[0:01] Okay.

[0:01] Good evening ladies and gentlemen.

[0:03] Welcome to the zoning Board of Adjustment for May 7th, 2026.

[0:06] Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

[0:11] Allegiance, lives of the United States of America,

[0:15] and two three Republic for which it stands.

[0:17] One Nation under God, individual liberty

[0:21] and justice for all.

[0:25] Okay, good evening everybody,

[0:26] and welcome to the zoning board room for the evening.

[0:32] And before we proceed, let's start

[0:35] by introducing our members as we're hosts for the evening.

[0:38] All the way to my far left, please. Anthony Henry Michael

[0:43] Donlin.

[0:44] A Richard Trip, I'd be Lynn Perkins. Acting chair

[0:48] Brent Ow. Jim Dietzel.

[0:51] Jason Ney. And all the way

[0:54] to the far right we have code enforcement.

[0:57] Carrie Owen with us and our clerk is Carrie Owen.

[1:01] She's in the back. Before we proceed,

[1:04] please shut off all cell phones.

[1:05] I, Eileen. I'm sorry, Eileen, what did I say? Carrie

[1:08] Owens?

[1:09] I did, I said, didn't I say your name afterwards?

[1:11] I was, oh, did I really? Oh, there it is.

[1:14] I hit my quota for names tonight.

[1:16] Everybody else is in trouble.

[1:19] Just other announcements,

[1:21] please shut off all your cell phones, iPhones,

[1:24] any electronic gadgets

[1:26] that could create distractions to the proceedings.

[1:28] These scheduled are scheduled to terminate at 10:00 PM

[1:32] and they are audio video recorded

[1:35] and it seems like I'm forgetting another thing there, but

[1:40] nonetheless, we can proceed.

[1:44] Case of an emergency.

[1:46] Oh yes. Thank you very much Mr. Dahlin. Case of emergency.

[1:49] That's the most important thing is getting

[1:50] everybody out of the building.

[1:52] So don't use the elevator and please wait at the stairs

[1:54] and someone will assist you and get you out of the building.

[1:57] So anyway, moving forward.

[2:01] First case up is

[2:04] case number 26 dash 1 0 5.

[2:10] As we have a lot of maneuvering in seats.

[2:14] Bear with me as I put some other things together

[2:21] to fill in for those who aren't with us right now.

[2:25] Case number 26 dash 1 0 5 is a motion

[2:28] for re-hearing tabled from April 2nd, 2026.

[2:32] We have Daniel and Jennifer Lan re

[2:37] requesting through their son

[2:41] No motion for rehearing.

[2:43] Mr. Trip, would you like to open with

[2:45] that on some information?

[2:46] Yes, I would. Okay.

[2:49] Mr. Phelan's, motion for rehearing

[2:54] pursuant to RSA 6 77 2,

[2:58] that's basically three points.

[3:02] The first point is Mr.

[3:06] Lan says the board authorized a second

[3:08] home business at the property.

[3:12] I took the time to took contact

[3:17] the code enforcement head to find out

[3:23] how many special exceptions Mr.

[3:28] Marian has, and she told me she had none,

[3:33] which means that the

[3:38] special exception that we

[3:42] authorized his is first

[3:43] and only, so that bullet is rebutted.

[4:06] The second point is that

[4:11] the firearm visit does not fall

[4:14] within any of the categories.

[4:15] The home business permitted

[4:20] the, this

[4:25] is the odd part about this whole discussion is that

[4:29] he only wanted to be permitted to have a business,

[4:32] but he was not going to actually run a business.

[4:36] And so I consider

[4:42] that will it rebutted to,

[4:47] It was pertaining to the FFL itself, correct?

[4:50] Yes. Okay, thank you.

[4:54] The final bullet was that

[4:58] the board exceeded its jurisdiction in attempting

[5:01] to regulate firearm discharge.

[5:03] Well, there's a, one of the things

[5:07] that the board does a lot is we set conditions

[5:11] that the applicant must follow in order to

[5:19] get his variance or or special exception approved.

[5:23] And Mr. Lan, well he is a lawyer, obviously,

[5:28] does not practice law in

[5:32] the great state of New Hampshire.

[5:36] I will read the,

[5:43] a zoning board of adjustment has the ability

[5:45] to attach conditions to any relief

[5:48] that is within the jurisdiction, which means that we,

[5:52] as a matter of practice set conditions that the

[5:56] applicant must comply with in order

[6:00] to have the variance and the basis for our being able

[6:05] to set conditions is

[6:10] Michael J. Robinson versus, oops, excuse me,

[6:20] Town of Hudson.

[6:22] The, the only condition is that the, the Condit, the

[6:28] conditions must be real relatable, reason, reasonable

[6:31] and relate to the spirit of the ordinance in question

[6:34] and the actual use of the land.

[6:36] So in, in addition to

[6:41] being able to, I don't know how many conditions we had on

[6:45] that, but I think there were several, one of which was

[6:48] that he was not going to

[6:51] fire any weapons at his house.

[6:56] Mr. LAN's con contention was that, that

[7:02] we cannot require Mr.

[7:06] Marin to comply with that.

[7:11] And the thing is, he has

[7:15] to comply if he wants to get approval

[7:17] of his special exception, if he decides that he wasn't,

[7:21] doesn't want to comply with the, the requirement

[7:25] that he not fire weapons

[7:30] at his house, then he won't get a special exception.

[7:34] So three contentions or,

[7:40] and I believe we have valid reasons

[7:43] for enforcing those. Very good. So,

[7:47] And Mr.

[7:48] Tripp, thank you. Did you find any other information that,

[7:52] that would justify rehearing in the failing application?

[7:57] No. Okay. Very good.

[7:59] Just for the record, I've appointed Mr.

[8:02] Ani to this case and Mr. Donlin as well. Mr.

[8:06] Donlin, do you find any new information in

[8:09] this beyond what Mr.

[8:10] Tripp has specified worth

[8:13] that would suggest we should rehear this case

[8:16] Beyond what Mr.

[8:17] Tripp stated? No, sir.

[8:19] Okay. Anything else there that's important to you?

[8:22] No, sir. Okay. Mr.

[8:25] Ani, anything that would stand out for you at this time

[8:29] regarding this case to be reheard?

[8:32] No, I think Mr. Tripp explained it perfectly. Thank

[8:34] You.

[8:35] Very good. Mr. Dietzel, any thoughts?

[8:38] Y yeah, I'm gonna differ from Mr.

[8:41] Trip on a, on a couple of matters here

[8:44] on 0.1 about whether there are

[8:48] two home businesses operating.

[8:52] That was one I really wrestled with

[8:53] and I tried to find a legal definition

[8:55] or case law that actually defines what a home business is.

[9:02] We have granted in the past an except special exemption, say

[9:06] for a hairdresser where the woman actually wanted

[9:09] to set up chairs in her home

[9:13] and do hairstyling there

[9:16] and run the business out of her home.

[9:21] She could have easily,

[9:23] and at the time she did, she was moving the business,

[9:25] have a business downtown

[9:28] and just do administrative duties in an office in her home.

[9:33] Is that a home business?

[9:36] Likewise, is

[9:39] what this applicant proposing is

[9:42] that a home business when he says

[9:44] that he's not gonna engage in sales, whether

[9:47] basically he's doing it just to get a license.

[9:53] And if the answer is yes, then I think

[9:58] whether or not the special exemption is on the construction

[10:01] business or not, I think the construction business is more

[10:04] of a home business than what he's proposing

[10:07] with the gun business.

[10:09] So that would be two home businesses.

[10:13] I don't see why it can be

[10:16] considered not a home business just

[10:18] because he didn't get a special exemption

[10:21] that he's required to.

[10:24] So I think that either there are two home businesses

[10:29] on the property or there are no home

[10:33] businesses on the property.

[10:34] If there are no home businesses on the property,

[10:37] why are we giving him a special exemption other than

[10:40] to allow him to get the gun permit?

[10:44] The gun permit is really not

[10:47] a con a zoning concern per se.

[10:50] So that's, that's where I, I wrestle with, with that,

[10:55] whether or not that's an error on the part of the board

[11:00] or a matter of my opinion.

[11:01] Differing. Well, that's debatable too.

[11:04] I'm gonna say that we're, we made that board made an error

[11:08] and that there would be two

[11:11] businesses operating on that property. Second,

[11:15] So, so Mr.

[11:17] Okay. Dietzel,

[11:18] I just wondered if you found anything here worthwhile to,

[11:22] that has been presented to rehear this case,

[11:26] if you can modify that a little bit or if you

[11:28] See some points.

[11:29] Yes. I, I found that this, this memo presenting the, the,

[11:34] the five or the three objections in addition,

[11:43] the, the, the more of the explanation

[11:48] and my research, I,

[11:52] that's what changed my mind.

[11:54] I believe that his, his arguments are convincing that,

[11:57] that we made an erroneous determination.

[12:00] I'm gonna go down a different shoot here, Ms.

[12:02] Oan, how do you typically establish a home use business?

[12:06] So that's a, it's,

[12:11] that's a great question.

[12:13] It is a, it is a fine line definition.

[12:17] So registering, simply registering a home business at a,

[12:20] at a, at a residence without actually having operations,

[12:24] whether it's meeting with clients at that residence

[12:28] or conducting business deals, that is a, you know,

[12:32] that is a legitimate business.

[12:34] If you're working from home and you have a home office

[12:37] and you're set up to be able to work remotely,

[12:39] that's not necessarily a home business.

[12:41] If you're parking a work vehicle,

[12:44] 'cause you're using it as transportation to

[12:46] and from your residence to your place of business,

[12:50] then I don't classify that as a home business.

[12:54] It's more of a parking space

[12:56] and I, it it, if we start seeing

[13:02] commercial vehicles or lettered vehicles on a property,

[13:05] one vehicle, okay, if it starts expanding beyond that,

[13:08] then we start questioning what that operation may be.

[13:12] Often whether or not you have clients coming in

[13:14] and out of the property often applies to like dental

[13:19] or hairdressers or,

[13:22] or clergymen or attorneys.

[13:25] And understanding in that light that you've sculpted

[13:28] that if it's somebody with that's just commuting and,

[13:31] and using it in

[13:32] and out, they're not processing,

[13:34] that's typically not someplace that you categorize as a,

[13:37] as a home used business, right?

[13:39] That's correct in this regard

[13:41] and this board going in a little deeper into the weeds than

[13:44] we normally do in these cases,

[13:47] but often what we also find is that

[13:53] that shipping and receiving

[13:56] and whatnot can be a, a, a tip off.

[13:58] The last point for me is that the applicant indicates

[14:03] that he's receiving his mail outside of the state

[14:05] and outside of that address.

[14:07] So that's where I rebut there in this case.

[14:12] We have a motion to read.

[14:13] Anybody have any last comments before we move forward? Ms.

[14:17] Dietzel? You all satisfied?

[14:18] Well, the last point is whether

[14:22] or not it meets the definition of an allowed

[14:27] special exemption use

[14:28] and I just don't see where

[14:33] under the enumerated allowable businesses

[14:36] where firearm sales falls.

[14:40] It's not a clergy, it's not a doctor's office, it's not it,

[14:45] I don't see where it falls in those categories.

[14:49] Okay. Y'all set? I I I guess yeah,

[14:55] I mean if you have any more you wanna say go ahead, but I

[14:57] Well, I, I, I'll, I do rebut a couple of the,

[15:01] I don't believe that we denied the council his ability

[15:06] to represent his client.

[15:07] In fact, you, Mr. Chair questioned him about his

[15:12] authority to represent, he satisfied your question.

[15:15] You allowed him to represent the applicants remotely.

[15:20] So we certainly are allowing him

[15:22] to practice before this board.

[15:23] So I I rebut that and as far as he's asserting that

[15:30] we're suggesting that the applicant could

[15:33] otherwise discharge firearms, I I don't see,

[15:39] I don't read the ruling that way, so I'm, I'm, I wouldn't,

[15:43] I would refute that assertion

[15:48] we're allowed as Mr.

[15:49] Chip put out to put on,

[15:51] put reasonable restrictions on the operation

[15:53] of the property in order to minimize well noise,

[15:57] safety, odors, pollution and so forth.

[16:01] So I think our restriction is, is fine.

[16:03] So it's those two points, having two,

[16:05] two home businesses on one property

[16:07] and the fact that it doesn't meet the definition

[16:10] of a approved use.

[16:13] Approved use. Okay. Thank

[16:14] You Mr.

[16:15] Chairman. You good now? Yes. Thank you.

[16:16] All right, very good. Thank you very much.

[16:19] That being said, we've heard from all five

[16:21] members deciding on this.

[16:23] With that we can take a motion.

[16:26] We don't need to go into deliberation,

[16:28] but I could take a motion to

[16:32] move forward for a vote on this.

[16:35] Okay, Ms. Chair, I, I I move that

[16:39] we approve the for a vote. The

[16:43] What?

[16:44] We make a motion for a vote.

[16:46] Oh, alright. What is the motion?

[16:49] Well, we need to read the motion, so, okay.

[16:52] In understanding that when we do special request

[16:55] for rehearing, it breaks us out

[16:57] and we've already deliberated out loud here.

[17:00] So if you'd like Mr.

[17:02] Trip, would you like to read the motion?

[17:04] Aye, fair enough. I make a motion on case number 26 dash

[17:08] 1 0 5 for Daniel

[17:09] and Jennifer Phelan to grant the request for rehearing

[17:12] for the January 19th, 2026 decision by the town

[17:16] of Jerry Zoning Board of Adjustment granting the request

[17:19] for a variance to permit a type

[17:21] oh one federal firearms license at the residence

[17:25] of 38 Ves Drive

[17:28] That motion's made by Mr. Trip. I have a second,

[17:31] Second.

[17:32] Mr. Donlin has a second on that.

[17:35] Mr. Chair, may I Yes, you may

[17:37] Ask a question just

[17:39] 'cause this one's a little bit different than normal.

[17:42] Yep. So a, a no vote for this would be to deny the request

[17:47] for hearing and a yes vote would be

[17:49] that you would request a rehearing,

[17:51] Correct?

[17:52] That is correct. Yep. Yes.

[17:55] Again, yes means you motion for approve for a rehearing

[18:00] and no means you deny that.

[18:03] All right, Mr. Donlin, you wanna lead forward?

[18:05] I vote no. Mr. Dietzel,

[18:09] I'm gonna vote yes because not

[18:12] because of the two businesses on the property,

[18:15] because I believe that was in a, a matter of opinion

[18:18] of this board and I don't, I can't say conclusively

[18:21] that that would be an error.

[18:22] However, I am gonna vote yes

[18:25] because I believe this board made an error in its

[18:28] interpretation of allowed uses Permi permissible uses

[18:32] as a special exception.

[18:33] Very good. Thank you. Mr. Trip?

[18:39] I'm gonna vote no because I believe that the three reasons

[18:44] that Attorney Lan presented to

[18:49] justify having a re-hearing were rebutted by the board

[18:53] and that there's,

[18:55] and subsequently there's no reason to have a re-hearing.

[18:58] Very good. Mr. Dani? I vote no o

[19:04] For reason, specified for

[19:06] Reason specified that I think we,

[19:11] I think that we disputed all those,

[19:16] all about all of his comments.

[19:17] Okay.

[19:22] Chair votes No on that as well.

[19:23] Making a four to one decision to deny

[19:27] that the rehearing request from the LAN's son,

[19:31] and I think Mr.

[19:34] Dietzel, you made a a point there to emphasized a point,

[19:37] which was that we established that he could speak

[19:40] as their son even though he didn't have certification to

[19:45] or authorization to do that.

[19:47] But we gave him his, his time to speak.

[19:49] So at any rate, I concur with the comments that Mr.

[19:53] Trip laid out as well as I rebutted Mr.

[19:57] Diet's comments regarding whether

[19:59] or not there was already an established use

[20:02] as a business going on there.

[20:04] And so the debate becomes the, the authorized use

[20:08] that the board has granted and has granted

[20:11] likewise in the past.

[20:12] So, at any rate, Mr. Chairman Yes sir.

[20:17] I don't believe that Attorney Phelan's

[20:21] discussion on whether he has permission to

[20:26] practice law in New Hampshire has any bearing

[20:30] on our decision tonight.

[20:32] I I agree. I I would concur. You know, did I

[20:35] Get that from you Mr. Donlin?

[20:36] I agree as well. Okay,

[20:38] Very good.

[20:40] Thank you Mr. Tripp for pointing that out

[20:42] and also for your support, Mr.

[20:44] Donlin. So at any rate, we have that decision

[20:47] and just want to go through finding a fact real quick

[20:50] for this, this,

[20:54] this application was for Mr.

[20:59] Marion and at, was it 37?

[21:04] Reva? 38? 38. At 38 DVAs Drive.

[21:09] And we, the board found that the,

[21:15] as a majority found

[21:17] that the applicant was not already doing an existing

[21:21] business and,

[21:27] and that he was just looking

[21:31] for a location to establish for contact

[21:36] and not for sales as the conditions that the board put on.

[21:39] Anybody else have any rebuttals there?

[21:42] I would like to point out that

[21:47] whether he is running another business

[21:53] isn't really pertinent to the finding of facts.

[21:57] I think what is pertinent is

[21:59] that the zoning board has not granted him

[22:03] a previous special exception to have a home business.

[22:07] Okay. You know, and since that's the case,

[22:12] there can be no double

[22:17] home business permitted by the zoning board.

[22:21] You know, the one that we granted

[22:26] at the previous hearing is the only home business that

[22:31] is permitted at 38 vets

[22:37] At 38?

[22:38] Yep. Okay.

[22:40] Does that mean you wanna retract, you'd like

[22:43] to retract the comment I made earlier

[22:47] on the second business?

[22:49] The comment to that or not?

[22:52] Well that's, I, I would say yes. Okay.

[22:56] You know, 'cause the other thing I did is I went to the

[23:00] Department of Secretary of State's

[23:04] business website.

[23:05] Yep. And Mr.

[23:07] Marion does not have a business registered there either, so.

[23:12] Alright, so it sounds like he's just parking

[23:15] a vehicle or equipment.

[23:16] Yes. Very good. Alright. Noted.

[23:19] We will strike, we'll, I'll withdraw the comment on the,

[23:23] on the double business

[23:24] and we can, we'll stick with your comments Mr.

[23:28] Trip. Mr. Donlin, you all set there?

[23:30] Anything you want to add or change?

[23:32] I'm good Mr. Chair. Mr. Dietl?

[23:34] All set, Mr. Chair? Thank you Mr. Ghani. Sounds good.

[23:38] Thank you. Very good. We'll, con con we will conclude

[23:42] that case is completed and we're all set.

[23:47] All right. Next case up. I would ask Mr.

[23:51] Donald and Msca to sit,

[23:54] we have 24 dash one 15, this is a request

[23:58] for extension

[24:04] 24 dash one 15 is the parcel

[24:09] down at the bottom of the hill here at 19 Elm Street.

[24:15] The board heard,

[24:20] was it two years ago now?

[24:22] Yeah, June the 24th.

[24:24] Okay. Anyway, there's,

[24:29] apparently there's extension extenuating circumstances

[24:33] regarding testing of the soil.

[24:37] This is a town owned property

[24:39] and the request was to put multi-family housing there

[24:46] and, and they are looking for an extension until all those

[24:51] that testing and all the other analysis can be done.

[24:57] Mr. Donlin, any thoughts here?

[25:02] It's not completely unheard of in a project of this scope

[25:06] to meet delays, especially with

[25:10] environmental testing.

[25:13] And, and I believe there's mitigation on this property

[25:17] if memory serves as well.

[25:19] So not surprising that it's delayed, it's,

[25:23] it's not unprecedented for us to meet the extension either.

[25:27] Okay. Mr. Trip?

[25:30] I agree. If, if the environmental testing

[25:33] or mitigation hasn't been completed,

[25:38] then there's no way that they could comply with

[25:43] building the, what is it,

[25:46] 26 unit multifamily workforce housing.

[25:51] Oh, Mr. Sca, I know you're fairly new to this process.

[25:56] Any thoughts from you?

[25:58] No, that I agree as well.

[26:01] I would like to see everything be accomplished, so

[26:04] therefore I believe that this would be justifiable.

[26:08] Very good. Yeah.

[26:11] This, this property is similar to the Abbott Court.

[26:15] It's a property that the town has taken over

[26:18] and needs to get back on its tax rolls.

[26:21] It's a complicated lot and,

[26:27] and so the extension again, is warranted just

[26:30] to the complexities of trying

[26:31] to find a use for this property.

[26:35] Similarly, just the hardship of it alone to find, try

[26:39] and find a proper use for it is, is a challenge.

[26:43] So in this

[26:45] regard, Mr.

[26:49] Dietzel, would you like to read the motion on this?

[26:53] Well, yeah. Would you not like

[26:57] Well, I, I just wanted to say that I concur

[26:59] with the other people and Okay.

[27:02] I would've actually have been surprised if they had gotten

[27:04] it completed in two years.

[27:06] So I'm, I'm for the extension and therefore

[27:11] Okay.

[27:12] Thank you.

[27:14] I make a motion on case number 24 dash one 15 for the town

[27:18] of DER to grant the request for extension.

[27:22] That concludes the reading of the motion.

[27:23] May I have a second please?

[27:26] I'll second the motion. Mr. Lusca has a second,

[27:29] Mr. Chair.

[27:30] Mr. Donlin, I believe there's multiple,

[27:37] multiple variances associated with this case.

[27:39] Should we put it in the motion

[27:41] that we're voting on all four?

[27:46] Yes. Good point.

[27:48] Let's, let's add that Mr.

[27:53] Dietzel would, can you amend that on the fly?

[27:56] Yes. That it's applying to

[28:02] You have the cover sheet from the, the administration here.

[28:06] Mr. Dietzel? Mr. Dietzel? Mr. Dietzel sir.

[28:11] Thank you. Thank you Mr, let's go.

[28:18] So if you would cite those articles

[28:20] that we gave the extensions

[28:22] To.

[28:23] Oh, okay. I'll make a motion on the case

[28:27] number 24 dash one 15 for the town of Derry

[28:30] to grant the request for extension parcel ID number

[28:35] 2 9 1 2 8 zone MHR two is presented

[28:39] with the following conditions

[28:41] and this variance will grant relief as follows.

