ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
September 30, 2010
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m.
Roll Call: Present were Larry Ordway, Chairman; Julie Matthews, Vice Chairman; Robert Loeffler; Paul Boniface, Alternate; Joyce Ingerson, Alternate; James Allen, Alternate. Roderic Cole was excused.
J. Ingerson and P. Boniface were appointed voting members for the meeting.
Minutes of August 26, 2010
R. Loeffler motioned, second by L. Ordway, to approve the minutes of the August 26, 2010, meeting. There was no discussion on the motion and the vote was 4-0-1. (Matthews abstaining)
# 10-14: A request from W. Warren Gerety for a special exception under Article X, all sections to permit a home occupation, namely an office for a professional financial services retirement planning company. The property is located at 1 Canterbury Forest, Tax Map 50, Lot 17, in the MDR District. The applicant is the property owner of record.
W. Warren Gerety, 1 Canterbury Forest was present for the application. He explained that the plan is to have a home office in his home primarily for record keeping and computer work. He said that he will rarely expect clients to come to the house as he has rented an office in Haverhill at 1012 Phoenix Rd. were most of his business will be conducted, as well as visiting clients at their businesses and homes.
The Board reviewed the requirements for the granting of a home occupation special exception noting the following:
- The application qualifies under § 220-66. Permitted use, section A – Consultant
- There would be no odors, or fumes, or anything that would be injurious to the neighbors
- Mr. Gerety and his wife are the property owners
- Only be 6% used for the home business
L. Ordway asked if there would be any other employees other than Mr. Gerety himself.
W. Gerety responded that it would just be himself. He added that his wife will not be an employee but might help. He added the following:
- There will be no storage, signs or any changes to the residence
- There will be no merchandise to display
- If there are any deliveries they will be made by normal parcel (USPS, UPS, FED-EX)
L. Ordway asked how clients would be parked on the property.
W. Gerety answered that they have a two-car attached garage for personal use and a two-car driveway. He added that he does not anticipate clients coming to the house however if they did it would not be more than one or two cars.
- There are no covenants in the deed that would prohibit this application
L. Ordway noted that this is not a Condominium. He stated that the rest of the Article pertains to inspections, that the Town and Building Inspector have the right to inspect the Home Occupation and the home occupation needs to be renewed every three (3) years.
L. Ordway asked if there were any questions from the Board, there were none. He asked if there was anyone speaking in favor of or in opposition to the application. There was no one and the matter was closed.
L. Ordway explained the deliberations process and that there could be no additional input from anyone.
DELIBERATIONS
# 10-14: A request from W. Warren Gerety for a special exception under Article X, all sections to permit a home occupation, namely an office for a professional financial services retirement planning company. The property is located at 1 Canterbury Forest, Tax Map 50, Lot 17, in the MDR District. The applicant is the property owner of record.
R. Loeffler moved, second by J. Matthews, to grant the request for a special exception under Article X to permit a home occupation at 1 Canterbury Forest.
L. Ordway summarized the application noting the following:
- Classic home occupation
- The office will have a desk, computer, a few books
- Will have very few clients visiting the home occupation as most of his business will be conducted at his Haverhill office.
There was no further discussion on the motion. The Vote was 5-0-0 U/A.
Continued from August 26, 2010:
REQUEST FOR RE-HEARING:
# 10-13: A request from Donald Connolly for a variance from Article V, §220-32I to permit a car port to be built within 10 feet of the property line, where 15 feet is the minimum required setback. The property is located at 2 Bailey Drive, Tax Map 38, Lot 96, in the MDR District. The property owner of record is Lynne V. Connolly.
R. Loeffler motions, second by L. Ordway, to consider the request for a re-hearing and the case is opened for discussion.
L. Ordway referenced a letter from Donald Connolly (see attachment) dated September 23, 2010. The letter stated that D. Connolly was appealing the Board’s Notice of Decision dated August 26, 2010.
R. Loeffler stated that based on the letter, he feels that D. Connolly doesn’t understand the rules and regulations about appealing because he does not qualify. He also added that the letter is upsetting to him because Mr. Connolly put in personal feelings that the Board has its mind already made up and that he refers to no evidence being submitted to back it up. R. Loeffler goes on to discuss the letter further stating that he feels there is nothing new in the letter that was not discussed at the variance hearing and recommends that the Board denies the request as meritless.
L. Ordway stated that he wanted to go over each paragraph of D. Connolly’s letter to make sure everything was covered when the request was turned down and to make sure no new information is present. He noted that in the first paragraph, D. Connolly stated that there was no other place on the property to build a car port. L. Ordway stated that they did discuss this at the hearing and discussed alternatives.
R. Loeffler added that having a car port is not an inherent right, adding Mr. Connolly has a garage that he is not using for its intended purpose. He noted that it is nice to have a car port, but if you do not have the room then you cannot have one.
J. Allen recalled that they had made suggestions to Mr. Connolly at the hearing that the car port could be made smaller, but that he did not want to do this.
L. Ordway discussed the letter stating that it said the Board erred in stating that the variance would potentially affect the surrounding property values. He added that this was the Board’s decision to make based on their knowledge of zoning laws, RSA’s etc. He went on further stating that they did discuss the roof of the car port being built, taken down, and being put back up again as well as renting a storage bin for the windows and doors. L. Ordway feels that Mr. Connolly doesn’t understand that the hardship is in the land not an economic hardship and that a financial hardship cannot affect the Board’s decision. L. Ordway added that there is nothing new in the letter that was not already discussed or points out an error in the way the Board heard the case. He agreed that there are no
grounds for a re-hearing of the case.
There was no further discussion on this matter. The vote was 0-4-1, with J. Matthews abstaining.
Other Business:
J. Ingerson asked if the Board had appointed a member.
L. Ordway responded that he had already signed a letter to the BOS to have P. Boniface appointed as a new permanent member of the ZBA.
There was no further business before the Board. The meeting was adjourned at 7:20p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Laurie Pagnottaro
Recording Secretary
| 
