[0:01] Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.
[0:02] Welcome to the zoning Board of Adjustment.
[0:04] Please rise for the P of Allegiance
[0:09] PGI in the United States of America
[0:12] and to the Republic for for One Nation, under God,
[0:17] indivisible, Liberty, justice for All.
[0:21] Okay. All right. Good evening everybody.
[0:23] Welcome to the Zoning Board of Adjustment,
[0:25] and as your host for the evening, let's start off
[0:28] by introducing ourselves,
[0:30] Anthony Henry, Michael Donlan.
[0:33] Richard Tripp, crystal Morin secretary.
[0:37] I would be Lynn Perkins, the Chair
[0:39] Gas Bimba, Jim Dietzel.
[0:41] And all the way down to our fire right is Code Enforcement
[0:44] Officer Carrie Owen.
[0:45] And we have Tina Guilford filling in
[0:48] as our clerk for this evening.
[0:50] Please shut off all cell phones, iPads, anything
[0:52] that could create a distraction to the proceedings.
[0:55] And these hearings are scheduled to end at 10:00 PM
[1:00] and our audio video record, in the event of an emergency,
[1:03] please exit to the rear of the room
[1:05] and do not use the elevator.
[1:07] Okay, so first case up, we have
[1:12] case number 26 dash one 18,
[1:14] which has been continued from prior two meetings.
[1:19] Mr. Omba, for the record, will sit on this case
[1:23] filling in for Mr.
[1:24] Ani. Gentlemen, how are you tonight?
[1:26] I'm very well, sir. How are you?
[1:28] Okay. Do you have anything you want to start with
[1:31] or do you want you, I know that you've had some back
[1:34] and forth with code enforcement,
[1:37] Don't really have anything significant
[1:41] to say since the last meeting.
[1:45] I understand that the board was reaching out to
[1:49] Town Council and Safety Services about
[1:53] some, some questions.
[1:55] And I know my understanding is those,
[1:59] those questions have been answered
[2:00] and we're hoping to move forward.
[2:03] Okay. So essentially what we're looking for now,
[2:06] you've kind of amended your position, which was
[2:08] that you wanted to put a garage garage on sixth Pearl,
[2:14] access it from Franklin Street, correct?
[2:17] This Correct Franklin Street Parcel.
[2:19] You are going to be moving your materials
[2:22] or are moved off
[2:23] of Pearl Street onto Franklin Street isolating the
[2:26] contractor use idea. Is that correct?
[2:30] That's the idea, yes. Okay. All right.
[2:32] Anything other details I'm missing here?
[2:36] I don't believe so. Okay, Ms. Owen, where are we at
[2:39] as far as your liability
[2:40] and your concerns addressing access from Franklin Aunt
[2:45] Pearl and anything else that comes under your purview?
[2:49] Excellent, thank you, chair.
[2:51] So based on discussions, we did confer with legal counsel
[2:55] and we also conferred with the fire department on addressing
[2:58] and access and safety regulations.
[3:00] So what we are basically going
[3:05] through all our due diligence, there doesn't appear
[3:07] to be any immediate concerns from a town perspective.
[3:11] The owner may wish to choose to explore the need
[3:16] for easements if they decide to,
[3:18] but the town would not get involved in a civil matter
[3:22] that would be private and,
[3:23] and any such agreements would be on the owner's behalf
[3:26] and would so be, so if the properties were to sell
[3:30] site access and addressing would be reviewed
[3:33] and determined by the fire department
[3:34] during the TRC process, which would be part
[3:37] of the planning board application.
[3:39] All right. And so if the board were to approve this,
[3:42] it's subject to town permits
[3:44] and inspections, they would, the applicant would be required
[3:48] to review with TRC, am I correct?
[3:51] They would be required to complete the site plan process
[3:55] with the planning board, which includes
[3:56] the TRC process? Correct.
[3:58] Very, very good. Okay.
[4:00] Gentlemen, you have anything concerns there
[4:02] or anything this board should evaluate here?
[4:06] I don't believe So. Okay.
[4:07] Opening up to the, the questions from the board, Mr.
[4:10] O Bimba is sitting in for Mr. Dani. Mr.
[4:13] Omba, you feel adequate on, on information with this case?
[4:17] I do. Mr. Chair. All right, Mr.
[4:19] So let's open up for questions. Mr.
[4:20] Dietzel, do you have any concerns
[4:22] or questions you wish to address?
[4:24] I just have one, one question.
[4:35] Is it my understanding that if you were to put this garage
[4:38] on Frank, the Franklin Street property, where that lawn is,
[4:43] that it would conform,
[4:45] but you simply feel that it, for you don't want
[4:47] to wreck the lawn and for aesthetic purposes,
[4:50] would it confirm if you were to put it on that lawn?
[4:55] I believe that it would.
[4:56] Okay. Alright. I don't have any
[4:58] more questions. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
[4:59] Alright, very good. Mr. Trip.
[5:03] So the, so the, the only variance
[5:07] that you're asking for is to be able to
[5:12] construct a contractor garage on,
[5:17] I don't remember the name of the street, Pearl.
[5:20] Pearl, right.
[5:21] And that would be the only use you would be making of
[5:26] the Pearl Street address?
[5:28] Effectively, the, the reason we need a variance is
[5:31] because the, the district central business district allows
[5:36] for combined residential and like multifamily
[5:39] and commercial use,
[5:41] but it's supposed to be an over under situation,
[5:44] which does not exist.
[5:47] And there are, you know,
[5:49] right now there's a three unit building,
[5:51] residential building on the property.
[5:53] And as of according to town records, it is not
[5:57] a grandfather commercial use.
[6:01] That was, that use was started in error.
[6:04] And that's the situation we are looking to get a,
[6:07] a remedy for that.
[6:09] The town has asked us to come in for site plan determination
[6:12] and this got flagged.
[6:13] So we're trying to get it properly permitted
[6:17] and so it's not, we're supposed
[6:20] to have like an over under situation.
[6:22] You can't have that. So it's technically a, a use variance
[6:27] to allow contractor use on the same lot as residential use
[6:32] without that situation, the over under thing.
[6:37] Right. But that would not include the storage
[6:40] of construction material on the Pearl Street?
[6:43] This is correct. Alright. Right.
[6:45] That's, and and any, any materials stored
[6:47] there would have to be in the garage.
[6:54] Oh, I thought you were gonna store vehicles in the garage,
[6:59] but I guess you could store materials in the garage.
[7:01] That's, yeah, that's, it's your house,
[7:03] it's your property, you know.
[7:06] Thank you. As long as they're not strewn about on the
[7:07] ground, what, as long
[7:08] as they're not strewn about the property.
[7:10] Yes. If I, Ms excuse me.
[7:15] Sorry if I may clarify.
[7:17] So this property is located in the
[7:19] central business district.
[7:21] Mixed use is permitted with the residential
[7:25] re residential is not permitted below the second floor.
[7:28] So that kind of comes into play adding the commercial
[7:31] use onto the property.
[7:33] It's creating the mixed use condition.
[7:35] They don't have the residential,
[7:37] they have residential existing on the property.
[7:41] So this mixed use doesn't really align with the ordinance
[7:44] as far as the configuration residential above
[7:49] Commercial.
[7:50] That's the request for variance? Correct.
[7:55] Ms. Moore, My question has been asked and answered.
[7:59] Okay. And so we're, to be clear now, the
[8:03] original motion, Ms.
[8:05] Zan, just keep your rear to this, is
[8:09] that the, the
[8:14] a the request in the application is to permit the use
[8:18] of the existing rear of the property
[8:22] as a contractor yard
[8:24] and allow the construction
[8:28] of a contractor garage
[8:30] for use from the abutting property at 27 Franklin Street.
[8:36] We are eliminating, I believe now is this,
[8:39] this is referenced and directed towards the Pearl Street,
[8:42] the contractor yard version, correct?
[8:45] Correct. This was the
[8:46] original motion that had been written
[8:48] And I believe that we are eliminating in this
[8:52] a contractor yard use.
[8:54] Correct. Which you
[8:57] are shifting onto the Franklin Street parcel, correct?
[9:01] Yes. But you are still looking for
[9:03] what you call the contractor garage,
[9:06] but I don't care if it's called a contractor garage
[9:09] or just a garage myself.
[9:11] Are we having a conflict there Mrs. Owen?
[9:15] Are we to stipulate
[9:17] that the garage is specifically a contractor garage
[9:20] or is it just being called a garage?
[9:25] It's called a garage,
[9:27] but it's being used for the commercial bi
[9:30] business operation from the adjacent lot.
[9:32] So,
[9:35] And when we, when we speak of it being used as
[9:40] for, for the contractor from the abutting lot,
[9:46] are we just stipulating that it is a, a garage
[9:51] for somebody's lettered truck?
[9:54] Is that what we're looking at?
[9:56] Or are we defining contractor garage differently?
[10:02] Can you clarify your question please?
[10:04] So I think that what we discussed in one
[10:06] of the past meetings on this case was that
[10:10] somebody could build a garage and rent out the spaces.
[10:12] Correct. And now the owner under the trust,
[10:17] the LLC owns different two both properties
[10:21] under different LLC names,
[10:23] but it still doesn't restrict the owner from Pearl Street
[10:27] to rent a garage space to whoever with having a truck.
[10:31] Right. A lettered vehicle.
[10:33] And I think that's calling it a contractor garage so
[10:38] to speak, where there's no specified materials there
[10:43] that, you know, again, this is gonna have to go through
[10:46] TRC and planning, correct?
[10:47] Correct. If, and I I did hear some verbiage to Mr.
[10:51] Trip's question that may indicate some latitude that
[10:56] that may be looked for.
[10:58] To that point, somebody could have two
[11:01] by fours in their pickup and park in the garage and,
[11:03] and no one knows about it.
[11:04] Correct. So what's the stipulation of the materials
[11:07] that are there and if they're in a truck
[11:10] and they're in that garage, does it, does it matter?
[11:12] Right. It becomes the, the gray area.
[11:16] So I'm, what I'm trying to do is give you what I'm looking
[11:18] for for the contractor garage stipulation and,
[11:23] and to me, as I think I've already indicated in a past
[11:26] meeting that this could be just a garage
[11:29] and that's what we're giving the usage for,
[11:32] but we're not giving usage
[11:34] as a contractor yard at Pearl Street.
[11:37] That is all our understandings. Correct.
[11:39] And that works for code enforcement as well.
[11:42] I think, not to interrupt, we can put a third stipulation
[11:46] that no outside material on Pearl Street.
[11:51] Say again please? No outside material on Pearl Street
[11:58] and that I, the outside material was what I thought one
[12:02] of the bigger issues
[12:04] And it was, and gentlemen, you have moved all
[12:06] that material offsite onto Franklin Street officially.
[12:09] Correct?
[12:11] Is that correct? Mr.
[12:13] Diet's question was relative to I guess
[12:16] where you would park, you had brought up concerns about
[12:20] grass area being diminished.
[12:22] Right. But it could be landscaped
[12:24] or designed I guess in your, to what works
[12:27] for you on Franklin Street, Mr.
[12:30] Diesel, is that marry with you?
[12:33] Yeah. Okay.
[12:34] And so, and what I'm really trying to articulate here is
[12:37] how this motion is to be constructed as it's weaned.
[12:42] Its way away from what the original request was.
[12:44] And I just wanna make sure that all parties are,
[12:48] are clear on this
[12:50] and you, if you decide at some later point that you're going
[12:55] to start putting materials outside on Pearl Street
[12:59] and doesn't remove your contractor garage,
[13:01] but you end up back here before us again, correct?
[13:04] Yes sir. We are on the right. Same page Misson,
[13:07] We are on the same page.
[13:08] But I would like to clarify
[13:09] that 27 Franklin Street is not permitted
[13:12] to have a contractor yard either.
[13:14] They could be permitted to have small amounts
[13:17] of accessory storage space in the yard,
[13:20] but how it exists today would be
[13:24] considered a contractor yard. So
[13:25] Correct.
[13:26] Okay. And so if there's any conflicts on Franklin Street
[13:30] that again could bring up a red flag
[13:34] and you could have concerns there as well.
[13:36] This board for this matter right now is only looking at the
[13:40] fact that you wanted a garage, how you deal
[13:45] with your storage, what you park there.
[13:47] We are not giving you any permission to do that, that's
[13:51] outside of our purview. Is that fair enough?
[13:55] That's fair enough. I I believe,
[13:57] and correct me if I'm wrong,
[13:58] but I think the, the variances for the use of the property
[14:02] as part of the contractor business
[14:05] and not explicitly for the garage, which would be,
[14:09] as you said, he would be allowed to just build a garage.
[14:13] I Think that's, it's, it's the use of the property
[14:14] that's at stake.
[14:16] That is correct. And that use is
[14:18] as a contractor yard on Pearl Street
[14:21] and you know, again, this, this approval for, for
[14:25] I guess a garage does not,
[14:30] does not, does not give you a green light
[14:34] for anything else beyond that.
[14:36] And, and for that matter, this, this board I guess is going
[14:40] to clear this case
[14:43] and you had an opportunity perhaps
[14:46] to consider a lot line adjustment that would make part
[14:50] of Pearl Street, part of Franklin Street.
[14:53] Correct. And you chose not to go that way as well. Correct.
[14:57] But for all intents and purposes,
[15:00] you would've stipulated that the construction of the garage
[15:04] may have just fallen within the setbacks,
[15:07] the setback stipulations, which means you still have
[15:11] to have the garage rear setback as 15 feet.
[15:14] Correct. So you still have to have
[15:16] that garage 15 feet back from the rear
[15:19] and from the side setback.
[15:21] Right, right. I think it's five downtown. It's
[15:24] Isn't it's, yeah, it had changed.
[15:25] It's 10 feet from the rear yard. 10 feet, sorry, 10 feet
[15:28] Shooting from the hip on that.
[15:29] I know, I, That's alright.
[15:31] I'm not making that part of this
[15:32] motion so it doesn't matter.
[15:34] Okay. To this point,
[15:37] the board has heard the narrative on this.
[15:41] I guess in some ways we have
[15:43] to amend this motion a little bit.
[15:47] Does anybody have any questions or concerns? Mr. Tripp?
[15:56] I, I believe the Carrie said that
[16:02] a contractor yard is not permitted that Franklin either.
[16:06] Correct. Now does that mean that they're not allowed to
[16:09] store material at Franklin Street
[16:13] Outside?
[16:14] They would pre permitted to have limited exterior storage,
[16:18] but not, not what we, we would consider a contractor yard
[16:21] with ma stockpiles of material.
[16:26] So,
[16:27] So they're not allowed to, to store
[16:34] building material on Franklin
[16:36] or Pearl Street? That's
[16:39] Correct.
[16:40] So I don't know if they're
[16:44] happy with that, but like I said, the
[16:51] the only thing that we're approving at this point is the
[16:55] construction of a garage on Pearl Street. That's
[16:57] Correct.
[16:58] All right. I I'm a little slow, so you have to talk slow
[17:02] and use short words.
[17:03] That's alright. There's a lot
[17:05] of moving pieces with this one.
[17:07] I'm, I'm slow too, Mr. Chair.
[17:08] I just want double clarification.
[17:11] We're they're asking now, just to boil it right down,
[17:16] they're asking for a garage or a contract garage?
[17:22] Well, what I was, what I was speaking to was the fact that
[17:27] for right now it's a garage.
[17:28] Okay. So I don't know
[17:30] what the definition of a contractor
[17:32] Garage is.
[17:33] Maybe that was rhetorical question.
[17:34] So the question is, if it, if it's a garage,
[17:38] what relief are they seeing looking for the setback?
[17:42] What, what variance would we be granting Setbacks or
[17:46] We're just, we're just straightening the, the motion out
[17:49] and moving the case along
[17:51] and the, this is for a garage
[17:55] at six Pearl Street.
[17:56] For all intents
[17:58] and purposes, it is almost, doesn't even need our approval.
[18:02] Okay. As long as it fits in the setbacks,
[18:05] but it does allow the garage use from the abutting property
[18:10] at 27 Franklin Street.
[18:12] And with that stipulation on the motion that gives them
[18:16] that Ms. Owen,
[18:18] I'd like to just clarify again, going back to,
[18:20] I'm gonna reference one section 1 65 dash 33
[18:24] B five.
[18:26] So multi-unit residential
[18:30] mixed use is permitted with
[18:34] residential is not, is prohibited below the second floor.
[18:37] So I think that that is
[18:39] where the variance is needed is they're
[18:42] creating a mixed use condition,
[18:46] but it doesn't align with the ordinance as far
[18:49] as the configuration on the lot.
[18:51] Can you circle back on
[18:52] that later paragraph about the
[18:54] residential thing that you just said?
[18:56] I'm sorry. Yes. Now maybe I'm a little slow.
[18:59] Section 1 65 dash 33 B five
[19:04] and I'm gonna go to subsection B,
[19:08] triple I all residential.
[19:10] So this is multi-unit residential uses are permitted as mi
[19:14] as a mixed use in conjunction
[19:16] with permitted non-residential uses.
[19:18] Subject to the following limitations,
[19:21] all residential units permitted under the subsection shall
[19:24] be prohibited below the second floor.
[19:28] So the residential is in the primary
[19:32] existing structure on the property.
[19:33] There'll be a detached garage
[19:35] with containing the commercial use
[19:39] and I think that that's the relief that's needed.
[19:56] What was your subsection on that?
[19:58] I'm 65 dash 33 B subsection five,
[20:04] lowercase Bs, triple I
[20:12] 33.
[20:14] Did you say B as in boy or D as in David?
[20:16] B as in boy. Yep. Five lowercase, B as in boy. Got it.
[20:21] Triple I.
[20:52] What's your recommendation on this at
[20:54] this point? Ms. Oland,
[20:55] That's what I believe that the variance would be required
[20:59] for in this condition.
[21:01] It was contractor uses permitted in CBD
[21:06] and a contractor yard is not,
[21:08] they've removed the contractor yard,
[21:12] we can call it a garage,
[21:15] but now you're creating the mixed use on the property
[21:19] with commercial and residential.
[21:22] And so I think that that is the relief,
[21:23] the variance that's needed.