[28:45] Article three, section 1 65 dash one zero Article

[28:50] six and sections 1 65 dash 45

[28:56] B2 little D article

[29:00] six sections 1 65 dash 45 B

[29:06] two little a article

[29:10] six sections 1 65 dash 45

[29:14] B2 E

[29:16] and article nine sections 1 65 dash 73.

[29:22] And the variance is subject

[29:24] to the following conditions obtaining all state

[29:27] and town permits and inspections subject

[29:30] to the technical review committee approval

[29:32] and subject to planning board approval.

[29:36] That concludes the reading

[29:37] of the motion. May I have a second please?

[29:40] I'll Second that.

[29:41] Mr. Dani has the, sorry Mr. SCA has the thanks.

[29:46] Second on that. Thank you.

[29:47] And thank you for the amendment

[29:49] and the attention to that Mr.

[29:51] Donlin. That's seconded.

[29:53] Let me do the finding of fact real quick.

[29:56] This parcel is at, this

[30:01] parcel is at 19 Elm Street in Derry.

[30:04] This parcel is owned by the town of Derry.

[30:07] This was previously approved for construction

[30:11] of multi-family par housing

[30:15] and the property has had environmental

[30:19] testing done to make sure that it's properly,

[30:23] properly remedied for that residential purpose.

[30:28] Are there any amendments to the finding of fact

[30:32] seeing no gestures there?

[30:34] All in favor of moving the motion for a votes Say aye. Aye.

[30:38] Aye. Any opposed? All right, Mr. Sca?

[30:42] I vote yes. Okay. Mr. Donlin?

[30:46] Yes. Mr. Tripp?

[30:48] Yes. Mr.

[30:51] Dietzel? Dietzel.

[30:54] I got it. Dietzel, I'm looking for his name on the sheet.

[30:56] I thought they took it off. Mr. Dietzel? Yes.

[30:59] Alright, very good.

[31:01] And the chair will vote yes as well, making it unanimous

[31:04] by a vote of five to zero.

[31:06] Thank you.

[31:18] Next case up is case number

[31:21] 24 dash 1 0 9.

[31:25] Mr.

[31:29] Get this up. Mr. Dani, would you sit on this for us?

[31:34] Yes sir. And Mr. Henry,

[31:39] would you sit on this for us?

[31:41] Yes. Mr. Chair. Very good.

[31:42] Mr. Henry, you've seen

[31:43] how the two processes before this went along.

[31:46] You comfortable with that?

[31:48] Yes, I am. Thank you. Okay.

[31:57] This, this request is 24 dash 1 0 9 submitted

[32:02] by promised land survey on behalf

[32:05] of Comos Beach Redevelopment LLC.

[32:08] It's at 74 Beaver Lake Ave.

[32:17] Ms. Owen, can you help us with where this case is at? Yes.

[32:26] I don't know if it's in planning or what the status is.

[32:30] Sure. So we actually had our third TRC meeting on

[32:33] April 10th, 2026.

[32:35] And this project had kind of evolved over time

[32:37] with conservation with the wetlands.

[32:42] So they have a west wetlands restoration plan, a permit

[32:45] by notification as well with a wetland.

[32:50] And it's gone through three rounds of TRC most recently,

[32:53] like I mentioned, April 10th.

[32:56] And they are working towards planning board

[32:59] submission after this evening.

[33:03] And there's two sections that the variance was granted on.

[33:06] This was granted May 16th, 2024.

[33:10] It was to article three, section 1 65 dash nine

[33:14] and article six, section 1 65 dash 46

[33:20] C2 to allow the property to be subdivided into two lots.

[33:25] One with frontage on a private road,

[33:27] which is Jenny Dickey way.

[33:30] It is subject to technical review committee approval

[33:35] as well as planning board approval

[33:39] and state shoreland permits

[33:42] and municipal waiver of liability is also required

[33:45] to be recorded with the deed.

[33:48] So this is an honest effort

[33:49] to continue on working with this.

[33:51] Is that what I'm seeing here? Correct.

[33:54] And per statute we can grant the

[33:55] extension to two years, correct?

[33:58] Correct. All right, very good.

[34:01] Anybody have any comments on that Mr. Trip?

[34:07] No. Okay. This is

[34:08] how things happen when you're on a late front.

[34:11] Alright, very good. And we have DES to contend with.

[34:14] Alright, Mr. Ani, any thoughts?

[34:18] I agree with Mr. Trip.

[34:20] Oh, when you're dealing with wetlands

[34:21] and many hands in the pot,

[34:23] sometimes it does takes a little bit longer.

[34:26] Very good. Mr. Henry, I have nothing further to add.

[34:30] Thank you. Very good. And did I,

[34:33] who did I forget? Mr. Dietzel?

[34:36] Yeah, I agree with what's been said.

[34:38] They're moving the, moving it forward.

[34:42] I don't see a problem.

[34:48] Okay. Very good. All right.

[34:51] I have no f nothing further. Mr.

[34:54] Dietzel, would you like to read the motion?

[34:58] I make a motion on case 24 dash zero nine for the town

[35:02] of Derry to grant the request for extension on parcel ID

[35:07] 5 1 0 8 4 zoned MDR has presented

[35:11] with the following conditions, one subject

[35:13] to obtaining Allstate and town permits and inspections.

[35:17] Two. Technical review committee review.

[35:21] Three, planning, view board committee review

[35:25] and seven municipal waiver of liability.

[35:29] That concludes the reading

[35:30] of this motion. May I have a second please?

[35:32] Second, Would we also add the,

[35:37] the two variances like we did with the other

[35:39] One?

[35:40] Oh, I didn't know there were two

[35:41] If you would like to amend that.

[35:43] Mr. May I also make a quick comment? I apologize.

[35:46] I I would like to refute an i a comment

[35:49] that I made no further.

[35:51] TRC is required,

[35:52] but planning board approval is required as well

[35:56] as the state shoreland permit

[35:58] and the municipal waiver of liability.

[36:01] Very good. So on on the motion, just

[36:04] as a learning lesson here, we wanna just stick

[36:06] to what's on the motion, Mr.

[36:08] Dietzel. Okay. Thank.

[36:09] And, and then we do want to amend the, the variance articles

[36:14] that, that are part of it,

[36:16] but the other developments that

[36:20] code enforcement has recommended will add to our finding

[36:23] of fact and leave off the motion

[36:26] Very well then.

[36:27] Thank you.

[36:29] Shoot for it again. So we, we have just one

[36:34] variance that

[36:35] Were, we have two variances.

[36:37] Two variances so I can, I'll recite the sections.

[36:40] Article three, section 1 65 dash nine

[36:45] and article six,

[36:46] section 1 65 dash 46 C two,

[36:53] Article six or article five, article

[36:56] Six.

[36:57] I have six. I have the

[37:01] original motion right here.

[37:06] I make the motion on case number 24 dash 1 0 9

[37:10] for the town of Derry to grant the request

[37:11] for extension parcel ID 510 84 zoned

[37:17] MDR as presented with the following conditions subject

[37:21] to obtaining all state and town permits and inspections.

[37:26] And this is for

[37:31] variance grant grants relief in the terms of article

[37:37] Article three, section 1 65 dash nine

[37:41] and article six, section 1 16 5 dash four six C

[37:47] two of the Tom Dairy zoning ordinance.

[37:51] That concludes the reading of the motion.

[37:53] Very good, thank You. Second,

[37:55] I'll second Who?

[37:57] Who had the second? Oh Mr. Dani? Yes. Okay. Good enough.

[38:01] Didn't recognize the, the voice. Okay.

[38:03] Yep that puts that motion on the floor finding

[38:08] of fact this parcel is at, is asking

[38:12] for an extension.

[38:14] It is in the MDR zone.

[38:17] It has currently been through technical review committee

[38:21] dealing with conservation

[38:24] and issues

[38:28] and still has to go through planning.

[38:32] But progress has been made on the parcel, moving it,

[38:37] advancing it towards approval.

[38:40] Any other amendments to finding a fact,

[38:43] seeing no gestures there.

[38:46] This is for two years, right?

[38:47] This is for two years. Yep.

[38:52] Seeing no amendments

[38:53] or gestures there all in favor of moving this for a votes.

[38:57] Say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Mr. Dani? Yes. Mr. Henry?

[39:02] Yes. Mr. Tripp? Yes. Mr. Dietzel? Yes.

[39:06] And the chair will make it unanimous. Five to zero.

[39:08] So that has been approved.

[39:31] Oh my god. Okay,

[39:37] Next case up is case number 26 dash 1 0 9

[39:45] and that is presented by Edward

[39:48] and Herbert Associations on behalf of Craig

[39:52] and Snow Bono.

[40:02] Oops. How are you tonight? Very

[40:04] Well. Good.

[40:06] Alright, here to identify yourselves

[40:09] For the record.

[40:10] My name is Shane Jen and I'm employed with Herb Associates

[40:12] and with me this evening I have Craig Bono

[40:14] who is the property owner

[40:31] Folks, a lot of moving pieces tonight.

[40:35] Yeah. And we're missing our secretary.

[40:37] Yes, we're missing our secretary

[40:39] So That too.

[40:42] All right. I think you recall Mr.

[40:45] Gendron being here with us

[40:46] before, we just ask you to read your application

[40:49] for the record and then we'll bounce questions

[40:52] off of you and so on and

[40:53] So forth.

[40:54] Sounds good. Okay. Okay.

[40:57] Variance is not contrary to public interest

[40:59] because it's an area of Central street

[41:01] that is predominantly residential multifamily use.

[41:04] Therefore the proposed use would be in keeping with the area

[41:07] construction of town homes is an appropriate for the area

[41:11] and the in increase front setback is appropriate

[41:14] for this residential use.

[41:16] Surrounding lots have pure purely residential uses and

[41:18] therefore a variance on the commercial requirement

[41:20] for this lot is appropriate.

[41:21] The applicant has been working closely

[41:23] with town planning engineering

[41:24] and DPW departments to design a desirable project

[41:27] that provides the most benefit to this neighborhood.

[41:30] Two, the spirit of the ordinance is observed

[41:32] because the ordinance allows

[41:34] for residential usage on the upper floors

[41:36] and the residential usage is in keeping with the area.

[41:39] None of the surrounding lots will be negatively impacted

[41:42] by the increase of the front setback and the rear

[41:44] and side setbacks will be met.

[41:46] There'll be no impact to any of the floodplain

[41:49] three substantial justices done.

[41:52] The use being proposed would allow the property owner

[41:54] reasonable use of the property consistent

[41:56] with other properties in the area increasing the front

[41:58] setback, better separation from surrounding properties.

[42:02] Four. The values of surrounding

[42:04] properties are not diminished.

[42:05] The area would be cleared of a dangerous unsightly,

[42:08] fire damaged building and new construction of town homes.

[42:11] Residential units would be in keeping with the area

[42:13] and would raise the value on the subject property in turn.

[42:17] Raising surrounding property values.

[42:19] The applicant has been working closely

[42:21] with town planning engineering

[42:22] and DVW departments to design a desirable project

[42:25] that provides the most benefit to this neighborhood.

[42:29] Five. No fair and substantial relationship exists

[42:31] between the general purpose and a specific

[42:34] application to this property.

[42:35] Because I'm trying to conform

[42:37] to the zoning would be difficult

[42:38] as the lock lot is unique in shape and configuration

[42:41] and does not make it conducive for commercial use.

[42:43] It is surrounded by residential properties

[42:45] and makes this proposal in keeping

[42:47] with the neighborhood limited area for parking

[42:50] for the residential use with its small area

[42:53] of garages is ideal for this lot in five

[42:58] i, the property is located on a lot that's surrounded

[43:01] by multi-family residential units which suits this proposal.

[43:04] The proposal plan would allow revitalization of the area,

[43:08] the proposal will not impact wetlands or floodplain

[43:10] and will meet all the rear and side setbacks.

[43:13] It will not pose any public health or safety

[43:15] and will meet all other building codes.

[43:19] Okay. So hold on just a second there. Mr. Sca and Mr.

[43:23] Donlin, would you sit on this case please? Yes sir. Yes.

[43:27] Yes. Okay, thank you. Alright, so

[43:32] you've been here before,

[43:34] had a bigger approval. Did you go through planning?

[43:37] We have been through A TRC, we been through several

[43:42] iterations of the plan with TDPW,

[43:47] with planning, we've gone back

[43:49] and forth with four different proposals as far as

[43:52] where the building's gonna be placed, trying

[43:54] to meet the zone and make this lot work.

[43:56] And what we're finding is that we're trying

[43:57] to put a square peg in a round hole.

[44:01] That's why you're here. We basically met most recently

[44:05] on March 3rd with planning staff, DPW Mark LaRue,

[44:09] your town engineer and the building department.

[44:13] And Mr. LaRue was the one that pushed us really to come in

[44:17] and asked to push the buildings back.

[44:19] What happens with this lot is

[44:21] that we only have about 68 feet

[44:22] of frontage on Central Street.

[44:24] It's very narrow because

[44:26] of the building setback requirements.

[44:28] In this new zone, we're supposed

[44:29] to be eight feet from the street or frontline.

[44:32] We're allowed to be five feet off the side property line.

[44:35] Elizabeth Du felt that we were crowding some

[44:38] of the existing pre-existing non-conforming uses,

[44:41] which are basically tenant houses.

[44:43] There's some larger homes that have multiple units in them.

[44:47] And so they basically asked us, look, what could you do?

[44:50] Could you go back to zoning board, see what kind

[44:52] of relief you could get.

[44:54] What we felt was

[44:55] that if we're gonna push the building back 130 feet

[44:58] and we're gonna create, you know,

[45:00] residential town home style units,

[45:01] it really doesn't make sense

[45:02] to have a commercial component to it.

[45:04] It's just, it's too far off the road.

[45:06] There's no other commercial

[45:08] that would be in, in keeping with that.

[45:11] It just didn't make sense for the property.

[45:13] We presented this to the staff, they agreed,

[45:15] they thought this was the best use of the property.

[45:17] They thought this was the best layout

[45:19] that my office had proposed as far

[45:21] as this property is concerned and,

[45:23] and that's why we're here this evening.

[45:26] I think with the being able to push the building back into,

[45:30] into the bigger area of the lot, we're able

[45:32] to have better circulation.

[45:33] We're able to be a little bit

[45:34] more creative with the drainage.

[45:36] The lot is very, very flat

[45:37] and getting water to move from one side of that parking area

[45:40] to the other is a struggle.

[45:43] And I just think that the layout we have, we agree

[45:46] with the town staff, we think that this is a good layout

[45:48] and that's why we're here before you.

[45:50] So it looks like you're reducing the impact from

[45:53] everything I can see here.

[45:54] Yeah, so originally I think we were here back in February

[45:57] of 2025 and we had requested, at

[45:59] that time we were doing 11 units.

[46:02] We were down to the five units,

[46:04] but they would be purely residential.

[46:07] Okay. Well in case I've taken you off your script, I yield

[46:11] to you and go ahead and finish your presentation

[46:13] and the board can ask you questions.

[46:16] Yeah, I I think that, you know, I've,

[46:18] ive gone over pretty much everything, you know,

[46:20] between the five criteria.

[46:22] We're looking at better circulation of traffic.

[46:24] We're not having any turning movements going on within the

[46:27] driveway access area.

[46:29] By pushing that building back, we have more flexibility

[46:32] with the drainage and utilities.

[46:33] We're able to provide adequate snow storage, adequate area

[46:37] for the dumpster and obviously clean up a site that's kind

[46:41] of an eyesore that Mr.

[46:44] Bono would like to get, you know, cleaned up and,

[46:46] and get going on his project.

[46:48] And I think that what we're proposing this evening is

[46:50] something that town staff's gonna get behind

[46:52] and that we can move this forward and and,

[46:55] and come to some resolution on this property.

[46:57] If there's any questions, I'm happy to answer them

[47:00] Board open to the board for questions.

[47:04] Alright. It appears you're asking for

[47:13] to be allowed to have residential on

[47:14] the ground floor. Is that correct?

[47:16] Yes. We're actually asking

[47:17] for all residential in this situation.

[47:20] Yeah. So part of the requirement would be there'd be a

[47:22] commercial component to this project.

[47:24] We're asking there to be no

[47:26] commercial component to this project.

[47:27] It'd be purely residential.

[47:29] Previously, back in February, 2025, we asked to allow not

[47:33] to have commercial on the ground floor

[47:35] because we were doing the town home style

[47:37] units with the garages.

[47:38] That's still the proposal,

[47:39] but in this case this evening we're asking

[47:41] for no commercial component to it.

[47:43] Right. And the other variance you're asking for is that

[47:50] the front yard depth is gonna be what, zero,

[47:54] About 130 feet where it's required

[47:57] to be eight feet from the street line.

[47:59] Yeah. And in this case, because of the shape of that lot

[48:02] and it being so narrow, I think it just makes more sense

[48:05] to push the building back.

[48:06] Yeah, that's, that's very true. Thank you

[48:11] Mr.

[48:12] Sca. Any questions?

[48:14] I have none at this time. Mr. Chairman.

[48:16] Mr. Donlin? I do roughly, you don't have

[48:20] to gimme an exact number here,

[48:21] but as far as like lot coverage is concerned,

[48:25] where do we stand now with the five units

[48:27] as opposed to the 10 prior?

[48:29] I, I don't have an exact calculation

[48:31] but we've cut it down in half.

[48:33] As far as building coverage, driveway is similar

[48:37] 'cause we really haven't cut down on driveway

[48:38] because we're still providing that same driveway width

[48:41] and we're going down the length of the, the building,

[48:43] but we can get the storm water to work.

[48:46] We did a full mockup, full set of plans,

[48:48] fully engineered on the 11 units and got that to work.

[48:52] We don't, we won't have a problem with the five units.

[48:55] Perfect. Thank you Mr. Dani.

[49:01] I have no questions Mr.

[49:04] Zel, I have no questions. Thank you Mr. Chair.

[49:06] I got a question real quick Mr. Chair. Mr.

[49:08] Sca, Just a question. How many floors are these?

[49:11] Are they gonna be ground, garage floor,

[49:13] first floor and a second floor?

[49:14] Yeah, so there'll be garages on the ground level.

[49:17] Walk up to first floor, second floor living and third floor.

[49:20] Okay. Typical town, town, home style.

[49:25] Are these by chance one or two bays?

[49:28] Single, single bay garages.

[49:30] But we have on the plan, as you notice,

[49:32] offered some additional parking we're not required to

[49:36] because the state has changed the parking regulations

[49:39] for residential units down to one.

[49:41] Yep. So we cover with the garage, but Mr.

[49:44] Bono's planning on maintaining this property

[49:46] and probably renting the units

[49:48] and he would like to have an attractive project

[49:50] that has ample parking for his residence.

[49:57] Mr. Henry, you have any questions?

[50:00] I'm all set, thank You. Okay, you're welcome.

[50:04] All right, well let's go over to staff.

[50:06] Mrs. Owen, any thoughts?

[50:11] Thank you. There was a, a very well stated presentation.

[50:16] As we as we know, the applicant's seeking approval

[50:19] to raise the existing non-habit structure.

[50:22] It was destroyed by a fire

[50:24] and construct five residential townhouses on the property,

[50:27] which will not include mixed use commercial component

[50:31] and will be located greater than eight

[50:33] feet from the property line.

[50:34] So there's two variances being sought this evening.

[50:38] Property is located in CBD district which requires an eight

[50:40] foot maximum front yard setback

[50:43] and proposed structure as we're aware, is being proposed

[50:47] to be approximately 130 feet set back from the front

[50:50] property line at its closest point.

[50:52] So the first variance request is to article six,

[50:56] section 1 65 dash three lowercase C do four.

[51:02] The second variance being requested is to article six,

[51:05] section 1 65 dash 33 B five,

[51:10] lowercase B three I,

[51:14] which permits multi-unit residential uses

[51:17] as mixed use in conjunction

[51:18] with permitted non-residential uses.

[51:21] So it prohibits residential below the second floor

[51:25] as the applicant stated in the presentation.

[51:27] There will be residential living via garage

[51:30] on that first floor level.

[51:31] So variance is being requested to that provision.

[51:34] The property is serviced by municipal water

[51:36] and sewer if approved.

[51:39] The proposal will require technical review committee as well

[51:43] as planning board site plan approval.

[51:46] They'll review items like lighting, parking, landscaping,

[51:49] drainage and and architectural design review as well.

[51:54] Beyond that, if it's approved this evening,

[51:56] appropriate permits and inspections are required

[51:59] and there's also pictures on file as well. Thank you.

[52:03] Alright, anybody have any questions for code enforcement?

[52:08] All set gentlemen.

[52:10] Have anything else you wanna share with us?

[52:11] There's any other questions from the board?

[52:13] I'm happy to answer otherwise I think we're good.

[52:15] Alright, well let's take, let's make a call

[52:18] to public, alright?

[52:20] And if anyone comes up,

[52:21] you know you have an opportunity to rebut.

[52:23] Okay? Anybody here wishes

[52:26] to speak in favor of this application?

[52:28] This would be your opportunity to come forward and be heard.

[52:31] Seeing no gestures

[52:32] or anyone in the room arising, anybody in opposition

[52:36] to this application.

[52:37] This would be your opportunity to be heard

[52:39] and come forward Again, seeing no one come forward.

[52:45] Mr. Chair, I would like to bring to your attention

[52:47] that we do have attendees that are raising their hand.

[52:50] We may wanna remind folks

[52:51] of the zoning board's policy on remote participation.

[52:56] Yeah. The board no longer provides a remote

[53:00] presentation or input.

[53:08] I can, whereas there are people there,

[53:12] but we still have a URL on there and an enter meeting.

[53:18] I suppose that's just for people

[53:20] who wanna view, is that correct? It is.

[53:23] Mr. Chair, there are other, other ways we can view

[53:27] and perhaps we could discuss that inclusion

[53:30] of offline sometime.

[53:31] Alright.

[53:32] Whereas the board no longer offers remote input,

[53:36] we would have be obligated to take a motion to hear anybody

[53:41] that is remote if anybody would like to make that motion.

[53:45] I second Now. Somebody needs to make the motion first.

[53:48] I'll make the motion to hear

[53:50] remote testimony or questions.

[53:54] Common mistake Mr.

[53:55] Lusca, but you're welcome to second now.

[53:57] Sorry, I second that.

