Three citizen petitioned amendments -- none of which are recommended by the planning board -- top off the 2007 town zoning warrant that will go before voters March 13.

Bedford voters will decide whether a certain type of senior housing will be allowed in the performance zone; if a parcel on Rundlett Hill Road should be rezoned; and whether wetland property owners should be exempt from future regulations. Voting will take place from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. at McKelvie Middle School.

Amendment 6
This citizen-petitioned amendment proposes rezoning the parcel at 54 Rundlett Hill Road from service industrial to residential.

Brian Nolen, of 51 Rundlett Hill Road, said the purpose of the zoning amendment is to protect the property values of about seven abutters.

A 1,572-square-foot house is currently located on the 20-acre parcel, but in the future it could become an industrial property.

It was zoned service industrial in 1974 and is bordered on three sides by residential properties.

“You can see how back then it probably made sense. There were no houses on that side of Rundlett Hill Road. Since then, it’s been developed as residential,” Nolen said at a recent public hearing.

A spokesman for the property owners, trustees Steven, Alan and Gary Chartrand, told the planning board that the family doesn’t want their property rezoned without their approval.

Town council liaison to the planning board Kevin Keyes said the planning board isn’t recommending the amendment was submitted without the property owner’s involvment.

“We felt that other people should not be trying to zone someone else’s land,” Keyes said.

Amendment 7
Residents abutting town wetlands submitted this amendment with the hope of exempting their properties from any future buffer setbacks.

The amendment would add to the wetlands conservation ordinance section of the town zoning ordinances.

The property owners say they are being proactive after voters failed a proposed 2006 amendment to increase buffers to 100 feet around 21 wetlands designated in a study to be of significant value in town.

The amendment also calls for the town to “make reasonable effort” to notify abutting property owners if future legislation would affect them.

Keyes said the board saw two problems with Amendment 7. First, it seems too broad to exempt property owners from any future regulations, which they might be for or against, he said. Second, there are technical problems with the wording of the amendment.

“It seems kind of minor, but we hate to see an ordinance enacted that can’t meet the letter of the law, because then it might be challenged by someone in the future,” Keyes said.

Amendment 8
This citizen petitioned amendment seeks to introduce into the performance zone a type of housing for seniors. The housing type, congregate care housing, offers site management but does not have on-site medical personnel.

According to the amendment, congregate care housing is defined as one- to two-bedroom units “designed to integrate the housing and service needs of elders to increase self sufficiency through the provisions of supportive services for their daily living activities in a residential setting.”

Senior housing is already allowed in the office, commercial and service industrial zones in town. Independent living was removed from the performance zone last year.

“The board felt that it really wasn’t needed, and that there was enough options within the existing zoning structure,” Keyes said.

Housekeeping
Town Planner Karen White said most of the amendments, items 1 through 5, are housekeeping to stay current with state and federal regulations, or to legitimize businesses in the neighborhood commercial zone.

Amendment 1 would alter terms in the wetlands conservation ordinance. The term “certified soils scientist” would become “New Hampshire certified wetlands scientist” and the term “High Intensity Soils Map of HISS Map” would be replaced with “jurisdictional wetlands delineation map.”

Amendment 2 would change minimum luminaire cutoffs in the performance zone, because the current regulations don’t conform with standards for the IESNA Lighting Handbook.

Amendment 3 seeks to modify definitions in the town’s flood plain development ordinance to comply with new FEMA standards.

Amendment 4 would add “floral arrangements” to a list of what is acceptable to sell in the neighborhood commercial zone. Flowers are currently sold at a store in the zone.

Amendment 5 seeks to delete “Public/Private Recreation and Open Space” from the Table of Uses. This is, according to the amendment text, to “remove any possible interpretation that ‘open space’ is or could be prohibited in any zoning districts.”