[21:25] So are you circling back on the, essentially,
[21:30] you know what I was getting at earlier was a
[21:32] garage is a garage.
[21:33] Are you considering that the mixed use?
[21:36] Correct. It's going to be used, I mean they can use it
[21:40] for other things, but if it's going to be used
[21:42] for the business operations storing commercial vehicles more
[21:46] than just one lettered vehicle, you know,
[21:49] as your transportation to
[21:50] and from your job, that would be com
[21:54] considered a commercial operation.
[21:57] So at this point it would be for,
[21:59] we would call it not a contractor garage,
[22:02] but a commercial commercial garage. Commercial,
[22:04] Yeah, absolutely.
[22:06] Mr. Deet. So how does that sound to you?
[22:09] Sounds fine, Mr. Chair. Mr. Trip.
[22:12] I like that. Okay, so that's a,
[22:15] that's a commercial garage
[22:20] for, for use from the abutting property at
[22:24] 27 Franklin Street?
[22:25] Yes. You're comfortable with that? Yes.
[22:27] Thank You gentlemen. You okay with that? Yes sir.
[22:32] Yep. Ms. Moore? Yes. All right.
[22:37] So the structure of the motion would be
[22:40] just breaking into it partway through.
[22:44] This would be to permit the use of the existing rear
[22:49] of the property at six Pearl Street
[22:53] and allow the, the construction of a commercial garage
[23:00] for use from the abutting property at 1 27 Franklin Street.
[23:05] Sounds pretty smooth Ms. Owen? Yes. Alright.
[23:09] Board Ms. Moore. Mr. Tripp. Mr. Dietzel. Mr.
[23:13] O Bimba, any comments there?
[23:15] I do.
[23:18] We have the authority to permit
[23:22] access from the adjacent lot to the,
[23:26] from Franklin to Pearl Street.
[23:28] There's no liability to the town,
[23:31] as Ms. Owen has indicated.
[23:32] In researched there's no, that's more of a civil matter
[23:37] and it would be up to the property owner or the LLC
[23:41] or trust of both properties to amend
[23:45] that at their will.
[23:47] And the, in my view, the commercial garage
[23:55] at some later point could be utilized in a different sense
[24:00] for Pearl Street
[24:02] and this amendment does not create a contractor
[24:06] yard on Pearl Street.
[24:16] I think the original aspirations of the applicant was
[24:20] to be able to have more storage.
[24:24] There's that fine line of, of materials.
[24:27] They've taken that off the par property at Pearl Street.
[24:31] They get their garage, they have the definition,
[24:33] the board's giving relief from the commercial use
[24:37] of the garage, which is a mixed use on Pearl Street.
[24:44] Can you go with that Mr. Trip?
[24:48] So the garage will be gonna use the garage
[24:50] not for storing material. I, I'm good with that.
[24:54] Okay. All set. Mr. O Biba.
[24:58] All set. Okay, very
[25:00] good with that.
[25:04] Let's take a motion. Going to deliberation.
[25:06] Moved. Thank you Mr. Tripp.
[25:08] Mr. Bumba, you wanna help out?
[25:09] I'll second the motion. All in favor
[25:13] of deliberation, say aye.
[25:15] Aye. Aye. Any opposed?
[25:22] We had reflectively Our deliberation should
[25:27] reflect to the finding of facts,
[25:29] so please keep that in mind.
[25:32] And anybody have any commentary they like,
[25:37] would like to start off
[25:38] with Mr.
[25:43] Dietzel?
[25:45] Well, I think since
[25:50] we simplified it quite a bit, then I'm just gonna go
[25:54] by the five criteria.
[26:00] The reason I asked my question about whether
[26:03] he could build a conforming garage on the,
[26:05] on the Franklin Street
[26:11] property is because pro primarily due
[26:15] to the fifth criter and the hardship criter,
[26:17] and it says for purposes of this paragraph,
[26:21] the little I no fair
[26:23] and substantial relationship exists
[26:25] between the general public purposes
[26:26] and the ordinance provision.
[26:28] And it's almost like By con,
[26:33] by conforming with the ordinance strictly, we'd wind wind up
[26:38] with a less desirable result than granting the variance
[26:41] because that piece of property with its lawn is attractive
[26:47] aesthetically and also can be used in the future
[26:51] if they decide that, you know, the,
[26:53] the lawn is not the best use.
[26:55] So I, I think I'd almost rather have a non-conforming
[26:58] structure than a conforming one.
[27:03] And so having said that, reviewing the other five criteria,
[27:07] I think follow, I think it is in the best interest
[27:10] of the town to, first of all, it will clean it up,
[27:14] which is the ultimate goal.
[27:17] It'll allow 'em to continue the business.
[27:22] I don't think property values will be diminished at all.
[27:25] And I, I I, I think, I think
[27:30] after all is reviewed and all the, all all the TRC
[27:34] and planning and everything, I, I think that it'll be okay.
[27:38] I think it meets the five criteria.
[27:40] Very good. Mr. O Bimba,
[27:43] I echo the similar sentiments as Mr.
[27:46] Di, so I like how we've cleaned up the motion.
[27:49] It makes it very simple for code enforcement to, to work
[27:54] with the applicants
[27:56] and it's very clear, I think I've been on this case for
[28:00] had on the sidelines for a while.
[28:01] It's, it's clear on, on the variance they're seeking.
[28:07] I don't see any problem with the, with the five criteria
[28:10] just because it's already a non, has some nonconforming
[28:15] usages on the property.
[28:18] The spirit of the ordinance here is, is to promote health,
[28:22] public safety and general welfare
[28:24] to the society, to the community.
[28:27] We are already using that as a business.
[28:30] I don't see how that gets greatly affected
[28:32] by granting this variance.
[28:37] I think the motion is clear enough.
[28:39] Very good. Thank you Mr. Emba. Mr. Tripp,
[28:42] Could we have somebody read the motion so that I can
[28:47] be fairly certain what it is?
[28:49] Okay, let me break into this halfway
[28:52] through it without noting the sections and articles and,
[28:56] Okay. Okay.
[28:58] This is to permit the use of the existing rear
[29:01] of the property at six Pearl Street
[29:06] and allow the construction of a commercial garage
[29:10] for use from the abutting property at 27 Franklin Street.
[29:17] That's it. That's it.
[29:19] Alright, are we going
[29:22] to add any
[29:24] Condit conditions?
[29:25] Conditions? Well, they'll be subject to obtaining Allstate
[29:28] and town permits and inspections.
[29:30] Completion of the site plan process with the planning board
[29:35] is required and as Mrs. Owen has indicated,
[29:38] that will include a technical review committee, which
[29:43] most relevant I guess is, is fire on that correct?
[29:48] That's it. That's it. All right, thank you.
[29:50] Okay, I must set. All right Ms. Morin,
[29:53] My only concern was the public interest
[29:56] and that's been taken care of.
[29:59] So I see that it meets all five.
[30:03] Very good. Well without repeat being repetitive,
[30:06] we have the motion as structured then we have
[30:08] two points on there.
[30:11] Two points on the motion.
[30:15] That being said, where I guess I orchestrated a lot of this,
[30:20] it would be absurd for me to disagree with it at this point.
[30:23] So with that, let's take a motion
[30:24] and go out of deliberation please.
[30:26] So moved Mr. Tripp. Mr. Dietzel, you wanna help out?
[30:29] I'll second. Thank you. All in favor
[30:31] of coming outta deliberation.
[30:32] Say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right, Mrs.
[30:37] You have a motion to read?
[30:38] I do. Thank you. I make a motion on case number
[30:42] two six dash 18 to grant a variance to the terms
[30:47] of article six, section 1 6 5 dash
[30:52] three three B of the town of dairy zoning ordinance
[30:57] to permit the use of the existing rear of the property
[31:02] to allow the construction
[31:04] of a commercial garage at six Pearl Street
[31:07] for use from the abutting property at 27 Franklin Street
[31:12] Parcel ID 3 0 0 9 2 zoned CBD
[31:18] as presented with the following conditions.
[31:20] We have two. One subject to obtaining Allstate
[31:24] and town permits and inspections.
[31:27] Two completion of the site plan process
[31:30] with the planning board is required.
[31:33] And that concludes the reading of the motion.
[31:35] I need a second. Second.
[31:36] Thank you. Mr. Trip puts the motion on the floor.
[31:41] Let's get into the finding of fact hearing. No opposition.
[31:45] I would ask for a motion to abbreviate the finding of fact.
[31:49] So move. Thank you Mr. Tripp. Second Mr. Omba. I'll second.
[31:53] Thank you. All in favor say aye. Aye. Very good.
[31:56] Finding a fact. The applicant desires to create a contractor
[32:00] yard or desired
[32:02] to create a contractor yard over two parcels.
[32:05] The application was in the central business district.
[32:09] The applicant owns the adjoin parcels
[32:12] and has been utilizing one as a contractor yard.
[32:15] By definition. The applicant originally
[32:20] started working on a change of use compliance requests in
[32:25] November, 2024.
[32:28] The board granted relief
[32:32] for a commercial garage
[32:35] on six Pearl Street.
[32:43] A little ahead of myself there
[32:46] and the application is zone is in the central
[32:50] business district zone.
[32:52] Anybody have any amendments to that finding effect?
[32:57] Seeing no gestures there?
[32:59] All in favor of moving the motion for a vote? Say aye. Aye.
[33:02] Aye. Mrs. Morin? Yes. Mr. Omba? Yes.
[33:10] Mr. Trip? Yes.
[33:12] Mr. Dietzel?
[33:15] Yes. And the chair will make that unanimous
[33:20] by a vote of five to zero.
[33:23] So gentlemen, under those conditions you're approved
[33:26] and don't have to come back
[33:27] and see us next meeting. How's that?
[33:30] Sounds great. Thank you you very much. Thank
[33:31] You.
[33:32] Very good. Thank you anybody We'll miss
[33:34] You.
[33:35] Miss you too. Anybody agree by this as 30 days to ask
[33:38] for a rehearing, otherwise
[33:40] recourse will be a superior court.
[33:41] Thank you. Okay, thank you. Thank
[33:43] You guys.
[33:47] Next up is case number 26 dash 1 25.
[33:51] Dolores de Oh, that's ario.
[33:57] Mr. Henry, would you sit on this case for me please? Yes,
[33:59] Mr.
[34:00] Chair.
[34:06] Good evening folks. How are you?
[34:08] Very well. Happy to see you.
[34:15] All right. So what we ask you to do is read your application
[34:17] for five criteria for the record.
[34:19] All right. And then we will barrage you with questions
[34:22] and try and get you outta here as soon as we can.
[34:25] Okay. Put my greeting glasses on.
[34:33] Okay. The first point is that the variance is not contrary
[34:38] to public interest.
[34:40] And our response to that is the requested variance
[34:43] of 11.5 feet for side yard setback to accommodate
[34:48] a corner of the proposed sunroom would only impact a 15
[34:54] square foot area within the standard 15 foot setback.
[35:00] This would increase the property value without adversely
[35:03] impacting the abutters or the neighborhood.
[35:06] And just to point out that 15 square foot area
[35:11] is equal to a half a sheet of plywood.
[35:14] You're right. It is. So if we're not talking much,
[35:17] Slightly less, I didn't know we were
[35:19] doing math tonight though.
[35:21] Well, I'm an engineer so Well this is
[35:22] Arithmetic.
[35:23] Thank you. Okay.
[35:26] And the second point, the spirit of the ordinances observed
[35:29] because the variance would not adversely impact the abutters
[35:34] negatively effective for sounding re surrounding property
[35:37] values or change the character of the neighborhood.
[35:42] Substantial justice is done
[35:44] because the lot is a very restrictive, odd shape.
[35:47] It's almost pie shaped requiring a small variance
[35:51] to accommodate a corner of the proposed sunroom.
[35:56] Item four, the values
[35:58] of surrounding properties are not diminished
[36:00] because the variance in construction
[36:04] of the sunroom would increase the property value
[36:06] benefiting the value of surrounding properties.
[36:09] There are no negative impacts to the surrounding properties.
[36:17] Okay. Let's see. Item five.
[36:22] Literal enforcement of the provision
[36:24] of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship.
[36:29] The odd shape of the lot is restrictive in a small variance
[36:32] is necessary to accommodate one corner of the sunroom
[36:37] to provide reasonable use
[36:39] while meeting the general intent of the ordinance.
[36:42] The existing house is small, it's it's
[36:46] 1,310 square feet and has one common room.
[36:52] The addition of the sun room is a,
[36:54] is a significant improvement for the period
[36:57] that the owner has
[36:58] to spend at home while undergoing treatment
[37:01] for a medical condition.
[37:05] And those are the five points.
[37:07] Can You state your name just for the record please?
[37:11] Yeah, my name is Timothy James Lynch.
[37:14] Thank you. Thank you Ms.
[37:18] Mrs. Moore. Alright. Care.
[37:23] Give us more of an explanation outside of the,
[37:25] the legal parameters.
[37:29] Well, I think that the biggest point is
[37:34] it's a very restrictive property.
[37:38] As I said, there's one common room.
[37:41] She uses a deck when the weather is good
[37:44] to get a little more room.
[37:46] She's, she's spending a great deal of time at the residence
[37:50] because she is undergoing medical treatment.
[37:54] And as I said, we're talking about encroaching on
[37:58] that 15 foot setback by half a sheet of plywood.
[38:04] So we're not talking much,
[38:05] it's just at the corner of the sun room.
[38:07] You're replacing a deck that's there now?
[38:09] Yes. Okay. Which is within the
[38:13] Boundaries, The allowed area.
[38:14] Yeah. Okay. Now the other, just one other point
[38:19] that I didn't put in here,
[38:21] we're tying the sun room ties into the existing building,
[38:25] the roof ties in, the walls tie in, so you're also limited
[38:29] on where you can tie into the building.
[38:32] Okay. Yeah.
[38:36] So it's not like a screen, separate screen porch. Correct?
[38:40] That's correct. Okay.
[38:42] All right. Anything else you wish to add?
[38:45] No, I think that pretty well covers it.
[38:47] All right. Just for the record, the board has two records
[38:50] of recommendation from Abutters.
[38:53] We'll read that into the record a little bit later.
[38:57] Anybody have any questions Mr. Dietzel? No. Thank you Mr.
[39:01] Chair. All right, Mr. Henry? No, thank you. Okay, Mr. Trip.
[39:07] I was just gonna say the one
[39:12] of the drawings that you
[39:13] provided shows that the old deck was
[39:21] within the setbacks, both the front setback
[39:24] and the side setback.
[39:25] Yes. Now what you're asking
[39:28] for is a relief from the side back side
[39:31] setback right now. Right,
[39:32] Right.
[39:33] The front side back doesn't come into play
[39:35] because if you look at the other plot plan
[39:40] from when the original building was built, they,
[39:44] the surveyor established that the average
[39:50] setback, front setback for 300 feet to either side
[39:55] of the property was 22 feet.
[40:00] That was the rear setback average
[40:02] or the front? Front? Front.
[40:03] Sorry. It's an old neighborhood.
[40:08] It's what? It's an old neighborhood.
[40:11] It is an old neighborhood.
[40:14] Yes. Yes it is.
[40:15] And if you look at the houses in the immediate area on the
[40:18] other side of the street, yep.
[40:20] They don't even make 10 feet.
[40:23] Got it. Okay. Mr. Trip, anything else?
[40:27] Well, I I, the reason I said that
[40:31] or noted that is if we're,
[40:36] if we're gonna give you a, a relief from the side setback,
[40:41] I was thinking that we should probably give you
[40:43] relief from the front setback too now.
[40:46] No,
[40:48] That would be preexisting.
[40:51] Well, it's preexisting, correct.
[40:52] They're not building to the front and we can miss,
[40:55] Well actually they are.
[40:58] Ms. Owen, you want to chime in
[40:59] with your staff report. Thank
[41:00] You.
[41:02] So I'll just start by reiterating
[41:04] what the applicant has stated.
[41:06] They're requesting a variance to allow the construction
[41:08] of a 14 foot by 14 foot sunroom 11
[41:11] and a half feet off
[41:12] of the side property line at its closest point when 15 feet
[41:15] is required, the property is located in the medium high
[41:18] density residential zoning district,
[41:20] which requires a minimum of 15 foot side setback.
[41:24] Therefore, the variance is required.
[41:26] The applicant proposes to replace the existing deck,
[41:29] as we can see, it was 11 foot by 12 foot
[41:32] and now build an enclosed sunroom measuring 14 foot by 14.
[41:36] The existing single family residence was
[41:39] constructed in 2015.
[41:42] The existing parcel is approximately just under a quarter
[41:46] of an acre and is serviced by municipal water and sewer.
[41:49] The existing single family residence is considered
[41:53] conforming with respect
[41:54] to the front setback requirements pursuant to Article three,
[41:58] section 1 65 dash 10, which allows the required setback
[42:03] to be determined by averaging the setbacks
[42:05] of principal structures located within 300 feet
[42:08] of the property on the same side of the street.
[42:12] So we're using that which was what permitted
[42:17] the existing single family home.
[42:21] We are con confirming with that section
[42:25] and that was permitted at that time, that the,
[42:28] the front setback is pre-existing non-conforming, I guess,
[42:32] or is conforming per this article.
[42:34] 1 65 dash 10
[42:37] the proposed sunroom addition would expand the existing
[42:39] footprint while maintaining the established
[42:41] residential use of the property.
[42:43] The variance pertains solely to the side setback
[42:48] and then if approved, appropriate permits
[42:50] and inspections are required.
[42:52] Thank you Ms. Zn.
[42:53] Any questions from any of the board to Ms. Zn? Alright, Mr.
[42:57] Trip, any other questions for the applicant?
[43:01] No, I'm thankful for the education I got tonight.
[43:04] I'd never, I'd never seen 1 65 dash 10. So.
[43:10] All right. So you're all set for now? I'm all set.
[43:12] Trip. I'm set. Okay. Mrs. Mor,
[43:14] Chairman, I'm all set.
[43:15] All right. And Mr. Donlin and Mr.
[43:17] Omba, either of you are of course, or
[43:19] or set welcome to chime in Mr.
[43:21] Dietzel. We all set? Mr. You're all set. Mr.
[43:24] Dietzel all set? Okay.
