Minutes of the Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting of July 3, 2012

Transcription

1 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 Minutes of the Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting of July, 1 A meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment was held on July, 1 in the Knightly Meeting Room of the Municipal Office Building, Geremonty Drive, Salem, NH PRESENT: Chairman Gary Azarian; Patrick McDougall; Bob Uttley; Mike Smith, Alternate; John Manning, Alternate; Anthony McKeon, Alternate; and Sam Zannini, Chief Building Official. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at :00 p.m. Chairman Azarian introduced the board members and explained how the meeting will proceed. The ZBA is a quasijudicial board, and all testimony should be truthful and accurate. Per the Statute, all the board members have visited all the sites. PETITION # 1 Map, Lot 0 Regina E. Baika hereby requests a Variance from Article, Section :1. and ask that said terms of the Zoning Ordinance be waived to permit construction of a x stall garage with finished area above to within.ft to the side lot line, where ft is required in a Residential District. Property Location: Glen Denin Drive Abutters: Habib and Aiello were present. Chairman Azarian said lot is not on the list of abutters that were notified. Mr. Zannini said that lot is the Town of Salem. Regina Baika read through the criteria. PUBLIC INTEREST: It is a permitted use and incidental to a single family home. SPIRIT OF ORDINANCE: The density between structures still met garage permitted use with living extended kitchen area seating above. The construction is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE: Of permitted use in keeping with the rest of the neighborhood. DIMINUTION: The property will be improved and value of the property will increase, along with property taxes to the town, while keeping within the character of the neighborhood. HARDSHIP: Town of Salem, NH Page 1 of

2 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 Special Conditions: Variance is required due to existing location of the single family dwelling, for the purpose of adding additional living area and a garage to protect personal property. B. A garage is incidental to a single family home to utilize our property, consistent with surrounding properties. Chairman Azarian asked, how will the finished area above the garage be used? Ms. Baika said it's a dining area, no bedrooms. Chairman Azarian asked if there were any abutters to speak in favor of this petition. Joe Habib, Glen Denin Drive, has been neighbors with Ms. Baika for about to 0 years. They are wonderful people and he has nothing against this. Thomas Aiello, 1 Glen Denin, has no objection. Chairman Azarian asked if there were any abutters to speak in opposition. There were none. He then closed petition # 1. Mr. McDougall said the side setback to the proposed garage is minimal. He believes this is a reasonable request, and consistent with the neighborhood. MOTION by Mr. McDougall to approve. Chairman Azarian agreed all the criteria are met. SECOND by Mr. Uttley. Mr. McKeon Mr. Uttley Mr. McDougall Mr. Smith Chairman Azarian VOTE: 0 MOTION PASSES. PETITION # 1 GRANTED. PETITION # Map, lot Jeanne M Derba hereby requests a Variance from Article, Section :. and asks that said terms of the Zoning Ordinance be waived to permit a second kitchen sink in existing single family home, a non-permitted use in a Recreational District. Property Location: Cove Road Extension Abutters: There were no abutters present. Jeanne Derba is asking for a second sink. Her home has a basement with a walkout to the beach. She explained why she needs a second sink. She then read through the criteria. Town of Salem, NH Page of

3 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 PUBLIC INTEREST: Housing is going to remain single family with no exterior changes. SPIRIT OF ORDINANCE: Property is recreationally zoned. Variance would allow lower level to be used in summer for that purpose. SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE: Permits use consistent with other properties on lake and provide easier access for entertainment in backyard. Owner is a senior citizen with knee issues that have required surgery. Steep stairs to main level kitchen when entertaining in lower level is a hardship. DIMINUTION: There will be no exterior changes. Variance requested for convenience of self in single family home. HARDSHIP: Special Conditions: Walkout basement to backyard and lake. Most properties in area have summer kitchens. B. To use lower level for recreational use. Cooking & carrying food down steep stairs is unsafe for owner who uses railing when going up and down stairs. Chairman Azarian said we have granted a summer kitchen on Arlington Pond. Mr. McDougall asked, what impact would it have for water? Is it on a well? Mr. Zannini said yes, but it wouldn't impact the water at all. You either use the sink upstairs or the sink downstairs. Mr. Smith asked, does this get put on the deed? Mr. Zannini said if granted, he would ask for a stipulation that the property owner would work with the town attorney to have an addendum done to the deed to specify that it's a second sink for a single family only. Chairman Azarian explained to the petitioner, the reason is that when you sell the home, that it's on the deed that it's approved and legal to have the second sink. He asked if there were any abutters to speak in favor of this petition. There were none. He asked if there were any to speak in opposition. There were none. He then closed petition #. MOTION by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mr. Uttley to grant with the stipulation that the applicant meets with the Building Official and the town attorney and put it in the deed that it's not a second apartment, it's a utility sink to be used as such. Chairman Azarian agreed that the criteria have been met. Mr. McDougall Mr. Smith Mr. McKeon Mr. Uttley Chairman Azarian Town of Salem, NH Page of

