The Lyndeborough Planning Board faced an unusual dilemma following this year’s March ballot vote on zoning amendments — two very similar, but not identical, versions of a zoning ordinance, which both passed at the polls.
During the March ballot vote, residents were faced with two versions of amendments to Lyndeborough’s zoning ordinance section 408, which details “soil-based zoning requirements.”
The Planning Board put forth amendments to the ordinance, but an article submitted by petition also sought to make amendments to the same article. While the two versions shared some proposed changes, they were not identical.
The ordinance, as it stood before the March 10 vote, required that lots in the Rural Lands One or Light Industrial zones that were less than five acres have at least two contiguous acres of soils rated with “slight” or “moderate” limitations for septic tank absorption fields. Existing lots would be grandfathered if they didn’t meet those criteria.
Both versions eliminated the “slight” and “moderate” limitations wording and replaced it with “not limited” and “somewhat limited,” respectively.
The Planning Board’s version also eliminated information about where the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service criteria can be found, while the petition version replaced the wording with updated information about where the criteria is published.
The Planning Board’s version also now requires a site-specific soil survey to be conducted by a certified soil scientist, where previously it was up to the board’s discretion whether a survey was needed. The petition version of the article did not include that change. The Planning Board version also included a grammatical change.
The board held a public hearing Thursday to present the final language to be adopted.
The final version put forth by the board included the language changes the two versions had in common, and preserved the grammar correction and the requirement to conduct a soil survey. The elimination of where to find the Natural Resources Conservation Service criteria was upheld, and new information on where to find the criteria was not included, ultimately aligning closely with the Planning Board’s original version of the article.
When offered the opportunity, no members of the public offered feedback on the wording of the final version. The board voted to accept the final version in a vote of eight in favor, with one abstention.
In other Planning Board news Thursday, the board also heard and ultimately approved a conditional use permit submitted by Dajana Faltenbacher for a home-based child care business at her home at 36 Wilton Road.
Faltenbacher told the board she intended to run a nature-based day care based on Waldorf principles. She said she intends to run the day care this summer and eventually expand it to a full-time program, though not this year. She proposed that the facility would serve between 12 and 17 children, from toddler age to 7 years old.
The board offered no objection to the use, but did discuss at length whether Faltenbacher’s septic system would support 17 children and an additional employee, in addition to her own family’s use.
Based on the size of Faltenbacher’s system, the board determined it would only support up to 15 non-family members.
Ultimately, the board approved the application, with the condition that the day care be limited to the number of people the septic system would support, though it did leave the door open for Faltenbacher to return to the board with an updated application if she increased her capacity through the use of a composting or portable toilet, or an upgraded septic system.