The House Special Committee on Housing continued its information gathering on Monday with presentations from more housing-focused entities and individuals, including the City of Manchester and Town of Newmarket. Over the course of the several meetings held by the Special Committee, some themes have developed: 

• Affordable housing requires density, and density is determined in large part by the availability of public water and/or sewer. Funding development of public water and/or sewer is challenging but must be a priority if density is desired.
• The best performing municipalities in terms of regulatory flexibility for housing development have updated their zoning ordinances recently or are in the process of updating their zoning ordinances. Updating local zoning codes is challenging because it is a time-intensive process that requires not only determining what ideas about development are appropriate, but also requires adapting those ideas to the realities on the ground.
• Municipalities are exploring different policy options, including looking at relaxing accessory dwelling unit requirements, to help alleviate some housing demand by infilling development on lots that can support a larger or additional unit(s). There is no one solution for every municipality given the constraints on infrastructure, but municipalities are trying to find solutions that work for their communities. 

One of the more intriguing suggestions that came before the committee was a modification of RSA 674:21, V to allow municipalities to use impact fees for public water and sewer for longer than the currently allowed 6 years. (The suggestion was for a minimum of 10 and up to 20 years.)

Looking toward the housing-related bills that are being considered for inclusion in HB 2 by the Senate, it appears that incentivizing buildout of public water and/or sewer at the municipal level, particularly in already dense (or desired to be dense) areas of the municipality, can make housing development more attractive and cheaper. That idea is what spurred SB 145, the housing champions concept. But it’s not just housing that becomes more attractive and cheaper; the running of new water and/or sewer lines can spur the creation of village nodes, which spur economic activity, concentrating the demand on public infrastructure and alleviating the costs associated with sprawl due to the need for longer lines, more roads, and greater maintenance. 

Comprehensive overhauls of local zoning ordinances to ensure that they are tailored to each municipality and reflect advances in building science, well and septic design, and other advances in construction and firefighting, require funding. Programmatic grants to accomplish such overhauls were part of the original InvestNH. (New Hampshire Housing has awarded Housing Opportunity Planning grants to 46 municipalities, so far, with grant sizes varying depending on town needs. Applicants may qualify for up to $175,000, and the total allocation in InvestNH was $5 million.) 

It is not yet clear how much money will be put toward housing in this budget, or how that will be allocated among the various ideas aimed at spurring innovation and creating more housing. We are hopeful that incentive programs will assist municipalities update their local regulations and build water and sewer infrastructure.