boarding/lodging/rooming houses to remove familial‑relationship language that state law now prohibits. Amendment 2 updates accessory dwelling unit (ADU) rules to comply with a July 2025 New Hampshire law requiring municipalities to permit at least one ADU by right for single‑family dwellings. Amendment 3 allows multifamily housing in commercial zones with local standards (unit location above ground floor, workforce set‑aside and height and public utility requirements) in order to preserve local control.

Other proposed changes would reduce front, side and rear setbacks in the general residential zone (Amendment 4); clarify how retaining walls are measured (Amendment 5); remove nursing homes and assisted‑living facilities as permitted uses in some commercial and performance zones citing concerns about emergency services capacity (Amendment 6); update standards for cottage‑court housing including cluster and size restrictions (Amendment 7); and make procedural housekeeping changes to the historic district ordinance (Amendment 8). The citizen petition (Amendment 9) would remove two properties at 320 and 324 Wallace Road from the historic district; staff said the petition had 51 signatures and met checklist requirements.

Councilors asked detailed questions about septic capacity and ADUs, wastewater and water availability, setback impacts on emergency access, workforce housing set‑asides, cottage‑court minimum acreage and whether nursing homes could still seek variances or waivers in certain districts. Hebert said many changes stem directly from state statute (House Bills 457 and 631 were cited) and emphasized that failure to update local code could result in loss of local development standards.

The council formally acknowledged receipt of the citizen petition and voted 7–0 to forward it to the Planning Board and Historic District Commission for review and for placement on the ballot if the Planning Board moves it forward. Hebert encouraged residents to attend Planning Board public hearings scheduled for Jan. 5 and Jan. 12 and said full amendment text and FAQs are posted online and at the library and town office.

The amendments alter the zoning ordinance’s definitions and procedural language but do not themselves adopt specific development proposals; the Planning Board and voters will determine which amendments, if any, ultimately appear on the town ballot.