4 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 VOTE: 0 MOTION PASSES. PETITION # GRANTED WITH STIPULATION. Mr. McKeon stepped down from the board. Mr. Manning joined the board. PETITION # Map 1, Lot Lexi Real Estate LLC, c/o Beaumont & Campbell Prof Assn hereby request the following Variances from Article/Section :1..1 to allow a lot for the display of used cars & trucks with % lot coverage where 0% is allowed; (ii) Article /Section :1..1 to permit a lot to be used as part of a used car dealership, said lot being within 0ft (abutting) 00ft, ft & 0ft of existing dealerships as well as any other properties within,000ft lawfully selling used cars & trucks where,000ft between used car dealerships is required and (iii) Article/Section :1.. to allow a parking lot for the display of used cars & trucks without the required ft landscaped perimeter, allowing free travel with adjoining pre-existing car dealership which has no buffer in the Commercial-Industrial B District. Property Location: 0 South Broadway Abutters: There were no abutters present. Attorney Bernard Campbell, from Beaumont & Campbell Professional Association is here on behalf of Lexi Real Estate. Mr. Alexa is present. We were here for a variance recently for an electronics sign and at that time he made it clear that we would be back. He showed the tax map of the area. The applicant is proposing to take down the property and use it as a display site for the used vehicle car dealership next door, owned by Lexi Real Estate and used by Alexa Motors. He talked about the proximity variance. The ordinance requires,000 feet from another used car facility. We are right next door, which is why we are asking for the 0 request. There is an auto auction within,000 feet and some used car activity on Hampshire Road. The proposal is to raise and remove the existing structure on the property and have the used car display. One variance is for the buffer. The lot line will be going through the pavement and there is really no buffer there now. The third variance is for lot coverage. The proposal indicates we'd be paving approximately % of the property and leaving % green space. The primary reason we believe it's justified is that because the lot is small, and to develop it in any conforming way isn't feasible because of the need for access and parking. So the variances are for proximity, buffer and lot coverage. He then read through the criteria. PUBLIC INTEREST: Development plan is for a use which will be an expansion of an existing used car facility on the adjoining premises. It will remove an existing small lot of record effectively lowering the density in this area of Route. The granting of the variance will not affect the essential character of the neighborhood, but use would be consistent with it. SPIRIT OF ORDINANCE: The proposed use is to expand an existing car dealership so that dispersion requirement is not being implicated and the ft. landscaped perimeter is not necessary because of the proposed shared access way with the adjoining site. Open space variance in this location does not violate basic zoning objectives. Town of Salem, NH Page of

5 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE: Plan will be an enhancement to the existing automobile sales facility. It will remove an additional business access to Route in this area. There is no apparent gain to the community in not allowing the proposed business expansion. DIMINUTION: This area is a heavily traveled, commercial highway; use will be to combine with adjoining automobile dealership; plan is expected to result in an enhancement to the area. HARDSHIP: Special Conditions: Property is a small pre-existing lot, originally serving as a single family residence; no feasible commercial redevelopment of the site would be possible without variances similar to those requested herein; is not suitable for continued residential occupancy. A. i.) As noted above, the dispersion and landscape perimeter do not apply if the site issued in conjunction with the existing auto sales facility. The open space requirement could not effectively be enforced on this site because of its small size and shape. ii.) It is a permitted use. It is to be operated as part of the adjoining automobile sales facility. Attorney Campbell said this will have to go to the Planning Board for site plan approval. The applicant understands we will need to do reciprocal easement agreements and a condition that it's contingent upon the operation of this site being associated with the operation of the adjoining site. Mr. Jordan who is the project engineer, is also here. Chairman Azarian clarified, you're going to remove the existing site and continue the rear lot line basically through the parcel now which will enhance egress from that site and use the same existing curb cut? Attorney Campbell said yes, there's an existing edge of pavement now, and it would be blended into a new edge of pavement. We'll have to address drainage with the Planning Board. Chairman Azarian asked, when you're coming from the back of Alexa where they service the cars, will the pavement be lined so that there will be a travel lane? As a safety issue, will that be lined? Attorney Campbell said it can be. He was told that awhile back there was a fence that was there. He mentioned the reciprocal easement agreement because right now the plan isn't necessarily to abandon the lot line. We'd do the reciprocal easement agreement to preserve the lot line but allow access over it. Mr. McDougall mentioned the memo from James Brown. Chairman Azarian then gave Attorney Campbell a copy of the memo. Attorney Campbell said he hadn't seen the memo before tonight. NHDOT would be involved when we realign the site. Regarding the easement along South Broadway, we'd be willing to entertain that discussion at the Planning Board. Attorney Campbell mentioned drainage, and said that Mr. Jordan suggests that the difference between the 0% and % that we're asking for can be accommodated in a drainage design. He thinks we can engineer that and we'll address it Town of Salem, NH Page of