[53:59] Any discussion on remote input?

[54:03] All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed?

[54:07] I I say no. You say no. All right.

[54:10] That's four to one Mr.

[54:15] One of the things we'll have to realize here is that

[54:18] sometimes we won't be able to verify

[54:21] who the people are for sure.

[54:24] And so we need to ascertain whether

[54:27] or not the individuals speaking are truly

[54:33] aggrieve by any decision this board would make versus just

[54:38] after we take their commentary.

[54:40] So Mr. Dietz, Mr.

[54:43] If you'd like to guide these folks in,

[54:45] we're welcome to hear 'em.

[54:47] Yes. At this, at this time, the number is reduced to one.

[54:51] This person is identified as James

[54:54] and we can allow them to speak at this time.

[54:57] Very good. They should be able to

[55:03] unmute and speak at this time.

[55:15] Hello? Hello. And it

[55:20] appears they have lowered their hand.

[55:23] Okay. And chose not to speak.

[55:27] Alright, very good. Now they've raised their hand.

[55:36] You know, this takes me back to one

[55:38] of the cases we had once when we did remote

[55:40] and I asked the individual, I asked him

[55:42] to verify his address

[55:44] and I said, are you at such and such an address?

[55:46] And he said, no, I'm in my kitchen. So yeah,

[55:49] Hence The complications of remote input.

[55:53] Is this individual satisfied? Can we tell

[55:56] Their hand is raised But we can't get

[55:59] 'em with, with it?

[56:00] Likely that they might be be having some

[56:01] technical difficulty.

[56:03] Okay. We may want to guide them to dial into the

[56:06] recording secretary's phone

[56:08] and we can help guide them through what's

[56:11] That phone number?

[56:12] Eight four five

[56:15] Should be right on there.

[56:16] I don't recall it off the top.

[56:18] No. Should be alright.

[56:21] Nothing there, Ms. Boudreaux.

[56:26] Okay, I don't know what that phone number is.

[56:41] Do we wanna reconsider taking

[56:43] Public?

[56:44] We'll just let's square this up and we'll move

[56:47] Along.

[56:58] All right, nothing there. We got

[57:09] 3, 4, 5.

[57:12] Thank you.

[57:14] All right. Whereas the board has motioned

[57:16] and made a decision to allow public input,

[57:19] we'll give him one minute

[57:20] and that is the gentleman online

[57:22] that keeps raising his hand.

[57:25] If you're having technical difficulties getting in,

[57:28] you can call 8 4 5 5 5 8 5.

[57:33] He's got his hand raised. Is it? It is number nine,

[57:36] Currently raised at this time. Mr. Chair,

[57:38] Was it number nine?

[57:39] He presses to get in or I

[57:41] Believe this individual's not dialed in by phone,

[57:44] but if he were, that would be star nine to raise your hand.

[57:47] I see. And star six to mute or unmute?

[57:49] There should be a mute button at the bottom of his green.

[57:53] Okay. Or, or it could be at the top, but either way.

[58:06] Of course that number again was 8 4 5 5 5 8 5 8 5.

[58:11] Yep.

[58:15] There you go.

[58:18] Go ahead and answer. Yeah,

[58:37] Use that theme.

[58:38] Music

[58:56] Canal.

[59:03] Let's,

[59:14] hi, how you doing?

[59:17] What's that?

[59:33] You got copies of that? Do you have copies

[59:37] of these or you need these?

[59:41] Are we all set? Mr.

[59:59] Mr. Chair? The, the gentleman's name is actually

[1:00:01] Steve.

[1:00:02] Okay. It

[1:00:03] Seems to be a a butter.

[1:00:05] We're gonna see if we can get it in through this style.

[1:00:07] He's having problems with his computer at all.

[1:00:09] Okay. Does his car

[1:00:41] It's a better night curve.

[1:00:42] Balls. How about for you?

[1:00:47] Any curve balls?

[1:00:51] Equipment.

[1:00:59] Great. By any chance,

[1:01:03] wanna just take your hat off?

[1:01:06] You wouldn't by any chance. Wanna take your hat off?

[1:01:16] No, you look fine.

[1:01:26] We're trying to get someone in

[1:01:27] that raise their hand and I don't want to

[1:01:36] Hello?

[1:01:37] Okay sir, can you hear me?

[1:01:39] Can you hear? Can you hear me?

[1:01:42] Hi, I'm gonna make it brief.

[1:01:45] Oh, this is Steve PI own 21 Central

[1:01:48] Street in dairy.

[1:01:51] Are you a director? Property Mr. Ano.

[1:01:52] And what he is planning to do will benefit the

[1:01:54] neighborhood tremendously.

[1:01:58] I've owned a property for over 50 years

[1:02:01] and I never seen anyone take an interest like he has.

[1:02:04] So I would, I would say that he would be the best guy

[1:02:06] to vote in for his.

[1:02:10] For his.

[1:02:14] Okay, so you're in support? Yes.

[1:02:19] Steve, you're in support. Steve,

[1:02:20] You're in support.

[1:02:23] I didn't hear you. Can you repeat please

[1:02:25] Have anybody follow you?

[1:02:26] Say you're in support of this, Steve.

[1:02:33] Okay. All right.

[1:02:35] Well, from what I detected he's in support of this.

[1:02:41] I agree.

[1:02:46] And

[1:02:53] all right.

[1:02:54] It sounded like he's in support of this.

[1:02:57] That was my takeaway. Okay, good enough.

[1:02:59] I think we've heard from all butters Are any

[1:03:02] interested parties in this?

[1:03:05] Gentlemen, you're welcome to come back up.

[1:03:11] It's Gotta be something in the moon tonight.

[1:03:16] Alright, Sony last comments before we move forward?

[1:03:21] Nope. The board. Any questions?

[1:03:22] We happy to try and answer 'em, but

[1:03:24] otherwise I think we're good.

[1:03:29] There's a difficulty with the zone

[1:03:31] and in complying with what you're wanting to do,

[1:03:37] you know, with not the non-conformity

[1:03:39] and the time that e evolves.

[1:03:41] How old was the house that's there? 200 years? Yeah.

[1:03:45] Oh yeah. Victorian?

[1:03:47] No, no, no.

[1:03:48] Just a typical

[1:03:52] colonial type of house.

[1:03:54] Single, single story.

[1:03:55] It's been there for 10 years in its condition?

[1:03:58] No, no, we're probably on year three and a half.

[1:04:02] Oh, it's, it has only been that long. Yeah.

[1:04:04] Oh, seems like it's been there forever.

[1:04:07] Burned out. It seems like that to me. Yeah.

[1:04:10] Yeah. Well it's a, it's certainly a safety hazard

[1:04:13] and the modification that I think that you've asked

[1:04:16] for seems a little less impactful.

[1:04:20] I was impressed with the first presentation a year ago,

[1:04:23] you know, in the way you were trying to fit this in.

[1:04:26] So, and I can relate to the

[1:04:29] square peg in the round hole thing.

[1:04:31] So I think all the board is all set. Yes sir. Okay.

[1:04:36] We've heard from public we've satisfied that statute,

[1:04:39] therefore we can take a motion to go into deliberation. So

[1:04:42] Moved.

[1:04:43] Second. Thank you.

[1:04:45] All in favor of deliberation, say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

[1:04:49] Okay, so

[1:04:58] I'm on the wrong page, that's why I can't find

[1:05:01] Who's sitting.

[1:05:03] Anybody Wish to lead off in this? Mr. Dietzel?

[1:05:09] I think this is pretty straightforward proposal.

[1:05:11] I've reviewed the five criteria.

[1:05:13] I believe that it fits in the current neighborhood.

[1:05:17] I really don't see how a commercial enterprise would fit in.

[1:05:21] Like the applicant council said, it's, it is a, a,

[1:05:25] a square peg in a round hole as far as the hardship,

[1:05:29] this is certainly this property has special conditions

[1:05:34] which did not lend well to a commercial property

[1:05:38] and it does lend well to a reasonable use of the property,

[1:05:43] which is the, the, the town homes.

[1:05:46] I do not see a problem with this applicant application.

[1:05:50] Thank you Mr. Chair.

[1:05:52] Mr. Don? Yeah, I agree.

[1:05:55] And, and just to touch on the variance requested

[1:06:00] for the setback, I,

[1:06:03] I think the lot itself specifically calls

[1:06:06] for these units to be setback.

[1:06:08] I don't think it's in any way an egregious

[1:06:15] footprint on the lot

[1:06:16] and the setback gives them some flexibility

[1:06:20] and extra parking, which is only gonna give relief

[1:06:23] to the neighboring properties as far

[1:06:26] as street is concerned.

[1:06:28] So that's a a, a win in my book.

[1:06:32] Okay. Mr. Tripp,

[1:06:39] This is not what I would consider a perfect lot.

[1:06:44] It's a lot of challenges, a lot of wetland

[1:06:50] and apparently you have may have standing water issues,

[1:06:55] but I'm sure you guys can figure that out.

[1:07:00] I think that the housing being

[1:07:04] what it is, five extra houses

[1:07:07] or town condos would, would help.

[1:07:11] And I think it's, I think it's a good idea.

[1:07:18] Okay.

[1:07:27] Mr. Swa,

[1:07:29] I think this is a great idea.

[1:07:30] I think it'll boost the area

[1:07:33] and I think the way that they have it now designed is

[1:07:37] well fit for what the lot entails.

[1:07:40] So I'm, I'm all for this.

[1:07:45] Yeah, I like the, for myself, I like the reduced impact

[1:07:49] even though it's conflicting with the non-commercial use

[1:07:55] requirement that that's established in this district,

[1:08:00] I think it's, it's just difficult,

[1:08:02] which is why this board is a, a relief valve

[1:08:06] to be able to, you know, kind of see

[1:08:11] in a more finite way aspects of the geography or,

[1:08:16] or just the historic aspects that don't quite keep up

[1:08:20] with the zoning requirements that we have.

[1:08:22] So overall, I, I like the plan, I like the reduced impact

[1:08:27] and, and I think it's a good fit in there.

[1:08:30] It's, it's actually gonna be kind of concealed so

[1:08:34] I don't see any conflicts with that.

[1:08:36] I think greater than that is the fact

[1:08:37] that staff has worked with the owner.

[1:08:40] They understand the hardship that's there in trying

[1:08:43] to make this parcel not just become a blighted piece

[1:08:47] in the center of town

[1:08:48] because it doesn't just comply with every ordinance

[1:08:51] that's been established and that's why we're here.

[1:08:55] Other than that I have no other commentary.

[1:08:57] We have subject to obtaining all state

[1:09:02] and town permits and inspections

[1:09:05] and subject to technical review committee

[1:09:07] and planning boards, site plan approval.

[1:09:12] Mrs. Owen, are we, how far are they into,

[1:09:18] into the planning board phase of this?

[1:09:21] So this is a new concept

[1:09:23] so we would still require technical review committee

[1:09:26] approval first and then planning

[1:09:28] board approval from there. Okay.

[1:09:29] Alright. And so and so in that case, no extension

[1:09:32] of the vari of a variance is gonna be necessary either?

[1:09:35] Correct. Okay, very good. I'm good with where we're at.

[1:09:38] If unless somebody has that something else to add,

[1:09:41] we can take a motion to come out of deliberation. Mr. Dona,

[1:09:45] Make a motion to come out of deliberative session.

[1:09:47] Second. Thank you Mr. Trip has a second.

[1:09:51] All in favor of coming outta deliberation, say aye. A Aye.

[1:09:55] Aye. Any opposed? All right, Mr.

[1:09:57] Tripp, you have a motion to read?

[1:09:59] I make a motion on case number 26 dash 1 0 9

[1:10:02] for Edward n Herbert Associates Inc.

[1:10:06] To grant a variance is

[1:10:07] provided in Article six, section 1 65 dash 33

[1:10:12] B five B triple I

[1:10:16] and section 1 65 33 C

[1:10:22] four of the town of dairy zoning ordinance

[1:10:25] to allow the construction of five

[1:10:28] residential townhouses on the property,

[1:10:30] which will not include a mixed commercial component

[1:10:33] and which will be located greater than eight feet from the

[1:10:36] front property line parcel ID 26 1 69 zone CBD

[1:10:42] as presented with the following conditions, subject

[1:10:44] to containing all state and town permits

[1:10:47] and inspections subject to technical review committee

[1:10:50] and planning board site plan approval

[1:10:55] Completes the reading of the motion.

[1:10:57] Second. Alright, thank you Mr.

[1:10:59] Donlin Has that motion seconded. It's on the floor.

[1:11:06] Mr. Corbett,

[1:11:08] because of other obligations is good enough to be here

[1:11:11] with us now and I'm gonna let him him

[1:11:13] read the finding of fact.

[1:11:14] Thank you Mr. Chair. On May 7th, 2026,

[1:11:18] the ZBA heard the application of Edward

[1:11:21] and Herbert Associates, Inc.

[1:11:22] Concerning the property located at 23 Central Street.

[1:11:25] Parcel ID 2 6 1 6 9 notice was

[1:11:29] provided to the immediate abutters per statute.

[1:11:32] The board received testimony from the applicant

[1:11:34] and counsel, town staff and Abutters

[1:11:36] and members of the public documentary evidence included,

[1:11:39] but was not limited to site plans, photos,

[1:11:41] records, and expert testimony.

[1:11:44] The property is located in the central business district.

[1:11:46] This is a different request than the prior variance

[1:11:49] that was granted on February 20th, 2025, which was

[1:11:52] to article six, section 1 65 dash 33

[1:11:55] B five BI ii

[1:11:58] and Article nine, section 1 65 dash 73

[1:12:02] to allow the redevelopment of the property

[1:12:04] as mixed use consisting

[1:12:05] of 10 residential style townhouse condominium units

[1:12:08] and three stories of commercial use facing Central Street.

[1:12:11] Excuse me. The applicant is now seeking to approve approval

[1:12:14] to raise the existing non-habit single family residential

[1:12:17] structure that was destroyed by a fire

[1:12:19] and cons construct five residential townhouses on the

[1:12:23] property, which will not include a mixed commercial

[1:12:25] component and which will be located greater than eight feet

[1:12:28] from the front property line.

[1:12:29] The proposed new structure appears

[1:12:31] to be set back approximately 135 feet from the front

[1:12:34] property line at its closest point.

[1:12:36] Therefore, the first variance is being requested

[1:12:38] to Article six, section 1 65 dash 33 C four.

[1:12:43] Then because the five unit residential townhouse townhouses

[1:12:46] proposed with residential living on the first floor,

[1:12:49] a second variance is being requested to Article six,

[1:12:51] section 1 65 dash 33 B five

[1:12:56] BI ii, which permits multiple unit residential mix uses

[1:13:00] as mixed use and conjunction

[1:13:02] with permitted non-residential uses while prohibiting

[1:13:05] residential use below the second floor.

[1:13:08] The board weighed testimony for the proposal.

[1:13:11] Now a change for this to the board.

[1:13:14] I'm now gonna go through the five criteria

[1:13:16] and I'm going to come to each of you to ask whether you feel

[1:13:19] that the criteria has been met

[1:13:21] or if it is not, feel free to elaborate as much

[1:13:25] or as little as needed for this Mr.

[1:13:29] Dietzel because you offered it during deliberative.

[1:13:33] I'm gonna start with you on the first one,

[1:13:35] the board's findings that the unnecessary hardship is

[1:13:37] demonstrated because a hardship relates

[1:13:38] to the unique characteristics of the property.

[1:13:41] You had mentioned special conditions did not lend well

[1:13:44] to the commercial property.

[1:13:47] Is there anything else that you would like to add to this

[1:13:49] or do I have that correctly for the unnecessary hardship?

[1:13:52] That's accurate, Mr. Vice Chair.

[1:13:54] Thank you Mr. Dietzel. Mr.

[1:13:56] Trip, do you feel

[1:13:57] that the unnecessary hardship is demonstrated due

[1:14:00] to the unique characteristics of the property?

[1:14:04] Yes, as I mentioned there previously, that

[1:14:08] there's a substantial wetland on a lot

[1:14:12] and the, the

[1:14:17] which it reduces the what can be done with the lot.

[1:14:25] I do appreciate the applicant I

[1:14:29] making use of the, the property to build

[1:14:34] housing because of the housing crisis

[1:14:37] that the state is in right now.

[1:14:39] So I think it'll be a, a, a, a good solution to

[1:14:44] a lot that is somewhat marginal.

[1:14:49] Thank you, Mr. Trip. Mr.

[1:14:51] Donlin, do you find that the unnecessary hardship is

[1:14:54] demonstrated due

[1:14:56] to the unique characteristics of the property?

[1:14:59] I do for reasons stated.

[1:15:03] Thank you Mr. Lusca. I also do

[1:15:08] Thank you. And Mr. Chair?

[1:15:11] Yes. I feel that the hardship exists

[1:15:13] because of the non-conformity

[1:15:16] of the lots in those districts to begin with.

[1:15:19] And restoration,

[1:15:20] the needed restoration without abandonment is

[1:15:24] necessary for this approval.

[1:15:26] Thank you.

[1:15:34] All right. That takes us to number two.

[1:15:37] I'll now, I'll start to my far left foot. Mr. Donlin. Mr.

[1:15:40] Donlin, do you find, or do you feel the board's findings is

[1:15:44] that this is not contrary to the public interest?

[1:15:49] I find that it is not contrary to the public interest for

[1:15:54] what we discussed during deliberation

[1:15:56] and elsewise, that this is a very unique property.

[1:15:59] I think it's a good use of the property in the neighboring

[1:16:03] areas as well as the need

[1:16:07] for housing writ lodge in the community.

[1:16:10] Thank you. Mr. Chirp.

[1:16:14] I believe that the spirit of the ordinance is observed

[1:16:18] because the, oh,

[1:16:20] I'm, I'm gonna, sorry, I'm gonna skip to that one.

[1:16:21] This one is just public interest.

[1:16:23] Oh, public interest. Do you feel

[1:16:25] that this is not contrary to the public interest?

[1:16:28] Yes. I think that any more housing that we can,

[1:16:32] we can have is definitely in the public interest.

[1:16:36] Perfect. Mr. Perkins?

[1:16:39] Yeah, I find that the public interest is served here

[1:16:43] and there's no, there's no lack of public interest

[1:16:48] by granting this application.

[1:16:50] Thank you Mr. Lusca.

[1:16:53] I think this would be great. The fact

[1:16:55] that their townhouses gives it a little more square footage

[1:16:57] for the people buying or renting.

[1:16:59] And I think it's a, it's a great, it's a great idea.

[1:17:03] Thank you. And Mr.

[1:17:05] Dietzel, do you feel that this is

[1:17:06] not contrary to the public interest?

[1:17:08] Yes, I agree with everything that's been said.

[1:17:10] In fact, not only will it not be contrary

[1:17:14] to the public interest, I believe it is in

[1:17:17] the public interest.

[1:17:18] So yes, I agree that criteria one has been met.

[1:17:21] Thank you. And then I will stay with you for this one.

[1:17:26] Mr. Dietzel, do you find that this application is consistent

[1:17:30] with the spirit of the ordinance?

[1:17:31] Yes. For a reason. Stated, Thank you Mr. Awa.

[1:17:35] Yes, Mr. Perkins.

[1:17:39] I find it satisfactory to the spirit of the ordinance.

[1:17:45] One second before we go to Mr. Trip.

[1:17:51] I find it in the spirit of the ordinance.

[1:17:54] The, i I think having to make this

[1:18:01] dual use would be actually a, a detriment

[1:18:06] to the property.

[1:18:09] Thank you. And Mr.

[1:18:13] Donlin?

[1:18:15] Yes, I do feel it meets

[1:18:20] for the spirit of the OR ordinance for a reason. Stated

[1:18:24] Thank you.

[1:18:26] And I'll leave it with you and we'll come back down.

[1:18:33] So, Mr. Donlin, do you feel

[1:18:35] that substantial justice would be served

[1:18:37] by denying this variance request.

[1:18:42] I feel like substantial justice is served

[1:18:46] by granting this request.

[1:18:48] Thank you. Mr. Trip.

[1:18:51] The i

[1:18:56] I believe that subj substantial justice.

[1:19:01] It would be done by granting the ordinance as

[1:19:06] it takes a piece of property that has been

[1:19:10] at a burned out hawk for a year

[1:19:14] and replacing it with five condos.

[1:19:17] Is it condos? Townhouse townhouses. Alright.

[1:19:23] Thank you. And Mr. Chair?

[1:19:25] Yes. Substantial justice is being served here.

[1:19:28] It allows the reasonable use of the, of the parcel

[1:19:34] in the same community

[1:19:35] that there's already similar properties existing in.

[1:19:40] Thank you. And Mr. Awa? I, I agree.

[1:19:43] Thank you. And Mr. Dietzel?

[1:19:47] I agree. I believe there's very little

[1:19:49] or no loss of the public,

[1:19:51] but there would be a significant gain for

[1:19:55] allowing the applicant reasonable use of this property.

[1:19:58] Thank you. All right.

[1:20:02] And then Mr. Dietzel, I'm gonna

[1:20:03] stay with you for the last question.

[1:20:05] I do you feel that the applicant has adequately demonstrated

[1:20:08] that surrounding property values will not be diminished?

[1:20:10] Yes. I see no evidence whatsoever

[1:20:13] that surrounding properties will not.

[1:20:17] In Fact, if anything, they'd

[1:20:19] be enhanced, in my opinion.

[1:20:20] Thank you.

[1:20:22] Swa? Yeah, I was gonna say the same thing is,

[1:20:24] if anything, it's gonna bring 'em up.

[1:20:26] Thank you,

[1:20:30] Mr. Chair.

[1:20:31] Never thought I'd be the one to say this

[1:20:34] as someone else on this board said it,

[1:20:36] but rising tides lift all boats.

[1:20:38] And I think that's certainly the case here.

[1:20:41] That's a nice homage there. Mr. Trip?

[1:20:46] The, I believe it's,

[1:20:51] like I said previously, anything

[1:20:54] that replaces the burned out Hulk is

[1:20:57] probably better than nothing.

[1:20:59] You

[1:21:01] Thank you. And Mr. Donlin?

[1:21:03] I believe the surrounding properties

[1:21:06] will not be diminished.

[1:21:08] In fact, I believe they will be.

