Will Bedford Get its Dog Park?

With the exception of the Bedford dog park and a three-way race for a three-year seat as library trustee, there was actually very little suspense on the municipal ballot, especially in comparison to the school district elections, which saw several close votes and a tight school board race.

Still, there was noted interest in the ballot question asking, specifically, if Bedford residents will support the construction of a dog park using privately raised funds.

The measure passed, which wasn't a surprise. The follow-up question, however, presented the heart of the matter, that being who would be responsible for the operation, maintenance and liability of the property.

Of the three questions presented, residents voted, by almost a two-to-one tally over the next closest option, to support the dog park only if it's privately funded, operated, and maintained subject to a lease with the town.

Since there is no group currently willing to accept that responsibility, it essentially places the project in a holding pattern, said Bedford Town Manager Jessie Levine, who noted that Tuesday's results back the Town Council's decision, in January of 2012, to conditionally back the dog park.

The following is a recap of all results, including five zoning amendments supported by the Bedford Planning Board and one citizen petition zoning amendment that was voted down by residents.

BEDFORD ELECTED OFFICIALS (Winners in BOLD)

Town Council: 2 three-year seats. Vote for TWO:

Library Trustee: 1 three-year seat. Vote for ONE:

Trustee of the Trust Funds: 1 three-year seat. VOTE for ONE:

Dog Park

On January 25, 2012, the Bedford Town Council approved the use of a Town-owned parcel of land on Nashua Road for the construction of a dog park. The  Bedford Friends of Canine Corner (BFCC), a private non-profit organization, has committed to privately funding the entire construction of the dog park. On January 22, 2013, a citizen’s petition was delivered to the Town Council asking to construct the dog park with privately raised funds, but failing to address the question of who will operate and maintain the dog park. Town maintenance of the dog park may require contract support due to Town employee workload providing core services. At the present time there is no organization willing to commit to a lease requirement, however, there may be an organization that would come forward to do so. 

 Are you in favor of the construction of a dog park on Nashua Road in Bedford, with the cost of construction fully-funded in advance by a private citizens group?

A. The Town of Bedford should operate and maintain the dog park with funds included in the annual Town operating budget (Taxpayer Funded).

B. The Town of Bedford should operate and maintain the dog park provided that funds are raised privately for all continuing and future costs (Privately Funded).

C. The dog park should only be privately funded, operated, and maintained subject to a lease with the Town. (Privately Funded, Operated, and Maintained)

Zoning Amendments

Bedford voters also supported each of the following zoning amendments, with the exception of Article 6, which was submitted by citizen petition:

• Amendment No. 1: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 1 as proposed by the Planning Board for the Bedford Zoning Ordinance to amend Article 275-6 Definitions, by adding the following words shown in bold as follows: SIGN — Any object, device, display, or structure, or part thereof, situated outdoors, or indoors within 18 inches of a window plane and visible from the exterior of the building, which is used to advertise, identify, display, direct, or attract attention to an object, person, institution, organization, business, product, service, event, or location by any means, including words, letters, figures, design, symbols, fixtures, colors, illumination, or projected images.[This amendment is intended to allow signs near windows without restriction provided that they are more than 18 inches from the glass. Signs within 18 inches of a window would continue to need to meet the signage ordinances as they do today.]

  Yes No 2,131 586

• Amendment No. 2: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 2 as proposed by the Planning Board for the Bedford Zoning Ordinance to amend Article 275-74 District Regulations for Signage, subsection C Commercial District by renaming it to be Commercial and Office Districts and to: Add the following new subsection (5): Structures with multiple tenants within the Office District shall have no more than four (4) wall signs. Multiple tenants may be located on the permitted wall signage provided no tenant is listed more than once. Delete 275-74 District Regulations for Signage, subsection D Office District in its entirety. [This amendment is intended to allow the Office District located on Constitution Drive to have similar signage as to the Commercial District with the exception of no building having more than four wall signs.]

