Brentwood Planning Board adopts multifamily design standards, adds dark‑sky language and rock‑wall guidance

The Brentwood Planning Board voted to adopt amended site‑plan review regulations for multifamily developments after a lengthy discussion of lighting, façade materials and landscape requirements.

The regulations package, introduced at the start of the meeting, formally adds a reference to the town's existing dark‑sky lighting expectations for multifamily projects and inserts a new general‑requirements goal encouraging developers to preserve existing historic stone walls where feasible. Board members also refined language about required landscape‑plan certifications and struck a sentence that would have prohibited vinyl siding and standing‑seam metal as exterior materials.

Board members debated the practical effect of several requirements. One member of staff argued for the dark‑sky language as part of the document's purpose, saying, “The end result of dark sky lighting is that it shields downward instead of just being open, illumination that goes in all directions.” Opponents and public commenters pressed for clarity so the rules would not force token or decorative uses simply to meet a materials count; an alternate recommended lowering a three‑material minimum to two as an option, while others favored keeping a three‑material guideline as a design driver.

On landscape‑plan certification, the board accommodated a written comment from Lisa McNaughton by editing the requirement to allow plans to be stamped and signed by a licensed landscape architect or by a New Hampshire certified landscape professional, unless precluded by state law; members agreed to follow up with the commenter on specifics. The board also added a short, explicit requirement that building elevations be supplied to the planning board so elevations illustrate how design standards will be applied to all facades.

After amending the draft to incorporate the dark‑sky purpose language, add rock‑wall preservation guidance and remove the absolute prohibition on certain exterior materials, a motion to approve the site‑plan review regulations as amended passed by voice vote.

The board treated the changes as regulations (not zoning amendments), noting that the regulations include a waiver process so the planning board may approve reasonable alternatives on a case‑by‑case basis. The board expects to publish the final text in the next amendment packet and said further edits can be made through the same public process.

Next steps: staff will finalize wording and publish the adopted regulations; board members asked staff to follow up with the commenter about certification language and to prepare the final text for posting.