6 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 during the the site plan process. We believe the applicant can satisfy the public interest with the drainage design. Mr. McDougall asked, if the Engineering Department is indicating it needs DOT approval, is this prematurely going before the ZBA? Chairman Azarian explained that no, they're here for relief under the variance. These issues will be taken care of at the site plan process. Attorney Campbell agreed. We will have to go to DOT when we go through the Planning Board process. But this is the first step to get to that point. Mr. McDougall asked, is there a considerable impact to the Spicket River watershed and that's the concern of the Engineering Department? Attorney Campbell spoke about the Engineering Department and drainage. Mr. Smith asked, what makes this land so special that you can't stay at the 0%? Attorney Campbell explained that given the nature of this site when we redevelop it, he thinks we'll be close to 0% regardless. And we won't have the -foot buffer. That drives up the percentage. Mr. Smith asked, then why do we not pave to the left of the site, why not have a larger buffer there to make up for it? Is there a reason that can't be done? Attorney Campbell said, from an engineering standpoint, the answer is no. It's feasible. But from the variance request, looking at the criteria, he thinks we meet the criteria. Chairman Azarian explained that the lot coverage in relation to the whole site is really minimal. Chairman Azarian asked if there were any abutters to speak in favor of this petition. There were none. He asked if there were any to speak in opposition. There were none. He then closed petition #. Mr. Manning believes they met all five criteria. MOTION by Mr. Manning to grant. Chairman Azarian agreed. He explained why it meets all criteria. It will go to the Planning Board. He believes that it will be safer to egress and ingress through the parcel. SECOND by Mr. McDougall. Mr. McDougall asked if we should have a stipulation in regard to NHDOT approval. Chairman Azarian said those concerns will be addressed at the Planning Board level. Mr. McDougall feels it meets all five criteria. It's appropriate and it's a minimal impact. Mr. Smith Mr. Uttley Mr. Manning Mr. McDougall Chairman Azarian VOTE: 0 MOTION PASSES. PETITION # GRANTED. PETITION # Map, Lot L Corp, LLC c/o MHF Design Consultants Inc. hereby requests a Variance from Article, Section :1. and asks that said terms of the Zoning Ordinance be waived to permit a Town of Salem, NH Page of

7 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 landscaping business, a non permitted use, and from Article, Section :..1 to permit a surface structure (vinyl shelter) within ft of a wetland where 0ft is required in the Residential District. Property Location: - Lawrence Road Abutters: Robert Bannon, MaartmanMoe, and Lombardi were all present. David Jordan, engineer/land surveyor with MHF Design Consultants, is here on behalf of Linehan Landscaping. Also here is Larry Linehan Sr and Larry Linehan Jr. This is a two acre parcel on the east side of Lawrence Road. Two plans were submitted, an existing conditions plan and a preliminary site plan. This is the site of the Linehan Landscaping business. On the property is an existing two story dwelling and a garage, that's currently not in use, and there is an old shed on the parcel. There are several vinyl shelters used to shelter equipment or landscaping materials. There are also storage bins on the property. This is a commercial landscaping business, not a retail supply location. There are small quantities of materials stored, no large materials are stored. He gave a history of the property. The Linehans occupied the site in 0 and got a permit to open their business. He read from the permit they received. This site has historically been a commercial use. The vinyl structures were put up over time, and were seen as a way to provide cover for their materials and equipment. They did this without permits. The larger building burned down a couple years ago and has been sitting there. The Linehans lease the property. They received a violation notice earlier this year, citing the building that burned down, and the expansion without permit. The Linehans want to bring the site into conformance. Now they have an opportunity to purchase the property and they have every intention to address the issues with the town. The burned building will be removed from the site. Most of the trucks and trailers have been removed. We're seeking a variance to allow the use they have here today. They're not looking to expand their business. The size they are at today is where they intend to stay. If the variances are granted, the next step is to go to the Planning Board for site plan approval. For access into and out of the site, there is pavement in front of the old building, with gravel adjacent to that, and a connection to the property to the south, which is owned by the same owner. Chairman Azarian asked, if this property is sold to the Linehans, will they still have the reciprocal agreement? Mr. Jordan said they will still have that, but we're looking to have a new driveway location. He explained that the new driveway location would be more central to the two properties. In the front, they will be creating a landscaped berm to buffer the activity in back. Regarding the vinyl structures, they do both material storage, like bark mulch, etc and they also store some of their equipment. There is also a storage trailer with a dirt floor. Regarding the structures in back, two will be brought towards the front of the site. For the third one, we have requested a variance to be feet from the wetland. Right now it's 1 feet to the wetland. When these were erected by the Linehans, they didn't clear any trees or do any regrading, it was all open area. Chairman Azarian asked, why feet? Why not 0 feet? Mr. Jordan explained that to get to 0 feet, we would have to move it about another 0 feet forward. That would bring it too close to the other shelter, which would restrict their ability to get their equipment around. Chairman Azarian asked, so it would impede a circular flow of the normal daily Town of Salem, NH Page of