[43:27] If folks have anything else to tell us.
[43:29] Alright, well let's make a call
[43:31] to public, see how that goes.
[43:33] And you'll have a chance to rebut anything
[43:35] that anyone says about you, okay?
[43:37] Okay. Alright. Or your application. Thank you.
[43:39] Alright, you, at this point we'll make a call to public.
[43:42] Any, anybody who wishes just to support this application,
[43:46] this is your opportunity to come forward
[43:49] seeing no one rise, Mrs. Moore.
[43:50] And you have two letters there for support.
[43:53] Can you just briefly acknowledge those individuals
[43:56] and their comments?
[43:59] The direct abutter at 20 Aiken Street
[44:03] under V-I-T-L-L-C for the sunroom
[44:08] sunroom request at 19 I Aiken, I approve
[44:12] of their zoning requests and wish them good luck.
[44:16] And then the other one's in here,
[44:21] the other one is as owner of two properties on Aiken Street
[44:26] and other nearby properties.
[44:28] I am in support of allowing the construction
[44:31] of a sunroom 11.5 feet
[44:34] from the side property line at the closest point when 15
[44:38] feet is required.
[44:39] And that is from Ralph Valentine. Very
[44:42] Good.
[44:43] No one else rises for support.
[44:45] So anybody in opposition of this application,
[44:48] this would be your opportunity to come forward.
[44:51] And likewise, we so see no one rise there.
[44:55] So with that being said, we will consider
[44:58] that we've met the statute for public input
[45:01] and we can take a motion to go into deliberation.
[45:04] So move Mr. Trip motions. We have second please. Second.
[45:09] Okay. Thank you Mr. Dietzel.
[45:11] All in favor of deliberation, say aye. Aye. Any opposed?
[45:16] All right. We have a motion that's structured.
[45:19] This is in the medium high density residential area.
[45:23] We have one condition already structured there, subject
[45:26] to obtaining all state and town permits and inspections.
[45:30] Anybody have anything else they'd like to add here? No.
[45:34] All right. Very good. Mr. Henry, you wanna give us a motion
[45:37] to come outta deliberation please?
[45:39] I move to come outta deliberation. Thank you very much.
[45:41] Second, Mr. Trip has a second.
[45:44] All in favor of coming outta deliberation. Say aye. Aye.
[45:47] Aye. Aye. Any opposed?
[45:49] Ms. Moore, you have a motion to read? I
[45:51] Do.
[45:52] Thank you. I make a motion on case number 26 dash
[45:56] 25 to grant a variance to the terms of Article six,
[46:02] section 1 65 dash 4 5 1
[46:07] BD of the town of dairy zoning ordinance
[46:11] to allow the construction of a sunroom
[46:14] 11.5 feet from the property side property line at
[46:19] its closest point when 15 feet is required.
[46:24] Parcel ID 2 6 0 3 0 dash
[46:28] 0 0 1 zoned MHDR as presented
[46:33] with the following conditions.
[46:35] We have one, one subject to obtaining Allstate
[46:39] in town permits and inspections.
[46:42] And that concludes the reading of the motion.
[46:44] I need a second. Second
[46:47] Motion is on the, on the floor.
[46:49] Any other comments there?
[46:52] Amending the motion, seeing no gestures there.
[46:55] Let's get into finding of fact
[46:57] the board has seen no opposition or, or
[47:01] but concerns with this.
[47:02] I ask for a motion to go to abbreviate the finding of fact.
[47:06] I'll make that motion. Very good. Second. Thank you Mr.
[47:09] Tripp. All right, just briefly.
[47:11] The application is in the medium high density residential
[47:14] zone
[47:19] and the application is for setback of a sun.
[47:22] New constructed sunroom.
[47:25] The application replaces an existing porch
[47:28] and the applicant rece seeks relief from a 15 foot side
[47:32] setback and the lot constraint is,
[47:37] it's a triangular shaped lot.
[47:39] Anybody wish to amend or add to that finding?
[47:42] Of fact seeing nobody. All right, very good.
[47:46] All in favor of moving this for a vote. Say aye. Aye. Aye.
[47:49] Any opposed? Mr. Dietzel? Yes. Mr. Henry? Yes.
[47:54] Mr. Tripp? Yes. Mr. Who am I missing?
[47:59] Ms. Moore? I'm sorry. Yes. Yep.
[48:02] And the chair will make that unanimous
[48:04] by a vote of five to zero.
[48:05] So folks, you're all set.
[48:08] Anybody agg agree by this has 30 days to ask this board
[48:11] for reconsideration.
[48:13] Beyond that would be your superior court.
[48:15] But other than that, you're all set. Have a good evening.
[48:18] Congratulations. Thank you very much.
[48:21] All right, next up we have Patricia Panco
[48:25] representing Robert Scott Rowe.
[48:27] Case number 26 dash 1 26.
[48:37] Okay.
[48:41] Good evening Ms.
[48:42] Panco. How are you?
[48:44] I'm fine and you? Good evening, Mr.
[48:46] Chairman, members of the board
[48:47] And you visited with us
[48:48] before, so you know, we like to have the motion
[48:51] or the five criteria read into the record first.
[48:54] Okay. So do you want an overview of the property
[48:57] or would you like to just read through the criteria?
[49:00] I just would like you to go to the criteria. Okay.
[49:02] And then we can bounce around if you need to afterwards.
[49:05] Okay. Everybody has your, your site plan in their packet.
[49:09] Okay. First criteria, the variance will not be contrary
[49:13] to the public interest.
[49:15] For the variance to be contrary to the public interest,
[49:18] it must markedly alter the essential character
[49:21] of the neighborhood or threaten the public health, safety,
[49:24] or welfare of the community.
[49:26] Harrington v Warner, the subject
[49:30] property is located in the low medium density residential
[49:35] district in an area of dairy
[49:37] where there are primarily single family homes located on one
[49:41] and two acre lots.
[49:43] The owner is proposing to add a two car attached garage
[49:48] to his existing single family home
[49:51] and finish approximately 911 square feet
[49:56] above the garage as an A DU where he will reside
[50:00] with his daughter Danielle.
[50:03] The plans for the structure have been submitted
[50:06] with the application as Exhibit F due
[50:09] to a 50 foot right of way, which was laid out by a
[50:15] 1980 subdivision.
[50:18] A 35 foot front setback applies
[50:21] to the northerly sideline of the applicant's lot
[50:26] that is shown on exhibit B.
[50:29] There is also a 20 foot wide drainage easement
[50:33] extending along the lot's northerly boundary.
[50:39] The exterior renderings for the A DU attached as Exhibit F
[50:44] show the front elevation was designed
[50:47] to match the existing home when viewed from Frost Road.
[50:52] For this reason, the A DU will not be seen from the road
[50:56] and will not change the character of the, or the of the area
[51:00] or threaten the public health, safety, or welfare.
[51:04] As shown in the two photos attached as Exhibit D
[51:08] of structures that are in the area for the spirit
[51:13] of the ordinance to be observed, it must markedly
[51:18] and conflict with its intended purpose.
[51:22] The owner is requesting a variance from the 35 foot front
[51:27] setback applied to the northerly sideline of his lot due
[51:32] to the unimproved roadway right of way created in 1980.
[51:38] The purpose of setbacks is to ensure adequate spacing
[51:42] between structures in between structures and roads.
[51:47] Greater setbacks generally AP apply to roads
[51:51] where traffic is anticipated to exist.
[51:56] The right of way,
[51:57] however, has existed on plans for 46 years
[52:02] and has yet to be improved.
[52:04] It is very unlikely there will never be a roadway built in
[52:09] the right of way due to the stream
[52:11] that flows across the right of way.
[52:13] Shown on exhibit E one where there is also a wetland
[52:19] and its topography drops off
[52:22] and then goes up dramatically actually about 20 feet
[52:26] as shown on exhibit two E two.
[52:30] There is also a wetland located on the parcel,
[52:34] directly abutting the rear of the lot.
[52:36] And collectively these physical challenges
[52:40] likely explain why the right of way has not been improved.
[52:45] It would not be contrary to the spirit
[52:47] and intent of the ordinance to grant the on's request
[52:51] for a modest reduction
[52:53] of the front setback requirement being applied
[52:57] to his side lot line
[52:59] to accommodate the construction of the garage.
[53:02] And the A DU substantial justice will be
[53:07] done by granting the variance
[53:10] because for it to be done, the benefit
[53:13] to the owner must outweigh any public harm.
[53:18] Since it is very unlikely the right
[53:20] of way will ever be improved due to its physical challenges,
[53:25] there will be no loss to the public
[53:27] by granting this modest relief to allow the garage in a DU
[53:32] to be constructed on the lot, the values
[53:36] of the surrounding properties will not be diminished.
[53:40] The owner's construction plans attached
[53:43] as Exhibit F show the exterior elevation
[53:47] of the proposed A DU is designed to match the exterior
[53:51] of his existing home.
[53:53] The house located directly across Frost Road from the lot
[53:58] is similarly styled.
[54:01] That's shown on exhibit C.
[54:04] There is also a much larger duplex loaded
[54:08] located on Frost Road with an A DU near the lot
[54:13] that's also similarly styled.
[54:16] Collectively, these photos confirm the onus proposed
[54:20] improvement will blend in with the area
[54:24] and not diminish surrounding property values.
[54:28] Literal enforcement of the provisions
[54:31] of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship.
[54:36] The purpose of the, of the unnecessary hardship,
[54:40] it means owing to the special conditions of the property
[54:44] that distinguish it from other properties in this area.
[54:49] The special conditions
[54:50] of this lot include there being no area available along
[54:56] the southerly side of the home
[54:58] to add the proposed structure, which is the opposite end of
[55:02] where the garage addition is proposed.
[55:07] In addition, there is the right of way.
[55:10] There's a 20 foot wide drainage easement
[55:13] extending the full length of the northerly sideline
[55:18] inside the limits of the lot
[55:20] that appear is shown on exhibit A.
[55:23] There is also a stream that crosses through the right of way
[55:27] to the lot directly on the opposite side of the right of way
[55:31] that empties into a pond further down Frost Road.
[55:36] The photos shown on exhibit D also show a very large
[55:41] outcropping alleged located directly
[55:43] behind the existing home where the well in a patio
[55:48] are also located
[55:50] before the topography drops down dramatically.
[55:55] These existing improvements
[55:57] and conditions preve prevent the garage a DU from BLE being
[56:02] placed elsewhere behind the home.
[56:08] No fair and substantial relationship exists
[56:12] between the general public purpose of the ordinance,
[56:17] which is the setback ordinance
[56:20] and the specific application to that provision
[56:24] to this property.
[56:26] The proposed garage, a DU cannot be moved back further
[56:31] due to the pool patio and ledge outcropping
[56:35] and the proposed A DU cannot be placed on the other side
[56:39] of the building because the existing home is too close
[56:42] to the southerly boundary.
[56:45] The purpose of a front setback is
[56:48] to ensure there is adequate space between the structures
[56:52] and vehicles traveling along a public way as applied
[56:56] to the northerly sideline of the lot the right of way.
[56:59] Platted 46 years ago has never been improved.
[57:03] And upon closer examination of its physical characteristics
[57:08] in consideration of the permitting that would be required
[57:11] to improve the right of way, it is highly
[57:14] unlikely it ever will be.
[57:18] In addition, the relief being requested here is
[57:21] approximately 10 feet.
[57:24] It's actually nine feet, 11 inches in the front
[57:27] and seven feet in the rear.
[57:29] It's actually six and a half feet exceeding the distance
[57:34] required by the side setback
[57:35] otherwise required in the M-L-M-D-R zone.
[57:41] If the side setback requirement were applied
[57:45] to this particular lot, but
[57:47] because it's a con lot, the front setback
[57:50] applies on both sides.
[57:53] The proposed use is reasonable.
[57:56] It, the relief is seven feet and 10 feet for the front
[58:00] and rear setbacks of the garage in the A DU.
[58:05] And it's reasonable in light of the age of the right of way
[58:09] and the likelihood it will remain on improved.
[58:20] Looking at your plan, the site plan,
[58:22] it looks like you have, I I thought
[58:27] that was a parking area for multiple cars,
[58:29] but I guess that's a, an existing leach field, correct?
[58:33] Oh, front, yes. Okay. Alright.
[58:34] Yes, that's the proposed leach field shows the two tanks
[58:38] because of the A DU.
[58:40] Yeah. The miniature size
[58:42] of the plan makes it look like a parking area does.
[58:45] It does. Alright. Yes. Mr.
[58:47] Donlin, you'll sit on this with us please? Yes sir.
[58:51] Alright, so I'll, I'll just step back for a second.
[58:55] Anybody wish to address attorney Panco? Mr.
[59:00] Dietzel? No. Thank you Mr. Chair. Mrs. Moore?
[59:05] My, My only question was the same as yours.
[59:08] The parking lot.
[59:09] Okay. Mr. Tripp pretty big.
[59:13] I have no questions Mr. Donlin? Not at this time, sir. Okay.
[59:18] Care to give us any, any more clarity Ms. Panco?
[59:24] It's up to you.
[59:27] When we first looked at this and,
[59:28] and I have spoken with Carrie about this,
[59:32] she wondered if we needed the variance
[59:34] because the plan originally
[59:36] and from 1980 showed a 15 foot side setback.
[59:40] Yep. Along the right of way.
[59:42] But given the extent
[59:44] of the investment my client is making into this particular
[59:48] improvement to be cautious, we elected to come
[59:52] before the board and ask for relief from a front setback
[59:56] to ensure that there was no violation in the future.
[1:00:02] The property is really substantially encumbered
[1:00:05] as you can see from the site plan.
[1:00:07] You've got the drainage easement that goes across the lot
[1:00:11] and then down the side that goes out under Frost Road.
[1:00:15] But there's also another drainage easement
[1:00:18] that you can see on the old recorded plans
[1:00:21] that actually crosses the lot
[1:00:23] and continues to the east
[1:00:26] where it across the other lots on that side of Frost Road
[1:00:31] and empties into a detention basin.
[1:00:35] There really is not a lot of area
[1:00:39] or wiggle room for Mr. Rowe to work within
[1:00:44] to accomplish this desire.
[1:00:48] The, he is moving into the A DU himself with his daughter
[1:00:52] who is disabled.
[1:00:54] They're both here tonight with me
[1:00:56] and they're his other daughter
[1:00:59] and their family are moving into his home in the main house.
[1:01:04] So this is really his only option to be able
[1:01:09] to remain in place on the site
[1:01:13] and have a separate living space.
[1:01:17] The topography drop also, if you look on exhibit E,
[1:01:22] it's E one or E two is really substantial.
[1:01:25] When you go in, there are photographs of the right
[1:01:28] of way from the road as you go in towards
[1:01:32] where the stream crosses the right of way,
[1:01:34] there's like a 20 foot drop in that area.
[1:01:38] So the chances of that ever being improved are pretty slim.
[1:01:43] The topography is shown on E two.
[1:01:49] So the relief is also
[1:01:54] fairly modest and well within
[1:01:56] what it would've been if we had elected
[1:01:59] to just follow the side setback.
[1:02:05] And what was your argument
[1:02:08] or point as to why the
[1:02:11] new construction cannot slide back?
[1:02:13] So it's flush with the front of the other of the main home?
[1:02:18] I'm sorry, I didn't understand your question Mr.
[1:02:20] Did you, did you specify why the A DU can't be
[1:02:25] constructed so that it was flush with the front
[1:02:27] of the existing pars house?
[1:02:32] If we were to slide the structure for the back, Mr.
[1:02:36] Chairman, we would still need relief from the ordinance
[1:02:39] and directly behind where the A DU is proposed,
[1:02:44] there's also a patio
[1:02:46] where in the well radius we are moving closer to the well.
[1:02:49] And there's a photograph also included as an exhibit
[1:02:53] that shows a very, very large outcropping of ledge.
[1:02:57] Okay. Alright. Yes, I believe that is.
[1:03:01] Yes. So you see a restriction in the back to the ledge.
[1:03:04] Yep. I didn't realize that there's a
[1:03:09] radius protection from from the foundation
[1:03:13] to a well, but I won't argue that point.
[1:03:18] I just wanted to verify why the A DU couldn't be back.
[1:03:22] I, I hear your argument.
[1:03:25] I do think we would still need the same relief,
[1:03:28] at least to some extent.
[1:03:29] I don't have the measurements.
[1:03:31] Okay. Here, well I know it's 75 feet to septic, right?
[1:03:36] The well radius. Yes.
[1:03:39] Yes. But pushing the A DU back,
[1:03:41] we would still need the setbacks from the
[1:03:43] right of way. Mr. Chairman
[1:03:45] The side.
[1:03:46] Yes, correct. No, I understand that. Okay.
[1:03:47] I'm just kind of looking at why
[1:03:50] we're looking at both sides there.
[1:03:54] Alright, anybody else have any follow up?
[1:03:58] Any no gestures there?
[1:04:00] Mrs. Owen, you wish to give us your staff report?
[1:04:02] Yes. Thank you Mr. Chair.
[1:04:04] As the applicant stated requesting a variance
[1:04:06] to allow the construction of a two car attached garage
[1:04:10] with an A DU above
[1:04:12] to 25.1 feet from the front property line, sorry,
[1:04:15] from the side property line
[1:04:16] where 35 feet could be required due
[1:04:19] to the existing right of way.
[1:04:21] The property is located in a low medium density residential
[1:04:25] district, which requires a 35 foot side front yard setback
[1:04:29] and a 15 foot side and rear yard setback.
[1:04:33] The property abuts a 50 foot wide right of way established
[1:04:37] as part of the original subdivision in 1980.
[1:04:40] The lot has frontage along Frost Road
[1:04:42] and approved Public Street
[1:04:44] and the existing driveway access is also off of Frost Road
[1:04:48] based on the property's existing orientation and access.
[1:04:51] The property's frontage typically is considered a long frost
[1:04:56] road and the property line adjacent to the right
[1:04:59] of way functions as a side yard, which case,
[1:05:02] which in case the applicable stepback would be 15 feet.
[1:05:07] However, as the applicant stated
[1:05:09] because of the right of way remains in existence
[1:05:11] and could potentially be developed in the future,
[1:05:14] the applicant is seeking a variance
[1:05:16] to allow the proposed addition
[1:05:17] to remain compliant regardless of any future changes
[1:05:21] to the status of the right of way.
