Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

RCPC presents cottage-court examples as Atkinson board weighs zoning and open-space rules

Atkinson Planning Board · April 1, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A Rockingham Planning Commission representative showed cottage-court and small‑home models and Atkinson board members discussed whether town-center, commercial and three‑acre residential zoning reflect current conditions; members also questioned whether the 50% open‑space requirement in cluster developments remains appropriate.

Jenn Rowden of the Rockingham Planning Commission presented examples from other communities on cottage-court and smaller-household options, prompting Atkinson Planning Board discussion about zoning alignment and development feasibility.

Board members expressed concern that the town center and commercial zones have not developed as envisioned and noted that the three‑acre residential zone is largely nonconforming because many lots predate that standard. Members emphasized the importance of examining conditions on the ground before proposing changes to zoning definitions.

Discussion explored housing trends toward smaller, more flexible housing types such as cottage courts and tiny homes, and where such approaches might be suitable in Atkinson (with particular attention called to lake-area neighborhoods). The board examined cluster-development rules, especially the 50% open-space set-aside, and debated whether that requirement is still appropriate given development feasibility and how open space is owned, valued and used in existing developments.

The board framed the work as incremental: much of the town is already developed or permanently conserved, so officials said the focus should be on practical reevaluation rather than sweeping changes. No formal zoning amendments, votes or deadlines were set at the April 1 workshop.

The Planning Board will continue discussion at future meetings.