8 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 operation? Mr. Jordan said it would. We also want to re-establish a foot vegetated buffer between the wetland and the activity. He then read through the five criteria. PUBLIC INTEREST: With respect to A) the use has existed on this parcel since September 0 without apparent harm to the safety or welfare of the public. The changes that will be made once the applicant is in possession of the property will only improve the character of the area. With respect to B) relocating two structures entirely outside the 0-foot wetland setback and moving a third structure in order to re-establish a -foot vegetated buffer to the wetlands will provide an improvement to the public benefit. SPIRIT OF ORDINANCE: With respect to A) the zoning ordinance recognizes preexisting, non-conforming uses. This site has been used for business use for many years prior to the applicant occupying the premises. The applicant did receive a permit in 0 to occupy this site but has since expanded his business beyond what was originally approved. It is the applicant's desire to remain at this location and to obtain the approvals needed to do so. Granting of this variance is the first step toward this and will then allow the applicant to file a site plan with the Salem Planning Board for their review and approval. With respect to B) the rear of the property has been occupied with a variety of uses over the years. Allowing the largest of the three structures to partially remain within the 0-foot wetland setback and establishing a -foot wide vegetated buffer will allow the applicant to continue to use the property in a manner that is most efficient for their operation and at the same time provide a setback between the use and the wetland that this property has otherwise not enjoyed for many years. SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE: With respect to A) it will allow the applicant to continue to occupy the property that they have leased from the owner since 0. The applicant has an agreement to purchase the property and plans on making significant improvements to the site. Denial of the variance would require the applicant to relocate this business to another area in town which would not result in any public benefit and would be an injustice to the applicant. With respect to B) allowing one structure to remain partially within the wetland setback and establishing a -foot wetland buffer within the previously disturbed portions of the property will provide an improved level of environmental protection to the wetlands. DIMINUTION: With respect to both A) and B) this use has existed on the property since 0 and the structures have been in place for a number of years. Once the applicant owns the property a number of improvements will be made that will help buffer the view from Lawrence Road and establish a vegetated buffer to the wetland resulting in an overall improvement to the visual character of this lot. These changes will not diminish and may benefit the value of the surrounding properties. HARDSHIP: Special Conditions: The property has been historically used for business purposes for many years, all of which were legal pre-existing, non-conforming uses. The applicant did receive a permit from the Town in 0 to operate a landscaping business with overnight parking of to trucks with 1 to trailers and a front end loader out of this location. Town of Salem, NH Page of