[1:05:24] One other thing I'd like to mention is in accordance
[1:05:27] with the revised zoning ordinance, which is effective as
[1:05:30] of today, September 3rd, 2026, the definition
[1:05:33] of frontage has also re revised to the following
[1:05:38] the lot line which directly abuts the street side
[1:05:42] of the lot except for, hold on,
[1:05:46] sorry I didn't write the whole thing down.
[1:05:47] I guess. Excuse me,
[1:06:08] I have lost my note, but it, it essentially states that
[1:06:14] the street side of the lot except for the lot,
[1:06:16] which I wish I had my note.
[1:06:20] I apologize.
[1:06:27] Thank you for your patience.
[1:06:29] So the new definition is as following the, the lot line
[1:06:33] front, the lot line which directly abuts the street side
[1:06:36] of the lot except
[1:06:37] for the lots which have multiple lot lines which abut
[1:06:40] streets, in which case the front lot line shall be deemed
[1:06:43] to be that lot line abutting a street from which the address
[1:06:47] is designated by the fire department is located.
[1:06:52] So this has a 67 frost Road address.
[1:06:55] And based on this new definition effective as of today,
[1:06:58] the frontage is considered Frost Road as well.
[1:07:01] Pretty clear cut on that. Aren't we pretty clear? Yeah.
[1:07:04] But in this case we would have the application in
[1:07:08] before the change, so
[1:07:09] Correct.
[1:07:10] Not applying. Okay. Very good.
[1:07:12] Thanks for making the board aware of the change.
[1:07:14] Any questions for code enforcement? Seeing nobody there?
[1:07:18] Y'all set Ms. Don? Yeah. Okay. All right.
[1:07:21] Well let's make a call to the public, Ms. Panco.
[1:07:23] Let's see what happens. Okay. Okay.
[1:07:25] Anybody who wishes to speak in favor of this application,
[1:07:28] this would be your opportunity to come forward
[1:07:31] and seeing nobody rise, anybody who is in opposition
[1:07:35] of this application,
[1:07:36] this would be your opportunity to come forward.
[1:07:38] Okay? Come on up Ms.
[1:07:40] Pco, if you could yield yep to the abutter
[1:07:42] and you'll have a chance to rebut.
[1:07:49] Good evening Mr. Chairman. Good
[1:07:51] Evening.
[1:07:52] I own the name the bar Jeff Thomas from 57.5 Frost Road.
[1:07:58] I own that piece of land that's, that's in question
[1:08:01] that looking for an easement fire.
[1:08:05] My problem is I don't have a problem granting them
[1:08:07] an easement on that property.
[1:08:08] But if I decide to use that land
[1:08:12] that we're planning a subdivision,
[1:08:14] we're planning on bringing our drainage down crossroad
[1:08:17] and continue into the existing right of way that I have.
[1:08:21] Okay. And right now the town has drainage also going
[1:08:24] into that right of way.
[1:08:26] The problem is that floods out in the spring.
[1:08:28] I'm just questioning that when they build that garage
[1:08:31] so far close to the area that that's wet,
[1:08:34] it's gonna be a significant more
[1:08:36] of water going down there than before.
[1:08:40] 'cause it's supposed to increase that cul size.
[1:08:43] What, what's your timeline plan on that?
[1:08:46] Not that it's within this board's purview, but
[1:08:48] Four or five months.
[1:08:50] Okay. Is that before planning now?
[1:08:52] No, we have in TRCA couple times.
[1:08:54] I see. Okay.
[1:09:00] I mean the relief here is that they're asking
[1:09:03] for consideration because of that right Of away
[1:09:07] and due to the space,
[1:09:12] I guess you're giving fair notice that some kind of change
[1:09:16] or in water flow and improvement will come along.
[1:09:20] They're not technically asking for an easement,
[1:09:23] they're asking for relief from that side setback.
[1:09:30] And so I guess in this case you're giving them fair warning
[1:09:33] that at some point, whatever the ground design is now that
[1:09:38] that God left is going
[1:09:40] to be altered or could be altered. Is that
[1:09:42] Correct?
[1:09:43] Could be, yeah. Exactly.
[1:09:44] The thing is, is it,
[1:09:46] it floods pretty much in the spring over there quite a bit
[1:09:49] and then the, where they're putting
[1:09:51] that garage set up is right where
[1:09:52] that culvert enters from the street, the crossover culvert.
[1:09:57] So are you suggesting
[1:09:58] that they are interfering with the culvert?
[1:10:00] Well, I just don't want to be at risk if I decide
[1:10:02] to run my drainage down in the plant and drain in there
[1:10:04] and all of a sudden we're creating more water flow.
[1:10:07] 'cause there is a drainage easement in there. Right.
[1:10:09] That I don't want to be at risk of them coming back
[1:10:11] and saying their garage is flooding now
[1:10:13] because they created more water down there.
[1:10:16] That's the only issue I have.
[1:10:17] Yeah, I've never come across this one before.
[1:10:21] But I, I understand your concern
[1:10:24] and you are giving fair warning on this.
[1:10:30] What is the, how much relief are they
[1:10:33] looking for on this side?
[1:10:35] 10. 10 feet effectively. 10 feet.
[1:10:42] And what is it, Ms. Owen, what is the distance between
[1:10:45] where they're at here and in the edge of the right of way?
[1:10:51] Currently? I, I don't mean to put you in a pinch.
[1:10:56] What was the question? What is the current distance
[1:10:59] between the,
[1:11:00] and perhaps attorney Panco may have to answer this.
[1:11:04] I just wanna get clarity before Mr. Thomas steps away.
[1:11:09] What is the current distance between the existing
[1:11:14] structure and the edge of the right of way?
[1:11:15] Do you know that?
[1:11:17] I can't. If I were to roughly scale, I I would
[1:11:20] consider it around 60 feet.
[1:11:22] 16 66, 0
[1:11:24] Oh got it.
[1:11:25] Okay. From the existing residence to the property line. Yep.
[1:11:28] I see. Okay. Yeah,
[1:11:32] so understandably the easement that's there,
[1:11:37] and I can't read the numbers,
[1:11:39] but the easement that's there is pretty close
[1:11:43] to the garage side.
[1:11:45] What's the width on that easement?
[1:11:46] Can you help me out with that Mrs. Owen?
[1:11:50] Typically they're 20 feet. Again, roughly scaling.
[1:11:55] It looks about 20 feet.
[1:11:56] Okay. How much culvert you putting in you think?
[1:12:01] What's that? Excuse me? How much
[1:12:02] culvert do you think you'll put in?
[1:12:03] I believe they're coming down with a 36 inch from
[1:12:06] 57 and a half down.
[1:12:08] Just one. One, okay. Alright.
[1:12:12] The board have any questions for Mr. Thomas?
[1:12:18] This building looks like it's kind
[1:12:19] of on a little crest on the lot
[1:12:22] and there's like a four foot drop on the back
[1:12:26] and it looks like there's gonna be like a four
[1:12:28] foot drop on the side too. Is that correct?
[1:12:31] You're have to run some drainage from the exit that
[1:12:34] proposed new structure down the right of way into the area
[1:12:37] to get to move some water away.
[1:12:39] Say again please. What's that say
[1:12:41] Again?
[1:12:42] You're gonna, when they, if they build the garage there,
[1:12:44] the only way to get rid of that water
[1:12:45] that's on the right hand side of it would be
[1:12:48] to run down my 50 foot easement
[1:12:52] and then get the water away from that.
[1:12:54] Their existing unit. It's gonna flood over there.
[1:13:00] Could you see That's your drainage easement?
[1:13:03] The town's drainage easement that crosses crossroad now
[1:13:08] pretty much floods that area in the spring.
[1:13:10] And now we're gonna be coming down the Yes
[1:13:12] Sir microphone.
[1:13:14] Could you speak into the mic? Sorry. That's alright.
[1:13:17] The, the pipe that crosses crossroad,
[1:13:20] I believe is a 16 inch crossover culvert
[1:13:23] that's existing from the, when they first put Frost Road in.
[1:13:28] And that cul goes in about 40 feet
[1:13:30] and then drains pretty much right at the corner
[1:13:32] of their foundation, their new proposed foundation.
[1:13:35] It's either should be added on,
[1:13:37] the culvert should keep continuing down towards the wetlands
[1:13:41] to alleviate that water problem that's gonna be there.
[1:13:46] Okay. So there's a, there's a, a pipe that goes
[1:13:51] Yeah.
[1:13:52] Yes. Yeah.
[1:13:55] So you, you project
[1:13:56] that you'll be running a three foot diameter drainage pipe
[1:13:59] down along that right of way.
[1:14:02] If we use that, that's what the plan was to come down.
[1:14:04] If we couldn't filter the water at the top of Frost Road,
[1:14:06] then we were gonna come down Frost Road
[1:14:08] and run it into that easement that I own.
[1:14:12] Okay. Well now you Own the easement.
[1:14:14] Well, I own the whole 34 acres. Acres.
[1:14:16] It's all one piece right now. It hasn't been subdivided yet.
[1:14:19] It's just one house on it.
[1:14:23] So at this point, by the way, what they're asking
[1:14:25] for is relief on the side, setback
[1:14:29] from the easement.
[1:14:32] And with any consideration,
[1:14:35] and I, I can't speak for the board,
[1:14:37] but for any consideration
[1:14:40] whenever someone is expanding into that setback, they do
[1:14:44] so at their own risk.
[1:14:46] Right? Yeah. Okay.
[1:14:48] That's all I need. Thank you sir. Yep.
[1:14:53] Did anybody else, Mr. Dietzel, were you all set there?
[1:14:56] I'm all set, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Okay.
[1:14:59] Anybody else in opposition seeing nobody there?
[1:15:03] Attorney Panco,
[1:15:05] Just to add a little bit of clarity
[1:15:09] to the comments provided by
[1:15:13] Mr. Thomas.
[1:15:14] The butter, The striped area
[1:15:17] that you see on Exhibit A is an underground pipe
[1:15:22] and my client just explained
[1:15:23] to me is a reinforced concrete pipe
[1:15:26] that is buried underground on his property,
[1:15:31] on his side of the boundary line there
[1:15:34] and the 50 foot right away, I think
[1:15:38] that Mr. Thomas had talked about running the three foot pipe
[1:15:41] in is beyond that.
[1:15:44] So of course they're gonna call Dick safe,
[1:15:48] they'll check what's in the ground
[1:15:50] before they put the corners of the foundation in
[1:15:53] underneath the garage.
[1:15:55] But it is setback relief as you've stated, Mr.
[1:16:00] Chairman, the culvert also to which he referred is closer
[1:16:05] to where, if you look at the plan
[1:16:08] up near the shed
[1:16:10] where the topography dips down quite dramatically
[1:16:14] and my client is telling me he's never had any flooding
[1:16:18] coming onto his property.
[1:16:20] So I think there may be some confusion about
[1:16:23] where the boundary line of the property is.
[1:16:25] The 50 foot right of way is beyond the striped
[1:16:30] underground easement.
[1:16:31] Okay. That's shown on the plan. Got it. Okay.
[1:16:34] Yeah, they, they probably wouldn't have put the,
[1:16:36] the pipe in the right of way if they had a choice.
[1:16:40] No. And I don't think there is any easement
[1:16:42] for the benefit of the abutting property owner in the
[1:16:45] striped area, but he does own the whole 50 foot width
[1:16:49] of that right of way.
[1:16:51] But we're in agreement the relief if this board
[1:16:54] so chooses Yes.
[1:16:56] Does not hold the abutter liable for anything. No.
[1:17:00] That ex that your client is expanding
[1:17:02] Into.
[1:17:03] Absolutely not. And we understand it's at our own risk.
[1:17:06] Got it. Okay. Okay. Very good.
[1:17:08] Any other questions for attorney Panco?
[1:17:11] No, everybody's all set. Okay. Okay. Thank you.
[1:17:15] I think we're good there. You have nothing
[1:17:17] else, attorney Panco?
[1:17:19] No, I'm all set. Thank you. Very good.
[1:17:22] Anybody care to, if we're all set on the board,
[1:17:25] we can take a motion to go into deliberation.
[1:17:29] So moved. Thank you Mr. Tripp. Mr. Donlan seconds.
[1:17:32] All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed?
[1:17:37] All right. So we have our motion structured
[1:17:42] and if one condition on which is the typical
[1:17:47] state and town permits
[1:17:48] and inspections, I don't know if any
[1:17:50] of the testimony alarms, any
[1:17:51] of the board members in a way other than what was narrated
[1:17:56] by myself and attorney Panco.
[1:17:59] Does anybody have any other conditions they would wish
[1:18:03] to add to this or commentary to the approval period?
[1:18:08] Mr. Dietzel? No. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Tripp?
[1:18:12] No. Mrs. Morin,
[1:18:15] My only thing is making a decision on a tentative thing
[1:18:20] that's not there even started.
[1:18:23] I doesn't, I understand we have to consider it,
[1:18:26] but it doesn't hold much weight.
[1:18:29] And that is the future expansion
[1:18:32] or development with drainage?
[1:18:34] Correct. Okay. Yeah, I think we understand that
[1:18:38] it's been expressed that the, the,
[1:18:41] if the board grants the relief the applicant does so
[1:18:45] at their own risk,
[1:18:50] no argument there, I suspect.
[1:18:53] And Mr. Donlin
[1:18:56] To the case in general or specific to the motion
[1:18:59] To either, if you like the case or don't or,
[1:19:03] and the motion itself.
[1:19:06] I'm okay with the motion just to speak
[1:19:10] to the case a little bit.
[1:19:12] The, with the relief being for what would be considered
[1:19:17] for all intents and purposes, a side setback,
[1:19:19] which would be 15 in reality, certainly in light of
[1:19:24] what changed today.
[1:19:26] 'cause they obviously could just resubmit even if
[1:19:31] like that not what's standing,
[1:19:33] they're not in the drainage easement
[1:19:36] in the 50 foot right away
[1:19:40] is 25 feet away.
[1:19:42] I don't, I don't see a problem with, with this at all.
[1:19:44] Okay. And you're okay
[1:19:47] with the one condition on the motion?
[1:19:50] Yes, sir. All right. Very good. All right.
[1:19:54] I, I don't see or need issue with this
[1:19:58] understanding that there's a lot of expansive room here
[1:20:01] and the the right of way
[1:20:05] holds conditions to the, to the parcel in question
[1:20:11] that are, do offer some restrictions.
[1:20:16] So that being said, that's my commentary.
[1:20:20] I'm fine with the one condition on the motion.
[1:20:23] That being said will take a motion.
[1:20:25] Come outta deliberation please. So move. Thank you Mr.
[1:20:28] Tripp. Ms. Donald, you wanna help out? Second.
[1:20:30] Thank you sir. And all in favor
[1:20:32] of coming out of deliberation?
[1:20:33] Say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed?
[1:20:38] Mrs. Morin. Ms. Morin, thank you.
[1:20:42] You have a motion to read?
[1:20:43] I do. Thank you. I make a motion on case number 26
[1:20:48] dash 1 26 to grant a variance to the terms
[1:20:53] of Article three, section
[1:20:56] 1 65 dash 25 A
[1:21:00] and article six,
[1:21:02] section 1 65 dash four seven B four
[1:21:07] of the town of dairy zoning ordinance
[1:21:10] to allow the construction of a two car
[1:21:14] attached garage with an A DU
[1:21:18] above 25.1 feet from the front property line
[1:21:23] where 35 feet is required due to the right
[1:21:27] of way parcel ID
[1:21:29] 0 2 1 4 9 dash 0 1 4
[1:21:34] zoned LHDR as presented with the following conditions.
[1:21:38] We have one, one subject
[1:21:41] to obtaining Allstate in town permits and inspections.
[1:21:45] And that concludes the reading of a motion. I need a second.
[1:21:48] Second
[1:21:53] Motions on the floor.
[1:21:55] Anybody have any comments? Seeing none.
[1:21:59] Finding of fact Case number 26 dash 1 26.
[1:22:10] Hang on a second.
[1:22:13] I gotta check this number here afterwards.
[1:22:15] Okay, 20.
[1:22:19] Sorry for the interruption there.
[1:22:22] Case number 26 dash 1 26.
[1:22:26] The application is for side and front setbacks.
[1:22:31] Relief from an easement on the right of way.
[1:22:35] The setback is, has been increased from,
[1:22:42] I had to write this on the fly was the setback from 15
[1:22:45] to 35 feet, is that correct?
[1:22:48] Correct. Yeah. Okay.
[1:22:50] The application is in the low medium density residential
[1:22:54] zone and the application is for a garage
[1:22:58] with an A DU above.
[1:23:05] Let's go through the five criteria as we have an abutter
[1:23:09] that has spoken on this matter.
[1:23:14] How does the board find the depictions
[1:23:16] of the applicant, Mr.
[1:23:19] Dietzel to public rec? Public interest. How do you find,
[1:23:26] I think attorney TCO addresses very well.
[1:23:29] I think it is not contrary to the public interest in that
[1:23:35] it, it is not highly visible from the street
[1:23:38] and it doesn't change the character of
[1:23:40] that, the neighborhood.
[1:23:42] I think that criterion is met
[1:23:44] Very good.
[1:23:45] Mr. Tripp, anything on public interest?
[1:23:50] No. Okay.
[1:23:52] Mrs. Moore, any conflicts with,
[1:23:54] or how do you feel on finding a fact
[1:23:56] for the public interest?
[1:23:57] I agree with,
[1:24:00] I agree with Mr. Dietzel.
[1:24:02] Very good. Mr. Donlin, any comment on the public interest?
[1:24:06] I agree. Nothing to add.
[1:24:08] Okay. The chair will say that I, I see no conflict
[1:24:11] with the public interest in this matter.
[1:24:14] The area is quite expansive, so plenty
[1:24:19] of space there.
[1:24:21] Spear the ordinance. Mr. Dietzel
[1:24:23] Similar response.
[1:24:26] She pointed out that the ordinance is written to make sure
[1:24:29] that there's adequate spacing and,
[1:24:30] and certainly that's observed second criteria incident.
