Monthly Archives: September 2019

Proposals for Senior Housing

Posted on by
Reply

The Planning Board is considering changes to the Lyme Zoning Ordinance to permit the development of Senior Housing. I propose to use the existing Planned Development language to permit a broad range of housing for seniors.

Planned Development allows placing multiple buildings on a single parcel, multiple dwelling units within a building (up to six), and retains the dimensional controls of the district, which means that construction under Planned Development could not be any larger than would already be allowed on the lot. The three proposals are:

  1. Create a new definition: Senior Housing is a living arrangement where at least 80 percent of the occupied units include at least one resident who is over the age of 55.
  2. Change the definition of Planned Development 4.49A to say, “Planned Developments may be 100% residential. At least 15% of the floor area shall be reserved for residential use. “
  3. Change Article IV so that a Planned Development for Senior Housing is permitted on any parcel with frontage along NH Route 10.

I submitted the following document to the Planning Board for review at their next meeting on Thursday, 26 September 2019. If you can, please attend the meeting to give your input at 7:00pm in the Town Offices.


Feel free to share this post on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, or email by clicking one of the icons below. Any opinions expressed here are solely my own, and not those of any public bodies, such as the Lyme Planning Board or the Lyme Community Development Committee, where I am/have been a member. I would be very interested to hear your thoughts – you can reach me at richb.lyme@gmail.com.

Proposals for Senior Housing

(Can’t read the PDF above? Download it at https://randomneuronsfiring.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Proposed-Senior-Housing-Amendments-25Sep2019.pdf)

Can ‘Planned Developments’ Help Lyme’s Housing Problem?

Posted on by
Reply

In an earlier note, I detailed some of the characteristics that make senior housing attractive. This housing could include a combination of:

  • Clustered homes and apartments with neighbors nearby for ease of access and social interaction
  • A mix of unit sizes, to serve the differing needs of Lyme residents
  • A variety of services: shared space for living and dining, on-site management and aides, garages, elevators, etc.
  • Attractive (but not necessarily low-income) pricing
  • Economic feasibility for a commercial developer
The Zoning Ordinance today only allows development like this in two places (“districts”): the Lyme Common District and the Commercial District near Pond View Apartments/85 Dartmouth College Highway. Could either of those districts support this kind of housing?
  1. Lyme Common District: Not really. The Planning Board’s recent build-out analysis shows that the Lyme Common District can only support a certain amount of “infill” development – adding one or a few units to the existing homes. There isn’t enough land, water, or septic capacity for significant new housing.
  2. Commercial District: Perhaps. But it’s more than two miles from the Lyme Post Office. Do we want to encourage development so far from the center of town?

What Could Lyme Do?

The Lyme Zoning Ordinance already defines a Planned Development that would allow the kind of housing envisioned above because it permits:
  • Multiple buildings on a parcel
  • Up to six business or dwelling units per building
  • As much footprint, lot coverage and gross floor areas as allowed in the district
A simple adjustment to the ordinance – permitting a Planned Development other places in Lyme, perhaps anywhere on Route 10 – would remove a significant regulatory hurdle to better housing.


Feel free to share this post on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, or email by clicking one of the icons below. Any opinions expressed here are solely my own, and not those of any public bodies, such as the Lyme Planning Board or the Lyme Community Development Committee, where I am/have been a member. I would be very interested to hear your thoughts – you can reach me at richb.lyme@gmail.com.

‘President of Seiko’ Strategy for Receiving Good Service

Posted on by
Reply

A long time ago, my watch wouldn’t keep time. It’s a Seiko Kinetic with a dark green face. I like it a lot: it’s a mechanical (analog) watch, but it’s electronic, keeps extremely accurate time, and I never have to worry about batteries. When it stopped working, I sent it to be cleaned at a local jeweler, and then they sent to the factory a couple times, but the problem persisted.

My good friend and business partner Stuart suggested that I Fedex the watch to the President of Seiko, with a nice note asking what can be done. About three weeks later, my watch came back, working perfectly, no charge. And it has continued to function perfectly to this day.