9 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 This is a relatively large parcel for the area and abuts another pre-existing, nonconforming business use in the Residential District. A. i.) With respect to A) the zoning ordinance recognizes pre-existing, non-conforming uses, which this property has always had. The applicant has expanded his business beyond what he was issued a permit for in 0 and is seeking to remedy that. With respect to B) the one vinyl shelter that the applicant is requesting to be allowed to remain partially in the 0 foot wetland setback is on an area of the lot that has historically been used for vehicle parking and the storage of materials related to other business uses on the property. The applicant will be reestablishing a -foot wide vegetated buffer to the wetland in conjunction with this request to provide an improvement to the existing conditions. ii.) With respect to A) there are very few areas within the Town of Salem where a landscape contractor can operate out of. The only districts where such a use is permitted by right is in Commercial-Industrial B and C, Salem's prime commercial zones. The cost of commercial land in Salem and the negative view of locating this type of use near or within a retail or professional office setting are why most landscape contractors are found on larger parcels in the residential or rural zones. This property has been in business use for many years and the size and location of the parcel make it well suited for the applicant's business. The improvements that will be made to the site will provide greater buffer for the residential parcels in the area. With respect to B) the vinyl shelters provide protection to equipment that otherwise would be stored outside. Allowing the largest of these shelters to remain partially within the 0-foot wetland setback is reasonable because it is located in an area that has been used for open storage of vehicles and materials for many years under previous business use of the property. Mr. McDougall asked, what will be stored in the garage? Will there be chemicals? His concern is proximity to the wetland. Mr. Jordan said they don't store chemicals on the property at all. They don't service their vehicles on the property. Chairman Azarian asked if there were any abutters to speak in favor of this petition. Sal Marino, Town Village Drive, said if the Linehans will modify this area and make it look as planned, this will improve the area into something functional and more aesthetically pleasing. Chairman Azarian asked if there were any abutters to speak in opposition. Eric MaartmanMoe, Town Village Drive, said this property has been an eyesore. The buildings to either side are in non-use and are also an eyesore. Though he thinks it's a good idea to have it cleaned up, there has been non-permitted use of the property over the years, and he doesn't see what guarantees there are, that there won't be further nonpermitted use. Town of Salem, NH Page of

10 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 Chairman Azarian explained that if the board lets them go forward, they will go to the Planning Board, and if approved, then you have regulations. This property is not the fault of the Linehans, it's the fault of the current owner. With an approved plan, the town will have regulations. Mr. MaartmanMoe asked about EPA approval. Chairman Azarian doesn't think there is any EPA issue, it has been taken care of. He explained why they need the relief from the 0-foot wetland setback. Mr. MaartmanMoe asked about the structure that is causing the setback issue. There was discussion of the buildings. Chairman Azarian said the Planning Board will discuss hours of operation and traffic. This is just for relief of the setback. Mr. MaartmanMoe talked about the traffic on this street. Chairman Azarian said, if the plan moves forward, you can go to the Planning Board and discuss your other concerns. John Sytek is not objecting to this business being there. We will want to talk to the Planning Board. This site is awful and any improvement they make we would applaud. He is not in opposition to them having a reasonable landscaping business. But why grant this if they can't get approval from the Planning Board? If you grant this and the Planning Board doesn't, what is the purpose of the variance? Chairman Azarian explained that this is the first step in the process. The Planning Board always says they need to come here first. So if we grant relief for the setback, then they will move the plan forward to the Planning Board. Mr. Jordan also pointed out that the abutters will be notified by mail of the Planning Board meeting. Chairman Azarian then closed petition #. This parcel has been in disrepair for many years. In his opinion, the applicant has presented a good plan and met all five criteria. He thinks the fact that this parcel will have new ownership is a good thing. Mr. Manning said it's an eyesore there and traffic is busy. He thinks the Linehans have done a great job and this will be great for the town and better than what is there. MOTION by Mr. Manning to grant. SECOND by Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith looked at the larger vinyl shelter in back. He also looked at the elevation and the road. He'd like to see it further from the wetland, but then it would be closer to the road. They are getting it away from the wetland. If it was his business, he'd want to make it look as nice as possible out front because that's their business card. Mr. Uttley Mr. Manning Mr. Smith Mr. McDougall Chairman Azarian VOTE: 0 MOTION PASSES. PETITION # GRANTED. Mr. McDougall stepped down from the board. Mr. McKeon rejoined the board. Town of Salem, NH Page of

11 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 PETITION # - Map 0, Lot Golden Brook Investment Realty c/o MHF Design Consultants Inc hereby request a Variance from Article, Section :1. to allow an existing residential use (third floor apartment) to remain in the building that is used primarily as an office building on the first & second floor, where residential uses are not permitted in the Commercial Industrial C District. Property Location: Main Street Abutters: There were no abutters present. Mark Gross, with MHF Design Consultants, is representing Golden Brook Investment Realty. This property is located at Main Street. It's a -story,,00 square foot building that is currently used as office. In 1 there was an approved site plan that converted the second and third floor, from residential to commercial. The request is to take the third floor which was never converted into true office space, although currently being used as office space, to a residential apartment. As a result of the approval in 1, we were required to come to this board for a variance for the third floor apartment to be converted back into a residential use. He then read through the criteria. PUBLIC INTEREST: The lot has existed prior to zoning and as was previously used residentially. The main use of the first and second floors is office space with the third floor remaining unoccupied as the proposed apartment. SPIRIT OF ORDINANCE: It will allow the property owner a use within the building that was previously enjoyed prior to zoning and this area was always a mix of residential and small business use. SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE: It will allow the owner of the property the use of a vacant residential space that has existed in the building for some time. DIMINUTION: The use of a portion of the building for residential will be less intense than the surrounding uses as commercial and the main use of the building will remain as office space, which is an allowed use in the Commercial District. HARDSHIP: Special Conditions: The subject property existed prior to the enactment of zoning and is an oversized lot that is split 0 feet back by the Commercial Industrial C zone and the Residential zone. The existing building remains virtually unchanged in its residential appearance and will not physically change as a result of the use of the third floor as a residential unit. A. i.) The enactment of zoning created a non-conforming situation for the residential use that existed on this lot. Additionally, residential uses, specifically apartments are allowed in the neighboring Business Office District, which is located 00 feet to the east of the property, and the area does not change significantly in Town of Salem, NH Page of