[1:24:34] Very good. Mr. Trip,
[1:24:38] Say again please, Mr.
[1:24:40] Trip to the spirit of the ordinance. Any conflict there?
[1:24:43] I did not see any conflict with the spirit of the
[1:24:45] Ordinance.
[1:24:46] Very good. Mr. Morn? Mr. Morn. I'm sorry.
[1:24:48] It's, I also don't see any conflict.
[1:24:51] All right, Mr. Donlin, anything to spear of the ordinance?
[1:24:55] I don't see a conflict, Mr. Chair. I have nothing to add.
[1:24:58] All right. And the chair will add that the spear
[1:25:00] of the ordinances is as no conflict as, again, once again,
[1:25:05] it's a fairly rural area
[1:25:08] and pretty wide open.
[1:25:10] Substantial justice. Mr. Dietzel cares lead on that.
[1:25:15] I see no harm to the public
[1:25:16] and certainly there is a benefit to the, to the applicant.
[1:25:20] I believe substantial justice is met.
[1:25:22] Very good. Thank you. Mr. Tripp.
[1:25:24] Speaking to substantial justice. You think this is fair?
[1:25:28] Well, the, since the right
[1:25:32] and since the variance requested is a, a setback
[1:25:36] to the right away.
[1:25:40] Right now it's 35 feet, I believe.
[1:25:44] And the typical setback is 15.
[1:25:49] The only time that the right away
[1:25:52] would come into effect would be if the road was
[1:25:55] ever put there.
[1:25:58] So I see no, no issue with
[1:26:03] Substantial justice.
[1:26:04] Mrs. Mor. I agree. Chair. All right, Mr. Donlin.
[1:26:07] I also agree Mr. Chair, I think the chair will say
[1:26:11] that substantial justice is served here as the,
[1:26:16] the encroachment into the setbacks is minimal
[1:26:21] and does not,
[1:26:23] does not disturb the prior two conditions of five criteria
[1:26:29] values of surrounding properties.
[1:26:31] Are they diminished Mr. Dietzel?
[1:26:34] No. Very good. Mr. Trip? No. Mrs. Morin?
[1:26:39] No. Mr. Donlin? No.
[1:26:44] I'm going faster than I can write.
[1:26:46] You know how I struggle with names. I would concur.
[1:26:51] Literal, literal enforcement creates unnecessary hardship.
[1:26:57] Mr. Dietzel care to speak to that.
[1:26:59] Well, I believe that the, the proposal in
[1:27:02] and of itself is reasonable
[1:27:05] and I think due to the topography
[1:27:07] and the, the other various com
[1:27:11] characteristics of the property
[1:27:13] that were spelled out in the application make
[1:27:16] conformance nearly impossible.
[1:27:18] And, and so I believe the hardship criterion is met.
[1:27:21] Mr. Trip, you concur? I concur. Mrs. Morin chair.
[1:27:26] I Concur. Mr. Donlin?
[1:27:28] I concur. Thank you. And the chair will concur as well.
[1:27:33] Well spoken Mr. Dietzel.
[1:27:36] And can the property be used in strict conformance
[1:27:39] with the ordinance?
[1:27:43] That was optional. So we will leave that off. Okay.
[1:27:48] Finding a fact has been read All in favor of moving this
[1:27:51] for a vote, say aye.
[1:27:53] Aye. And the opposed Mr. Trip? Yes. Mr. Donlin?
[1:27:58] Yes. Mrs. Morin? Yes. And Mr. Dietzel?
[1:28:03] Yes.
[1:28:08] And Chair make a unanimous as well by a
[1:28:12] vote of five to zero.
[1:28:14] Congratulations Ms.
[1:28:16] Panco, you and your client are proof
[1:28:19] and you have anybody agreed by this says 30 days
[1:28:23] task this board for reconsideration,
[1:28:25] otherwise recourse will be superior court.
[1:28:28] So have a good night.
[1:28:33] Oh Jesus. Alright, Mrs. Owen.
[1:28:39] No. Who's Owen? Yeah. Ms. Owen. Did I say that one?
[1:28:44] Our next case reads as case number 26 dash 1 28,
[1:28:48] but the prior case was 1 2 6.
[1:28:51] Do we need to amend that?
[1:28:53] We can amend that, yes. We had a case dropout.
[1:28:55] Oh we did. We determined through zoning verification
[1:28:59] that a variance was no longer needed
[1:29:01] after a site survey was performed by an engineer
[1:29:04] and revised the frontage for that property.
[1:29:07] Alright, Mrs.
[1:29:09] Gilford, would you note that we're going to
[1:29:14] alter case number 1 28 to 1 27 and
[1:29:18] likewise, case number 1 29 will be
[1:29:21] 1 28.
[1:29:24] And as our usual clerk, you'll appreciate our keeping
[1:29:29] that straightened out
[1:29:30] because next year when we have
[1:29:31] to do our audit, it'll mess us up.
[1:29:34] Okay.
[1:29:40] All right. Case number 26 dash
[1:29:45] 1 27 Revive Recovery Resource Center.
[1:29:48] Jessica Carter with Devaro Trust.
[1:30:00] Good evening folks.
[1:30:01] Evening Mr. Chair. Respective board members
[1:30:05] Care to introduce yourselves?
[1:30:07] Yes. For the record, my name is Nick Harris.
[1:30:09] I'm attorney at she and Finney.
[1:30:11] And joining me is Jessica Carter, CEO of Revive Recovery.
[1:30:16] She and Finney? Correct. Okay. Mr.
[1:30:20] Donlin, would you sit on this one please? Yes sir. Mr.
[1:30:22] O Bial, I'll have you on the last, okay, Mr. Chair.
[1:30:25] Alright, please proceed.
[1:30:27] We ask that you read the five criteria for the record
[1:30:29] and then we'll barrage you with questions if we'll just see
[1:30:32] where it goes from there.
[1:30:34] So criteria number one, Mr. Chair.
[1:30:37] The variance will not be contrary to the public interest
[1:30:40] because of the court, excuse me,
[1:30:44] not got turned around here.
[1:30:46] The, the variance will not be contrary
[1:30:48] to the public interest because for two reasons,
[1:30:52] the essential character of the neighborhood is preserved.
[1:30:55] The property is and will remain a residential structure.
[1:31:00] While revived recovery will under undertake repairs
[1:31:03] and improvements to the residential structure,
[1:31:05] the structure will retain its outward residential character.
[1:31:08] IT appearance. The proposed residential use is consistent
[1:31:13] with the residential and mixed commercial residential
[1:31:16] character of downtown dairy.
[1:31:19] And given the modest scale 10 beds
[1:31:22] and the fact that residents will rely primarily on public
[1:31:25] transportation, bicycles, ride shares services,
[1:31:28] there will be no meaningful increase in vehicular traffic
[1:31:33] and residents will not be permitted to have
[1:31:35] vehicles at the residence.
[1:31:38] Secondly, the public health safety
[1:31:40] and welfare are advanced and not threatened.
[1:31:43] The residents will operate as a structured,
[1:31:46] well supervised living environment with on, with, excuse me,
[1:31:50] with onsite house management staff
[1:31:52] and resident policies governing curfews,
[1:31:55] community engagement and property upkeep.
[1:31:59] The project directly addresses an acute
[1:32:01] and well-documented unmet need
[1:32:03] where there is presently no publicly funded recovery housing
[1:32:08] for people in dairy and individuals in recovery must
[1:32:12] frequently leave the community to access housing
[1:32:15] and New Hampshire continues
[1:32:16] to confront severe housing shortages and high substance use.
[1:32:21] The second criteria, the spirit of ordinance is observed
[1:32:25] because the GC district,
[1:32:27] the general commercial district purposes are
[1:32:30] advanced, not frustrated.
[1:32:31] The GC district is intended to accommodate a range
[1:32:34] of commercial service
[1:32:36] and related uses in addition to multi-family dwellings.
[1:32:40] Permanented via conditional use permit
[1:32:42] a group residence whose occupants will live within walking
[1:32:45] distance of and will patronize
[1:32:47] and seek employment at nearby commercial establishments is
[1:32:50] fully consistent and complimentary
[1:32:52] to the parent uses in the GC district.
[1:32:55] No district permits, excuse me, no district in dairy
[1:33:01] permits group residences as is
[1:33:03] because a group residence is not a permitted use in
[1:33:06] any district within the town.
[1:33:07] And the spirit of the ordinance is best observed
[1:33:09] by permitting this neither residential use in the district
[1:33:12] that is most appropriate for it,
[1:33:14] which we argue is the GC district
[1:33:17] granting the variance advances rather than undermines the
[1:33:20] general aware of welfare objectives
[1:33:23] underlying the ordinance.
[1:33:25] The third criteria,
[1:33:26] substantial justice is done for two reasons.
[1:33:30] Because one denial causes enormous harm
[1:33:33] with no countervailing public gain
[1:33:36] denial would result in significant loss not only
[1:33:39] to my client revive, which has secured site control,
[1:33:42] taken substantial pre-developed planning
[1:33:44] and committed funds to this project,
[1:33:46] but also to the intended residents of this place whose need
[1:33:50] for stable recovery oriented housing is particularly acute
[1:33:53] in light of the ongoing housing shortage and opioid
[1:33:56] and substance use crisis I mentioned earlier
[1:33:59] the proposed use is consistent
[1:34:00] with the present residential use of the property,
[1:34:03] which is an existing single family dwelling.
[1:34:06] Secondly, there's no gain to the public from a denial
[1:34:09] denying this variance would do a disservice
[1:34:11] to the general public by needlessly frustrating a charitable
[1:34:14] initiative addressing one
[1:34:15] of the communities' pressing needs.
[1:34:18] The fourth criteria values
[1:34:21] of surrounding properties will not be
[1:34:23] diminished for several reasons.
[1:34:25] One, there's no evidence of an adverse impact.
[1:34:29] The proposed residential use is consistent
[1:34:31] with the largely residential
[1:34:33] and mixed commercial residential character
[1:34:35] of the surrounding area and will not fundamentally alter the
[1:34:38] appearance or character of the neighborhood.
[1:34:42] Secondly, this residence will be well managed
[1:34:44] and well supervised.
[1:34:46] The residents will have onsite staff,
[1:34:48] professional property maintenance
[1:34:50] and resident policies designed to ensure the property
[1:34:53] and landscaping remain well kept
[1:34:54] and visually consistent with the surrounding community.
[1:34:57] In fact, improvements will actually
[1:34:59] enhance the property values.
[1:35:01] Revive intends to reha rehabilitate
[1:35:03] and repair the existing structure
[1:35:05] and make significant exterior
[1:35:06] and interior improvements
[1:35:07] that will preserve the property's character while proving
[1:35:10] its aesthetic appeal and longevity potentially enhancing the
[1:35:13] overall appeal of the neighborhood.
[1:35:16] The last criteria, Mr.
[1:35:17] Chair, literal enforcement would result in
[1:35:20] unnecessary hardship.
[1:35:22] Under this fifth criteria, the applicant must show
[1:35:24] that owing to special conditions of the property
[1:35:26] that distinguish it from other properties in the area, such
[1:35:29] as no fair and substantial relationship exists
[1:35:31] between the general public purposes of the ordinance
[1:35:33] and the specific application
[1:35:35] of the provision to the property.
[1:35:37] And two, the proposed use is a reasonable one, speaking
[1:35:40] to the special conditions of the property.
[1:35:42] First the property is an existing appropriately sized single
[1:35:45] family dwelling, supplemented by detached garage well suited
[1:35:49] to adaptive reuse as community programming
[1:35:51] and support space for recovery residents.
[1:35:54] The property is developed as a residential site,
[1:35:57] but is located in downtown dairy in a highly walkable
[1:36:00] setting, providing ready access to employment, healthcare,
[1:36:02] retail, and other such services
[1:36:04] for the residents characteristics
[1:36:06] that make it especially well suited to the proposed use
[1:36:09] and that reduce transportation related barriers
[1:36:11] for residents in early recovery.
[1:36:14] Additionally, the residents' proximity
[1:36:15] to Dairy Friendship Center is important as well.
[1:36:20] In terms of no fair and substantial relationship,
[1:36:22] the use restrictions of the GC district are tending
[1:36:24] to promote an orderly mix of commercial and related uses.
[1:36:28] The proposed use advances does not frustrate those purposes.
[1:36:32] The residents will be well supervised, excuse me,
[1:36:35] the residents will be well supervised residential use
[1:36:37] where whose occupants will support
[1:36:39] and integrate with surrounding commercial establishments
[1:36:42] involving adaptive reuse
[1:36:43] of existing residential structure rather than any
[1:36:46] intensification of a redevelopment.
[1:36:50] Lastly, the proposed use is a reasonable one.
[1:36:53] The property, again is their existing residential structure
[1:36:56] and is well situated
[1:36:57] for the proposed 10 bed recovery residence.
[1:37:01] The garage is well sued
[1:37:03] to convert into complimentary community and support space
[1:37:06] and again, its proximity to their,
[1:37:09] the Dairy Friendship Center will be beneficial
[1:37:11] for the residents that go there.
[1:37:14] And I'll stop there.
[1:37:16] Okay. Care, give a separate narrative
[1:37:20] or anything that parallels your testimony.
[1:37:26] Freehand, either of you,
[1:37:28] May I? Yeah,
[1:37:29] Sure.
[1:37:30] Good evening, Mr. Chair. Members of the zoning board.
[1:37:33] My name's Jessica Carter
[1:37:34] and I'm actually the executive director, not quite CEO
[1:37:37] yet, but hopefully in the future.
[1:37:41] REVIVE is requesting a variance to establish a 10 bed,
[1:37:44] a DA accessible level three men's recovery residence at 32.
[1:37:48] Crystal Ave. REVIVE is a New Hampshire based nonprofit
[1:37:53] recovery community organization.
[1:37:55] We provide peer recovery support, harm reduction services,
[1:37:59] criminal justice recovery navigation, youth
[1:38:01] and family programming,
[1:38:02] and other community-based services for individuals
[1:38:05] and families affected by substance use disorder.
[1:38:08] We are not a new organization entering dairy without local
[1:38:12] relationships or experience.
[1:38:14] REVIVE already operates recovery services at in dairy at
[1:38:18] through our partnership at the Dairy Friendship Center.
[1:38:21] This residence would be a natural extension
[1:38:24] of the work we are already doing in this community.
[1:38:27] There is currently no recovery residents in dairy in no
[1:38:31] publicly funded recovery residents in Rockingham County et
[1:38:34] all This project would fill a significant gap
[1:38:37] by allowing individuals
[1:38:39] to access structured recovery housing while remaining
[1:38:42] connected to their families, employment treatment providers
[1:38:45] and community-based support systems.
[1:38:47] The property at 32,
[1:38:49] crystal Ave is an existing single family built in 1905
[1:38:53] in the Dairies General Commercial District.
[1:38:56] We are not proposing new development
[1:38:58] or a large institutional facility.
[1:39:00] We are proposing to rehabilitate an existing residential
[1:39:04] property while preserving its residential
[1:39:06] appearance and character.
[1:39:08] Also doing something about that shrubbery.
[1:39:11] The property is particularly well suited for this purpose
[1:39:14] because of its downtown location.
[1:39:17] Residents will be within walking distance of employment,
[1:39:20] healthcare stores, community services,
[1:39:23] and revives existing recovery support network.
[1:39:25] At the Dairy Friendship Center,
[1:39:28] the proposed use is classified
[1:39:29] as group residence under dairy zoning ordinance group
[1:39:33] residences are not currently permitted in the general
[1:39:36] commercial district,
[1:39:37] or importantly any zoning district in Derry.
[1:39:41] This leaves us no location within the town
[1:39:43] where it would be needed or reasonable to use
[1:39:46] and be established without a variance.
[1:39:50] I would like to briefly address the five criteria the board
[1:39:53] must consider first.
[1:39:55] Well, I'm gonna hold you up.
[1:39:57] I I don't need that repetitive testimony.
[1:39:59] It's already been read once.
[1:40:01] Okay. No that's fine. Thank you.
[1:40:04] Well the home will only accommodate three, sorry,
[1:40:07] 10 residents and we'll have onsite staff,
[1:40:10] 24 7 people.
[1:40:13] Staff will be living on site
[1:40:14] and there will be additional staff there.
[1:40:16] During daytime hours, we'll have structured policies.
[1:40:19] Good neighbor, we already have a good neighbor.
[1:40:21] Policy governing.
[1:40:24] We will be governing recovery status,
[1:40:26] curfews conduct community participation and property upkeep.
[1:40:31] They will not be, our residents will not be permitted
[1:40:33] to keep vehicles on site.
[1:40:35] So we do not anticipate meaningful increase in parking
[1:40:38] demands or traffic.
[1:40:40] We, this residence will not threaten public health,
[1:40:43] safety or welfare.
[1:40:45] It will advance them.
[1:40:46] Stable structured housing gives people in recovery the
[1:40:49] accountability and support they need to become healthier,
[1:40:52] maintain employment, rebuild relationships,
[1:40:54] and participate positively in their communities.
[1:40:59] And I'm just gonna skip through all this then.
[1:41:04] This property we found super special
[1:41:07] and some of the characteristics
[1:41:09] that make it particularly appropriate for its proposed use.
[1:41:13] It's an existing residential property of a suitable size
[1:41:17] with additional structures that may support programming,
[1:41:20] programming and community space.
[1:41:22] It is also located in a highly walkable downtown area,
[1:41:25] near employment, healthcare, retail, transportation,
[1:41:28] and what we're already doing downtown.
[1:41:31] And because dairy
[1:41:34] does not permit group residences in any zoning district,
[1:41:37] strict enforcement would effectively prevent revive from
[1:41:41] establishing this type of need in
[1:41:44] or housing anywhere in the town.
[1:41:46] So we were respectfully believe that
[1:41:49] an outcome would create unnecessary hardship
[1:41:51] and would not serve the community's broader interest.
[1:41:54] And we just wanna reiterate
[1:41:55] that recovery doesn't happen in isolation.
[1:41:57] It requires safe housing accountability, peer support,
[1:42:01] meaningful community connections,
[1:42:03] and access to employment and services.