[1:21:10] The values will go up for reasons stated

[1:21:14] specifically the fire damage building as removal

[1:21:18] and in new houses or townhouses being built.

[1:21:23] Excellent. Thank you all. And that

[1:21:25] concludes the finding of fact.

[1:21:26] Does anybody have any additions that they would like

[1:21:29] to make prior?

[1:21:32] Nope. See no gestures there.

[1:21:35] All in favor of moving this motion for a vote? Say aye. Aye.

[1:21:39] Aye. Any opposed? Seeing none, Mr.

[1:21:44] Dietzel? Yes. What? Say you Yes. Mr. Trip?

[1:21:49] Yes. Mr. Donlin? Yes. Mr. Sca? Yes.

[1:21:53] And the chair will make you unanimous

[1:21:54] by a vote of five to zero.

[1:21:56] So, congratulations, gentlemen, on your modification.

[1:21:59] Sorry to take you through the painful steps,

[1:22:02] but those authorities above us, this is what they'd like

[1:22:05] to see us try and do. Thank

[1:22:08] You very much. Thank

[1:22:09] You.

[1:22:10] Alright. Very good. Have a good evening. You too. You too.

[1:22:11] Thank you. Good luck.

[1:22:22] Okay. You

[1:22:25] Need a few minutes?

[1:22:26] What's that? You need a few minutes or you all set?

[1:22:29] I think I'm alright. You need a few minutes?

[1:22:33] Sure. We're gonna take five. Okay. Gentlemen, Mr.

[1:22:38] Venter, let's give us five minutes.

[1:22:40] Yes, Mr. Chair.

[1:28:27] Okay. Very good. We're moving on again, folks.

[1:28:30] Who is here for case number 26? One 12?

[1:28:36] That would be under Jeffrey Molton. Okay.

[1:28:40] I don't think we're gonna get to you tonight.

[1:28:42] You're welcome to stick it out if you'd like.

[1:28:44] Or we can motion to table you to the next meeting,

[1:28:48] Whatever the board's.

[1:28:49] Pleasure. I've been asked to come here

[1:28:53] and we were told ahead

[1:28:57] of time to it.

[1:29:00] Okay. All right.

[1:29:02] Well let's, let's motion and get you, give you excused

[1:29:05] and then we can get you back on the next meeting.

[1:29:07] Okay. Instead of having you sit around

[1:29:10] for another hour and a half.

[1:29:11] Mr. Chair, Mr.

[1:29:13] Chair, I'll make a motion to table case two six dash

[1:29:15] 1 1 12 to our next meeting. Very good. Thank

[1:29:17] You.

[1:29:18] Second. Second by Mr. Trip. All in favor of that say aye.

[1:29:21] Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Very good. You're excused.

[1:29:23] Guys can take off.

[1:29:29] Mr. Landon, are you here?

[1:29:33] I can give you the same courtesy if you'd like.

[1:29:35] It'll be cutting, but I don't,

[1:29:37] IM thinking you won't get heard tonight.

[1:29:39] If you'd like us to give you the extension now we can.

[1:29:42] And you can be dismissed to the next meeting.

[1:29:47] Your call

[1:29:49] That, is it two weeks?

[1:29:51] Yes. Yeah, David. Alright,

[1:29:53] Very good.

[1:29:54] So case number 26 1 11. Mr.

[1:29:56] Corbett, I'll make motion

[1:29:58] to table case 26 dash 1 1 1 till the next meeting.

[1:30:01] Very good. Second. Second by Mr. Tripp.

[1:30:03] All in favor of tabling that case. Say aye. Aye. Aye.

[1:30:06] Opposed? Very good. We'll see you folks in two weeks.

[1:30:10] All right. Let's get back to our,

[1:30:12] our regularly scheduled program.

[1:30:14] We've got case number 26 dash 1 0 7.

[1:30:18] We have some housekeeping rule stuff to take care of.

[1:30:23] Before we go any further with this,

[1:30:27] all board members had the prior application before Mr.

[1:30:31] Donlin. You'll are sitting on this with us. Yes, sir.

[1:30:35] And we had the prior application from,

[1:30:39] I think almost a year ago.

[1:30:41] And we need to review

[1:30:46] to make sure that the board is, how the board feels

[1:30:51] relative to the material information

[1:30:54] of this case versus the prior.

[1:31:01] The prior application was stated for

[1:31:07] a wall cabinet channel letters,

[1:31:14] Della Hunte channel letters,

[1:31:17] pylon sign 156 inches by 60 inches

[1:31:22] and an inclusive three by five full color.

[1:31:26] LED, electronic Messaging Center.

[1:31:34] Lemme grab that other application

[1:31:36] here. Do you

[1:31:39] Have their face page, Mr.

[1:31:42] Corbet? I believe so.

[1:32:06] Hang on a second.

[1:32:10] I was looking for the face page on that.

[1:32:13] On this current application, do you have,

[1:32:15] does anybody happen to have a, what's the face page?

[1:32:17] The face page would look like this.

[1:32:23] The, yeah. Do you have that right there?

[1:32:29] Yeah. Right there. That's it. Perfect. Thank you.

[1:32:41] This does not spell out as succinctly

[1:32:44] as the prior

[1:32:45] application. All right. I'll

[1:32:49] Bring this Back to you Mr.

[1:32:50] Trip. Thank you.

[1:32:56] This application that we are currently hearing

[1:33:03] is asking for the similar post

[1:33:09] to remain in place.

[1:33:13] And it is asking for two

[1:33:22] wall cabinets.

[1:33:26] Mr.

[1:33:31] Yanko, sorry, too many names tonight. And I see Mr.

[1:33:35] Cronin is with you as well.

[1:33:37] We'll come back around to you shortly.

[1:33:40] Why don't you gentlemen come up to the dais.

[1:33:53] I am reading from the original application,

[1:33:55] however that would be inaccurate

[1:33:57] because I believe in the prior case you had,

[1:34:01] you had made some amendments

[1:34:03] to your application during the hearing.

[1:34:05] This goes back to last July, right?

[1:34:09] That is correct. Okay.

[1:34:11] Can you refresh my memory as to your revisions

[1:34:15] that you had that the board finally decided on

[1:34:19] In it last July?

[1:34:20] Yes. Maybe.

[1:34:22] Maybe. Yeah. So the revisions, I think we made at

[1:34:27] that point where if, if memory serves correct,

[1:34:30] the electronic reader board at the time, the town

[1:34:35] town ordinance or the state ordinance,

[1:34:37] whatever it's referred to, had it changing no more

[1:34:41] frequently than seven seconds. I'm going to, yep.

[1:34:44] Plea 7, 8, 6. I don't know the answer to that.

[1:34:47] I had made an offer at that point, or,

[1:34:49] or a vision at that point that I wouldn't change it.

[1:34:52] I, I made a concession

[1:34:54] that I would change it no less than five minutes.

[1:34:58] That was a major change. I believe at that point.

[1:35:01] I believe I made a change

[1:35:02] that the electronic reader board would

[1:35:04] shut off at nine o'clock.

[1:35:05] At that time I had a,

[1:35:10] I believe there was a stipulation at that point

[1:35:12] that I was gonna put that, that sign on a time clock

[1:35:15] that was also gonna be shutting off at a particular

[1:35:17] time, nine or 10 o'clock.

[1:35:19] Again, have to go back and read that.

[1:35:21] I, I don't know, it's so long ago at this point.

[1:35:23] And there's been a lot that's changed since then.

[1:35:28] I do believe from the initial application to

[1:35:30] what was approved by the board,

[1:35:32] there was a reduction in size for some extent

[1:35:35] because there was a third tenant sign

[1:35:38] that we just had put in there originally that was removed.

[1:35:41] Again, I can't tell you how many square feet

[1:35:43] or inches was removed, but that was conceded.

[1:35:46] I believe those were the generic concessions

[1:35:50] or changes at that time.

[1:35:52] Since that time, we've also come back

[1:35:54] with some additional concessions

[1:35:55] and I have some additional tonight,

[1:35:57] but I believe on the original case, that was

[1:36:01] what my memory serves best.

[1:36:03] I think I recall you correct, there was,

[1:36:05] there was a third tenant sign

[1:36:06] that you had originally entered with

[1:36:10] and you had the electronic messaging sign,

[1:36:12] which is indicated on the former application.

[1:36:16] The pile on this, which I guess would be the pole

[1:36:19] that all this is mounted on, was 1 56 by 60 inches.

[1:36:24] But those two primary changes from the original application

[1:36:29] now that we're discussing it, stand out for, for me.

[1:36:33] Anybody else have on the board have any recollections

[1:36:37] that they wish to characterize here? So I

[1:36:39] Re I reviewed this in depth

[1:36:40] after our last meeting, so I requested more time to be able

[1:36:43] to go through the minutes and those were all the concessions

[1:36:45] that I noted as well between the original hearing

[1:36:48] and the second day that we heard the case.

[1:36:51] In addition to that, where it went through, you know,

[1:36:54] what I found was,

[1:36:57] What I found was murky last meeting was whether

[1:37:00] or not we separated the sign from the electronic messaging.

[1:37:03] And we know that we kept it all as one,

[1:37:06] but all, I don't wanna say all,

[1:37:07] but the heavy majority of all

[1:37:10] of our discussions surrounding the hours, the strength

[1:37:13] of the lights and safety, the timing, yeah,

[1:37:18] the safety of, the timing of was all towards the electronic

[1:37:20] messaging portion, not the entirety of the sign.

[1:37:23] I think in, in, you know, by saying that,

[1:37:27] I do think there was oversight on our behalf with that.

[1:37:29] You know, we should have kind of realized

[1:37:32] that we were just focused on one of three portions of it.

[1:37:35] But because of that, I do feel that this is now, you know,

[1:37:38] again, because of our error, I do feel

[1:37:39] that this is a materialistic change

[1:37:42] Material different. Yeah.

[1:37:43] Yes. And also now, sorry, last piece.

[1:37:47] As I measured it, it appears the sign itself now is also

[1:37:50] 42 and a half square feet.

[1:37:51] Granted, I'm, my math isn't the greatest. Okay.

[1:37:54] But it looks like we have a slight reduction

[1:37:56] as overall from the 50 that was proposed.

[1:38:01] Got it. And, and Mr.

[1:38:03] Yako, was that a modification that you made at that time?

[1:38:07] Do you recall? Mr. Corbet?

[1:38:09] I went off the math on the, the drawing

[1:38:11] Where I size again, Mr.

[1:38:13] Chair, I, I'm not a hundred percent sure of Yep.

[1:38:15] That change, I do know that the third tenant portion

[1:38:19] of the sign that I originally had there, if I, again,

[1:38:22] if you recall, my explanation for that was that, you know,

[1:38:25] my family is, has had this happen over time

[1:38:27] and we made the mistake of not having an extra space.

[1:38:29] Right. I had no tenant. It was just to have the extra space.

[1:38:32] Sure. And it was gonna be blank, you know, whatever.

[1:38:35] So I think that reduction probably brought you down

[1:38:37] to the square footage that Mr.

[1:38:39] Corbett said 60

[1:38:41] By 1 0 2 is now what's Yeah.

[1:38:42] Remaining just of that. And, and,

[1:38:44] and also with the reduction

[1:38:45] of the electronic reader board portion,

[1:38:47] that reduces the sign again as well.

[1:38:57] So, to answer your question, in general terms,

[1:38:59] since the initial application till today, it's significantly

[1:39:03] changed in sizing. Smaller.

[1:39:04] Right. 'cause the, the electronic

[1:39:06] reader board is now gone.

[1:39:07] It is gone, yeah. Okay.

[1:39:12] Mr. Trip to what we've been discussing,

[1:39:16] how do you feel on this current application

[1:39:20] and the testimony has been given so far?

[1:39:24] It's, there are material substantial difference here,

[1:39:28] in your view for this application presented versus the one

[1:39:33] last, last year.

[1:39:35] The, as Mr.

[1:39:39] Corbit said, the, the original meeting, we,

[1:39:43] we definitely got sidetracked on the electric

[1:39:49] messaging sign

[1:39:51] and there's hardly any discussion on the remainder

[1:39:56] of the application.

[1:39:59] You know, the, I believe that

[1:40:04] since the, the sign the electric messaging sign is, is,

[1:40:08] is no longer part of the application, you know, that

[1:40:14] should, you know, if we accept the application,

[1:40:18] should make it a lot easier to,

[1:40:23] to go through the, the

[1:40:27] Five criteria.

[1:40:28] Yep. The five criteria.

[1:40:29] Okay. Mr.

[1:40:31] Donlin, as you sat on this, on its first evening,

[1:40:34] this current application,

[1:40:36] and I think you were here for, for the prior

[1:40:38] or have seen the original face page of the application.

[1:40:43] What are your view, your viewpoints on the, on this matter?

[1:40:47] I, I agree that the lack

[1:40:49] of the electronic reader board makes

[1:40:51] this substantially different.

[1:40:52] This application tonight

[1:40:55] in substantially different relative

[1:40:57] to the prior request from a year ago.

[1:40:59] Okay. Mr. Dietzel, your thoughts here?

[1:41:03] You asked for recollections as I recall.

[1:41:06] You asked, I I think you asked me, you asked all the members

[1:41:10] whether you objected to just the electronic portion

[1:41:13] of the sign or the sign altogether.

[1:41:16] And I, I think I kind of, I was wishy-washy

[1:41:20] 'cause I wanted to discuss it more

[1:41:22] and I, I said the whole sign, but then, like Mr.

[1:41:25] Corbitt said, we sort of focused on the electronic portion

[1:41:29] and I don't think we really deliberated

[1:41:32] or focused on the sign as its entirety.

[1:41:36] So I agree with what the others said.

[1:41:38] This is different in

[1:41:40] that it does not include the electronic messaging portion.

[1:41:43] It's just the sign itself.

[1:41:44] And I, I think this is, this warrants a new hearing.

[1:41:49] Okay. And,

[1:41:51] and I will say that, you know, I think I recall asking

[1:41:54] specifically to one of the abutters, you know,

[1:41:57] their objection to this.

[1:41:58] And, and I even, we tabled the meeting specifically to,

[1:42:03] to have information rel relative to the impact

[1:42:07] of the electronic messaging sign.

[1:42:10] And that became a primary focus that out outside of that,

[1:42:16] you know, the questions that went on in that hearing

[1:42:20] in 2025, I think the,

[1:42:23] and my feeling is that the initial application

[1:42:25] that's being asked for now honors

[1:42:28] and respects the higher court's rulings on the matter.

[1:42:32] And, and this is substantially different

[1:42:38] and similar but,

[1:42:39] but substantially different to warrant the process

[1:42:43] and the testimony that we've allowed to

[1:42:47] be presented at this point.

[1:42:50] So I'll just ask for a quick motion on that, that the board,

[1:42:54] Mr, that the board approves this application as,

[1:42:59] as different from the prior application in 2025.

[1:43:05] You wanna move that Mr. Trip?

[1:43:06] So move. I'll Second Mr. Corbett. All in favor say aye.

[1:43:11] A Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Very good. No one opposed.

[1:43:15] All right. So let's proceed on

[1:43:17] with this hearing on this, on this case.

[1:43:23] Gentlemen, do you have anything that you'd like to,

[1:43:25] we heard some good ideas we heard

[1:43:28] and good dialogue at our last meeting.

[1:43:31] Do you have anything that you'd like to

[1:43:34] suggest or open up with?

[1:43:35] Y Yes, I would. And for, for the record,

[1:43:37] I'm Chris Drescher, counsel for the applicant with me as,

[1:43:41] as well as you saw in the audience is John Cronin.

[1:43:45] Yes, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

[1:43:46] I think when we tabled the meeting last time,

[1:43:48] and I'm not gonna belabor any

[1:43:49] of the testimony we've already put in.

[1:43:51] I'll simply say I defer to

[1:43:52] the testimony that's already on record.

[1:43:54] But the, I think the biggest discussion was lighting

[1:43:57] as we were sort of ending the, the last meeting

[1:44:00] specifically, you know, the, the Abutters address or,

[1:44:03] or you know, put forward concerns about

[1:44:05] certain lights, specifically.

[1:44:07] One that's off the top of my head were the lights

[1:44:09] that were shining up at, I guess

[1:44:10] what was once a a church people.

[1:44:12] Yeah, we'll just say those lights have been there

[1:44:14] for 27 years, but my client went ahead and removed those.

[1:44:18] He's turned off the lights at night.

[1:44:20] He's doing his best working with code to try

[1:44:22] to strip the sign down until we can hopefully legitimize

[1:44:25] what we're trying to do here tonight.

[1:44:27] But something that my client showed up with here tonight

[1:44:30] that I thought was very helpful I think would be very

[1:44:32] helpful for the board is I have,

[1:44:34] these are just multiple copies,

[1:44:35] but just two single pieces of paper

[1:44:38] and I'll be happy to hand them to you.

[1:44:40] Or is that the process? I'm gonna, do you accept those Ms.

[1:44:43] Hand 'em campaign? Alright, so I'm gonna take one from each

[1:44:47] of these just to, so I can talk about 'em.

[1:44:49] Thank you so much. So what's being handed

[1:44:52] out are two pieces of paper.

[1:44:54] This first one here, they don't have titles at the top,

[1:44:57] but you'll just see that there's some instructions about

[1:45:00] turn on and turn off.

[1:45:01] And what this is, is he has reached out to, I guess,

[1:45:04] an electrician who has provided us with some technology

[1:45:08] and evidence of that technology that can demonstrate

[1:45:10] that these lights can be on a timer

[1:45:12] and they can be turned off.

[1:45:14] The second page here, which offers up a grid

[1:45:19] of times of the day, is when is sunrise, sunset.

[1:45:24] Thank you. That kind of thing.

[1:45:27] And it gives it during the winter, the spring,

[1:45:29] the summer in the autumn.

[1:45:30] What my client is proposing is

[1:45:32] that this sign would not be turned on until

[1:45:36] essentially dusk or sundown.

[1:45:38] And then at 9:00 PM they would be shut off.

[1:45:41] And what very interesting fact I think

[1:45:44] that would be in here is this, you'll see right up here at

[1:45:46] the top of this one, it says, on average

[1:45:47] for the entire year, there are approximately one hour

[1:45:50] and 55 minutes of darkness between sunset

[1:45:53] and 9:00 PM in dairy.

[1:45:55] So on average that the sign, if, if per missed

[1:46:00] that we can have it, we'll only be on for an average

[1:46:02] of approximately two hours a day.

[1:46:06] And if I can just add in, go ahead. By all means.

[1:46:08] So if I can just add in the, the first sheet of paper is,

[1:46:10] is a new technology that's, I say new technology.

[1:46:13] It's been around for eight or 10 years now,

[1:46:15] but it is called the Lutron device rather than just the old

[1:46:19] school timer clock.

[1:46:21] It is actually an app. It's programmable, it's smart.

[1:46:24] So it come, it, it is gonna be set

[1:46:26] that this ti this sign will actually turn on based on the,

[1:46:30] the zip code of Dairy New Hampshire at sunset every day

[1:46:33] and go off at 9:00 PM in Dairy New Hampshire every day.

[1:46:36] So it changes daily based on the sundown.

[1:46:40] That's how I, that's how it comes up with the time of,

[1:46:44] you know, the average time throughout the course

[1:46:46] of 365 days a year in the town of Derry.

[1:46:49] They're between the, between sundown

[1:46:52] and 9:00 PM is an hour and 55 minutes.

[1:46:55] Fortunately for us folks that are getting a little older,

[1:46:58] that is a chat GPT

[1:47:00] or a Gemini search that gives you the smart search

[1:47:02] of what's happens in every zip code in the country

[1:47:05] and tells you exactly how many hours of darkness

[1:47:08] between sunset and 9:00 PM You will see monthly.

[1:47:12] Daily if you wanna go into a further search.

[1:47:15] But it'll be on average of an hour and 55 minutes.

[1:47:17] That sign will be on a day

[1:47:19] and it will be on a smart timer that will go on at sunset

[1:47:22] and go off at 9:00 PM

[1:47:26] You want to ask a question?

[1:47:27] I have a quick one. Just go ahead.

[1:47:28] The app, a quick question on the app.

[1:47:29] Right now at work we've got what we call bots that go

[1:47:32] through, they make everything

[1:47:33] automated, supposed to make life awesome.

[1:47:35] It's the kind of the bane of my existence to be honest.

[1:47:37] 'cause they don't always work in this scenario.

[1:47:40] Lutron doesn't turn off when it was supposed to.

[1:47:42] You get notified, you're,

[1:47:44] you're wherever you're in Massachusetts sort of reason.

[1:47:46] Can you override through the

[1:47:47] App?

[1:47:48] I I don't know the answer if I get notified. Okay.

[1:47:50] I'd be surprised if I didn't.

[1:47:51] Just with today's technology,

[1:47:53] I already have the Lutron device on some of my home things.

[1:47:56] So if I'm, if if I'm coming home

[1:47:58] and, you know, my daughter's coming home at 10 o'clock,

[1:48:00] I can go on my app and hit on

[1:48:01] and it turns the lights on it, it's an automated app,

[1:48:03] so yes, you can do it manually as well.

[1:48:06] But I was actually unknown, unbeknownst to me this,

[1:48:10] it actually has the feature that it can go on at sunset

[1:48:13] and go off at 9:00 PM so that's just an added feature.

[1:48:16] I can also manually go in like an old school time clock

[1:48:18] and say, I want it to go on at 7:00 PM every day

[1:48:22] and go off at 9:00 PM Oh,

[1:48:23] That's good. I I

[1:48:24] But then it's on during the daylight. I don't need that.

[1:48:26] Oh, it works. I just wanna make sure

[1:48:27] there was some type of Yes,

[1:48:28] There is a manual.

[1:48:29] Manual of course. Yeah. There's actually a switch in the

[1:48:31] building too that you can actually turn on and off.

[1:48:33] It's just, it has the smart features.

[1:48:36] I think one of the things I'd like to look at is in,

[1:48:40] in some of the considerations in the discussions

[1:48:43] that have gone back and forth is in, in your own testimony,

[1:48:49] you know, your, your importance or your understanding

[1:48:55] or our understanding of the legitimacy of a business

[1:48:58] that's in a location that needs advertising.

[1:49:02] And I think in all of this,

[1:49:03] and hearing the arguments going back

[1:49:05] and forth, it's how much is required

[1:49:10] or significant or necessary in that area or, or in any area.