• Amendment No. 3: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 3 as proposed by the Planning Board for the Bedford Zoning Ordinance to amend Article 275-73 Signs, General Provisions by adding the following new subsection P: In the Commercial, Commercial-2, Office, Service Industrial, Highway Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial and Performance Zoning districts, vehicles, trailers or equipment with commercial signage that are routinely parked or stored on a property must be shown on a site plan and approved by the Planning Board and shall be located in a parking spot or approved area where its visual impacts to abutting property and rights of way are limited, or can be reduced or screened. These vehicles, trailers and equipment shall not be located within required parking spaces or travel ways unless approved by the Planning Board. This requirement shall not apply to uses allowed under Article 275-18 or to individuals who drive a company vehicle and park it at their place of residence while not at work. [This amendment is intended to require business with vehicles, trailers or equipment that contain commercial signage to locate those items in places on their site that have been approved by the Planning Board.]

  Yes No 2,104 585

• Amendment No. 4: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 4 as proposed by the Planning Board for the Bedford Zoning Ordinance to amend Article 275-73 Signs, subsection F, by adding the following words shown in bold as follows: Permanent and temporary off-premises signs shall not be allowed in any district, except as noted in subsection N below. [This amendment is intended clarify that all forms of off-premises signs are not allowed unless a permit under the Town’s Sign and Banner ordinance has been issued.]

  Yes No 2,129 521

• Amendment No. 5: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 5 as proposed by the Planning Board for the Bedford Zoning Ordinance to amend Article 275-34F(2) Cluster Residential Development, Buffer Zone to add the following new subsection (c): The buffer shall be located and flagged by a surveyor licensed by the State of New Hampshire and permanent markers identifying the buffer and its no disturbance requirement shall be placed along the contour of the buffer, generally not more than seventy-five (75) feet apart. Where buffers intersect property lines the marker shall also be placed on the property line. [This amendment is intended to require new residential cluster subdivisions to post markers identifying the location of currently required non-disturbance buffers.]

  Yes No 2,181 412

ZONING AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED BY CITIZEN PETITION:

• Amendment No. 6: Are you in favor of the adoption of Amendment No. 6 as proposed by petition of Jon C. Carnevale and others to amend the Town of Bedford Code, Chapter 275, ZONING, Article II, ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS, Section 275-8, Location of Districts and the Zoning Map by: Rezoning the northerly portion of Tax Map #13, Lot #40 from the Commercial Zone (CO) to the General Residential Zone (GR), being described as follows: Beginning at a point on the westerly side of Olde Bedford Way, Bedford, Hillsborough County, New Hampshire, being the southeast corner of lot 10-50-5 and the northeasterly corner of the herein described premises; thence in a generally southerly direction along the westerly sideline of Olde Bedford Way along a curve to the left with a radius of 1,575.00 feet a distance of 144.39 feet to a point; thence S06º 37' 58"W by the sideline of Olde Bedford Way a distance of 59.38 feet to a point; thence in a generally southerly direction along the westerly side line of Olde Bedford Way along a curve to the left with a radius of 2,725.00 feet a distance of 86.27 feet to a point; thence S04°49’52”W by the sideline of Olde Bedford Way a distance of 41.73 feet to a point; thence N83°04’50”E through Lot 13-40 a distance of 59.86 feet to a drill hole at a stone wall; thence N83°04’50”W through Lot 13-40, along a stone wall, a distance of 105.85 feet to a drill hole; thence N83°44’38”W through Lot 13-40, along a stone wall, a distance of 121.93 feet to a drill hole at the intersection of stone walls; thence N82º 58' 42"W by lot 13-43-5, along a stone wall, a distance of 202.81 feet to a drill hole; thence N85º 19' 42"W by lot 13-43-5, along a stone wall, a distance of 145.32 feet to a point; thence N83º 20' 17"W by lot 13-43-5, along a stone wall, a distance of 249.72 feet to a drill hole; thence N83º 04' 37"W by lot 13-43-5, along a stone wall, a distance of 169.68 feet to a point at the southeast corner of lot 10-49-9; thence N26º 47' 48"E by lot 10-49-9, a distance of 197.25 feet to a drill hole; thence N22º 45' 58"E by lot 10-49-9, a distance of 152.73 feet to a point at the southwest corner of lot 10-50-5; thence S83º 30' 12"E by lot 10-50-5, a distance of 948.57 feet to the point of beginning Containing 329,928 square feet or 7.5741 acres, more or less, and being 76.95% more or less of Tax Map#, Lot 40. [The Planning Board does not support passage of this amendment.] 

  Yes No 596 1,976