[1:42:05] This project represents responsible growth
[1:42:08] by an established nonprofit org
[1:42:10] and we have identified a documented gap, selected a property
[1:42:13] that's well suited to meet the need
[1:42:15] and developed a plan for a structured
[1:42:17] and professionally operated residence that will
[1:42:20] compliment the recovery services already here in Derry.
[1:42:23] So this decision is about the use of one property,
[1:42:25] but it's an impact.
[1:42:27] Its impact will reach much further.
[1:42:29] It is an opportunity for dairy
[1:42:31] to strengthen its local recovery infrastructure
[1:42:34] and for Rockingham County to gain a level
[1:42:36] of structured recovery housing it does not currently have.
[1:42:40] We respectfully ask the board to approve revive recovery
[1:42:43] resource centers' variance application
[1:42:45] and allow this important project to move forward.
[1:42:47] Thank you for your time and consideration.
[1:42:49] I'm happy, happy to answer any questions.
[1:42:52] How is this different than the Granite Sober living?
[1:42:56] So Granite Sober Living does not exist
[1:42:58] in this area anymore.
[1:42:59] They took that property
[1:43:01] and turned it into a treatment center.
[1:43:03] So we're much different. We provide peer support.
[1:43:07] We won't be, you know, billing insurances for all,
[1:43:11] you know, clinical codes.
[1:43:13] It's all peer support people
[1:43:15] that are in recovery just trying
[1:43:16] to help other people in recovery maintain
[1:43:19] what it looks like for them.
[1:43:20] So you said it was a treatment center?
[1:43:24] It, so the Granite House,
[1:43:26] which was originally recovery housing back in like 2016
[1:43:29] through maybe 2019
[1:43:31] and then they converted into a treatment center.
[1:43:33] So they used that same building. Right.
[1:43:35] So my question to you is,
[1:43:36] you said it was a treatment center.
[1:43:39] So would you define the difference between,
[1:43:41] what's the definition
[1:43:42] of a treatment center versus what you're doing?
[1:43:45] So what we're doing is nonclinical,
[1:43:47] It's generic for me by the Way.
[1:43:48] Yes, that's okay. Happy to, happy to explain it.
[1:43:51] But we're nonclinical
[1:43:52] and we're not going to be offering clinical support
[1:43:56] or it's not like a residential treatment center.
[1:44:00] It will be people can come on their own free will choose
[1:44:03] to partake into a recovery plan that we help them establish.
[1:44:08] And it's not necessarily something that's going to be forced
[1:44:11] or prescribed onto them.
[1:44:13] You know, like a lot of times people end up in treatment
[1:44:16] centers 'cause they're being told they need to go there.
[1:44:19] And we are working more with the folks
[1:44:23] that are coming on their own accord
[1:44:24] and looking to develop a recovery plan that works for them.
[1:44:29] And the position of that, you've given a lot
[1:44:33] of information Correct.
[1:44:34] And I just want to sort through some of it for myself.
[1:44:38] The idea that,
[1:44:40] or the argument that it's in appropriate for a general
[1:44:44] commercial district is kind of what I'm going,
[1:44:48] what I'm looking at right now.
[1:44:51] Basic zoning objectives is spoken under the
[1:44:57] contrary to the public interests criteria.
[1:45:01] And what are I, I'm curious as to
[1:45:04] how you see the basic zoning objectives
[1:45:07] and this a little more clarification there to
[1:45:11] how this meets that.
[1:45:13] Sure. Yeah. So we think the essential character
[1:45:16] of the neighborhood is preserved.
[1:45:18] This is a single family, it was a single family residence
[1:45:22] to our knowledge it was rented out,
[1:45:25] the previous owner rented it to tenants.
[1:45:29] You know, we're not turning this into a,
[1:45:33] a development or anything.
[1:45:34] This is gonna be, you know, more residents in the,
[1:45:38] in the building, but we're not gonna change the exterior
[1:45:43] or enhance the exterior and do renovations on the interior.
[1:45:49] And so we feel that it fits within, you know,
[1:45:53] the general commercial district
[1:45:55] because, you know, it's, it's a modest renovation
[1:46:00] and there's not gonna be an increase in vehicle traffic
[1:46:04] or anything like that that's gonna stay the same as it is
[1:46:07] The supervisory phrase that this is really supervisory.
[1:46:13] It takes us to the question of how do you monitor
[1:46:18] and keep that supervisory role in check.
[1:46:22] That becomes one of the primary arguments
[1:46:26] that you're presenting.
[1:46:28] I think to, in contrast to these are individuals
[1:46:32] that could support commercial activity
[1:46:35] in within a close proximity.
[1:46:38] The, the supervisory role, you know, kind of is,
[1:46:43] is suggested in that aspect I think. Can you define that?
[1:46:48] So is your question what, what steps in terms
[1:46:50] of supervisory role is revive gonna play?
[1:46:52] Yeah,
[1:46:54] So our plan is to have three staff
[1:46:57] involved in the housing project.
[1:46:58] Two, there will be at least two present at all times,
[1:47:01] but during daytime hours there will be up to three.
[1:47:04] Okay. And what kind of constraint do you have in
[1:47:09] that supervisory role?
[1:47:12] And I say constraint, I guess, I guess control in that,
[1:47:16] in in with those individuals. How does that work?
[1:47:20] The individuals that are living in the house
[1:47:22] or will be monitored by the, our peer leaders
[1:47:25] who will be well trained
[1:47:27] and in the process
[1:47:29] of getting their certified recovery support worker
[1:47:32] certification through the board of licensing.
[1:47:35] We do have staff also that are located at the center,
[1:47:39] which is about a half a mile down the road that can be
[1:47:42] of assistance should anything be needed.
[1:47:46] We have members of our leadership here
[1:47:47] that are all on the emergency contact list
[1:47:50] for the fire department and they're all willing
[1:47:52] and able to come in crisis
[1:47:54] or if there's anything needed at the house at any hour.
[1:47:58] We have board members that live in the area that are also on
[1:48:02] that emergency contact list.
[1:48:04] And we have like a whole protocol for
[1:48:06] what happens if this happens
[1:48:08] and what happens if that happens.
[1:48:10] And we have this whole handbook for our certification.
[1:48:13] We are already provisionally certified
[1:48:15] through the New Hampshire Partnership
[1:48:16] for Recovery residences for our first housing project,
[1:48:20] which is unrelated to this.
[1:48:21] But those same policies will carry over to this project
[1:48:24] and we do anticipate provisional certification
[1:48:28] probably before we even open.
[1:48:29] Okay. I'll yield for now to other members of the board.
[1:48:32] Mr. Any Mr. Trip,
[1:48:36] What exactly are you asking for here?
[1:48:39] Variance on the ordinance
[1:48:42] that does not allow congregate housing in the entire town.
[1:48:46] So this is a use variance? Yes.
[1:48:48] Use variance, correct. For group residence.
[1:48:51] What's, what ordinance number is that?
[1:48:55] So it's section 1 65 dash three.
[1:49:01] What page is that on?
[1:49:21] It looks like there was an error in the motion.
[1:49:26] Are you talking about 1 65 32?
[1:49:29] Yeah, it looks like there's a typo so it is,
[1:49:31] it should be 1 65 dash 32 capital
[1:49:35] A for the use.
[1:49:37] 32 1. Sorry. What is the board looking at right now?
[1:49:44] We are looking at the accurate definition of the section
[1:49:48] of infra or relief that you're looking for on the motion.
[1:49:53] It's structured as 1 65 31 A
[1:49:56] but it's actually appears to be
[1:49:58] 1 65 32 A Mrs. Owen,
[1:50:01] 32 1 Point capital A
[1:50:06] To Clarify.
[1:50:07] Okay. 32 1 capital A. So we missed a one in there.
[1:50:12] We missed a two. A Two, yeah. A two. I'm sorry.
[1:50:15] Yeah, we put the one in the wrong
[1:50:18] Position.
[1:50:19] It's hard to prove something when you don't
[1:50:20] know what you're approving.
[1:50:22] I get that. Mr. Trip. Anything else?
[1:50:28] Not right now. Okay. Mr.
[1:50:32] Donlin,
[1:50:37] I'm gonna see where this goes.
[1:50:38] Okay, Mr. Dietzel? No thank you Mr. Chair.
[1:50:43] Alright Mrs. Moore,
[1:50:45] I have a question.
[1:50:46] So with substance use, usually there's mental health,
[1:50:50] there's often dual diagnosis
[1:50:52] and also, you know, they have, you know,
[1:50:55] a past criminal past.
[1:50:57] Is there any level that you won't allow, like crime wise?
[1:51:02] Yeah, so our policies now for our,
[1:51:06] it's called the Hive Recovery residences is, you know,
[1:51:11] any violent crimes, any sex crimes, arson.
[1:51:17] And there was one of their, they're
[1:51:21] Are these personal injury type of
[1:51:24] crimes. I see. Yes. Yep.
[1:51:26] Yeah, because it's super close to a school.
[1:51:28] But you already mentioned the one with my concern.
[1:51:31] Yeah, I think the other one was like domestic violence,
[1:51:33] but that kind of goes along with violence, so. Okay,
[1:51:36] Thank you.
[1:51:37] I appreciate it.
[1:51:42] Anybody else? Mr. Henry? I'm all set. Okay. Mr. Emba,
[1:51:48] You said there's 10 beds, so that's 10
[1:51:51] individuals you'll be taking care of
[1:51:53] with two permanent staff.
[1:51:55] So that's a ratio of two to five, two staff or five members.
[1:51:59] So if the two of those staff are included in the 10.
[1:52:03] Okay, so two and four. Two to four.
[1:52:07] And how many beds does this property have?
[1:52:09] How many bedrooms?
[1:52:12] One, two. It's technically a three bedroom house,
[1:52:17] but some of the rooms on the first floor are the ones we're
[1:52:20] gonna be converting into a DA accessible.
[1:52:22] Okay. Okay.
[1:52:26] What is it, what is defined under the a DA in this req in
[1:52:29] this sense?
[1:52:34] Is it two beds per room or something like that?
[1:52:36] Two beds per Room. Okay. Alright. Mrs. Moore,
[1:52:41] I'm assuming people are going to question the
[1:52:45] outside of the building.
[1:52:46] Are you gonna have a sign, is it gonna be like noticeable
[1:52:51] or is it just going to look like the house is as now
[1:52:54] It's gonna look a little, a little better version
[1:52:57] of what the house looks like.
[1:52:58] Right now we don't intend on having a sign
[1:53:01] and our plan for our first housing project was just so
[1:53:05] where the, the housing,
[1:53:06] our housing projects are called the Hive.
[1:53:08] So we were gonna have a bumblebee shaped mailbox
[1:53:11] and that was the only way that you could
[1:53:12] really identify who we are.
[1:53:15] We, you know, intend on trying to keep our, you know,
[1:53:18] privacy, protect the privacy of the people living there
[1:53:22] as much as the community around us.
[1:53:25] Thank you. Anybody else? Mr.
[1:53:29] Dietzel? You all set? All set,
[1:53:30] Mr. Chair.
[1:53:31] Thank you. Alright, your folks have
[1:53:32] anything else you wanna share with us?
[1:53:34] No. Thank you Mr. Chair. Alright, Ms. Chair,
[1:53:38] One point of clarification.
[1:53:40] In our application we submitted
[1:53:42] in the deed it was pending sale with the Devaro trust.
[1:53:48] We have since that's been conveyed to Revive recovery.
[1:53:51] So Revive recovery is the owner.
[1:53:52] Now we're happy to supplement with the deed,
[1:53:56] the most current deed after this, this hearing.
[1:53:59] If the, if the board wants, we just wanted to clarify
[1:54:02] that our application materials, that one piece,
[1:54:04] the deed we included has changed since we submitted it.
[1:54:07] So we're happy to supplement that
[1:54:10] at the board's request. We're happy to do that.
[1:54:13] And so at time of application you're under a purchase
[1:54:15] and sale agreement, correct?
[1:54:17] Correct. That's correct, yeah. Okay.
[1:54:20] You know, the one thing I will say on this,
[1:54:22] in this regard is I have a hard time sometimes
[1:54:25] with people in, in hardship
[1:54:29] when it's something that they've just purchased
[1:54:33] that becomes a struggle for, for myself
[1:54:36] that's historically consistent.
[1:54:39] Doesn't mean I say no,
[1:54:41] but it's, it's something for me that stands out.
[1:54:46] No, I understand. Do you mind if I comment on that?
[1:54:48] Sure. We, we were intending on getting
[1:54:51] before this board in August
[1:54:53] and the seller, you know, the, it had been on the market
[1:54:56] for quite some time and it was getting to the point
[1:54:59] where he was threatening to take it off the market
[1:55:01] completely and go a different direction.
[1:55:03] So we were kind of put in a place to kind of have to
[1:55:07] jump on it or potentially lose the option.
[1:55:09] Yeah, no, I understand that.
[1:55:11] My point is that if, if the owner had said to me
[1:55:15] to this board, well I can't do anything else with this
[1:55:17] and I've, I've owned it for 20 years
[1:55:19] and I'm in this tight district
[1:55:22] and you know, no one wants to buy it,
[1:55:25] that becomes more a clear hardship for my considerations.
[1:55:30] I can't speak for everybody,
[1:55:32] but when you have just purchased something
[1:55:34] and you're coming into a zone that's not approved for it
[1:55:38] and, and crying a hardship, that's
[1:55:41] where I see a bit of a problem. So
[1:55:44] Yeah, just to clarify, you know, that that was a point
[1:55:46] of care for clarification in terms of, you know,
[1:55:49] being transparent with the board, that that has changed.
[1:55:51] I mentioned it in our hardship criteria,
[1:55:53] but we also mentioned other,
[1:55:56] you know, points on the hardship.
[1:55:58] So we hear you and we understand that,
[1:55:59] but we just want to clarify that, that,
[1:56:01] and happy to supplement with a new deed.
[1:56:03] Okay. Alright, staff Mo, Ms.
[1:56:07] Zan, you wanna help us out or give us your version on this
[1:56:10] Thank you chair.
[1:56:12] As previously stated, the applicant is requesting a variance
[1:56:15] to permit the operation
[1:56:16] of a 10 bed level three men's recovery group recovery
[1:56:20] residence within the existing structure on the property,
[1:56:24] property is located within the general
[1:56:25] commercial zoning district.
[1:56:27] Group residence is not a permitted use,
[1:56:29] therefore a variance is required.
[1:56:31] The applicant proposes to convert the existing building
[1:56:34] to establish and operate a non-profit, fully accessible
[1:56:38] peer supported 10 bed level.
[1:56:40] Three men's recco group recovery residents
[1:56:44] for individuals recovering from substance use disorder.
[1:56:47] The residents will include onsite
[1:56:50] management and support staff.
[1:56:52] The applicant is not new, a new organization to dairy
[1:56:55] and currently facilitates recovery support services
[1:56:58] through the Dairy Friendship Center.
[1:57:01] The property consists of approximately 0.08 acres
[1:57:05] and contains an existing 1,876 square foot single family
[1:57:10] residence constructed in 1905 along
[1:57:14] with a detached garage on the property.
[1:57:17] If approved by the board,
[1:57:18] a site plan amendment will be required to be reviewed
[1:57:20] and approved by the planning board
[1:57:23] and if approved, appropriate permits
[1:57:24] and inspections will be required. Thank you.
[1:57:28] Okay, thank you Ms. Olin.
[1:57:30] Any questions for code enforcement from the board?
[1:57:33] I have one. Mr. Mr. Donlin,
[1:57:36] To the best of your knowledge now, can you just touch on
[1:57:41] what the residence looks like as far as like how many
[1:57:44] is it two family, three family,
[1:57:46] the beds, that sort of thing?
[1:57:48] Absolutely. Happy two. The existing
[1:57:54] property, it's a existing single family residence.
[1:57:56] It is three bedrooms.
[1:57:59] It's approximately a little over a thousand square feet on
[1:58:02] the first floor and about five,
[1:58:04] just over 500 square feet on the second quarter
[1:58:07] story is what they're calling it.
[1:58:08] So it's built into the roof line.
[1:58:11] There is a detached garage on the property as well.
[1:58:15] And it says it's, let's see,
[1:58:19] I already talked about the acreage.
[1:58:22] You answered my question. Thank you. Okay,
[1:58:24] Excellent.
[1:58:25] Thank you.
[1:58:27] I have a question. Mr. Trip,
[1:58:31] You mentioned that this is a
[1:58:33] level three men's group recovery residence.
[1:58:35] Could you
[1:58:39] Define level three?
[1:58:40] Elaborate on that a little.
[1:58:42] I think the applicant should elaborate so
[1:58:45] that it's coming clear.
[1:58:47] I see. So level three recovery residence is intended
[1:58:50] for folks that are reentering from treatment centers
[1:58:53] or from other kind like residential treatment options.
[1:59:00] Level three means that there's 24 7 staff on site
[1:59:04] and it's just like they, with the NAR standards,
[1:59:07] they make different levels based on the amount of staffing
[1:59:10] and the amount of like treatment that might be provided
[1:59:13] or not provided in a space.
[1:59:16] So you would, you would restrain them at times
[1:59:21] and make sure that like, 'cause I noticed
[1:59:22] that you said something about curfews, you know, so
[1:59:26] Yeah, there will be curfews
[1:59:27] and like when, you know, there's different levels,
[1:59:29] but within the program when they're, you know, new
[1:59:31] to the program they have to be in earlier,
[1:59:33] they have different accountability measures.
[1:59:35] And then as they've been with us longer, those kind
[1:59:37] of like lower and they start, you know, getting jobs
[1:59:40] and, you know, getting out
[1:59:42] and maybe trying to get their kids back
[1:59:44] or, you know, working on stuff like that.
[1:59:47] So the level of monitoring will change depending upon
[1:59:50] where they are in the program.
[1:59:53] The, the, I wouldn't say the level
[1:59:55] of monitoring would change.
[1:59:57] The level of the expectation of
[2:00:00] what they're gonna be held accountable
[2:00:02] for will change over time.
[2:00:05] They'll be monitored at all times regardless.
[2:00:08] Yeah. So you, you basically will be a,
[2:00:13] working with them and you setting goals and expectations
[2:00:17] and you know, monitoring them. Yeah. So
[2:00:21] That we'll be monitoring them. We will, I,
[2:00:24] I, I can't think of a better word.