12 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 appearance to not warrant allowing residential uses in this portion of the Commercial Industrial C District. ii.) It will allow the property owner the use of a previously existing residential use with a new apartment unit that is now vacant and has remained so for a period of time. Mr. Gross also mentioned that it's tough to rent out as office space being on the third floor. The lease is up at the end of June. Mr. McKeon asked, when was the last time this was leased out as an apartment? Mr. Gross said, prior to 1 it was an apartment. The second floor had two apartments. The owner at that time came to the Planning Board in 1 to convert those three apartments into commercial use. Mr. Smith said would suggest stipulations of Planning Board approval, and meet all current building and fire code regulations. Mr. Gross agreed. Chairman Azarian said they have to go to the Planning Board anyway. Chairman Azarian asked if there were any abutters to speak in favor of this petition. There were none. He asked if there were any to speak in opposition. There were none. He then closed petition #. Mr. Manning said it meets all criteria. It was an apartment before. MOTION by Mr. Manning to grant. SECOND by Mr. Uttley. Mr. Uttley said it meets all five criteria. This was an apartment in the past and they are just reverting it back. Chairman Azarian agreed. This is difficult to rent the third floor as office and it was residential. This is reasonable, and it's in a mixed use area. They have met all five criteria. Mr. McKeon Mr. Smith Mr. Manning Mr. Uttley Chairman Azarian VOTE: 0 MOTION PASSES. PETITION # GRANTED. Mr. Smith stepped down from the board. Mr. McDougall rejoined the board. PETITION # Map 0, Lot James Matthieu hereby requests a Variance from Article, Section :1 and asks that said terms of the Zoning Ordinance be waived to permit limited parking of my work trailer (1ft long, two axles, four wheels) at my home as I am a self employed carpenter in the Residential District. Property Location: 1 Garrison Road Town of Salem, NH Page 1 of

13 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 Abutters: Tardiff, Chase, Parrino, and Corey were all present. Jim Matthieu, 1 Garrison Road, read through the criteria. PUBLIC INTEREST: I have a black, enclosed trailer with no lettering. As far as I know, my neighbors do not object. The trailer is not an eyesore. The trailer is parked on a limited basis only. SPIRIT OF ORDINANCE: I am not creating any noise or mess on my property. The trailer is parked only when it is not left at one of my job sites. The continued limited use of my trailer does not adversely affect the general health, welfare or safety of our neighborhood or community, and does not violate any of the other zoning purposes pursuant to RSA :. There is no proposed commercial use of my property which continues to remain residential. I have no employees and all my work is done away from my home. SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE: I have a substantial amount of money invested in tools, they are much less likely to be stolen from my driveway than if left unattended on a commercial lot somewhere. It adds time to my day if I have to go and get it and drop it off somewhere. In this poor economy, any additional expense would potentially adversely affect me from pursuing my occupation which I need to support my wife and two children. I believe that other similar requests have been granted. DIMINUTION: The trailer is neat, clean, registered and inspected. It has no lettering and is only on my property part time. My neighbors do not object to this request. My home has one of the highest assessed market values in the neighborhood. My trailer is not an eyesore. I have a large lot as compared to some others on my street. HARDSHIP: Special Conditions: Our house lot is somewhat larger than many of the other lots in the neighborhood. It is neat and aesthetically pleasing in appearance. I have lived in my home for 0 years and my trailer has been there for over five years. i) The general public purpose of the ordinance is to prohibit commercial use and I am not proposing a commercial use of my home. I am not violating the health, safety or welfare of the community or neighborhood. ii) Of all the evidence and facts I have already presented. Additionally, the proposed use is extremely limited and necessary to my occupation which is conducted off site. This allows me to continue my work as a self employed carpenter and to support myself and family. Mr. McDougall asked for a description of the trailer. Mr. Matthieu said it's an enclosed cargo trailer. He then gave a photo to the board. He also has signed letters from six of his eight abutters, with no objections. Mr. McKeon asked, it's on 1A. Mr. Matthieu said where it's parked now is the driveway at 1A. He has a corner lot, so he has a driveway at 1, and at 1A. That is where it's least noticeable. Town of Salem, NH Page 1 of

