Cited by

Rancourt v. Town of Barnstead, 129 N.H. 45, 50 (1986).

Rancourt v. Town of Barnstead, 129 N.H. 45, 50 (1986).

Although the members of a planning board are entitled to rely, in 7 In Rancourt v. Town of Barnstead, 129 N.H. 45, 48-49 (1986), we rejected a planning board’s reliance on limited growth recommendations in a master plan when no such limited growth legislation had been implemented by an action of the local legislative body pursuant to State statutes.

Bodwell v. Brooks, 141 N.H. 508, 510-11 (1996) (statistical probability evidence may be used to rebut the presumption of legitimacy); Rancourt v. Town of Barnstead, 129 N.H. 45, 50-51 (1986) (validity of a town’s growth control ordinance rests upon a relationship between the town’s growth restrictions and a projection of “normal growth” based upon scientific and statistical evidence); In re Neurontin Marketing and Sales Practices, 712 F.3d 21, 42 (1st Cir. 2013) (“courts have long permitted

Our well-settled rule is to refrain from engaging in such an inquiry out of recognition that “[t]he credibility and weight to be given to a witness’ testimony is a question of fact for the trial court.” Rancourt v. Town of Barnstead, 129 N.H. 45, 50 (1986).

Barrows v. Boles, 141 N.H. 382, 396-97 (1996) (brackets, citations, and quotations omitted); see also Rancourt v. Town of Barnstead, 129 N.H. 45, 50 (1986) (“The credibility and weight to be given to a witness’ testimony is a question of fact for the trial court.

Indeed, we have recognized in another context that scientific and statistical data are “but one kind of evidence” and “cannot function as the sole guide” in examining zoning ordinances, Rancourt v. Town of Barnstead, 129 N.H. 45, 51 (1986), and have further stated that “any fair reason [that] could be assigned for bringing legislation within [the town’s] purview” might be sufficient to save it, Sundeen v. Rogers, 83 N.H. 253, 257 (1928).

Johnson v. Nash, 131 N.H. 731, 734, 559 A.2d 842, 844 (1989); Rancourt v. Town of Barnstead, 129 N.H. 45, 50, 523 A.2d 55, 59 (1986).

Rancourt v. Town of Barnstead, 129 N.H. 45, 50, 523 A.2d 55, 59 (1986).

Citing Rancourt v. Town of Barnstead, 129 N.H. 45, 523 A.2d 55 (1986), the plaintiffs maintain that the city council’s reliance solely on the master plan’s recommendation gave “greater legal status to the master plan than the legislature intended.” Id.

The trial court, we believe, mistakenly relied on Rancourt v. Town of Barnstead, 129 N.H. 45, 523 A.2d 55 (1986).

RSA 674:1, I; RSA 674:2 (Supp. 1990); Rancourt v. Town of Barnstead, 129 N.H. 45, 49, 523 A.2d 55, 58 (1986).

Because a master plan is merely a general guide to aid planning boards in making zoning decisions, see Rancourt v. Town of Barnstead, 129 N.H. 45, 48-49, 523 A.2d 55, 58 (1986) (master plan indicates board’s recommendations for desirable development and, unlike an ordinance, cannot be directly applied), it need not, and indeed cannot, be particularly detailed in describing future land uses.

Rancourt v. Town of Barnstead, 129 N.H. 45, 50, 523 A.2d 55, 59 (1986).