no local actions or ordinances will be permitted to contravene it.” Wasserman v. City of Lebanon, 124 N.H. 538, 542-43, 474 A.2d 994, 998 (1984). The statutory scheme here is concerned with the location and “effective control” of junkyards near certain highways. RSA 236:90, :96. “Effective control” requires only that such junkyards be “screened by natural objects, plantings, fences, or other appropriate means so as not to be visible from the main traveled way.” RSA 236:91,1. The statutory scheme set forth in RSA 236:90-:110 “is concerned with the eyesore,” State v. Bryant, 127 N.H. 69, 72, 498 A.2d 322, 324 (1985), and does not purport to comprehensively regulate junkyards near certain highways, cf. Stablex Corp. v. Town of Hooksett, 122 N.H. 1091, 1101-02, 456 A.2d 94, 100 (1982) (<HOLDING>). “[Ajrbitrary or unreasonable restrictions
holding guilderlands local law was preempted by new york state law which provided a comprehensive scheme for funding road construction holding that a states regulation of a hazardous waste site did not make it an operator of the site holding local regulation of hazardous waste disposal facilities preempted by comprehensive and detailed state regulatory scheme recognizing that a state regulatory scheme that provides no new cause of action under state law and authorizes no new form of ultimate relief is not preempted recognizing oklahomas policy of allowing regulation instead of competition in waste disposal services