[1:49:14] Right. I think this has caused me

[1:49:17] to look at the ordinances overall.

[1:49:19] And I think one of the abutters is, you know, his,

[1:49:21] his commentary at the last meeting really opened my eyes a

[1:49:26] bit more to three pages of ordinances relative

[1:49:29] to signs in our, in our community.

[1:49:31] And even with churches that are in non-residential

[1:49:36] or in residential areas, there's restrictions with the ideas

[1:49:40] of lighting and what that, what a sign for

[1:49:43] that would be would, would what's necessary there.

[1:49:47] And, and relating to your own testimony

[1:49:50] and your drive to have a sign there,

[1:49:53] which I think is a legitimate requirement here.

[1:49:57] It's just how far does that legitimacy go

[1:50:00] and do, what is the necessity of lighting for this

[1:50:05] parcel or for these signs, you know, in, at, at all

[1:50:11] if your operations are limited to daytime hours to begin

[1:50:15] with in understanding the corridor that you're operating in.

[1:50:20] You know, that's, that's one of the areas that I'm wrestling

[1:50:23] with is in, in reviewing our own ordinances.

[1:50:27] What's, what's really truly necessary here

[1:50:30] for lighting in at all for the signs?

[1:50:33] Well, I think if I, I could comment

[1:50:35] and then I'll let my client speak

[1:50:36] because he has taken down the sign

[1:50:38] and it's already had an impact on his business.

[1:50:40] Yeah. To his detriment, which he can speak to.

[1:50:43] But I I will say that, you know, driving around that area,

[1:50:46] once it gets dark, there needs to be some kind

[1:50:48] of light to see the sign.

[1:50:49] I mean, the business is going to be open at, at least

[1:50:52] for a period of time when it is dark out,

[1:50:56] as you just heard him say, the sun, the sign wouldn't be lit

[1:50:58] until, until it's nighttime.

[1:51:01] And I agree with you at least

[1:51:03] why would you need the lighting

[1:51:04] when it's broad daylight, right?

[1:51:05] Yeah. So I think I could, I could totally understand that.

[1:51:08] But what he's suggesting is that it just needs

[1:51:10] to be lit once it's dark.

[1:51:12] And as he can speak to the, the kind

[1:51:14] of hit he's been taking in the past couple

[1:51:15] of weeks at his business, just 'cause

[1:51:16] of people literally calling him

[1:51:17] and saying, Hey, what's going on?

[1:51:19] I, you know, and it's Mother's Day

[1:51:20] and he has got a landscaping business there.

[1:51:22] So I dunno if you wanna comment on

[1:51:23] That.

[1:51:24] Yeah, I mean certainly I, you know, I,

[1:51:25] I don't have enough history there to tell you what my,

[1:51:27] you know, what, what my loss

[1:51:28] of business is from year over year.

[1:51:30] But what I can tell you is that I have a significant,

[1:51:32] you know, impact at this point.

[1:51:34] People think I'm outta business. That's been certainly the

[1:51:36] first thing that happened when I had to remove the sign.

[1:51:39] Right? People don't believe I'm there now.

[1:51:41] They call and see if we're still

[1:51:43] in business, if we're still around.

[1:51:44] So certainly it's been a huge impact on that.

[1:51:47] As far as, you know, speaking to the, the timings

[1:51:50] or the, the necessity for myself

[1:51:52] and my businesses at that location to have a sign

[1:51:57] and a sign that is illuminated for a period of time,

[1:52:00] which I believe that the concessions

[1:52:01] that I'm offering are the bare minimums.

[1:52:04] What I'm, I, I really need from my requirement

[1:52:07] to operate a viable business there.

[1:52:09] I think that the, that in the past, the, you know,

[1:52:11] my buyers have come up with several other signs from

[1:52:13] landscape companies

[1:52:15] or landscapers that don't do retail businesses

[1:52:17] and have signs and so forth

[1:52:19] and shown those that, you know, the, the, the thing that's,

[1:52:22] that's lost here is I own a,

[1:52:23] I own a sports business there as well.

[1:52:26] That the impact is crucial on the nighttime business.

[1:52:30] You know, I'm approved to be

[1:52:31] open till nine o'clock at night.

[1:52:32] We do have, we, we, we, you know, people are there

[1:52:35] until at nine o'clock and then they leave, you know,

[1:52:38] or thereafter until they get out.

[1:52:41] You know, that is a business that is open in the wintertime

[1:52:44] where it is, is longer, darker hours.

[1:52:47] My commercial slash residential

[1:52:50] landscape business really does

[1:52:52] virtually no business in the winter.

[1:52:54] We don't need to turn the sign on in the morning.

[1:52:57] I almost don't need the sign at all lit ever

[1:52:59] for my commercial landscape business.

[1:53:01] And my, my sale of products we're closed

[1:53:04] before the darkness.

[1:53:05] That, that has no bearing on that.

[1:53:07] What it does have a huge bearing on is my sports business,

[1:53:10] people coming from outside of the town

[1:53:12] or even within the town,

[1:53:13] driving down a very busy road in the dark,

[1:53:16] could be four 30 in the

[1:53:17] afternoon, in the middle of the winter.

[1:53:19] And I have no advertising

[1:53:20] that can be seen if it isn't illuminated at that time.

[1:53:23] So the impact for me, for the, for the allowed business for

[1:53:27] that area is a massive impact without any

[1:53:30] illumination on that sign.

[1:53:32] And I think that the concessions that I'm offering or

[1:53:35] or asking for are, I think they're very fair.

[1:53:39] I really do. I think they're very

[1:53:41] fair for what I'm offering.

[1:53:42] I'm not looking to have the sign on all night.

[1:53:44] I'm not looking for the electronic reader board anymore.

[1:53:46] I'm not looking to turn the sign on in the morning.

[1:53:49] I'm looking for the sign to be on so people

[1:53:51] after dark know where I am.

[1:53:54] And just to embellish on a point,

[1:53:56] he just made a little bit of, when you talk about a,

[1:53:57] like a baseball camp or a school

[1:53:59] or whatever you wanna call it,

[1:54:01] that's gonna be an after school thing.

[1:54:02] That's gonna be something that's going on after school

[1:54:04] and into the evenings that, you know, kids are going from,

[1:54:07] you know, high school or wherever and coming there.

[1:54:08] So it's gonna be a little dark at times.

[1:54:11] So that substantiates the need for, for at least one

[1:54:14] of the signs after dark.

[1:54:17] Well, They're the same cabinet, but yes.

[1:54:20] Okay. Mr. Mr. Corbit.

[1:54:22] So I have a, I have a question regarding that kind of,

[1:54:26] not necessarily just the light as Mr.

[1:54:27] Chairman's going to, but the overall size

[1:54:30] as we discussed concessions.

[1:54:34] So I drove by a few times when the sign was up.

[1:54:38] And admittedly, I think the sign is very,

[1:54:42] it was done very tastefully, I will say that.

[1:54:45] And I thought the size of the overall sign, I didn't find

[1:54:48] to be egregious personally.

[1:54:50] I thought that coming down the road, it actually jumped out.

[1:54:53] It, it was actually in my opinion, necessary to find it.

[1:54:56] But what really jumped out at me was the almost 16 foot

[1:55:00] pylon that we're now attached to that I think was designed,

[1:55:03] or I know was designed,

[1:55:04] but we had, when you guys had the electronic messaging sign

[1:55:07] attached to it, that depiction, it looked like

[1:55:12] the sign started roughly four.

[1:55:14] The bottom of the electronic messaging started

[1:55:15] about four feet off the ground.

[1:55:17] And then the D honey sign went all the way to the top.

[1:55:20] Now, especially with the electronic messaging sign down,

[1:55:22] does the opportunity exist to cut the pylon portion

[1:55:25] of this, you know, almost in half.

[1:55:27] Could we look, could you look

[1:55:28] to almost reduce the overall size?

[1:55:31] You know, that maybe it's

[1:55:32] only coming up a little bit higher?

[1:55:36] I'm Not sure. I, I don't, I I,

[1:55:37] to be quite frank, I don't know the answer to that.

[1:55:39] I mean, in my limited knowledge of signage and,

[1:55:42] and you know, steel, yes, I think it's very possible,

[1:55:47] but I can't, I'm not a sign expert,

[1:55:49] so I can't speak to that.

[1:55:52] Probably be a discussion we'd have to have

[1:55:53] with the installer, I would think.

[1:55:57] Okay. But not something that would, you'd

[1:55:58] Be opposed to off The bat at this moment?

[1:56:02] I mean, right now I can't give you an answer to it if

[1:56:03] that's, if we're in the move of hearing to look at hearing

[1:56:05] to look, I have no problem I guess

[1:56:07] asking the question. Yeah.

[1:56:09] I guess if, yeah, so I'll leave it at

[1:56:11] That, you know, the, the board formed some questions and,

[1:56:15] and went through with planning, you know,

[1:56:18] and understanding, you know, the plight here.

[1:56:21] Correct. Which is, you know, you're given approval

[1:56:27] to operate a business there and,

[1:56:31] and make use of, make a useful purpose of, of this parcel.

[1:56:35] And you know, I think there's mixed reviews about that

[1:56:39] with the abutters,

[1:56:40] but you know, it's, it's, you know, the horse is out of the,

[1:56:44] the barn on that part point, right.

[1:56:48] But at some point, and it's within our own ordinances,

[1:56:52] it establishes the criteria for the planning board to

[1:56:56] review your site plan and, and what was going on there.

[1:57:00] And it's, and it's pointed out that it was noted

[1:57:02] that you had an existing location for a sign that was part

[1:57:07] of your site plan.

[1:57:09] What was your understanding of being able to have a sign

[1:57:14] for, to operate at this business at that time?

[1:57:17] Do you recall?

[1:57:19] I, I don't recall. And I wasn't here at the time. I

[1:57:22] Mean, it is noted on your site plan

[1:57:24] that there would be a sign at that for this location.

[1:57:28] And I think that's a legitimate thing. Yeah.

[1:57:29] If, if I remember correctly, and I know that the, the,

[1:57:32] the town officials have actually

[1:57:33] changed since that point too.

[1:57:34] I'd have to defer back to that,

[1:57:36] those conversations if possible.

[1:57:37] But I think the conversation at that point was that if I was

[1:57:40] to move forward with doing anything, an additional signage,

[1:57:43] I would be before you.

[1:57:45] Yeah. Okay. I remember that was the understanding I had.

[1:57:50] And but you at no time had any indication

[1:57:53] that you would not be allowed to have a sign,

[1:57:56] but that you would just have to

[1:57:57] Go Oh, I was never given the

[1:57:58] indication I wouldn't be allowed to have a sign.

[1:57:59] No. Alright. Not this particular sign. A sign.

[1:58:01] Yeah, for sure. Yeah. Okay. A hundred percent

[1:58:04] Mr. Trip.

[1:58:05] I was gonna say that I, I spent a lot of time

[1:58:09] watching videos and that's

[1:58:12] the exact Im impression I got.

[1:58:14] And that's also the impression I got from reading the,

[1:58:18] the planning board minutes.

[1:58:20] You know, they pretty much washed their hands of any

[1:58:26] assistance on what the method

[1:58:30] for getting a sign would be, you know, which

[1:58:36] I guess kind of makes sense.

[1:58:37] But, you know, knowing that, as you said, the

[1:58:42] this is, this is not, you know, a a commercial

[1:58:47] district in, in town where there's lights everywhere,

[1:58:51] as you said that, you know, there's, there's

[1:58:55] no lights out on 180 7 H road, you know, so

[1:59:01] you, you need a, a illuminated sign in order for people to,

[1:59:05] to see it, you know, when the sun's down, you know.

[1:59:09] So, you know, I I,

[1:59:12] I don't wanna say that, that this is a, a,

[1:59:17] a misstep in the, in the process for, for the planning board

[1:59:21] because obviously, you know, that's what we're for,

[1:59:25] you know, to make a determination of, you know,

[1:59:31] what should be done in your particular situation.

[1:59:35] And like I said, it's one of those things that, you know,

[1:59:38] you need to have a sign that identifies

[1:59:41] where your business is

[1:59:43] and the sign should also, you know, give some indication as

[1:59:47] to, you know, what services

[1:59:49] or products you're, you're providing, you know, so it's,

[1:59:52] and it needs to be led.

[1:59:54] Yeah. That, that was my goal on the electronic greeter

[1:59:56] board was to, to allow people

[1:59:57] what services and products I have.

[1:59:59] Yeah. But I'm now just looking

[2:00:01] to now let people know I'm even there and open, so.

[2:00:03] Yeah. Well, you know,

[2:00:06] 'cause you know, I, I spent considerable time driving

[2:00:09] around, you know, dairy looking to see what kind of signs

[2:00:14] businesses in, in rural areas have,

[2:00:19] and I, I will admit that there,

[2:00:23] I don't believe I've seen any that are illuminated, but,

[2:00:29] but you know, the, they're

[2:00:34] fairly close to the road, you know, to where they're,

[2:00:37] they're highly observable now, which is, I think

[2:00:42] your, your, your sign is probably 50 feet off the road.

[2:00:45] No, it's not that far off. I think it might be 15,

[2:00:46] 20 feet off whatever the, the ordinance is. Yeah.

[2:00:49] But it's, it's something that, you know, you have to,

[2:00:54] you know, the, the sign has to serve its purpose, you know,

[2:00:58] if if it's, if it's, if you, if you don't notice it,

[2:01:02] then it's not serving its purpose

[2:01:04] and you're, you're, you're not providing a

[2:01:11] Was, sorry, I'm strip Was this rendering depicted,

[2:01:14] do you know, depicted within the site plan that was

[2:01:16] provided to planning with the pylon sign

[2:01:19] and the electronic messaging? Or was that

[2:01:22] I don't believe so. Okay.

[2:01:23] Yeah, I'm not certain, but I don't believe so.

[2:01:28] Mr. Don, any questions?

[2:01:30] I do not to belabor the,

[2:01:33] the light anymore,

[2:01:35] but kind of stepping on the back of what Mr.

[2:01:38] Tripp was saying, and an overarching question I have

[2:01:41] for discussion is, I, I have seen

[2:01:46] some, and I believe there was testimony last hearing

[2:01:50] of lights that projected up at a sign, as opposed, does,

[2:01:54] does anybody on the board have any thought as to this, any

[2:01:59] material difference between a light,

[2:02:03] a floodlight shining up at a sign as opposed to

[2:02:06] what we keep referring to

[2:02:07] as like a backlit sign in any material way?

[2:02:10] Does that change your opinion of light luminescence?

[2:02:13] We asked that specifically to planning

[2:02:15] and we did, the answer we got back was just the definition

[2:02:18] of what the difference between internal and external is.

[2:02:21] So I actually, I, it makes me think it's material,

[2:02:24] but I actually question honestly if everyone understands it.

[2:02:28] And to this specific question.

[2:02:31] I didn't see that one. Yeah.

[2:02:32] It's at number four.

[2:02:39] Yeah. Churches in residential neighborhoods shall not be

[2:02:42] internally lit, but maybe externally lit.

[2:02:45] And could you explain the significance of this

[2:02:49] and externally lit?

[2:02:50] Yeah. As Mr.

[2:02:51] Corbitt said, all, all you got was the definition

[2:02:53] between the differences, but not what the true,

[2:02:57] what the intention was, which,

[2:02:58] And certainly not in the context of, of, of this.

[2:03:02] Right. Right. And,

[2:03:03] and so as the board tries

[2:03:05] to figure out what's just in this matter

[2:03:07] and you're looking at the spirit of the ordinance

[2:03:09] and what's appropriate for this use

[2:03:13] getting you towards the hardship, this becomes kind

[2:03:16] of a significant piece to it.

[2:03:18] Right. What is the difference between the two?

[2:03:22] Certainly. And, and that's the, the discussion, right.

[2:03:24] And if the overarching objective is so that the sign is

[2:03:30] able to be read in times of, you know,

[2:03:32] the sun's not adequate.

[2:03:34] Right. Do you find a material difference in

[2:03:37] how it affects the surrounding areas as

[2:03:40] to whether the light's shining up or out? Oh yeah.

[2:03:42] So per, I didn't miss,

[2:03:43] I didn't understand the question at first to me, yeah.

[2:03:45] I would think that if it's externally lit, you know,

[2:03:48] almost a flood light shining on it, I think about trick

[2:03:50] or treating, you know, really when the houses have those

[2:03:52] kind of projecting the kids

[2:03:53] or somebody kicks it over within, you know,

[2:03:56] the first three cars that pull up.

[2:03:58] Now what happens when that flood light gets kicked

[2:03:59] and now it's shining directly into an abutters window rather

[2:04:02] than the internal lit that's just in

[2:04:04] that one spot all the time?

[2:04:05] I think you're opening up a lot of, a lot more cans

[2:04:08] of worms if it was external myself.

[2:04:10] But

[2:04:12] I, I would tend to agree,

[2:04:13] if you eliminate kids kicking it even right

[2:04:17] to your point is, is like, I would think

[2:04:19] that it would be more likely for a floodlight in,

[2:04:23] let's just say that it faces east

[2:04:26] and west for the sake of argument.

[2:04:27] Anybody on a light that's facing east on the Eastwood side

[2:04:31] of it is gonna,

[2:04:32] it's gonna be more like a beam facing into the house

[2:04:34] where this is just like radiant

[2:04:37] and not as egregious in that manner.

[2:04:39] Which I bring that up

[2:04:42] because that was something that was discussed prior.

[2:04:45] One of the opinions, let's

[2:04:47] Go by the thinking, I think if I may, it, it,

[2:04:50] it is also possible when you have those lights in the ground

[2:04:51] that are facing up, that they can, they can be, you know,

[2:04:54] manipulated and they could accidentally go somewhere.

[2:04:57] They could also affect traffic if they point at the road.

[2:05:00] I've, we've seen that in other towns that I've been in, so,

[2:05:03] Well, I think something that, something else

[2:05:05] that the voters mentioned at the last meeting was when,

[2:05:09] when the light, when the sign was on all the time, they said

[2:05:12] that it was very bright.

[2:05:16] I noticed on your sheet that you handed out that the,

[2:05:22] the Lutron has the ability

[2:05:27] to, to dim the intensity of the,

[2:05:31] the internal illumination. Is that correct?

[2:05:33] I don't know the answer to that. It it, it may,

[2:05:36] I just was focusing on, when I printed that out

[2:05:39] for you folks, I was focusing on the fact

[2:05:41] that it can go on at sunset.

[2:05:42] Yes. And off at nine. I, I didn't do the research on that.

[2:05:45] That might happen. That may happen.

[2:05:47] But like I said, I think, I think that was, that was one

[2:05:49] of the things that, that was the epiphany I had at the last

[2:05:52] meeting is after listening into the abutters for an hour

[2:05:57] or two, that it finally came down to, oh,

[2:06:00] the light's on all the time

[2:06:01] and it's really bright, you know, so we've,

[2:06:03] we've solved the problem with the light being on all the

[2:06:06] time, you know, and what I'm asking is, you know,

[2:06:09] is there something that can be done

[2:06:10] to make it not quite so bright,

[2:06:12] Mr.

[2:06:13] Trip? So per the document they gave us for the record

[2:06:17] under number one at the third bullet point Yeah.

[2:06:20] To set it, it says when you're turning it on

[2:06:22] or setting for an event specifically Sunset,

[2:06:24] you can select the action, select the lights you want,

[2:06:27] set them to on, or a specific dimming percentage.

[2:06:30] Yeah,

[2:06:31] I, I would be happy to look into that.

[2:06:33] I don't know the answer to that, but,

[2:06:34] 'cause like I said, date, Yeah, well obviously

[2:06:36] that would matter on whatever fixture was on the other side.

[2:06:38] Like not every light is dimmable,

[2:06:40] so we don't know what's inside the sign.

[2:06:41] Like if it's a fluorescent then no,

[2:06:43] but if it's, yeah, certain LEDs and yes or incandescent.

[2:06:50] Is it safe to say that it's,

[2:06:52] if it's an internally lit based on this conversation,

[2:06:55] that it's internally lit that it's an easier controlled

[2:06:59] light than just having an external flood floodlight

[2:07:03] flashing up on a sign?

[2:07:05] I would think so. I would think the pictures

[2:07:07] that we got last meeting of the steeple,

[2:07:11] that's no longer really a steeple I think kind

[2:07:13] of shows exactly where it can go wrong.

[2:07:15] Where you now just have the bat signal, you know,

[2:07:16] flying up into East Derry that internally lit.

[2:07:19] Yeah, it's more like a nightlight. And I think to Mr.

[2:07:23] Dallman's point, it's just kind of there

[2:07:26] humming at you all the time, rather than blasting at you

[2:07:28] depending on which angle you're at.

[2:07:30] But again, we have seen that it is a little bright,

[2:07:32] so I'd be curious on, you know, the looming capabilities

[2:07:36] that we have to lower it.

[2:07:38] Okay. Mr. Donlin, anything else?

[2:07:43] Any questions at all or?

[2:07:45] Not at this time, Mr. Chair.

[2:07:47] Mr. Dietzel, I'd like

[2:07:48] to know just a little bit more about the school.

[2:07:52] Mr. I'm sorry.

[2:07:57] I think I got a pretty good handle on the nursery,

[2:07:59] but the school, exactly.

[2:08:01] What are you you doing in there?

[2:08:04] When my son was in little league there, there was a place,

[2:08:07] it may still be there in Salem

[2:08:09] where they had like indoor batting cages

[2:08:12] and they had instruction instructions

[2:08:15] and my son took a a, a class from a,

[2:08:18] a catcher instructor down there

[2:08:21] and they had the teams would go in there

[2:08:24] and they'd have the spot for an hour.

[2:08:27] It was basically a place of practice indoors in the winter.

[2:08:31] And then they had instructors too.

[2:08:33] What's the nature of your school? Who uses it?

[2:08:36] Who are your clients? And the reason I'm asking is I'm

[2:08:39] trying to establish the need for just general passer buys

[2:08:44] to know that you're there versus people

[2:08:46] that are showing up there specifically for instruction

[2:08:51] or as a team or,

[2:08:54] Sure.

[2:08:55] No, I, I can answer that a hundred percent.

[2:08:57] One, what you described, what you first described

[2:08:59] that you took your son to is exactly

[2:09:01] what we do on one side of things.

