Planning board urges building inspector to review Pine Point site; seeks counsel on short-term rentals and tower review

The New Durham Planning Board voted on May 19 to advise the town building inspector to consider an after-the-fact conditional-use permit for substantial site work at a Pine Point woodlot after members raised concerns about septic installation, steep slopes and runoff.

Craycraft, the board chair, moved the action, stating, "I move that we advise Rick Varian based on the septic plan of the site that the applicant needs to come in for a conditional use permit to deal with the drainage issues around the improvements on the site." The motion was seconded and recorded as carrying unanimously.

Board members described the site's recent clearing and a retaining wall cut into a steep slope, and questioned whether the applicant’s installed septic and associated work matched the DES (Department of Environmental Services) approvals on file. A member noted that prior local practice treated woodlots as a 1980-era special designation intended primarily for timber harvesting and limited temporary agriculture, not for permanent structures, and said the board's interpretation appears to have shifted over time. The board agreed it should notify the building inspector and let code enforcement determine any necessary remedies.

The board also discussed legal questions about short-term rentals and whether a property’s recorded rights "that run with the land" can later be limited through licensing or health-and-safety enforcement. Members debated whether short-term-rental standards should be placed in the zoning ordinance and coordinated with the Zoning Board of Adjustment. The board asked staff to seek formal legal advice from town counsel (Laura) and to delay major public workshops until counsel’s guidance is received.

In a separate action on a forthcoming telecommunications application, the board voted to have outside counsel review the final design packet for a proposed tower (GMR Holdings) and comment on compliance with local ordinance standards before the board conducts design review. That motion passed by voice vote.

Other business included approval of the May 5, 2026 minutes as amended (motion by Scott Drumming; second by Tim Rockey) and a report from the town administrator on an AI-assisted minutes service the office had trialed. Admin Susan Stilwell said the vendor’s drafts were faster when speakers clearly identified themselves; the board asked staff to continue proofreading drafts before finalizing.

Members also reviewed counsel’s guidance about "paper roads" and RSA 674:41, noting that lots shown on a planning-board-approved subdivision plat may be eligible for building permits by right without Select Board approval; the board discussed coordination with the building-inspection module in the town’s Avatar system to make permit information more accessible.

The board agreed to cancel the June 2 business meeting and to hold a workshop instead, and it requested that staff circulate counsel’s response and proposed short-term-rental language before scheduling a public workshop. The board also expressed interest in a future speaker on water quality, particularly sources of nutrient and runoff impacts and potential shorefront measures.

The meeting closed after the motions were passed and routine scheduling items were addressed. The board’s actions were procedural and advisory in nature; enforcement and formal permit determinations were referred to building inspection or to counsel as appropriate.