ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
March 4, 2008
4/1/08 jrl ________
AGENDA: VARIANCE: PEFF CORP., 40 Beech St., #114-150
ATTENDING: Dan Bouchard (Chairman), Mike Willingham (Vice Chairman), Lloyd Belbin, Sandra Heaney
Alternates: Lorraine Onoratto-Sullivan
ABSENT: Donna Hardy
OTHER: None
The meeting opened at 7:04.
MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 5, 2008:
One amendment was made: on page 3, last paragraph, 1st line, following “Mr.
Bouchard asked” replace the rest of the sentence with “if there was anything the applicant could do to make Ms. Seeler happy and she answered that there wasn’t.”.
M. Willingham made a motion, second by S. Heaney, to accept the minutes as amended. The motion carried.
VARIANCE: PEFF CORP./MICHELLE MULLEN
The secretary read the application, referral, abutters notified, where the case was advertised and stated that there were no phone calls or written correspondence received.
For Dept. comments: Water/Sewer said that they would need to apply for water and sewer for the new units. The Police had concerns with the current parking. Highway was okay and Fire did not respond.
Ms. Mullen introduced herself and also Whitney Leggett. They are the managers of the apartment building. Mr. Bouchard asked if Ms. Mullen had written permission to represent the owners. She presented a handwritten copy. The Board discussed that the permission slips should really be notarized.
M. Willingham made a MOTION, second by L. Belbin, to ACCEPT THE APPLICATION AS COMPLETE. The motion CARRIED.
Ms. Mullen stated that Beech St. has had a bad reputation and they are trying to change that. They have worked with Norm Skantze, Fire Chief, so as to bring the building up to code. They have been working on the project for 1 ½ years, putting on a new roof, adding sprinklers, etc. Due to a drainage problem, they have put in 3 I-beams in the barn and are shoring the barn up. Mr. Leggett stated that they have repaired the underpinning, added new floors and fire escapes, new heating, and have widened the driveways. They added that there is 1980’ of unused premium quality space. They
-2-
ZBA Minutes
3/4/08
VARIANCE: PEFF CORP. continued:
turned the 5th apartment that was there (not legal according to the property files) into a laundry and have opened up a fire apparatus access to the back side for three buildings.
Mr. Bouchard asked if an engineer was involved and Mr. Leggett stated that they had Blouin Steel. Ms. Mullen went on to say that the building was not taken care of when they got it. They are asking to use the space that is already there. Everything has been renovated.
Mr. Bouchard asked clarification that this is a 4-unit apartment building and, with the use of the barn, they would like to add 2 more units. Mr. Leggett stated that there are 3 units in the house and 1 in the barn at present. For the additional units, they plan to use a 30’ x 30’ with an additional space and a 2-story in back. They will have a small utility, the heating and sewer and storage as well. All are accessible to the ground level.
Mr. Willingham asked if they are the owners and they answered that they are the managers. Mr. Bouchard read the note from Philip Petschek, the owner, which gives Ms. Mullen the right to represent him. Though it is not notarized, it was determined to accept this tonight.
Mr. Willingham asked when they purchased the property. Ms. Mullen stated that they purchased it in Nov. 2006. Mr. Willingham stated that he went inside and there were 3 apartments at the time. The secretary explained that the property file shows that 4 units are legal. Mr. Willingham asked if they live on the premises and Ms. Mullen answered that they live in Bridgewater but visit the property daily. Mr. Leggett added that they are on call 24/7.
The 5 Variance criteria were then addressed.
1. Not contrary to the public interest: Ms. Mullen stated that the Master Plan looks to revitalizing and restoring old buildings and providing housing. They are not encroaching on the neighbors. They have improved the property value of it and of the neighbors. Mr. Leggett added that they have also improved the clientele and provide dumpsters. They are putting up trees and shrubs, retaining walls, a drainage system and widened the drive. Instead of several gas tanks, they are to have 1 large tank in the lower level to the back, and there is designated parking.
2. Special conditions: Ms. Mullen mentioned the lay of the land and that there is flood plain in the back so they cannot do more than the present footprint.
3. Spirit of the Ordinance: As Ms. Mullen was unsure of this criteria, Mr. Bouchard mentioned that the area is not zoned for multi-family. Ms. Mullen stated that it is zoned Village Residential but is close to Commercial. Mr. Leggett added that it should have been considered Commercial as it already had 4 units and this made it already non-conforming. Mr. Bouchard stated that the spirit is currently so that multi-family is not allowed. The 4 units are grandfathered. The applicants must convince the Board that this is in the spirit. Ms. Mullen stated that there are five multi-family buildings on this street. Mr. Leggett added that the Master Plan mentions concentrating on multi-family and how it is better to cluster.
-3-
ZBA Minutes
3/4/08
PEFF VARIANCE continued:
4. Substantial Justice: Ms. Mullen stated that the building was run down and they have fixed it up. It increases the town beauty as it was an eyesore.