[2:09:03] We have teams that come in from all surrounding areas

[2:09:07] that come in with their, their groups.

[2:09:09] Hu We have boy, every high school in the area,

[2:09:13] Pinkerton Academy, London area High School,

[2:09:16] Wyndham High School, Haverhill Salem,

[2:09:20] which has turnover every year and every week.

[2:09:22] So they have different players coming in,

[2:09:24] they're just learning how to drive

[2:09:27] or their parents are dropping 'em off.

[2:09:28] So it's not just a one person that just is

[2:09:30] with us for year after year.

[2:09:32] So they need to know

[2:09:33] where we are on any given day coming into us.

[2:09:35] So that's one group. So the, the practicing,

[2:09:38] we do instruction, catchers instruction, just like you said,

[2:09:41] hitting instruction.

[2:09:42] We have more technology than probably was there initially

[2:09:45] when you went down with your son.

[2:09:46] So we actually have classes and so forth that we go through

[2:09:49] and talk about progressions on pitching and health

[2:09:52] and fitness and arm care

[2:09:53] and all the things that need to be done, which we do

[2:09:56] with all kinds of individuals from all over the southern

[2:09:58] New Hampshire and, and in northern Massachusetts region

[2:10:02] we have little leagues everywhere from,

[2:10:04] I believe Dairy Little League has come in.

[2:10:05] We have Quinn Town, which is some towns west of us,

[2:10:09] lampre River, Sanborn, all kinds

[2:10:12] of people coming in for those type of things.

[2:10:14] Most of those classes are evening classes in the winter.

[2:10:17] And when I say evening in the winter,

[2:10:19] I'm co considering evening after, after dark.

[2:10:23] So after, you know,

[2:10:24] after dinner time, so 5, 6, 7 o'clock at night,

[2:10:27] these folks come in, they have a class,

[2:10:29] we offer different mini camps,

[2:10:32] pitching classes, hitting classes.

[2:10:34] So I don't know if that a hundred percent

[2:10:36] answered your question.

[2:10:38] It does.

[2:10:39] And if I may It does. Thank you.

[2:10:40] Yeah, I'm sorry, does, I apologize.

[2:10:42] I didn't mean to cut you off the, the last hearing.

[2:10:45] I, I know, I, I tried to make the point to that

[2:10:47] because of the nature of this baseball camp,

[2:10:49] it's gonna bring people that aren't familiar with the area

[2:10:53] that, that are not gonna be

[2:10:54] generally familiar with the area.

[2:10:56] So, okay, thank you.

[2:10:57] 'cause I think that was the thrust of my question. Yeah.

[2:11:00] Because I mean,

[2:11:01] you're not just gonna get some person off the

[2:11:04] street driving by.

[2:11:05] Somebody's going to be specifically

[2:11:07] looking for that building.

[2:11:08] It's not just, you know, some store

[2:11:11] where some guy might be hungry and get a snack

[2:11:14] and pass you by.

[2:11:15] 'cause he has no idea. You have your convenience store

[2:11:18] there, it's people specifically going tour

[2:11:22] to your business looking for it.

[2:11:25] So if they had their GPS,

[2:11:27] it'll say turn right here, or you have arrived.

[2:11:30] And my GPS sometimes it's too late

[2:11:35] and by the time it says you have arrived,

[2:11:37] I'm 50 feet past the entrance

[2:11:39] and I know that street, there's a difficult, it's difficult

[2:11:44] to find a place to turn around

[2:11:46] and especially if the traffic is heavy.

[2:11:49] And so I'm, I'm just trying to picture myself as a customer

[2:11:55] and how much I would need a sign there

[2:12:00] and I'll, I'll ponder that.

[2:12:01] So thank you. You've answered true in,

[2:12:03] In, in a lot of the,

[2:12:04] the business we had this winter just being open

[2:12:07] and being new to the area.

[2:12:08] And you know, the turnover will continue is

[2:12:11] that Hampstead Road is a busy road

[2:12:14] and it does connect the town of Derry to other towns.

[2:12:16] Now it connects it to sand down Chester

[2:12:19] Hampstead in a significant amount

[2:12:21] of the business we were able to gain where,

[2:12:22] because b people drove by

[2:12:24] and, you know, someone from Hampstead, little league,

[2:12:26] little league stopped in

[2:12:27] and said, Hey, what are you guys about?

[2:12:29] So yeah, that, that certainly is a need

[2:12:31] for sure on both ends of the spectrum.

[2:12:33] Yes. What you spoke to of coming down the street

[2:12:36] with your GPS, you know, on

[2:12:38] and folks just knowing our presence.

[2:12:41] Okay, thank you. Anything else Mr. Diesel?

[2:12:44] No, thank you Mr. Mr. Ani or Mr. Lusca, you have

[2:12:47] Anything?

[2:12:48] Actually, I do have a little bit.

[2:12:49] I didn't realize in the first one we were always talking

[2:12:51] about illumination, how bright it was that crown

[2:12:56] is a very bright crown in the very top of the post

[2:13:00] and that does quite a bit

[2:13:02] of illumination when it was still going on.

[2:13:04] It went by there a couple times

[2:13:05] and it was the brightest part

[2:13:07] where the sign wasn't the biggest offense, but that top was.

[2:13:12] And I just, one other question I have for you.

[2:13:14] I I could be wrong.

[2:13:16] I thought when we were talking before,

[2:13:17] and you're talking about your nursery

[2:13:19] and landscaping, you weren't open for the public,

[2:13:22] you were open for landscapers commercially?

[2:13:27] No, I don't, I don't think I misrepresented that. Okay.

[2:13:29] We've always been open to the public.

[2:13:30] I just want to deal with more landscape customers. Okay.

[2:13:33] We are still open to the public.

[2:13:35] We don't actively, if you live in town, which you all do,

[2:13:38] obviously you're not seeing us market ourselves out in

[2:13:41] newspapers or ads or anywhere else for, for retail.

[2:13:44] But we're happy to sell something to you if you come in.

[2:13:46] But I predominantly our

[2:13:48] businesses is the wholesale business.

[2:13:49] Alright. And I was, I misunderstood that part.

[2:13:52] Well, and, and in the planning notes I saw

[2:13:54] that it was indicated that it was primarily wholesale.

[2:13:58] So I didn't see any mis anything

[2:14:00] misleading about that at all.

[2:14:02] I think other commentary I heard suggested that

[2:14:06] the public may have been deceived by this,

[2:14:08] but I think that based on the application I saw

[2:14:11] with the planning board, they were very open about

[2:14:14] their intentions there.

[2:14:17] Yeah. So that's the part.

[2:14:19] So, you know, when we're talking about mono illuminations,

[2:14:21] when you compare the sign with the top,

[2:14:25] you see a dramatically chi difference.

[2:14:27] Yeah. I'm not sure what you mean by the top.

[2:14:29] Do you mean the, the top sign,

[2:14:30] The very, the very crown it says down lighting

[2:14:34] and that's not down lighting that's illuminating that top

[2:14:39] It, it is down lighting, although I agree with you, it is

[2:14:43] Brighter almost nut It is brighter than it needs to be

[2:14:46] for what the purpose it serves, it serves the purpose

[2:14:49] of showing the address of the, the, the building.

[2:14:52] I see. Which is, is something

[2:14:54] that is a public safety concern.

[2:14:55] I, you know, believe police and fire need

[2:14:57] to know that address.

[2:14:58] That being said, as I just just mentioned

[2:15:00] to my attorney here, I'm completely fine

[2:15:03] with removing those lights.

[2:15:05] I I have no concern with that whatsoever.

[2:15:08] I think they are somewhat unnecessary to, to, to,

[2:15:11] to gentleman's concern.

[2:15:13] And if, if we feel as though the sign is bright enough to

[2:15:17] continue to illuminate the, the address, I have no concerns.

[2:15:21] Okay. And else Mr. Ani?

[2:15:23] No, that was the only questions I had. Thank you. All

[2:15:25] Right Mr. Sca.

[2:15:26] I'm all set. Mr. Chair. Mr. Jen, you all set?

[2:15:29] I'm all set. Okay. Anybody else have any questions?

[2:15:34] Alright, well we're gonna go to Republic and,

[2:15:36] and get some rebuttal there.

[2:15:38] Thank you. Thank you very much.

[2:15:40] Alright folks, I'm sure somebody would like to come up

[2:15:43] and speak here.

[2:15:45] Is there anybody that wants to speak in favor

[2:15:47] of this application?

[2:15:50] So, you know, okay, I was just clarifying you. Yes sir.

[2:16:05] My name is Jim Foley.

[2:16:07] I live at 1 78 Hamstead Road here in Derry

[2:16:11] and I'm a direct ofbut to the

[2:16:13] applicant's property.

[2:16:16] I kind of feel like the

[2:16:20] Tom Hank's character in Forrest Gump when he went

[2:16:23] to the White House for the third time.

[2:16:25] Here we are again. So a couple of things.

[2:16:30] First of all, I just wanna make it clear that we seem

[2:16:33] to be getting on the path again

[2:16:35] of conflating the business with the sign.

[2:16:38] We know what the business does, we understand the business,

[2:16:41] we understand how it, what it brings to the town.

[2:16:44] Nonetheless, this variance is for the sign.

[2:16:48] The second thing is, I want to reiterate is the fact

[2:16:52] that the planning board said that this is approved use on

[2:16:56] that lot does not turn that lot into commercial zone.

[2:17:02] And the continual effort to bootstrap that it's appropriate

[2:17:06] to have a sign for this type

[2:17:08] of business does not apply here.

[2:17:11] But my main argument is this.

[2:17:15] And it was not addressed in any of the hearings previous

[2:17:17] to this or again, tonight the court ruled

[2:17:22] that the applicant has not shown the unnecessary hardship

[2:17:28] to grant this variance.

[2:17:30] Nothing has changed in that land

[2:17:34] since the court made its ruling

[2:17:37] that there is no unnecessary hardship.

[2:17:40] The lots the same size, the buildings are the same,

[2:17:44] the buildings are the same distance off of the property.

[2:17:47] The parking lots are same, the trees are the same,

[2:17:50] the bushes are the same, the neighborhood is the same,

[2:17:53] the zoning is the same.

[2:17:55] But this is not an area of variance. It's a use variance.

[2:17:58] And so you struck the cord about hardship

[2:18:01] and so we're gonna get to that in just a minute.

[2:18:03] But how do you disseminate the difference between

[2:18:06] what you're, you're citing, which is the area variance,

[2:18:10] frontage, square foot, whatever, and the use variance,

[2:18:14] The Court.

[2:18:15] And that's what we're talking about. Court already

[2:18:16] Ruled on that.

[2:18:18] The court already ruled on that.

[2:18:21] But, but this is not that case, Jim.

[2:18:23] And you have to make the, it

[2:18:24] Is the exact same case.

[2:18:25] You have to make the argument for this.

[2:18:27] If you want to hear the board's ears

[2:18:30] Make the argument for what I made the argument in front

[2:18:32] of the superior court in one, it

[2:18:34] Has nothing to do with this case.

[2:18:35] This board has found this to be a new application and

[2:18:37] therefore you have to present to this.

[2:18:39] And now my question to you is this, which is,

[2:18:42] this is a use variance, not an area variance.

[2:18:45] How do you disseminate and how do you correct that?

[2:18:48] Then I would direct the,

[2:18:49] I would ask the the board to look at the same fact.

[2:18:51] You can come in front of this board as many times

[2:18:53] as you want and you can bring up as many

[2:18:55] different variations of this sign that you want.

[2:18:59] If it doesn't meet the residential sign agreements, it does.

[2:19:03] It's, it's, it's, it doesn't, it's not valid

[2:19:06] Court.

[2:19:07] So do you, do you not agree, Jim, that is

[2:19:10] There any opportunity that I

[2:19:11] could actually finish the sentence? Sure.

[2:19:12] Go ahead and finish the sentence. And

[2:19:14] That's exactly what the court ruled.

[2:19:16] There is no unnecessary hardship in this.

[2:19:19] He was asking for a use variance before

[2:19:21] and putting the sign up.

[2:19:24] So are you done with your sentence?

[2:19:25] So now I can interject and ask you a question. Sure.

[2:19:28] Which is, isn't there a hardship when they

[2:19:33] can establish a business as a use variance in

[2:19:37] what should go on with what should be part

[2:19:40] of a business use?

[2:19:41] Because I get, I get lost when you say that the,

[2:19:46] that this is an application for a sign or, or just

[2:19:51] because the business is approved

[2:19:52] or as a use, it doesn't authorize it

[2:19:55] to operate as a business. I don't quite

[2:19:57] Get that. I didn't, I did not say that.

[2:19:58] Well go ahead and clarify The argument in front

[2:20:00] of the superior court and you were there was that

[2:20:05] You keep bringing up the prior case.

[2:20:07] And as you would know at any,

[2:20:09] at any other time, if you remove this, it's

[2:20:11] Going back to the superior court.

[2:20:12] But the statute is that that that

[2:20:16] that a decision on one case is not a, a,

[2:20:19] a prerequisite for another.

[2:20:22] But the fact is, is

[2:20:23] that the precedent has been set, has it not?

[2:20:27] I don't know that it has. What's

[2:20:29] that? I don't know that it has

[2:20:30] Then, then, then I think that you're completely wrong

[2:20:33] and out of bounds on that, the precedents have been set,

[2:20:36] the sign that was that the applicant a application was

[2:20:39] before didn't fit the sign requirements

[2:20:42] of a residential area,

[2:20:45] nor does this sign, even though it's different than

[2:20:47] the sign that was done before.

[2:20:49] And I don't Understand if they don't want, they want

[2:20:52] to put up an oversized commercial sign in a residential

[2:20:55] area, whatever the design of

[2:20:57] that sign is doesn't change that fact.

[2:21:00] So so why do you say it's oversized?

[2:21:03] Because there's in within the I don't think I need to,

[2:21:07] I don't educate the board on

[2:21:09] what signs are allowed in a residential area. Do I?

[2:21:11] Well what what happens is that, that one

[2:21:14] of your other abutters has pointed out the last hearing

[2:21:17] what's, what's an appropriate size for this.

[2:21:20] And he enlightened the board to something

[2:21:22] that caused ma a few of us

[2:21:24] to start researching the three pages of our town ordinances.

[2:21:28] And that is the, the square footage of signs

[2:21:31] that's appropriate usually under the planning board's

[2:21:33] discretion often saw, seen at the beginning

[2:21:37] of a development or a street.

[2:21:40] And, and the questions from the board to the, from the board

[2:21:44] to the planning director are, are the significance

[2:21:48] of the variations of the different sizes

[2:21:50] that are permitted in the ordinances through the town.

[2:21:54] One sign identifying a multifamily complex development

[2:21:57] should be allowed, provided that does not exceed

[2:21:59] 24 square feet in area.

[2:22:00] Right. Residents may erect a single free standing sign not

[2:22:05] exceed, exceeding three square feet in area showing the

[2:22:08] owner's name and or address pupil conducting home

[2:22:11] occupations may further erect a single sign not

[2:22:14] to exceed three square feet, if so approved

[2:22:16] by the zoning board of adjustment. So

[2:22:18] Where's the part in there about a church in a,

[2:22:21] in a residential zone allowed to have a 24 square foot sign?

[2:22:26] Are you citing that because that's,

[2:22:28] that's, that's, it's not a church.

[2:22:30] It doesn't matter. It's not a church.

[2:22:31] It's, it's what the, what the board's going to look at is

[2:22:34] what is the spirit of the ordinance?

[2:22:35] What is the hardship?

[2:22:37] And those are the questions that starts being hardship here.

[2:22:40] What is the hardship? What a, what

[2:22:42] hardship has the application,

[2:22:44] has the applicant put forth in any of these hearings

[2:22:47] to have that oversized?

[2:22:49] Do you not think that a, that a business use in a,

[2:22:51] in an unusual circumstance is not a hardship if

[2:22:55] they cannot have a sign? No,

[2:22:56] Don't.

[2:22:57] As a matter of fact, a matter of fact the exact case on that

[2:23:00] is carbon all versus the town

[2:23:02] of Exter one 19 New Hampshire 2 59.

[2:23:05] Okay. Ver Verbatim on that very point.

[2:23:08] The fact that, that as little,

[2:23:10] that this claim hardship has little to do

[2:23:13] with the property's physical attributes.

[2:23:15] It it, but this isn't about physical attribute,

[2:23:18] but what is this is about,

[2:23:19] you keep going back to Can I finish?

[2:23:21] No, you can, you, you, you can give

[2:23:23] and take a little bit, Jim. No,

[2:23:24] I'm not.

[2:23:25] This is, but this seems to be all but this

[2:23:27] Is the but this is the point.

[2:23:28] Okay. You make a point and you want a filibuster,

[2:23:31] but you don't want do, I'm not filibuster

[2:23:32] I'm trying to read the end of the

[2:23:33] Sentence.

[2:23:34] But here here's the point, okay.

[2:23:35] Which is you keep citing that this is an area variance

[2:23:38] and it's not, it's a use variance and those are

[2:23:40] Different. This is, I do

[2:23:42] Not see that.

[2:23:43] And now that you're citing carbon V versus Exeter,

[2:23:45] you're talking about about a, an area variance

[2:23:48] and you're not using the, the, the proper terminology,

[2:23:51] which is a use variance.

[2:23:53] The business preference

[2:23:55] and nu the claim hardship has little to do

[2:23:59] with the property's physical attributes,

[2:24:01] but with bird's business preference

[2:24:03] and economic strategies, carbon all says

[2:24:07] specifically the fact that you can't do

[2:24:10] as well without the sign is not a reason

[2:24:12] to overcome a hardship use specifically.

[2:24:17] This is the we, they went before the superior court

[2:24:20] and you can talk all you want that that was that case.

[2:24:22] There's no significant difference

[2:24:24] between the request in this one,

[2:24:26] which is a sign oversized commercial sign in a residential

[2:24:29] area and the previous one which you lost.

[2:24:34] And that seems to be a bone of contention with you all.

[2:24:38] I don't think the fact of the matter is fact

[2:24:39] that we lost is a bone of contention. Oh,

[2:24:41] You, that re was reversed.

[2:24:44] Your, your application, your, your decision was reversed

[2:24:48] because there was no evidence brought up, nothing

[2:24:52] that was said at the hearings

[2:24:54] or in the Superior Court hearing that said that there was an

[2:24:59] undue hardship with contained within the land

[2:25:03] that would allow the erection of that sign.

[2:25:06] The difference is it didn't get specified in the,

[2:25:08] in the certified record, Jim, that's

[2:25:11] It.

[2:25:12] Oh, no, that's, that's not, that's not true.

[2:25:14] That is true. I would ask you then

[2:25:16] to read section three of the court's ruling

[2:25:18] who found within the certified record, found within

[2:25:21] what passes for a certified record found within

[2:25:25] that certified record that the court had failed.

[2:25:27] That this board had failed to find the unnecessary hardship

[2:25:31] and nothing has changed since that time.

[2:25:33] Okay. The lot is the same.

[2:25:35] The buildings are the same, the distance off is the same.

[2:25:38] So you can throw up any sort of on sort

[2:25:40] of changes in the sign that you wish to.

[2:25:42] The fact of the matter is nothing has changed,

[2:25:44] has not overcome that aspect of it.

[2:25:47] The court found on the other, on the other

[2:25:49] variance request, there was no record. I agree with that.

[2:25:53] Okay. Well, that's what I said.

[2:25:54] But you went on telling me that wasn't the case and

[2:25:57] The unnecessary hardship.

[2:25:59] He found evidence,

[2:26:02] he separated this into three separate areas.

[2:26:06] Three separate sections.

[2:26:07] Section three unnecessary hardship found.

[2:26:10] He said there's sufficient evidence from the ruling below

[2:26:13] that no hardship existed.

[2:26:17] That's what the, that's what the decision says.

[2:26:19] It's clearly in the decision.

[2:26:22] Okay. Go ahead. Finish up.

[2:26:24] I, there's nothing else to be said.

[2:26:28] The fact of the matter is, is thank you.

[2:26:29] The applicant has not, has not

[2:26:33] overcome the unnecessary hardship

[2:26:34] and quite frankly, hasn't even argued about any

[2:26:37] of the other, hasn't presented any

[2:26:39] of the evidence about the other ones about substantial

[2:26:41] justice, spirits of the ordinance contra the public

[2:26:44] interest or land values.

[2:26:46] Would you like him to come up and do that? Now?

[2:26:50] I'm sure he'll come up with a rebuttal,

[2:26:52] But that'd be do it before it's his right. I

[2:26:54] Don't, I really don't.

[2:26:55] You know, you, you folks sit there and say,

[2:26:57] and get all concerned

[2:26:58] because we appear to be confrontational.

[2:27:02] Well, this is why you don't seem to take us seriously. Don't

[2:27:05] You take, take it very seriously.

[2:27:07] And what you can, what you can see if you watch the last

[2:27:10] hearing is your demeanor versus the that of your neighbors'.

[2:27:13] We heard nothing different

[2:27:15] But your behavior versus

[2:27:16] that of your neighbors and your behavior.

[2:27:18] What, sir? There was a nicer exchange versus your,

[2:27:20] your blasting us.

[2:27:22] And, and when we, when you try to make a point

[2:27:25] and I try to interject

[2:27:26] and ask that question interrupt to understand my abuse,

[2:27:29] you can, you can terminology put it whatever

[2:27:31] terminology you want.

[2:27:33] Okay.

[2:27:34] But You, if, if you wanna make bullet points just to

[2:27:36] what you've said so it's clear for the record,

[2:27:38] feel free. I won't interrupt.

[2:27:39] I did make my bullet points. Okay. Clear. This is this.

[2:27:41] Thank you. And I'll state it again.

[2:27:42] You're all set. You're all set.

[2:27:44] Thank you. And you wonder why

[2:27:47] town counselors asked me Thank you to come in front of you.

[2:27:50] You're all set. Thank you, Mr. Foley.

[2:27:55] Anybody else?

[2:28:04] Mr. If you could back, yeah. Yes, Mr. French. Thank you.

[2:28:07] Thank you

[2:28:09] Mr. Rose.

[2:28:10] You made some great points.

[2:28:11] I'll have you introduce yourself for the record.

[2:28:14] Do I really need to by now?