[2:00:26] You know, maybe you, maybe you guys can, but
[2:00:29] Supervision was a good one.
[2:00:30] Okay. Like that. Alright. All right.
[2:00:33] 'cause I, I, I think a lot of people's
[2:00:38] questions tonight will be, you know, you know,
[2:00:40] what exactly is, is your organization doing, you know, in
[2:00:44] that, in the, in the building that you're
[2:00:46] gonna be operating.
[2:00:49] So thank you. Welcome.
[2:00:50] Thank you. Okay. Anybody else? All set?
[2:00:54] Hey, let's make a call to public, see where this takes us.
[2:00:57] Okay. You folks just listen
[2:00:59] and you'll have an opportunity to rebut anything,
[2:01:02] any statements that are made.
[2:01:03] First call is for anyone who wishes
[2:01:05] to support this application.
[2:01:07] This is your opportunity to come forward.
[2:01:13] Good evening. Thank you for the record.
[2:01:15] My name is Carol Boden, I am the chairman
[2:01:18] of the Dairy Friendship Center here in town
[2:01:21] and a lot of, you know, the Friendship Center.
[2:01:24] We've been in the community for probably over 40 years.
[2:01:27] And what I'd like to start out by saying is I, I'm hoping
[2:01:30] that the conversation around substance misuse is changing.
[2:01:36] That it's not a moral issue, it's a health issue.
[2:01:40] And I, you know, and I wanna say this, that I don't think
[2:01:43] that people that have problems with substance misuse
[2:01:47] wake up one morning and say, you know
[2:01:48] what, I'm bored to death.
[2:01:50] I think I have nothing better to do.
[2:01:51] I think I'll just start using alcohol and drugs.
[2:01:55] That's not how it goes. But I don't want to get into that.
[2:01:59] But I, I did want to say that.
[2:02:01] So the Friendship Center, you know, like I said,
[2:02:03] it's been in the community for over 40 years
[2:02:05] and we've never had any trouble,
[2:02:08] we've never had any trouble.
[2:02:09] It's peer to peer support, you know,
[2:02:11] and I don't see anything but a benefit
[2:02:14] because REVIVE has been
[2:02:17] renting space in our building, you know,
[2:02:19] we've fortunate enough to have moved to Railroad Ave.
[2:02:23] I I'm sure a lot of you remember when we were on Broadway,
[2:02:26] which was, you know, a notch above sketchy at the time.
[2:02:29] But, but we have our own building.
[2:02:31] We've been in our own building now for about 11 years
[2:02:34] and REVIVE has been renting an office space there
[2:02:37] and they have a staff that is there every
[2:02:39] day from 11 to three.
[2:02:40] So if someone were to come in off the street looking
[2:02:43] for help or call looking for help, they're there to give it.
[2:02:48] And, and they have their finger on the pulse, they know
[2:02:52] where to go, where to send this person for maybe help with
[2:02:57] rent or utilities, utility bills
[2:03:00] or finding them a detox or a residential program.
[2:03:05] So they're very active in dairy community as well
[2:03:08] as Nash or in Manchester.
[2:03:11] And I think that expanding their services
[2:03:16] would be a, a boost to this town.
[2:03:19] Again, you know, they have a great track record and,
[2:03:25] and I'm all for it and I think it's great
[2:03:28] and I, I get, I get the concern, you know, I get the concern
[2:03:31] because, you know, people have sort of an idea of people
[2:03:36] that have been addicted to alcohol and drugs, but,
[2:03:39] but people that are looking for help need the help.
[2:03:44] They need the help. So that's why I am here
[2:03:46] to say I think it's a great idea
[2:03:48] and I'm hoping that the board approves it.
[2:03:50] So, so certainly from the compassion side you can
[2:03:53] understand that and the need is there.
[2:03:57] The, the greater, a greater focus becomes what I've spoken
[2:04:01] to already, which was the design intent of, of
[2:04:05] that ordinance and how it looks.
[2:04:07] So Right. Considering one over your position, you know,
[2:04:12] basic zoning objectives over your position is it can be
[2:04:16] understood I think.
[2:04:17] Right, right, right. Now I'm not saying
[2:04:19] you have to agree with me.
[2:04:21] No, but we all have that weighing analysis of which is the
[2:04:27] more serviceable position
[2:04:29] and it's not biased necessarily
[2:04:31] to the individuals that you're trying to treat.
[2:04:34] Correct. So it's more about
[2:04:36] how this is gonna work ordinance wise.
[2:04:40] Right, right. Well I'm sure you know,
[2:04:42] you guys know what you're doing.
[2:04:45] There are people that question that.
[2:04:48] Well, it won't be me. Okay. I won't question it.
[2:04:51] But anyway, thank you for listening to me. Okay,
[2:04:53] Thank you.
[2:04:54] Really good. I've Mr. Trip.
[2:04:57] Now, do you anticipate working with the, the people
[2:05:01] that are requesting the variance?
[2:05:05] Yes. I would imagine that the people
[2:05:07] that are gonna be in the house will be, be able
[2:05:09] to attend meetings at the Friendship Center.
[2:05:11] We have over 20 meetings a week
[2:05:13] and we have approximately about 400 people a week that come
[2:05:17] through our doors looking for help.
[2:05:19] And it's all peer to peer.
[2:05:20] It's, there are no like clinicians or professionals involved
[2:05:26] and yeah, so I anticipate that, you know,
[2:05:28] they would be coming to the Friendship center
[2:05:29] and attending meetings as well.
[2:05:31] Yeah. Hi. Yeah.
[2:05:34] Thank you. You're Welcome. Anything else? No.
[2:05:37] Alright, great. Thank you. Good.
[2:05:39] Thank you. Anybody else wish to speak in support?
[2:05:51] Good evening. Good evening, Mr.
[2:05:53] Chairman, members of the committee. My name is Jake Berry.
[2:05:56] I'm the Senior Vice President in New Futures.
[2:05:58] We are a statewide nonprofit health policy
[2:06:00] and advocacy organization.
[2:06:02] We've been working for more than 30 years
[2:06:04] to help address drug and alcohol issues in our state.
[2:06:07] I can't speak much of the specifics that you've heard
[2:06:10] so much about tonight, leave that to others in the room.
[2:06:12] But I do want to talk about from talk from a statewide
[2:06:15] perspective about the importance
[2:06:16] of recovery housing projects like this.
[2:06:19] I know I don't need to tell you the vital role of head
[2:06:21] that housing plays in helping us
[2:06:23] to address the ongoing addiction crisis here in
[2:06:25] New Hampshire and all across the country.
[2:06:27] Research is crystal clear that homelessness
[2:06:29] and housing instability contribute
[2:06:30] to higher rates of substance use.
[2:06:32] And conversely, access to recovery housing is associated
[2:06:35] with decreased rates of substance use, reduced probability
[2:06:38] of recurrence and lower rates
[2:06:39] of criminal activity and incarceration.
[2:06:42] These benefits are crystal are clear, yet
[2:06:44] as a state we continue to face a severe shortage
[2:06:46] of recovery housing as, as you heard tonight,
[2:06:50] not only is there not one single recovery house here in
[2:06:52] Derry, but there aren't any publicly funded
[2:06:54] or certified houses to be found in all of Rockingham County.
[2:06:58] In total projections show that around
[2:07:00] that New Hampshire needs more than 15,000 recovery beds
[2:07:03] to meet the needs of our state
[2:07:04] and its people, I should say, additional recovery beds.
[2:07:07] Thankfully these people here
[2:07:08] before you tonight want desperately to help.
[2:07:10] Recco Revive Recovery is known around New Hampshire as one
[2:07:14] of our largest and strongest recovery community
[2:07:16] organizations here in Derry.
[2:07:18] They've been an important community partner
[2:07:19] for several years with their resource
[2:07:20] center on Railroad Ave.
[2:07:22] And their recovery centers and housing units in Manchester
[2:07:24] and Nashua are saving lives every day.
[2:07:27] I understand fully, fully
[2:07:28] that land use decisions like this one are complicated
[2:07:31] and require careful considerations,
[2:07:33] but revive has shown here in dairy
[2:07:35] and all around the state that it's a respected, responsible,
[2:07:37] and impactful community partner.
[2:07:39] And projects like this
[2:07:41] that they're proposing will not only benefit the individuals
[2:07:43] they serve, but the entire dairy
[2:07:44] community in our state as a whole.
[2:07:46] For these reasons I'd ask you to support this,
[2:07:48] to grant the variance and support the projects
[2:07:50] and I'm happy to take any questions.
[2:07:52] Okay. Any questions from any of the board? Mr. Tripp,
[2:07:56] What would you, what did you say your
[2:07:57] organization's name was? It's called
[2:08:00] New Futures.
[2:08:01] So we're, so we're, we're based in Concord,
[2:08:02] but we do statewide advocacy on substance use
[2:08:05] and mental health and, and a variety of other issues.
[2:08:11] Have you worked with the Revive Recovery people?
[2:08:16] We have, yes. Very much so. Previously, yes. Yeah.
[2:08:19] And a number of different projects, they, they work
[2:08:21] with us on state level policy in, in a variety
[2:08:24] of ways. Yeah.
[2:08:25] And where would that be? I'm sorry?
[2:08:28] Where would, where have you
[2:08:30] worked with these people before
[2:08:31] In Nashua and Nashua, Manchester and, and,
[2:08:34] and it's here outta the center in Dairy.
[2:08:37] Say again? In Nashua and Manchester
[2:08:39] and here out of the center in Dairy.
[2:08:40] We have worked with them in a variety of ways. Alright,
[2:08:43] Well thank you. Sure.
[2:08:45] Mr. Donlin. Mr. Henry, folks all set? I'm good Mr. Chair.
[2:08:49] All right. Good enough. All right, we're all set. Thank you.
[2:08:51] Thank you. Anybody else wish
[2:08:53] to speak favorably to this application?
[2:09:04] Good evening.
[2:09:05] Good evening and thank you
[2:09:06] for the opportunity to speak tonight.
[2:09:09] My name is Priscilla Montoss.
[2:09:10] I'm the director of operations
[2:09:12] of REVIVE Recovery Resource Center.
[2:09:14] But my story with REVIVE didn't begin with employment.
[2:09:18] I first walked through the door as a participant looking
[2:09:21] for support in my own recovery.
[2:09:23] I eventually became a volunteer, served multiple years
[2:09:27] through the AmeriCorps program,
[2:09:29] continued growing within the organization
[2:09:31] and today I have the privilege of serving
[2:09:33] as the director of operations.
[2:09:36] I share that because I know firsthand
[2:09:38] that it can be, I'm sorry.
[2:09:42] I share that because I know firsthand
[2:09:44] what can happen when somebody is given support,
[2:09:46] responsibility, and the opportunity to grow.
[2:09:49] That belief is at the heart of why REVIVE wants
[2:09:53] to expand recovery into recovery housing.
[2:09:57] A few years ago during a strategic planning session,
[2:10:00] our board and leadership team were given markers
[2:10:03] and blank pieces of paper.
[2:10:06] One question was asked, what do you want
[2:10:08] to see the future of revive look like?
[2:10:11] When we laid the drawings out, we all noticed something.
[2:10:14] There were little houses everywhere.
[2:10:16] Without planning it, without talking about it,
[2:10:18] we had all drawn, drawn the same thing.
[2:10:21] We recognized that while recovery centers are incredibly
[2:10:24] important, recovery doesn't only happen inside a center.
[2:10:27] It happens in everyday life.
[2:10:29] Going to work, rebuilding relationships, learning
[2:10:32] to manage money, developing healthy routines
[2:10:35] and figuring out who you want to become to do those things.
[2:10:38] People need stability.
[2:10:40] Those little drawings eventually became the Hive Revives 18
[2:10:44] bed, a DA accessible women's recovery residence.
[2:10:47] We chose the name The Hive
[2:10:49] because the hive represents con
[2:10:51] connection and shared purpose.
[2:10:54] Each member contributes while also growing individually.
[2:10:59] And a hive isn't meant to keep its members inside forever.
[2:11:03] It gives them what they need
[2:11:05] to eventually go out and thrive.
[2:11:07] Now we hope to bring that same philosophy to dairy
[2:11:10] through 10 Bed men's recovery residence.
[2:11:13] I understand why residents may
[2:11:15] have questions about having
[2:11:16] a recovery home in their community.
[2:11:18] Those questions are important and we want to hear them.
[2:11:21] I also think it's important for dairy to know who REVIVE is.
[2:11:25] We are not a large corporation coming into
[2:11:28] New Hampshire from somewhere else.
[2:11:30] Revive was grown right here in New Hampshire.
[2:11:33] We are local people who live, work, raise families,
[2:11:37] recover in these same communities.
[2:11:40] I personally want went to Alvern High School.
[2:11:43] I understand what it's like to grow up in a New Hampshire
[2:11:45] town and why people care deeply about
[2:11:47] what happens in their neighborhoods.
[2:11:50] We care about that too.
[2:11:52] If there is ever a concern, revive isn't some corporation
[2:11:55] with a headquarters hundreds of miles away,
[2:11:58] a phone number that leads nowhere.
[2:12:00] You can call us, you can talk to us.
[2:12:02] You can know the people responsible for the home.
[2:12:05] We want to have a relationship with dairy, it's neighbors,
[2:12:08] town officials, businesses, and community organizations.
[2:12:11] Because being a good neighbor is part
[2:12:13] of making recovery residents successful.
[2:12:16] The individuals living in this home will be people actively
[2:12:19] working to move their lives forward.
[2:12:20] The residents will provide structure
[2:12:23] and expectations while residents work towards employment,
[2:12:26] independence, stronger relationships,
[2:12:27] and long-term stability.
[2:12:29] It isn't simply about providing someone with a bed.
[2:12:32] It's about providing an environment
[2:12:33] where people are expected
[2:12:35] to take responsibility for what comes next.
[2:12:37] And ultimately our goal is for residents to reach a point
[2:12:40] where they no longer need us.
[2:12:42] I think about my own journey.
[2:12:43] When I think about the men who will be living in this house,
[2:12:46] when I first walked into revive, nobody would've known
[2:12:49] that one day I'd become the director of operations.
[2:12:51] I certainly didn't, but someone gave me the room to grow.
[2:12:54] Today I have today I have a career
[2:12:56] and I serve the recovery communities throughout
[2:12:58] New Hampshire by creating opportunities for people
[2:13:02] who are standing where I once stood.
[2:13:05] That's what these 10 beds represent to me.
[2:13:09] Not 10 beds, 10 people with futures we cannot predict yet.
[2:13:14] One may become a business owner, one may become a mentor,
[2:13:17] one may rebuild a relationship with his children.
[2:13:21] One may eventually become a leader in this community.
[2:13:24] We don't know what their stories will become.
[2:13:26] We just want to give them a safe place
[2:13:28] to start writing the next chapter.
[2:13:30] Years ago, those little drawings on a piece of paper
[2:13:36] is something we couldn't imagine.
[2:13:37] And here we are today,
[2:13:39] those drawings are becoming real homes.
[2:13:41] We hope dairy will allow us to continue the vision, not
[2:13:43] as outsiders coming into the community,
[2:13:45] but as fellow New Hampshire residents who believe
[2:13:48] that strong recovery communities help create stronger
[2:13:51] communities for everyone.
[2:13:52] Thank you for your time and your consideration.
[2:13:55] Very good. Any questions for the go ahead, Mr. Trip,
[2:14:01] You seem to be quite knowledgeable about,
[2:14:03] about revive recovery.
[2:14:06] Do you know how many locations you served in New Hampshire?
[2:14:10] Yes. So most people said three. It is actually four.
[2:14:13] So we have Nashua, which is our original location,
[2:14:18] dairy, which is our second location, Manchester,
[2:14:20] which is our third, and then Milford,
[2:14:22] which is some location.
[2:14:23] We are just in the process of opening up now, so.
[2:14:27] So you're growing, Growing, growing.
[2:14:29] Very good. Thank you.
[2:14:31] You had indicated the third is dairy,
[2:14:33] it's not second, the second,
[2:14:35] The second was dairy. Correct.
[2:14:36] Okay, but that's not current now?
[2:14:39] No, not our residents, our,
[2:14:41] our recovery centers. I, I see.
[2:14:42] Okay. Revive, I'm sorry.
[2:14:44] Yes, revive. Very good, thank you.
[2:14:46] So, so active facilities are Nashua
[2:14:49] and Manchester currently.
[2:14:51] So our, for our re residents, yes,
[2:14:54] that would be Manchester.
[2:14:56] Oh, Manchester is where you're operating out of right now?
[2:14:58] Yep. So our 18 bed woman's house
[2:15:00] that will be fully operational in the fall?
[2:15:02] Yes. Oh,
[2:15:04] Okay.
[2:15:05] And is it located in the downtown
[2:15:07] like you're hoping you do here
[2:15:08] West side, so
[2:15:11] 2 6, 6 33.
[2:15:15] I got it. 6 33 Second Street. Yeah.
[2:15:18] So west side of Manchester where we're our,
[2:15:20] our center is also located, so kind of the same thing
[2:15:24] that we're looking to do here, where the center is right
[2:15:27] down the road from the house.
[2:15:29] So that if anything needs to be
[2:15:32] provided, resources, support the center is very close
[2:15:35] and can go to the house to provide those services.
[2:15:37] If anything were to happen or if the participants
[2:15:40] of the house just need extra support.
[2:15:43] So you, you're gonna have two,
[2:15:45] two buildings here in dairy.
[2:15:47] We're gonna have our recovery center, which is co-located
[2:15:51] with the Dairy Friendship Center.
[2:15:52] We rent from them. And then the house,
[2:15:56] if this all goes very well tonight. Oh,
[2:15:59] Alright.
[2:16:00] Well thank you. Yep.
[2:16:02] Okay. Anybody else? All right, thank you.
[2:16:06] Anybody else want to speak affirmatively on this?
[2:16:13] Hello, name and address please.
[2:16:18] Good evening. My name is Justin Micho
[2:16:20] and I am the director
[2:16:22] of operations at On the Road to Wellness.
[2:16:24] And we are a peer run mental health organization. Could
[2:16:28] You say what your organization's name is again
[2:16:30] On the road to wellness?
