Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adu Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Stoddard planning board presents ADU ordinance changes to align with state law
Summary
The Town of Stoddard Planning Board proposed amendments to its Accessory Dwelling Unit ordinance to conform with NH RSA 674:71-73: allow one ADU per single-family parcel by right, reduce parking to one space per unit, set unit standards (max 1,000 sq ft, two bedrooms) and require septic compliance; vote deferred to April 7, 2026.
Bob Maden, chair of the Town of Stoddard Planning Board, presented proposed amendments to the town’s Accessory Dwelling Unit ordinance at a public meeting, saying the changes are intended to bring the town into compliance with recent state law changes. “The purpose of these changes is to make the Stoddard ADU ordinance compliant with recent change to the NH RSA 674:71-73,” Maden said.
Under the draft language, a single‑family dwelling would be allowed one ADU by right, eliminating the need for a special exception from the Zoning Board of Adjustment. The proposal reduces off‑street parking requirements from two spaces to one space per unit, removes restrictions on rentals for ADUs, and lists unit standards: separate complete kitchen and bathroom facilities, a maximum living area of 1,000 square feet, and no more than two bedrooms.
The draft requires ADUs to meet septic‑loading standards from the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Subsurface Bureau and requires a building permit. The text also specifies that structures lacking a permanent foundation (for example, mobile homes or travel trailers) cannot be converted to ADUs and that ADUs must be accessible to the Town of Stoddard Fire Department and emergency vehicles.
During public comment, Terri LaRoche asked whether the amendments were merely correcting “bad language” in the current ordinance; Maden answered that the intent is to align local rules with state requirements and avoid conflicts. Joshua Hutchins questioned the meaning of the word “solely” in the owner‑occupancy clause, suggesting it could be read to exclude spouses or children. “The language states that one of the units is occupied solely by the owner of the property, to me that seems that the word solely means that 1 person…not spouse, kids,” Hutchins said. Maden said the board would consult legal counsel and that the board’s intent is that the owner live on the property with immediate family or guests.
The board did not vote on the ADU ordinance at the meeting. Vickie Williams moved to postpone the vote until the Planning Board meeting on April 7, 2026; the motion carried. The board also voted to send the question about the term “solely” in the ADU language to the town’s legal counsel for clarification.
What happens next: The Planning Board will take up the ADU and Commercial ordinance votes at its April 7, 2026 meeting; the ADU wording regarding owner occupancy will be reviewed by legal counsel before that vote.