[2:28:16] Andrew Roja, 1 64 Hampstead Road in Derry.

[2:28:23] How are you all doing tonight?

[2:28:25] It's a happy night. All right. Same as last time.

[2:28:29] I have a prepared statement

[2:28:31] and then I have some additional points I'd

[2:28:32] like to discuss with you guys.

[2:28:35] We met here a month ago,

[2:28:37] and we've already reviewed the facts.

[2:28:40] That being said, I do wish to reiterate a few things as well

[2:28:44] as make a few new points.

[2:28:46] The New Hampshire Superior Court did reverse the prior

[2:28:49] variance outright on the basis

[2:28:50] that it found the applicant did not meet the statutory

[2:28:53] requirement of unnecessary hardship, which requires

[2:28:57] that hardship arise from special conditions

[2:28:59] of the property itself, not the owner's business needs.

[2:29:03] The special conditions of the property have not

[2:29:05] changed since that time.

[2:29:07] The applicant argued

[2:29:08] that three factors created special conditions.

[2:29:11] One was distance from the road, the building is set back,

[2:29:14] but the court found no evidence that complying

[2:29:17] with the ordinances sign size

[2:29:18] or lighting limits imposed in unnecessary hardship.

[2:29:22] The setback alone does not justify a larger

[2:29:24] or illuminated sign trees surrounding the property.

[2:29:28] Many were planted by the applicant

[2:29:30] and the court emphasized

[2:29:31] that self-created conditions cannot establish hardship.

[2:29:34] Simply having trees does not legally justify

[2:29:37] exceeding the sign limits.

[2:29:39] And three nature of the business operating a permitted

[2:29:42] commercial business does not create a special

[2:29:45] condition of the land.

[2:29:46] The court rejected the argument that the sign was necessary

[2:29:49] for business viability.

[2:29:51] Hardship must relate to the property itself,

[2:29:54] not the owner's operational needs

[2:29:56] because none of these factors constitute a

[2:29:59] legally sufficient hardship.

[2:30:00] The court concluded that the variance should have been

[2:30:03] denied at the town ZBA level.

[2:30:05] We previously discussed the issues that Mr.

[2:30:09] Yanko has created since the time

[2:30:11] that the Superior Court declared the ZBA variance null

[2:30:15] and void in December of 2025.

[2:30:18] Those, those problems

[2:30:21] that he's created include that Mr.

[2:30:24] Yco kept the illegal signage in place for four months.

[2:30:27] In that time, Gary's code enforcement

[2:30:29] attempted to contact Mr.

[2:30:31] Yco to comply with zoning ordinances

[2:30:34] and were ignored at every turn.

[2:30:36] Mr. Yco had the signage brightness at a level that,

[2:30:40] although the town was unable

[2:30:42] to formally test was clearly too bright.

[2:30:45] Mr. Yco had spotlights aimed in the air further causing

[2:30:49] light pollution, and Mr.

[2:30:52] Yco was leaving his signage on all night

[2:30:55] after our last ZBA meeting a month ago.

[2:30:57] Mr. Yco did finally come into compliance

[2:31:00] by taking the signage down.

[2:31:03] And it seems that the public shaming

[2:31:05] that happened here a month ago was what it took

[2:31:08] to finally get him to come into compliance.

[2:31:15] To repeat a still very applicable part of my previous speech

[2:31:20] to this board, granting a variance is an exercise

[2:31:23] of discretion and trust.

[2:31:25] It allows an exception to rules that apply to everyone else.

[2:31:29] And it is reasonable still for this board

[2:31:32] to consider whether that discretion is being sought in good

[2:31:35] faith and with a willingness to comply with the outcome.

[2:31:38] Mr. Yco has demonstrated to us all that he only cares

[2:31:43] to come into compliance when he thinks it best suits him

[2:31:46] and not when the law requires it,

[2:31:48] and certainly not for the betterment of his community.

[2:31:51] For all of these reasons, I respectfully request

[2:31:53] that the board deny the variance request.

[2:31:58] Mr. Rose? Yes, Mr.

[2:31:59] Corbert? Good points. I had had two that I wanted to talk

[2:32:02] to and I admittedly lost one of them as soon

[2:32:05] as I said, oh, I wanna speak to that.

[2:32:06] Right before, I think it was just

[2:32:10] before the, the public shaming portion.

[2:32:12] You had a, you had a point.

[2:32:13] What were, did you go over like your two

[2:32:15] or three points right before that one?

[2:32:17] Are are you asking for just the bullet points?

[2:32:20] He kept the illegal signage in place for four months, et

[2:32:23] Cetera. Prior. Prior, I think prior to that.

[2:32:24] Prior to that,

[2:32:30] do you want to just look at this?

[2:32:32] That would be okay, if you don't mind. Thank you.

[2:32:34] Hang on. Oh, sorry. I actually have to give it to

[2:32:37] Someone.

[2:32:39] Sorry. Thank you. And I'll pass that back once I see it.

[2:32:43] Mr. Je, one of the things

[2:32:44] that you had done at the prior meeting was you had

[2:32:48] brought some points forward relative to other comp, I guess,

[2:32:53] competitors of other businesses

[2:32:55] in the Yeah, in the community.

[2:32:56] I think that testimony was pretty enlightening.

[2:33:00] Thank you. You know, the, the other things

[2:33:03] that you're saying, like the public shaming

[2:33:07] and whatnot, I don't know that that's necessarily the case,

[2:33:12] but the, the other part of this is the

[2:33:17] hardship is self-imposed.

[2:33:21] Would you not agree that if this applicant

[2:33:25] takes a business proposal, takes it to the planning board,

[2:33:30] the planning board reviews, that they see that there's a

[2:33:34] location for a sign on there that this owner is,

[2:33:38] is expecting to open up a business in that area.

[2:33:41] It's a conforming business from the agricultural aspect and,

[2:33:46] and is given that green light with the understanding

[2:33:49] that he would be able to have a sign there, wouldn't you,

[2:33:53] Indic, wouldn't you believe that withdrawing that

[2:33:56] after the fact creates a hardship for him

[2:33:58] and is not self-imposed?

[2:34:01] So I have not seen the, the drawing that you're referring

[2:34:05] to where it shows the sign,

[2:34:06] but my understanding from all

[2:34:07] of the discussion is it didn't show a size of the sign.

[2:34:11] It showed an approximate location for a sign.

[2:34:13] And I would argue Mr. Perkins, that absolutely not.

[2:34:17] It doesn't, you, you know, at at, at the planning board.

[2:34:22] I would not look at, hey, there needs to be a sign here

[2:34:24] and assume that it's a non-conforming sign

[2:34:27] that's being requested.

[2:34:28] There are such things as conforming signs in the LMDR

[2:34:34] and thank you for helping me segue into the bottom images.

[2:34:40] All four from the right to left are in our area

[2:34:45] signs that are conforming.

[2:34:47] Right. And if you look at the bottom right image,

[2:34:49] that is a agricultural business

[2:34:52] that is right down the road from Mr.

[2:34:54] AKA's business. Right. That is a conforming sign.

[2:34:58] And, and can I ask you, what's the size of the sign?

[2:35:01] That one is actually fairly small. It's oval.

[2:35:04] I'm not sure. I haven't measured it.

[2:35:06] I would say it's, it, it's under three square feet.

[2:35:10] I'm not sure what it is per size.

[2:35:13] Well, a, a regular sign,

[2:35:15] like the groundhog sign up there is larger than four

[2:35:18] by six. Wouldn't you say

[2:35:20] The groundhog sign is actually

[2:35:23] deceivingly small from the image.

[2:35:26] I'm, again, I don't have square footage,

[2:35:27] but that's actually quite a small sign.

[2:35:30] It's just a very zoomed image.

[2:35:31] Right. And so the point, the, the point

[2:35:33] that I'm getting at and, and I understand your, your passion

[2:35:37] and the, and the speech and whatnot.

[2:35:39] There's a couple of presumptions that are going on here.

[2:35:42] Number one, that we've already made a decision.

[2:35:44] Number two, that the,

[2:35:46] I I don't think I said that There's presumptions,

[2:35:48] there's presumptions either in, in, in

[2:35:51] what you were reading to Mr.

[2:35:53] Corbet or either or from Mr. Foley.

[2:35:56] There's presumptions that the board

[2:35:58] I'm not Mr. Foley, sir.

[2:35:59] It doesn't, it doesn't matter. Okay.

[2:36:01] It's, you are a group

[2:36:02] and you are a group that were,

[2:36:04] that contested this into the higher court.

[2:36:06] Correct. You were part of at all.

[2:36:08] I I was a part of that court

[2:36:10] Case.

[2:36:11] So, so you just, the generalization. Right.

[2:36:12] And so we're trying to get to what the hardship is

[2:36:14] and if there's existing, if there is an existing hardship

[2:36:18] and the, and, and there are established rules

[2:36:21] for signs throughout the community.

[2:36:23] Usually they focus around 24 square feet.

[2:36:28] Your comment is, well, yes, they may have had this

[2:36:32] with the planning board

[2:36:33] and there was a location established for it,

[2:36:36] but it was a non-con,

[2:36:37] no one knew it would be a non-conforming sign.

[2:36:39] So my question to you is, what's a non-conforming sign?

[2:36:43] Especially in an area that it's, it's unfamiliar

[2:36:46] with this type of practice.

[2:36:48] Yeah, so that, that's something that,

[2:36:51] that we actually touched on when I was up here a month ago.

[2:36:54] And at our previous ZBA meetings,

[2:36:59] there was a, an assertion

[2:37:03] that a conforming sign was 24 square feet

[2:37:07] or under and unlit.

[2:37:09] And even at the last meeting a month ago, I followed

[2:37:12] that assertion because that was the last I heard.

[2:37:14] And if you recall on the top right, I made a rendering

[2:37:19] of what he could potentially have within that.

[2:37:24] Personally, I would actually be okay

[2:37:26] with a 24 square foot or under sign.

[2:37:28] As long as it's unlit, I think that it looks reasonable.

[2:37:34] I don't know what anybody else feels,

[2:37:37] and that's not really my problem, but that's what I feel.

[2:37:41] That being said, there seems to be some discussion now

[2:37:45] that maybe within the LMDR ordinance, it, it,

[2:37:50] it's actually limited to three square feet or under.

[2:37:53] And I'm not really sure how I feel about

[2:37:57] that, if I'm being honest.

[2:37:59] I'm very concerned about this, you know, 50 ish square foot

[2:38:03] that we're talking about right now.

[2:38:05] It looks massive. Mr.

[2:38:06] Corbett, you pointed out it's really tall.

[2:38:09] It's unnecessarily tall.

[2:38:14] And somebody, I apologize,

[2:38:18] I don't recall who I think it was Mr.

[2:38:19] Donlin pointed out that it also has a lit crown,

[2:38:21] which is just a, another bright,

[2:38:24] you know, strange thing on it.

[2:38:25] But you know, to answer your question directly, I don't know

[2:38:29] what the ordinance calls for three or 24

[2:38:32] and I don't know how I feel about the 24.

[2:38:34] I think I'm okay with that.

[2:38:37] Either way, it's supposed to be an unlit sign.

[2:38:40] And I do actually want to touch on that

[2:38:43] because you guys were discussing it a little while ago.

[2:38:46] Mr. Donlin noted the idea of an internal

[2:38:50] or external lit sign

[2:38:53] and kind of was trying to pose the question of, you know,

[2:38:56] how is that, how is one different than the other?

[2:38:59] And Mr.

[2:39:00] Corbett, I I, I'm trying to keep this a a friendly chat back

[2:39:03] and forth, but I do take exception to what you said

[2:39:07] where you said that, you know, if,

[2:39:10] if you put in the externally lit sign, a kid is likely

[2:39:13] to kick it over and then

[2:39:14] it's gonna be pointing somewhere else.

[2:39:16] Personally, I think better of our town than that.

[2:39:19] I don't think that that's a high risk scenario

[2:39:22] that we should be discussing here.

[2:39:24] I I, I, I don't like that assertion.

[2:39:26] Well, but I'll

[2:39:28] But to, to, to, to back that up if I can.

[2:39:31] I'm not it, it's just, you know, if that were to happen,

[2:39:36] it is possible.

[2:39:37] Sure. Just like any other maintenance thing.

[2:39:41] What if a kid took a baseball bat

[2:39:42] to the signed Well, you repair it. No. If, I

[2:39:44] Mean, and if I may, I didn't mean it,

[2:39:46] ill will no will, ill will intended.

[2:39:47] Okay. The exact image that I had Halloween might've been

[2:39:50] where off I think of the kids just as they're running up

[2:39:53] to the house just excited.

[2:39:54] They're not paying attention as they run up.

[2:39:56] It's a cord, it's a kit, not an

[2:39:57] intentional, I'm looking at the sign.

[2:39:58] Sure. And kicking. So did not mean that appreciate that.

[2:40:01] To be very honest, what I was thinking,

[2:40:03] and it was actually the point that I was going back to

[2:40:05] the spotlights in the air, that was exactly

[2:40:07] what it had me thinking of was that Yeah.

[2:40:09] When before those were aimed at the steeple,

[2:40:12] but then when the steeple was gone,

[2:40:13] those lights were still permitted.

[2:40:14] Yeah. So what we ended up having was lights that were now,

[2:40:17] as I referred to as the bat signal,

[2:40:18] the lights just shining to nowhere.

[2:40:20] Right. That's exactly what I was picturing when I thought

[2:40:23] of the external one then aimed at the sign,

[2:40:25] if it was a car backing in, if it was, you know, again,

[2:40:27] just the kid running up, running to the car,

[2:40:29] running from the car and just whatever.

[2:40:31] Now all of a sudden it's shining. Yeah.

[2:40:33] Honestly, the thought I had was shining directly into the

[2:40:35] Davis' bedroom and

[2:40:36] was trying to prevent something like that.

[2:40:38] Okay. So, you know, just just to touch on that,

[2:40:41] the externally lit sign, that lighting

[2:40:44] to my understanding is a part of the sign, so to speak.

[2:40:48] I know that it's staked into the ground separate,

[2:40:50] but as, as, as a use case, it is part of the sign, you know,

[2:40:54] and, and so if the sign were ever removed, yes,

[2:40:58] you have a light pointing out into the air,

[2:41:00] but that's a pretty simple call into, well,

[2:41:04] first of all, your neighbor.

[2:41:05] But then if that goes nowhere into code enforcement saying,

[2:41:07] Hey, there's this leftover thing that shouldn't be there.

[2:41:11] That being said, I, I do just want

[2:41:13] to touch on there actually is a difference

[2:41:15] between an externally lit and an

[2:41:17] and an internally lit sign from a functional standpoint.

[2:41:22] When, when you have a externally lit sign,

[2:41:27] the only outward shining

[2:41:30] that you get away from the sign is whatever is

[2:41:33] reflected off of that sign.

[2:41:36] If you have an internally lit sign,

[2:41:38] it is emanating light outward

[2:41:41] toward the neighbors by design.

[2:41:44] It's, it's the primary thing that it does.

[2:41:47] So, you know, we, if we want to talk about what is the,

[2:41:50] the functional difference, it's huge.

[2:41:52] It's, it's actually either I, I'm shining a light at you

[2:41:56] or I'm shining a light at that wall

[2:41:58] and a little bit of that light reflects back at you.

[2:42:00] That's, that, that's a big difference.

[2:42:02] Yeah. And I think that was what Mr.

[2:42:04] And I were kind of kicking back and forth, did we?

[2:42:07] And even put in perfect world, it's glowing, you know,

[2:42:10] as you said, radiating right now as we see,

[2:42:13] it's not glowing, you know, it's, it's shining.

[2:42:15] So Devin, say I agree with those two things. Yeah.

[2:42:18] Before I go to the other question I have, I don't want

[2:42:21] to interrupt you and chain and go off,

[2:42:25] but I, I think it's a good point on

[2:42:26] that a an external could be hardwired.

[2:42:28] So I think that's the, the possibility.

[2:42:30] I didn't think of that. Right. Are you sent on this portion?

[2:42:33] Can I go to my other question or do you want me to wait?

[2:42:35] Yeah, please. Okay. It's the only one.

[2:42:36] And it came back

[2:42:37] and it was on the hardship, it was on the trees when I took

[2:42:41] that is I, I read it through

[2:42:43] with the superior court findings as well.

[2:42:45] Yeah. And I didn't,

[2:42:47] I don't think it was misrepresented in any way.

[2:42:49] I, I honestly felt that it was misunderstood from

[2:42:55] what's the right word for the judge,

[2:42:56] but from the judge that when the trees were discussed

[2:43:01] and perhaps during a rebuttal, whatever,

[2:43:03] even your feedback on it, I took the trees as

[2:43:06] that they were put in to proactively try

[2:43:09] to create more distance with the houses in the back just

[2:43:12] to create more of a buffer.

[2:43:14] Not that because the buffer was there, the sign was needed.

[2:43:19] Interesting. During the minutes of it,

[2:43:23] that was more of how it was depicted.

[2:43:24] And that, that's the only thing it,

[2:43:25] what you read was directly from the court minutes.

[2:43:27] So as I said, I don't think it was

[2:43:29] intentionally misrepresented on your part.

[2:43:31] I don't think he misrepresent or misrepresented.

[2:43:33] I think he may have just misinterpreted. Okay.

[2:43:35] So that was just my only takeaway.

[2:43:36] Otherwise I thought it was all really good points.

[2:43:38] Okay. I'm, I'm,

[2:43:40] I don't have a response to that either way.

[2:43:42] Oh, okay. Fair

[2:43:43] Point.

[2:43:44] When, when you're talking about the 60 square feet

[2:43:47] or the, I'm sorry, how big is it?

[2:43:49] 50 50 square

[2:43:51] Feet.

[2:43:52] Could, could we actually clarify that?

[2:43:53] I don't think in this whole meeting we've

[2:43:54] clarified what the size is. Yeah, it's

[2:43:56] 42.5 right now. So

[2:43:57] It's, it is 42.5 60 Feet across and 1 0 2 down.

[2:44:01] But that's just the cabinets.

[2:44:03] Okay. Thank you. Sorry Mr. Perkins.

[2:44:05] Well, no, that's fine. And I think Mr.

[2:44:07] Trip has brought something forward to my attention as well.

[2:44:10] But you know, one, one box

[2:44:15] is certainly less than the 24 square feet that's allowed

[2:44:19] and I think permitted in this district as well,

[2:44:21] under certain circumstances.

[2:44:23] And, but when you're citing the, the total size,

[2:44:27] which was 50 square feet, you're talking about two signs.

[2:44:32] But these are a sign for each business

[2:44:34] that is operating at that facility.

[2:44:38] Yeah. You know, you,

[2:44:39] you did bring this up at our last meeting

[2:44:41] and I, I, I very much disagree with it.

[2:44:46] I have an LLC registered to my property

[2:44:48] 'cause I have a home office there,

[2:44:50] and I could very easily register three more LLCs

[2:44:55] and put up a sign for each one

[2:44:57] and try to claim that I'm within the ordinance

[2:45:00] and I don't need a variance.

[2:45:02] And then I could have as many square feet

[2:45:04] of signage as I want if I just

[2:45:05] Register an I.

[2:45:06] That's where I'm going with it. I i, it's going back to the,

[2:45:09] the hardship question, which is that he has,

[2:45:12] he's been given approval for use here by the planning board

[2:45:16] and for both uses.

[2:45:17] And what we're trying to get down to the bottom to is

[2:45:23] does each business, should each

[2:45:26] of the two businesses be permitted

[2:45:28] to have its own individual sign?

[2:45:31] I I do not think so.

[2:45:33] They are both owned by the same person,

[2:45:35] the same entity really.

[2:45:38] I mean, this, we're talking about bird enterprises

[2:45:40] and he may run two different profit streams.

[2:45:44] There being, you know, I

[2:45:47] Yeah, but now you're kind of touching into that,

[2:45:48] that court, that higher court ruling.

[2:45:50] Right. Which is that the finance is, is not a, a problem,

[2:45:54] you know, should not be a,

[2:45:56] I I'm not, I'm not trying to touch into

[2:45:58] that. I'm not talking about the dollars,

[2:46:00] But to this point, right, you're talking about, well,

[2:46:02] it's Bird Enterprises.

[2:46:03] He owns both of them, but it's not Bird Enterprises

[2:46:07] that's selling the unique features of each

[2:46:10] of the two businesses.

[2:46:11] One's a baseball camp, one's trees, plants,

[2:46:16] It, it's, it's one address.

[2:46:19] It's one building. It's one person.

[2:46:22] I'm, I'm sorry, I, I just, I don't see it. Okay.

[2:46:25] I just wanted to clarify my question so I knew

[2:46:28] what you were, you were answering to.

[2:46:29] Yeah. There, there's dispute going back

[2:46:31] and forth about not contentious dispute, about whether

[2:46:36] or not it should be internally lit

[2:46:38] or externally lit, what the differences are.

[2:46:41] There's nothing to suggest, this is disparaging on Mr.

[2:46:44] Corbett's part, but I think you go, you can see

[2:46:47] by his questions the line of expansive thinking that

[2:46:51] that happens when you're on, you know, in this board.

[2:46:54] And you've seen as many cases as we had, right? Yeah.

[2:46:57] Nobody's trying to indicate that there's gonna be a rash

[2:47:00] of vandalism, but anything could happen.

[2:47:03] But in regards to the lighting of these signs, if,

[2:47:08] if there was no lighting

[2:47:09] and both of these signs were of a design

[2:47:11] that you had established the last time you were here,

[2:47:14] where do you stand on this now?

[2:47:17] I'm sorry, can you repeat the actual question there? You

[2:47:19] Proposed some kind of sign design

[2:47:21] before, which showed both signs

[2:47:24] and it showed them in a spirit that Mr.

[2:47:26] Corbett has alluded to about lowering those, those two boxes

[2:47:30] cabinets down lower, right?

[2:47:32] Yeah. On the top right. Yeah.

[2:47:33] And so if, if the proposal was to do that

[2:47:36] with no lighting, where do you stand on that?

[2:47:40] If it were conceptually speaking, that sign

[2:47:43] as shown on the top right with no lighting,

[2:47:46] I would be fine with it.

[2:47:47] I wouldn't be sitting here arguing

[2:47:49] Personally, those two signs.

[2:47:51] I, that's a long way for me. But is is that top right?