14 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 Mr. McDougall asked, previously when we've approved these, haven't we encouraged or asked the petitioners to put fenced in screening areas? Mr. Zannini said that's a determination that the board makes. There are instances where you've done that, and others where you haven't. It's your call. Mr. McDougall asked Mr. Matthieu, would you have any objections to screening? Mr. Matthieu said he has no objection. There was one granted in the area, with a dump truck and trailer that was required to be screened and also one on School Street, both within the last year. It's more money for him, he can do it, but he would prefer not to have to. Chairman Azarian asked Mr. Zannini, if he had a recreational trailer that was the same size, would that be permitted? Mr. Zannini said those are a permitted use. Chairman Azarian asked if there were any abutters to speak in favor of this petition. Gardner Chase, Cole Street, has been there since 1, and has known Jim since he lived there. He is in favor of having the trailer there. It's a nice trailer and it's closed in. He is in favor of it. Mr. Matthieu is trying to make a living. On another site, it would be subject to break ins. Dorothy Tardiff, Garrison Road, said this is parked next to her property. It's not an eyesore. It's setback and it doesn't block any view. It is a well kept trailer. She is in favor of the variance. Chairman Azarian asked Ms. Tardiff, how often does he take the trailer from the home and bring it back? Ms. Tardiff has lived there two years, and it's probably moved daily or every other day. She doesn't even notice if it's there. The property is kept well. Chairman Azarian asked if there were any abutters to speak in opposition. Celeste Corey gave photos to the board. She has lived at Garrison Road for 0 years. She lives across the street from the petitioner. She is totally opposed to the request for a variance to park the work trailer at his home. There are too many abandoned businesses that we shouldn't be converting residential communities into business areas. Mr. Matthieu was not truthful on his application. He had said that there are currently no zoning violations on his property, but there is a zoning violation for his accessory apartment. Chairman Azarian said, if there is a violation other than what is being asked for today, that's the purview of the Chief Building Official for another time. That's not what we're discussing today. We need to stick to the trailer. Ms. Corey said he didn't obtain permits. He rented the apartment to a family. Chairman Azarian stated again that we're only here for the variance application, which is to permit him to park his trailer there. If there is another violation, then you need to speak with the Chief Building Official at another time. This is not the place for that. Ms. Corey also mentioned that he recently had a dumpster on his property alongside the trailer for over two months. She had to call the town to have him remove it because it was overflowing. If this variance is granted, it will be a hardship on her because it will diminish the value of her property since it runs with the property. She will have to disclose this when she sells her home. This trailer can be seen from everywhere he parks it. The statement that others don't oppose this is not correct. She objects to it. If he is Town of Salem, NH Page 1 of

15 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 granted a variance, he will expand his remodeling business. This is a slippery slope. She understands that other requests have been granted, but these were unique driveways with long driveways and enclosed areas where the trailers can't be seen. Regarding tools being stolen, there was recently criminal mischief at Garrison Road and commercial lots have cameras. She asked the board to deny it. Mr. McDougall asked, was there more than one trailer on this property? Ms. Corey said there is a little one. There was discussion of the pictures. Chairman Azarian said this trailer has been there for five years. Why is it an issue after years? Ms. Corey said he just started parking it there. Then he parked it on Cole Street. She explained that the white trailer in the pictures is at Garrison. Mr. McDougall said he doesn't see any relevance to this property, and Ms. Corey said it looks like an industrial park. It diminishes the value of her property. Anthony Parrino, Garrison Road, is in opposition of the variance. He mentioned the white trailer, which appeared a couple months ago. If you grant this variance, others will be here and this will set a precedent. His property value will go down. If he sells his property, he has to disclose that there is a variance on the street. He wants to keep it a residential area. It's parked across the street for most of the winter. He has nothing against Mr. Matthieu, but he feels that he should go out and rent property for the trailer. Chairman Azarian asked Mr. Zannini, regarding Garrison, what's the issue there? Mr. Zannini said they were parking a landscape trailer, which is not permitted. He was sent a cease and desist order and has since removed it from the property and found a commercial spot. The dumpster is also gone. Mr. Parrino said, regarding Garrison, he has a diesel truck which he starts every morning, and he had a dumpster there. Chairman Azarian said the town has resolved that. Gardner Chase mentioned that Ms. Corey doesn't live across the street, they live on the corner. The dumpster wasn't overflowing. He sees it everyday. When it was filled Mr. Matthieu had it moved. It was never overflowing. Mr. Matthieu has been there for 0 years and Mr. Chase has known him since he was a kid. He thinks if a fence was put up, it would detract from the appearance of the property, and the property looks great. Mr. McDougall asked Mr. Matthieu, how long has the trailer existed at your residence? Mr. Matthieu explained that he started his business on 1//0 and purchased the trailer in June 0. He has owned it since June 0, and it's been on and off his property. It depends on the length of the job. Regarding his neighbor, the reality is, his neighbor's son started a landscaping business, and moved home with his Dad, and the trailer came back with him. But his neighbor decided to move his trailer elsewhere. He moved home and that's why the trailer showed up, it's not because Mr. Matthieu has one. Ms. Corey and the other neighbor had issues. We've been great neighbors, and he hopes we can move forward as great neighbors no matter what the resolution is. Chairman Azarian then closed petition #. Town of Salem, NH Page of