5. Surrounding property is not diminished: Ms. Mullen stated that it has increased the property values of both theirs and their neighbors.
Mr. Bouchard stated for the record, there was no public for comment. He then asked if there were any further questions from the Board. Mr. Belbin asked the rent scale and was told that they have 2 3-bedroom units and 2 2-bedroom units now and the 2 new would be 2-bedroom. The rents now are $700 and $800 mo. and the new units would be $600 and $900. Mr. Belbin asked if they would be allowing school children and was told that they would.
Ms. Oranato-Sullivan asked to see the photos that they had brought with them. Mr. Belbin asked about the parking and Mr. Leggett stated that none of it would be on the neighbor’s side (where parking is designated). That is the neighbors’ parking lot. Ms. Mullen felt that this project is in the town’s best interest as we want to rejuvenate the town. They are asking to use their full potential. They have worked with the town employees to revitalize the building. This is a long term investment.
The public portion of the hearing was then closed.
Mr. Belbin felt that they met #1 of the criteria but not the other 4. He mentioned that every child will cost the town money. Mr. Bouchard told him that the town is not discouraging children. Mr. Belbin felt this to be the contrary. Mr. Willingham felt that this was contrary to the Ordinance as only 2-family are allowed in Village Residential. Ms. Heaney felt that it doesn’t meet the area. Mr. Belbin added that it is good to bring the building up but not to expand. There will be more traffic and more visitors. A discussion followed as to the type of people not a reason to deny. Mr. Belbin still felt that adding apartments and kids is not a benefit.
Ms. Oranato-Sullivan felt that this project is good for the public by bringing up that area. However, she is not sure about making a non-conforming building more non-conforming. Mr. Bouchard agreed but added that we must look at each individual case. He mentioned that he had asked Town Attorney, Bernie Waugh, about a case such as this and Mr. Waugh felt that if they were making the building larger it would make it more non-conforming but when it is the same footprint, which is a little different.
Ms. Heaney felt that it was similar to the last case that the Board had. She stated that it wouldn’t be so bad if this were an area Variance. Ms. Oranato-Sullivan questioned if this would be allowed if adding another building in this area and the Board answered that it would not. The Board continued in discussion.
Mr. Bouchard felt that this area is improperly zoned. Mr. Willingham thinks that they were trying to stop the continued development/retro fitting of existing homes into multi-family dwellings . He commended the applicant for the work they have done and of improving the area but felt that it is not in the best interest. It is not appropriate for
-4-
ZBA Minutes
3/4/08
PEFF VARIANCE continued:
6 apartments. Ms. Heaney agreed. The vote was then taken and the variance was DENIED, none in favor, 4 against.
Mr. Bouchard explained that they have 30 days in which to appeal the process and that making a non-conforming more non-conforming is a hard way to go. Ms. Mullen expressed her disappointment as they have worked hard and would have liked to have seen some compromise on the town’s part.
COMMUNICATIONS:
It was determined that the DES training workshop on Auto Salvage Yard Licensing & Inspection should be given to the Code Enforcement Officer.
The DES copy of the letter to Frank & Shirley Bednaz was read and will be filed.
The invite to the Fire Co. spaghetti dinner was read and the OEP Spring Conference applications were copied for each member. The Feb. Town & City magazine will be held in the office.
CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: Mr. Bouchard reported that Michelle Bonsteele of Hooksett will be the new Code Enforcement Officer. She has been Hooksett’s Code Enforcement, Building Inspector, and Health Officer and is extremely qualified. She is to start March 12th.
MEETING WITH ATTORNEY WAUGH: Mr. Bouchard mentioned that some of the Board attended the law update meeting that Atty. Waugh presented. He also explained that DES is enacting a 250’ shoreland buffer. When he asked Atty. Waugh who has jurisdiction, Atty. Waugh stated that they must meet both the town and the state requirements.
NEW FORMS: Mr. Bouchard passed around a copy of new forms for the ZBA for the Board’s approval. The Board felt that they should be incorporated.
LETTER FOR PLANNING BOARD, PLAN NH: Mr. Bouchard stated that he wrote the letter that was requested from the ZBA and the application has been sent to Plan NH.
PROCEDURE ADJUSTMENT: Mr. Bouchard feels that we need to adjust our procedure as it is not required for us to make a motion to accept an application as complete. The Code Enforcement Officer and the Secretary are responsible to see that everything has been applied for correctly and, at the meeting, the secretary can say “The application is accepted as complete”. The Board agreed with this.
NOTORIZATION: A discussion was held and felt that this has never been done in the past but this Board feels that it should be.
-5-
ZBA Minutes
3/4/08
NEXT MEETING: The next meeting will be held April 1, 2008 at 7:00 pm. We shall hold the election of officers and the bylaws should be updated as needed. An applicant has until March 10th to apply.
With no other business, M. Willingham made a MOTION, second by S. Heaney, to adjourn at 8:15 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Jan Laferriere, secretary