[2:47:56] Is that one sign or two?

[2:47:58] It it's one sign, it's one panel showing both Della Hunts

[2:48:03] and NEA, I mean, you know, it's just a conceptual render.

[2:48:07] You can easily put a line between to,

[2:48:10] to distinguish them, but Sure.

[2:48:12] I like the seasonal touch. Yeah. Okay.

[2:48:15] Any idea what that rendering sign size is?

[2:48:20] That was 24 square feet.

[2:48:22] That whole sign there is? Yeah. Is four by six. Yeah.

[2:48:25] Okay. All right. Let me rest Mr. Trip. Do you have a point?

[2:48:30] Well, you pretty much asked the question

[2:48:34] that I was gonna ask.

[2:48:36] Sorry. You know, which is, what is

[2:48:40] a sign that is conforming, I'm sorry

[2:48:45] I'm not speaking in the microphone,

[2:48:48] but I, I happen to have a copy

[2:48:52] of the court's decision

[2:48:53] and the court

[2:48:58] on page 15 seemed to think

[2:49:02] that section 1 65 dash 1 0 1 1

[2:49:06] of the ordinance restricts signs in the LMDR

[2:49:10] to 24 square feet, which we can, we

[2:49:15] Can agree You're looking at the Supreme Court.

[2:49:17] Yes. That I, I can't superior say

[2:49:19] for sure, but, but maybe the

[2:49:21] Superior Court.

[2:49:22] Yeah, sorry, the Superior Court.

[2:49:23] Maybe that's just because that was the assertion that we had

[2:49:26] and it was in the minutes that they were working off of.

[2:49:30] I don't know. But

[2:49:32] What he seemed to be quite careful about

[2:49:36] what he cited in a decision. So I, well,

[2:49:38] Frankly, I think we were all pretty certain

[2:49:42] for whatever reason, and it was in the minutes

[2:49:45] that we talked about 24 square feet.

[2:49:47] Am I wrong about that? I can't

[2:49:50] Recall, I can't recall it being in the minutes.

[2:49:53] But because as, as you've pointed out that it's

[2:49:59] this sign ordinances are

[2:50:05] difficult to understand

[2:50:08] As, as written, I, I I would tend

[2:50:10] to agree it's either three or 24.

[2:50:12] And that's a very big difference, frankly. Say again?

[2:50:15] I, I said I would tend to agree, you know, it's either three

[2:50:18] or 24 and I don't, that's a little

[2:50:21] Bit of difference there.

[2:50:22] That that's what I just said. I'm not sure

[2:50:24] that anybody on this board has kind of stood up

[2:50:27] and said, oh no, it's this number, not that.

[2:50:30] So the fact that nobody has done that

[2:50:32] and clarified it means it's probably a little

[2:50:36] Mahy.

[2:50:37] Yeah, yeah. Because I believe the signs that you're showing

[2:50:42] are probably in the 24 square foot range. No,

[2:50:46] N not all of them.

[2:50:49] So if, if I could just walk you through what these are.

[2:50:52] No, no, that's okay. Well, I I, I do want to walk you

[2:50:56] through it some point ahead so

[2:50:57] You don't mind. Go ahead then.

[2:50:59] What's That? I said please go ahead.

[2:51:01] Okay, so the, the bottom right, I already said

[2:51:03] that is an agricultural business that runs kind of the same

[2:51:06] as Della Hunts does.

[2:51:08] The next one over, you see the greenhouse there,

[2:51:11] that's another agricultural business.

[2:51:12] They have a less than three square foot unlit sign as well.

[2:51:18] Both of those, well, I, I should say the, the bottom right,

[2:51:21] the, the Jolly botanist, they've been in business

[2:51:24] for quite a while successfully.

[2:51:26] They've been there for years.

[2:51:28] The next one over where you see the greenhouse,

[2:51:30] they're pretty new, but they've been pretty busy.

[2:51:33] They're actually my next door neighbor,

[2:51:36] the next one over from that, you know, we keep talking about

[2:51:39] how NEA is a school and schools need signage

[2:51:42] and, you know, we were talking about trying to find the

[2:51:47] after school programs

[2:51:48] and how it's people

[2:51:49] who maybe don't know where they're going or something.

[2:51:54] You know, this, this is an entire school, schools do have

[2:51:57] after school programs.

[2:51:58] They are an unlit small sign in our neighborhood.

[2:52:02] So, you know, again, I would argue, I mean,

[2:52:06] raise your hand if you don't have GPS in your

[2:52:08] phone. I, I mean,

[2:52:09] Sorry, a specific question about that sign.

[2:52:12] The the school? Yeah, the East Area one. Yeah. Yeah.

[2:52:13] That's one of three signs for the school.

[2:52:16] That is the first sign that you come across when you're

[2:52:18] Trying to find the school.

[2:52:19] And then another one at the end. Yeah. Then another one at

[2:52:20] the end of that road, and then another

[2:52:21] one when you enter the school.

[2:52:23] So I guess in that regard,

[2:52:24] what would your thoughts be if they had three unlit signs,

[2:52:27] like in that quarter mile leading up to this facility?

[2:52:34] Well, the, the school's on a, a private road

[2:52:36] for the school, aren't they?

[2:52:39] No, not entirely. No.

[2:52:40] Oh, really? Yeah, dubose residential.

[2:52:42] Oh, interesting. I don't know how that came to be,

[2:52:45] but he's certainly not getting approval

[2:52:47] to put a sign in my property down the road.

[2:52:49] No. Yeah. I was just, I, I noticed it the next day

[2:52:51] and all of a sudden, like it jumped out at me.

[2:52:52] I was like, wow. There's, there's not just one,

[2:52:54] there's three and then just how that, yeah.

[2:52:56] And, and I wasn't trying to mislead anyone.

[2:52:58] This is the sign that you used to find the school though.

[2:53:02] This is, you know, as you're driving down the road looking

[2:53:05] for the school, this is what you see.

[2:53:09] And the next one over that is a horse farm

[2:53:13] that is also a successful business right down the

[2:53:16] road from Della Hunts.

[2:53:17] They're just a few houses down

[2:53:20] and across the street from Alan's Garden.

[2:53:24] And again, you know, they're a small unlit sign.

[2:53:27] It, it's, you know, I really appreciated Mr.

[2:53:30] Trip pointing out that, you know, he drove around town

[2:53:32] and was hard pressed to find a, you know,

[2:53:35] big oversized backlit sign in our rural area.

[2:53:41] And he's, he's right.

[2:53:42] There aren't any, it's it, this is why we're fighting this

[2:53:45] because it doesn't belong.

[2:53:47] That's what it boils down to.

[2:53:51] You know, the next sign over,

[2:53:52] you have, this is the old church.

[2:53:53] We keep talking about the old church sign.

[2:53:56] And I think some people's memories were fuzzy on it

[2:54:00] 'cause it's been a while since it's been there.

[2:54:01] But that was a small, small sign that was, you know,

[2:54:06] maybe two feet off the ground total with

[2:54:11] one foot of that actually being the sign

[2:54:13] and it was 10 feet long.

[2:54:15] So that is a, you know, 10 square foot sign for that church

[2:54:20] certainly exceeds the three square foot,

[2:54:22] but it's under 24. Then we

[2:54:25] Have, pardon Mr.

[2:54:26] Chair, if I could bring your attention to the time.

[2:54:27] So you may seek a motion to extend. Thank.

[2:54:29] Very good. Thank you Mr. Prior

[2:54:30] To that, could we make a motion to let Case one 10 leave?

[2:54:35] Yeah, it was the only one we didn't table. Go ahead.

[2:54:38] Yep. I'm gonna make a quick motion. Sorry Mr.

[2:54:41] I'm gonna make a quick motion to table case

[2:54:42] 26 1 1 10 to the next meeting.

[2:54:44] Give Mrs. Laina about four minutes back in her night. Mr.

[2:54:47] Donald, you want a second? Sorry. Second. Thank you.

[2:54:50] All in favor of that say aye. Aye.

[2:54:52] Aye folks, for that case you're free to go.

[2:54:57] We will see you a couple weeks.

[2:55:01] I think I made my point regarding these

[2:55:03] that there are no other oversized backlit signs in the area.

[2:55:10] And I think that that's all that I have for the moment.

[2:55:12] Unless you have additional questions.

[2:55:15] Mr. Chair, I have a couple questions. Mr.

[2:55:16] Lusca, On all those other signs that are on Lit,

[2:55:21] how many of them are hours of operation after sundown?

[2:55:27] Good question. I do not, I do not know.

[2:55:35] I don't know if Groundhog Landscaping is,

[2:55:38] I don't know if the horse farm is, the school certainly has,

[2:55:44] you know, things that they do after dark Alan's garden.

[2:55:48] I think that they close at six or 7:00 PM

[2:55:52] and then I don't know the jolly botanist.

[2:55:55] It's a good question. Well, I can speak on behalf

[2:55:56] of Groundhog 'cause I am the abutter to that location.

[2:56:00] But my next question is, well it's not really a question

[2:56:04] per se, but in regards to the school, the elementary school,

[2:56:09] having a kid, if I were to have him going to that school,

[2:56:13] I would know exactly where that school is now.

[2:56:17] Well they, they're asserting that they are a school,

[2:56:19] so yeah, they would know exactly

[2:56:21] where NEA is. You're right,

[2:56:23] So acc one point there so that, I feel like

[2:56:25] that wouldn't have to be lit

[2:56:27] because as a parent you would be fully

[2:56:29] Aware of Where it's

[2:56:30] Fully agree and your GPS counts down one mile 0.9 0.8

[2:56:34] and then tells you turn in 500 feet, 250 there.

[2:56:39] I, I'm sorry Mr. Dietzel, but I, I disagree with you.

[2:56:42] You're not gonna miss your turn with modern GPS. It's just,

[2:56:47] And then with some of his clientele

[2:56:50] being new drivers.

[2:56:52] Yep. Don't you think that A GPS would be a lot more

[2:56:56] of a distraction that could possibly cause a safety issue

[2:57:01] for these 16 year olds that are new to the

[2:57:02] Road?

[2:57:03] No, actually, and, and,

[2:57:04] and this is getting a little personal,

[2:57:06] but a very, very quick story.

[2:57:08] When I got my license, I

[2:57:11] coincidentally started having back pain quite often

[2:57:15] and for Christmas my mom bought me a GPS

[2:57:17] and my back pain magically went away.

[2:57:19] I was stressed out 'cause I had no idea where I was

[2:57:21] until there was a little map in front of me.

[2:57:23] No, your, your GPS is not a distraction in my opinion.

[2:57:27] It's actually something that makes it so you have less

[2:57:30] to worry about in life.

[2:57:31] 'cause it, you know where everything is.

[2:57:34] Alright, I, that's all I had for questions. Thank you. All

[2:57:37] Set, Ms, do you all set?

[2:57:40] Do you want me to motion to extend Mr Chair? That

[2:57:42] Would be fine.

[2:57:43] Thank you. Let's go to 10 15.

[2:57:46] Make a motion to extend to 10 15. Second.

[2:57:50] All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right.

[2:57:53] So Mr. Che, right now I just, you know,

[2:57:56] we've pondered about the size of the signs, whether

[2:58:00] or not these signs are exceeding those

[2:58:04] that are permitted within the ordinance, trying to get

[2:58:07] to spirit of the ordinance

[2:58:09] and of course is a question of hardship.

[2:58:12] The other question that's arisen is whether

[2:58:14] or not hardship establishes when the

[2:58:18] owner of the property is permitted, the use

[2:58:22] by the planning board with an established location for

[2:58:26] that sign, which he goes into this knowing that there's a,

[2:58:29] there's a location he can put a sign and then, and,

[2:58:33] and whether or not that creates a hardship or not.

[2:58:36] Sure. And that's one of the things that as we,

[2:58:40] your neighbor was up here trying to get to and, and,

[2:58:44] and have that discussion.

[2:58:46] And I think there's a third point here that we're trying

[2:58:49] to zero in on.

[2:58:51] I think you've touched on the lighting

[2:58:53] and I think that's about where I'm,

[2:58:56] I'm going in my, in my thinking.

[2:58:58] Anything you want to add to that before you step

[2:59:00] Back?

[2:59:01] Yeah, actually you, you just reminded me that

[2:59:04] there was some back

[2:59:05] and forth discussion about, I believe it was Mr.

[2:59:09] Corbett who was a, yeah, it was Mr.

[2:59:10] Corbett asking if he could potentially cut down the height

[2:59:14] of the sign and Mr.

[2:59:15] Yako kind of said, you know, maybe I don't really know.

[2:59:18] We can look into it.

[2:59:21] I do wanna point out that this board

[2:59:26] approved A ZBA variance

[2:59:28] and then it was within a few days we filed

[2:59:31] with Superior Court and notified Mr.

[2:59:34] Yako that it was being challenged.

[2:59:36] He chose to spend the money to put up the sign.

[2:59:38] Wait, I I so I, I don't want to cut you off,

[2:59:40] but here's part of the problem we keep running into Yeah.

[2:59:43] Is that you get off into these anecdotes

[2:59:46] versus the merits of this case. Right. Which is, well,

[2:59:49] I I I just wanna be careful though to, to, you know,

[2:59:52] when he says, well look, maybe I could modify it.

[2:59:56] Honestly, I don't want this board looking at it

[2:59:58] and going, oh, you know, it might cost

[2:59:59] him a lot of money to do that.

[3:00:00] It might be hard. Maybe he can't modify it. Frankly.

[3:00:04] He put it up knowing it was being challenged

[3:00:06] ground. We're all aware if he has to

[3:00:07] Raise it.

[3:00:08] My my point is to the ground,

[3:00:09] you keep going into these anecdotes

[3:00:11] and you're missing, you know, two weeks ago

[3:00:14] or a month ago when you were here, you came in

[3:00:16] with a petition and I explained to you the difficulty

[3:00:19] of a petition and what it does and what it doesn't do.

[3:00:22] It's the same kind of thinking here.

[3:00:23] So getting into the anecdotes, which you've tended

[3:00:27] to branch off quite a bit in the last 20 minutes,

[3:00:30] and this is one as well.

[3:00:32] It's up to the board that to, you know, decide to,

[3:00:36] to decipher that.

[3:00:38] And you know, I just want to emphasize that so

[3:00:40] that we can hear testimony, we can hear poignant testimony.

[3:00:44] Yeah. And not have it be redundant as well.

[3:00:48] Okay. I I'm not sure

[3:00:49] that you're fully understanding me though.

[3:00:51] You're concerned that the board is gonna have empathy

[3:00:54] for the money that he spent when he was

[3:00:56] warned not to put up the

[3:00:57] Sign.

[3:00:58] And the reason that I'm worried about that is because Mr.

[3:01:01] Corbett's question should not have been a question

[3:01:04] respectfully, can you modify it?

[3:01:08] Of course you can. If you have to raise it to the ground,

[3:01:10] The reason Mr, It shouldn't be a

[3:01:12] Question.

[3:01:13] So the rea Yeah, the reason I'm asking that is

[3:01:14] because what's presented to me is a 16 foot sign.

[3:01:17] So right off the bat, I'm really just putting it up there,

[3:01:21] what concessions can be made

[3:01:22] because as you noted,

[3:01:23] I declared 16 feet felt too high for me.

[3:01:25] Yeah. So it's, it's not, I'm nervous about

[3:01:28] how much money is being spent.

[3:01:29] That's, I think you know exactly what I'm asking.

[3:01:32] I I do. And I, I want, I want make sure it's clarified so

[3:01:35] that everybody in this room

[3:01:37] and everybody who's listening also understands.

[3:01:38] Yeah. For anybody who has ever attended a dairy zoning

[3:01:41] board meeting, I can very personally, proudly say,

[3:01:46] I unfortunately do not take into account

[3:01:48] how much money anyone has spent on what they have done prior

[3:01:51] to having to come to us because

[3:01:52] it's unfortunately unrelated.

[3:01:54] Okay. What you're, you're, I think

[3:01:56] what you're doing is you're preaching to the audience

[3:01:57] because we already know what statutes are and what laws are.

[3:02:01] And so when you're concerned about expressing this to us

[3:02:04] and, and just diverting more time

[3:02:06] to caution us about being concerned about somebody else's,

[3:02:11] the money they've spent, I think that's the point I'm trying

[3:02:14] to get at, which is if you could just stick to the merits

[3:02:17] of law with it, it would be helpful.

[3:02:19] Sure. That's it. You all set?

[3:02:21] Yes, sir. Alright. Ken, just

[3:02:23] before we're gonna close this off, is there anybody else

[3:02:26] that wants to speak to this when we reconvene

[3:02:29] and that the next meeting you do.

[3:02:32] Okay. Mr. And Mrs. Davis, did you wanna speak again or not?

[3:02:38] I, Okay. Alright. Very good.

[3:02:40] So we're gonna close this hearing off and Mr.

[3:02:43] Car Carton, we're gonna close this hearing off.

[3:02:45] Did you wanna speak at the next hearing?

[3:02:47] Do I wanna speak at the next meeting? You say

[3:02:49] We're, we're closing testimony off now.

[3:02:52] Okay. So if you, I just asked the question,

[3:02:54] is there anybody else that wants

[3:02:56] to give testimony at the next, when we resume?

[3:02:59] Okay. Do, do you,

[3:03:01] Can I speak?

[3:03:02] Not tonight. Do you like to speak

[3:03:04] At the next meeting?

[3:03:05] We're hearing now, but what

[3:03:05] The next meeting?

[3:03:06] So at the next meeting do you wish to speak

[3:03:09] so we can know Mr. Davis as well?

[3:03:11] Very good. Okay. We got three people scheduled. What

[3:03:13] Is the date of the next meeting?

[3:03:16] May 21st. What?

[3:03:18] May 21st. Two weeks from tonight.

[3:03:20] The Tuesday night. Thursday. Thursday.

[3:03:23] Two weeks from tonight? Huh?

[3:03:25] Two Weeks from tonight.

[3:03:28] I don't think I'm gonna be here two

[3:03:29] Weeks. Oh,

[3:03:30] Sorry.

[3:03:31] Well, we have to close off hearing. I'll tell you what,

[3:03:32] if you want, you can you submit something in writing, okay?

[3:03:36] Okay. Alright. Thank you very much.

[3:03:39] We're gonna close this hearing off.

[3:03:41] We will see all parties back here in two weeks if you wish

[3:03:45] to speak to this or address the board.

[3:03:52] All of the cases have been tabled for the evening.

[3:03:55] The board will now wrap up on the business for the evening

[3:04:01] appointment of officers.

[3:04:03] That has been, I need a motion to table that please.

[3:04:06] I'll make a motion to table that

[3:04:07] to our next meeting. Second.

[3:04:08] Thank you. All in favor of that say aye. Aye. Aye.

[3:04:11] Any correspondence? Mr. Trip?

[3:04:14] Did you indicate there was some correspondence? Yes.

[3:04:17] You wanted mentioned? Okay. Is it this here? Yes. Okay.

[3:04:20] Go ahead and speak to it real quick if you'd like.

[3:04:22] The, when I was up at the Southern

[3:04:26] New Hampshire Planning Commission meeting,

[3:04:30] we had a presentation on accessory dwelling units

[3:04:35] and I got a, a handout from

[3:04:40] the New Hampshire housing.

[3:04:44] So I'm going to gift this to Carrie

[3:04:48] and if anybody wants to check it out,

[3:04:51] you can get it from Carrie.

[3:04:53] It's, it was pretty good information.

[3:04:57] Did I just have that lying around up

[3:04:58] there? Could you grab me a copy?

[3:05:00] What? You, could you grab me an additional copy?

[3:05:02] No, I, they didn't have

[3:05:04] that many copies, so I only took one.

[3:05:05] You don't wanna fight anybody for me? What?

[3:05:07] You don't wanna fight anybody for me?

[3:05:09] No, you can, you can have this one for now

[3:05:12] and then you can give it to Carrie.

[3:05:13] All right. Next, next business second.

[3:05:18] I, we have, we have no correspondence that I can tell.

[3:05:22] Next business is approval of minutes.

[3:05:25] I need an approval of minutes. Excuse me.

[3:05:28] And those have been amended in my correct Ms. Boudreaux.

[3:05:31] Two 19. Okay.

[3:05:33] I need a approval of those men minutes as amended

[3:05:38] for 2 19 26.

[3:05:40] So Moved. Thank you. Second, please. Mr.

[3:05:42] Donlin has that second? Yeah. Thank you.

[3:05:45] All in favor say aye. Aye.

[3:05:48] Sustain need approval of minutes.

[3:05:51] Are there amendments on the four, two? Nothing. Okay.

[3:05:56] Approval of minutes for April 2nd, 26 as presented.

[3:06:02] So moved. Thank You. And a second please. I'll second.

[3:06:06] Who had that? Jason. Mr. Ani. Very good.

[3:06:09] All in favor say aye. A. Aye. Any opposed? All right.

[3:06:13] Hearing none, Mr.

[3:06:15] Chair, I'll abstain from both of those.

[3:06:17] Very good. Thank you. Mr. Henry. Very professional of you.

[3:06:19] Nice going for the first night here. What a rookie.

[3:06:24] All right. We have no other business before us,

[3:06:27] but we will have a busy night the next meeting.

[3:06:30] And with that we can take a motion to adjourn.

[3:06:33] Well, Saturday is the seminar too.

[3:06:36] Yes it is. Yep, we are.

[3:06:37] So has everyone signed in for this? Yes. Yes. Yep.

[3:06:41] Yep. I believe it's ending in the next like 24 hours or

[3:06:45] So.

[3:06:46] Okay. Good enough. Well, I keep,

[3:06:47] Get and ask if I'm gonna sign up. Can we

[3:06:49] Have confirmation of who is attending as well, please?

[3:06:52] I think we all have. Excellent.

[3:06:54] Okay. No pushups

[3:06:57] for us all.

[3:07:00] Take it up long. Entire Saturday. Thank Mr. Dietzel.

[3:07:02] You wanna help us find the door please?

[3:07:05] I make a motion to adjourn

[3:07:07] A second, please.

[3:07:08] Mr. Donlan. Second. All in favor of adjournment, say aye.

[3:07:11] Aye. Any opposed? We adjourned. Have a good night everyone.

Zoning Board of Adjustments - 05/07/26

Agenda

Transcript