Planning board issues finding after Silky Ridge Farm withdraws home‑business application

Brookline Planning Board on July 16 adopted a formal finding for the withdrawn home‑business application filed for Lot C21‑2 (Silky Ridge Farm), saying the town will require a site‑plan review if the property conducts customer visits, maintains more than two nonresident employees, or posts business signage.

The action follows a continued public hearing on an application filed by Marissa and Gregory Hiller of 36 Countryside Drive; staff reported the applicants had withdrawn the application but recommended that the board record a finding to guide similar future cases. The board discussed the scope of its authority under the Brookline Zoning Ordinance (section 1700) and cited New Hampshire RSA 21:34‑a regarding agricultural activities and noise, which can limit local noise regulation for farm operations.

Board members and staff listed the specific activities that would trigger a conditional home‑business site‑plan approval: any customer visits requiring on‑site parking; more than two employees who are not residents of the dwelling; and signage or other on‑site business practices that advertise or invite public commerce. The board agreed the finding would be case‑specific rather than a blanket ordinance change and asked staff to prepare the written text to become part of the record.

Tom Duggan, a nearby resident who identified himself at the meeting, told the board he was concerned the Hillers had not followed through on commitments raised at earlier hearings — including removing roosters and other steps — and questioned whether withdrawing the application removed accountability. "They never did what they said they would," Duggan told the board, saying neighbors remained worried about ongoing activity and possible effects on wells.

Staff responded that manure‑management recommendations had been drawn from the agricultural commissioner and described as best practice (drying and moving material so it does not drain toward neighbors). Board members noted that well‑contamination complaints would be handled by the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services and that code enforcement is the appropriate avenue if undisclosed, disallowed activity is observed.

The board also discussed practical noise‑mitigation measures; the chair said staff member Andrea had compiled suggestions such as screening landscaping, fencing and sound insulation to share with the Hillers and with future applicants implementing poultry operations.

A motion to adopt the finding was moved by Eric and seconded by Scott; the board approved the finding by voice vote. Staff will file the adopted finding in the case record and circulate the recommended noise‑mitigation ideas to the applicants and neighbors.

The public record for the Silky Ridge Farm matter remains that the application was withdrawn and the board issued a finding describing the activities that would require future site‑plan review. The board will not take further action on this application while no active application is before it, but it placed the agreed language in the record to guide enforcement and future applicants.