16 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 Mr. Manning has seen some of these granted, and some not granted. He thinks the board should decide if it's yes or no. He has seen dumpsters and trailers and if we do allow it to continue, it will be a fiasco. If you have a business, don't bring it home. They are trying to keep a nice neighborhood. The board should decide, either we're going to grant it or not. So far it's gone both ways. He agrees with the abutter, this is not the place for it. Chairman Azarian explained that there are zoning laws to protect the different zones, but in certain instances, they do overlap for many reasons. One reason is the economy. We have granted relief in the past, and we look at every one on a case by case basis. The abutters' concerns are valid. But Garrison Road is a different issue. This petition is a nice home and smaller trailer. He discussed the decision. The abutter is concerned about her quality of life, but the applicant is concerned about his quality of life and being able to afford to park it somewhere. He has to meet all five criteria. Mr. Manning said it looks like an eyesore, but he agrees that times have changed, and the economy has changed. It's a business, and he is using this spot as a business. If you grant this, you have to grant it for everyone. There was more discussion. Mr. McDougall thinks the ZBA is reasonable with every petitioner. We take everything into consideration on a case by case basis. He doesn't see any violations in the five criteria. The petitioner is trying to make money in a difficult economy. He understands the abutters, but Mr. Matthieu is trying to make money. Chairman Azarian asked Mr. Zannini, how would you control it, to be to this trailer alone? Mr. Zannini said if granted, it would be specific for the trailer you have a photo of which you can initial and date, and if it changes, they have to come back. Mr. Manning has an issue with criteria. He believes it diminishes the value. Mr. McDougall said we have asked for screening in the past. Both Mr. Manning and Mr. Uttley don't think that would help. MOTION by Mr. Manning to deny because it doesn't meet all criteria. SECOND by Mr. Uttley. Mr. Uttley Mr. Manning Mr. McKeon Opposed Mr. McDougall Opposed Chairman Azarian Opposed VOTE: MOTION FAILS. Chairman Azarian said that on a case by case basis, he thinks it meets all five criteria and he explained why. The abutters make a good point. Ms. Corey is worried about the variance running with the land, but in this case, the relief is just for this trailer only. If he sells the trailer, he can't park anything else until he comes back. He doesn't think this specific trailer causes a problem for this neighborhood. At Garrison, he would agree with the abutter. But the other issues aren't the purview of the board tonight. In this instance, he doesn't believe it will diminish the value. Town of Salem, NH Page of

17 1 1 1 Board of Adjustment Minutes July, 1 MOTION by Mr. McKeon to grant with the stipulation that it's for this trailer only and we want it parked at 1A. Mr. McDougall thinks it's ideal where it is now at 1A. He doesn't think it violates any criteria where it's parked right now. SECOND by Mr. McDougall. Mr. McDougall Mr. Uttley Opposed Mr. McKeon Mr. Manning Opposed Chairman Azarian VOTE: MOTION PASSES. PETITION # GRANTED WITH STIPULATIONS. Chairman Azarian said it's a reasonable request. Minutes of the June, 1 meeting MOTION by Mr. McDougall, seconded by Mr. Manning to accept the June, 1 minutes as printed. VOTE ON MOTION: - 0 UNANIMOUS MOTION TO ADJOURN by Mr. Manning. Second by Mr. McKeon. MEMBERS IN FAVOR All were in favor. The meeting adjourned at : p.m. Minutes by: Susan Strugnell Approved: Zoning Board of Adjustment Date: September 0, 1 Town of Salem, NH Page of