Why did this work? Like Seiko, every company president has a team whose job is to take care of problems. They are charged with “making things right”, so the problem doesn’t even need to reach the desk of the president.

If you’re receiving poor customer service, find out the name of the president of the division or company – the higher up, the better. (Google is your friend).

Prepare a short, polite note telling why you are disappointed by their service. Give specific details about the problem, and what you have done to try to resolve it. Name names, if you wrote any down during your calls.

Summarize with something like, “So I decided to ask you for help.” and make a clear request for what would make you happy. (Make sure it’s something they have the power to fulfill.)

Send a real letter – physical stuff still has power at companies. Use overnight or two-day delivery to give bigger impact, and also to confirm they received it. Include “Personal” in the address – it might get more attention.

At the worst, it’ll cost you a few bucks for the Fedex. If they blow you off, you can savage them publicly. But if they do the right thing – and lots of times they will – they give you a great story for social media.

Coffee Shop Bloat Test

Posted on by
Reply

We all have heard the perennial complaint, “the network is sooo slow.” A primary reason is the inelegantly-named bufferbloat – caused by a bad router that queues up too much data (“the router gets bloated because it buffers too many packets”).

The good news is that a fix has been known for quite a while now, and it’s often a matter of properly configuring the router.

Dave Täht likes to go into coffee shops and help the owners provide better network service for the customers. (Sometimes, he gets a free meal!) He developed a small script for measuring the bufferbloat to use for before and after tests.

I’ve tweaked the script to make it easier to run and display the results. (You still need to install Flent and fping to make it work on your laptop.) But now you can go to your favorite coffee shop to measure the state of the network. See the script at https://github.com/richb-hanover/coffee-shop-bloat-test

US Robotics Acoustic Coupler

Posted on by
Reply

Ahhh… the memories… Back in the day (around 1978), I had one of these beauties. All you had to do was place the telephone handset into those cups (really! [1]), dial up your favorite server, and Presto! You were on-line at 300 bits per second. And for only $139 – it was heaven!

While rummaging through my files, I came upon its (dot-matrix) printed manual, so I scanned it for posterity. Enjoy!

Photo credit: http://www.swtpc.com/mholley/USR/USR_Modem.htm

[1]: Wait… What? You had to insert the handset into those cups? Why? AT&T insisted on this  to “prevent damage to the telephone system” from third-party (unlicensed, untested, unreliable) equipment. Only after the Carterphone decision in 1968 would AT&T allow you to make any sort of electrical connection to the phone network. Before that, you could not connect your own telephone (you had to rent one from AT&T), or a fax machine, or a modem, etc.

USR-310 Acoustic Coupler Manual

Senior Housing at the Planning Board — Two Years Later

Posted on by
Reply

Two years ago, the Lyme Planning Board hosted a Senior Housing Forum where community members spoke about their thoughts and hopes for senior housing. The quote below comes from the Planning Board minutes of 28 September 2017:

Item 1: Senior Housing Forum

… The Board discussed with the attendees the various forms that senior housing could take. The overall sense was that different people wanted different types of housing. The various forms below were discussed:

  • Smaller single resident homes allowed on a single lot.
  • Cooperative housing in larger buildings.
  • A mixture of small houses and apartment or town house style buildings.
  • Large assisted living facilities.

Almost exactly two year later, there has been no concrete action toward permitting any of these kinds of housing. The current draft of a Senior Housing amendment still does not provide a realistic way that these (or any other kind of moderate price/workforce) housing could be built.

Please attend the next Planning Board meeting on Thursday, 12 September 2019 at 7pm to give your views.


Feel free to share this post on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, or email by clicking one of the icons below. Any opinions expressed here are solely my own, and not those of any public bodies, such as the Lyme Planning Board or the Lyme Community Development Committee, where I am/have been a member. I would be very interested to hear your thoughts – you can reach me at richb.lyme@gmail.com.