[2:16:33] So we are a peer run mental health organization
[2:16:36] that serves the dairy and Manchester communities.
[2:16:40] Our dairy location, we just relocated from 45 South main
[2:16:44] to 16 Manning Street right next door.
[2:16:48] I'm here tonight, not only
[2:16:50] as a professional working in peer support,
[2:16:52] but also as someone with my own lived experience
[2:16:54] with mental health challenges and recovery.
[2:16:57] My experiences are a large part of
[2:16:59] what brought me into this work
[2:17:00] and they have taught me something very important.
[2:17:02] People can and they do recover.
[2:17:04] And when they are given the right opportunities,
[2:17:06] support an environment at on the road to wellness.
[2:17:09] We have developed a strong partnership
[2:17:11] with REVIVE Recovery organizations serve many
[2:17:14] of the same people, make referrals to one another,
[2:17:16] connect individuals or resources
[2:17:18] and share the belief that recovery happens
[2:17:20] through community connection
[2:17:23] and meeting people where they are.
[2:17:25] REVIVE is already doing amazing work here in Derry
[2:17:27] and throughout New Hampshire.
[2:17:29] They provide peer recovery support
[2:17:30] and help people navigate some
[2:17:31] of the most difficult moments of their lives.
[2:17:34] I would love to see them have the opportunity to expand
[2:17:37] that work by opening this Men's recovery house.
[2:17:40] There's a real need for safe, supportive recovery housing.
[2:17:43] Someone can make the decision to change their life,
[2:17:46] complete treatment or begin their recovery journey.
[2:17:49] But if they do not have a stable
[2:17:51] and recovery focused place to go afterward,
[2:17:54] maintaining recovery becomes significantly harder.
[2:17:57] New Hampshire has seen encouraging decreases in overdose
[2:18:00] deaths in recent years.
[2:18:01] That progress should be celebrated,
[2:18:04] but it shouldn't make us believe that the work is finished.
[2:18:06] I believe that progress is happening in part
[2:18:08] because we have continued creating
[2:18:10] opportunities for recovery.
[2:18:12] Places where people can find support,
[2:18:14] connection, stability, and hope.
[2:18:15] Organizations like REVIVE are part of that solution.
[2:18:19] A recovery house isn't simply a house, it's an opportunity.
[2:18:22] It's a place where someone can rebuild their life,
[2:18:25] find employment, reconnect with family,
[2:18:27] and become part of their community again,
[2:18:29] eventually be the person helping
[2:18:31] the next person through the door.
[2:18:33] I respectfully asked the board to support REVIVE
[2:18:35] and give them the opportunity to continue expanding their
[2:18:37] lifesaving work that they are already
[2:18:39] doing in the community.
[2:18:41] And thank you for your time. Alright,
[2:18:43] Any questions?
[2:18:44] Nope. Thank you. Very good. Thank you.
[2:18:46] We're good. Oh Mr. Drew.
[2:18:47] So you're presently in dairy also?
[2:18:51] Yes. Yeah, we are
[2:18:53] At 16 Manning Street in the greenery right next door.
[2:18:57] Oh, alright. Now is your organization located in multiple
[2:19:01] sites in New Hampshire?
[2:19:03] Yes, we have that support center
[2:19:05] and then we have one in Manchester on South Willow Street.
[2:19:09] And then we have a recovery house also in Manchester.
[2:19:13] Oh the, the big difference is we are mental health primary
[2:19:18] and revive is substance abuse primary.
[2:19:21] So we work very well together.
[2:19:23] I know you, somebody had mentioned on the
[2:19:25] board about mental health.
[2:19:27] That's, that's kind of where we work together the best.
[2:19:31] 'cause we do primary mental health stuff.
[2:19:34] All of us do peer support.
[2:19:38] Okay, very Good. So there's a, you're one of a number
[2:19:40] of organ organizations.
[2:19:42] What's that? You're a num one of a number
[2:19:44] of organizations working here in Derry
[2:19:46] to, to help these people.
[2:19:48] Yes. Alright, thank you much.
[2:19:50] Yes. We all tend to, to work together well
[2:19:54] takes, takes many people.
[2:19:58] Thank you. Okay. And all set. Thank you.
[2:20:01] Thank you. Have a good night guys. Yep.
[2:20:02] Thank you Again, this is for support of the application.
[2:20:08] Seeing no one else
[2:20:15] Evening.
[2:20:16] Thank you folks, sir for seeing us tonight.
[2:20:17] All right. Name and address please.
[2:20:19] My name is Louis Hastings.
[2:20:21] My address is, yep, five Jers Drive. Nashua.
[2:20:25] Okay. We ask you to be brief with
[2:20:28] how you would be aggrieved by this.
[2:20:30] Thank you. It's pretty basically curtailing on
[2:20:33] what a lot of people have said.
[2:20:36] I'm a personal long-term recovery.
[2:20:37] I've been in working in the field for over 30 years,
[2:20:39] but approximately 20 of those years focused specifically on
[2:20:42] substance of use of recovery.
[2:20:45] Throughout my years of experience, I have been the privilege
[2:20:47] of seeing firsthand
[2:20:48] how individuals can change their lives when they are given
[2:20:51] the right opportunity support structure.
[2:20:55] Watching someone who has once struggled to find direction
[2:20:56] and begin the rebuild their lives,
[2:20:59] regain their independence,
[2:21:00] become productive members of the community.
[2:21:03] And truly it's been heartwarming.
[2:21:06] That is the purpose behind recovery housing,
[2:21:09] especially the men's housing that we are proposing here.
[2:21:13] Recovery is about much more than
[2:21:14] simply stopping substance use.
[2:21:16] It is about learning how to be live a healthy,
[2:21:18] responsible, and productive life.
[2:21:20] Stable housing can be important part of that process.
[2:21:24] A safe support place to live,
[2:21:27] give individuals the opportunity to work on themselves,
[2:21:29] to maintain employment, build healthy relationships,
[2:21:32] develop life skills,
[2:21:33] and take responsibilities for their futures.
[2:21:36] Our goal is to provide men to in recovery with a structure
[2:21:39] and support of a living environment while engaging them
[2:21:42] to become responsible,
[2:21:43] contributing members in the dairy community.
[2:21:45] We want the men who live at recovery men's housing
[2:21:49] to understand that they are not to be defined by their past.
[2:21:53] With the accountability, support,
[2:21:54] and determination, they can create something very
[2:21:56] different for their futures.
[2:21:58] I believe strongly in value recovery housing
[2:22:00] because I have seen firsthand the impact.
[2:22:03] Men who have given an opportunity
[2:22:05] to establish stability can go on to work,
[2:22:07] support their families, do volunteering, pay taxes,
[2:22:10] contribute positive in the community.
[2:22:13] We understand that being a good neighbor is an important
[2:22:16] part of operating in the recovery is
[2:22:19] residents revive recovery, men's housing, we strive
[2:22:21] to maintain a safe, respectful, clean and well-managed house
[2:22:24] and be a positive presence within the dairy community.
[2:22:27] I respect to ask the dairy zoning board
[2:22:29] to consider the importance of this house
[2:22:31] and the opportunity to provide the men who are working hard
[2:22:34] to change their lives after more than 30
[2:22:37] years working in this field.
[2:22:38] I have learned recovery is possible.
[2:22:39] I've seen people who have once felt
[2:22:41] that they have very little hope to going on
[2:22:43] to build meaningful purpose, life
[2:22:46] revive recovery men's housing as well,
[2:22:48] creating another opportunity transformation should happen.
[2:22:51] Thank you once again for listening.
[2:22:54] Very good, thank you. We're gonna wrap up.
[2:22:58] You're all set. Anybody wish to wrap up
[2:23:03] with the affirmative on the application?
[2:23:07] Anybody opposed to this application?
[2:23:09] This would be your opportunity to come forward.
[2:23:16] And we do have some letters for the record as well. Okay.
[2:23:20] Thank you. And name and address please?
[2:23:22] Yep. Brian Ello, six Rollin Street.
[2:23:26] I wanna know for the re I mean
[2:23:27] for the record, I want it to be known.
[2:23:29] I'm not against the project itself. It's a worthy project.
[2:23:34] What my concerns are, the zoning
[2:23:38] behind this building is actually multi high density
[2:23:42] residential two, which many years ago, the planning board
[2:23:47] kept it that way as a strict neighborhood
[2:23:50] because of the old older homes in that area.
[2:23:54] It was stated that this home was, is 1905
[2:24:00] and it's a three bedroom, one bathroom, single family home.
[2:24:07] 15, I think it, it was,
[2:24:09] I think it was said it was 1500 square feet.
[2:24:12] My house, which is a block away, my house is 1902.
[2:24:16] I have a 1,350 square foot home.
[2:24:19] I raised two daughters in there.
[2:24:20] So it's my, me and my wife, my two daughters.
[2:24:23] And the home was tight.
[2:24:26] I think this home is just too, it's too intensive of a per
[2:24:29] of a 10 beds is just a lot.
[2:24:34] I can't envision how they're gonna fit it All.
[2:24:38] The lot was
[2:24:41] 0.08.
[2:24:44] So it's the teeniest lot possible.
[2:24:47] I know they mentioned that some
[2:24:48] of these people won't be driving,
[2:24:50] but will will staff be driving
[2:24:52] because you've probably got maybe space,
[2:24:55] maybe you can squeeze three cars in that lot.
[2:25:04] So while I think it's, it's a, it's a good cause.
[2:25:10] I just don't think this is the right location.
[2:25:12] Now, in full disclosure, I am a real estate agent.
[2:25:18] I did see this property on the market for, for months.
[2:25:24] The, the owner that owned it prior, I guess
[2:25:29] in my, my humble opinion, was just overpriced.
[2:25:33] And that's probably why it didn't, it did not sell.
[2:25:36] So my question to the board is, you know, where is,
[2:25:40] where is the hardship?
[2:25:41] There's no hardship because you can actually sell that home
[2:25:44] as a single family home.
[2:25:48] There are other locations that may be a better location for,
[2:25:52] for their 10 bid community home.
[2:25:55] This is not, this is not it.
[2:25:57] And I hope, I hope you kind of consider that as well.
[2:26:01] So thank you.
[2:26:03] If, if the applicant were,
[2:26:06] I mean I I'm presuming that they have their designs already
[2:26:11] figured out and I have no doubt Ms. Owen, that I,
[2:26:16] did we get your staff report?
[2:26:17] You did, yes. Alright,
[2:26:19] Thank you.
[2:26:20] Sorry. At some point, what is the
[2:26:24] building inspection in this situation do?
[2:26:27] Is there a category for this? Under the IBC?
[2:26:32] This is going, from my understanding,
[2:26:34] they're converting this existing interior,
[2:26:36] the structure renovating to match their needs.
[2:26:39] I'm not familiar with what they may be proposing in concept,
[2:26:43] but we would be, if it's approved this evening,
[2:26:46] they would still go to the planning board
[2:26:47] and if that is approved, then building permits would be
[2:26:50] required at that point and we'd perform inspections.
[2:26:52] Yeah. So the IBC gives a category for this, this type
[2:26:56] of application.
[2:26:57] Correct. And so I'm just curious if they had been into that
[2:27:02] discussions yet. So
[2:27:03] It is an interesting conversation to bring up and,
[2:27:07] and what I can say is I've been in
[2:27:09] communication with the fire department.
[2:27:10] I believe that the applicant has been in communication
[2:27:13] with the state fire marshal as well.
[2:27:14] Okay. There is an RSA that pushes this type
[2:27:18] of group residents
[2:27:19] to be considered a one and two family home.
[2:27:22] And at that point, there's not a lot of limitation
[2:27:26] that can be put on that other than a full fire alarm
[2:27:28] system is a requirement.
[2:27:32] All right. Well, where I was going
[2:27:34] with it was essentially the fire inspections
[2:27:36] and, you know, subject to inspections and whatnot.
[2:27:40] A DU specifications have been indicated here,
[2:27:44] and I don't have a DU specifications at the top of my head,
[2:27:49] two beds per room, certain radiuses for, you know,
[2:27:53] wheelchairs that all those kind of criteria
[2:27:57] fall into the a DA.
[2:27:59] And my point to you, Mr.
[2:28:01] Ello, is, you know, if,
[2:28:03] if they can only get eight beds in there, you know, how does
[2:28:06] that affect this, this area if,
[2:28:12] if they are able to use it,
[2:28:14] but in a reduced ca capacity, how does that fit for you?
[2:28:19] I'm just gonna revert back to if you think about that and,
[2:28:23] and it was stated that this is,
[2:28:25] this was a single family home, right?
[2:28:28] It isn't a gc so to me it's a, it's a
[2:28:33] preexisting non-conforming because the house is 1905.
[2:28:37] If you can put yourself back to 1905, my house is 1902.
[2:28:41] So that whole area was all small little houses.
[2:28:44] And you can take a look at the map
[2:28:45] and you'll see the streets behind it.
[2:28:48] They're all residential, they're all teeny homes.
[2:28:53] Yep. And so really the, the flavor of that to the day was
[2:28:58] a single family home.
[2:28:59] That's what it's been since
[2:29:01] nineteen oh five, a hundred twenty one
[2:29:02] years of single family home.
[2:29:05] As I mentioned, I have nothing
[2:29:06] against what they're trying to do.
[2:29:08] I think it's the program. It's great.
[2:29:09] I think the program's great. I just think
[2:29:11] it's in the wrong location.
[2:29:13] I think it's just too, too intense
[2:29:15] because you can't, I mean, if you think about it,
[2:29:18] the acreage of land I have is 0.32.
[2:29:21] I have a third of an acre. Okay? Mm. Which is a tight lot.
[2:29:25] 0.08.
[2:29:28] Yep. That's extremely tight.
[2:29:30] There's really, you know, it's,
[2:29:32] there's not much room to do anything.
[2:29:35] Okay. So anyway, I I, I think from, from that standpoint,
[2:29:40] I don't see the hardship
[2:29:41] because it can be sold as a single family home.
[2:29:44] Well, in all fairness, I don't know that I heard
[2:29:46] that they were, that the owner was necessarily
[2:29:51] desperate to sell to them.
[2:29:53] I heard that they may have been under some kind of agreement
[2:29:58] and they were waiting for this to come together
[2:30:00] and they couldn't get be before the board.
[2:30:02] I'm thinking I, I understand, I understand
[2:30:04] how real estate works, the process
[2:30:06] and everything is probably a purchase
[2:30:07] and sale with a conditional, right.
[2:30:09] If they don't get the approval
[2:30:11] of the deal, probably won't happen.
[2:30:12] Yep. I get that and I understand that
[2:30:15] and I have empathy for them.
[2:30:18] But, you know, DER's a big town.
[2:30:20] There's probably plenty of other places that
[2:30:22] that would be a better fit in my personal opinion.
[2:30:27] So that's, that's all. That's all I gotta say. Okay,
[2:30:30] Very good.
[2:30:31] Any questions for Mr. Chair?
[2:30:33] Ch No gestures there. All right, we are good.
[2:30:36] Anybody else in opposition?
[2:30:40] All right, we have a letter for record.
[2:30:41] Ms. Moore, you wish to read that.
[2:30:45] This is from the owner
[2:30:47] of 43.5 Crystal Ave.
[2:30:51] He says the town along
[2:30:53] with myself are all working on a retail corridor
[2:30:57] with limited frontage on Crystal Ave and Broadway.
[2:31:02] That use is contrary to public interest.
[2:31:06] We need to compete with Woodmont
[2:31:09] and not lose valuable frontage.
[2:31:12] That use does not meet the spirit of the ordinance.
[2:31:15] Observed that use in no way meets the underlying
[2:31:20] underlining intent
[2:31:22] and general objectives of the zoning regulation
[2:31:26] for that district.
[2:31:29] That is a large component of retail restaurants attracting
[2:31:33] that will attract pedestrians from all over SNH.
[2:31:38] That use does not warrant relief.
[2:31:41] Substantial justice will not be done.
[2:31:44] This relief does not benefit the applicant,
[2:31:47] but does cause harm and loss to the public
[2:31:50] and neighbors removing one of the few
[2:31:54] locations on the main downtown road for retail traffic.
[2:31:59] Finally, there's definitely no hardship.
[2:32:03] There is no special conditions at the property
[2:32:06] that distinguishes it from other properties in the area.
[2:32:11] That property can be reasonably used in compliance
[2:32:16] with the ordinance and zone it is in, it may be used
[2:32:20] for retail offices
[2:32:22] or most importantly it is ripe for assemble,
[2:32:27] especially when the new four A exit comes in 2028.
[2:32:33] Let's not help shoot the town of dairy in the foot here.
[2:32:37] I understand the use
[2:32:38] and substance abuse is allowed in every area,
[2:32:42] but zoning cannot allow this use
[2:32:45] that ultimately will cause harm to deny it's tax space
[2:32:50] and economic development.
[2:32:52] Thanks, Steve. 43.5. Crystal Ave.
[2:32:56] H-A-M-B-I don't bergeron. LLC.
[2:33:01] And that concludes the reading.
[2:33:03] That was 43.5 Crystal Ave. Yes. Is that correct?
[2:33:09] Yes. Yeah. Okay. All right. Very good.
[2:33:12] Anybody else wish to speak on this? Let's see. No one rise.
[2:33:17] Any other questions from the board or considerations?
[2:33:22] All right,
[2:33:26] If I may respond, Mr.
[2:33:27] Chair. Sure. I'll be brief.
[2:33:29] Just a couple points of clarification.
[2:33:31] The residence currently is three bed, two bath.
[2:33:34] There's previously stated three bed, one bath.
[2:33:37] It is 1800 square feet.
[2:33:40] I think one of the abutters in oppositions
[2:33:42] that it was 1500 square feet.
[2:33:45] The Manchester Revive Group residence is roughly
[2:33:49] 2000 square feet.
[2:33:51] Just for comparison. It's extra 2000 to
[2:33:53] what we're proposing here in terms
[2:33:56] of full capacity of the 10 beds.
[2:33:59] Revive anticipates roughly around 80%
[2:34:01] of it being filled at one time.
[2:34:03] So there will be times obviously
[2:34:06] where it's not fully capacity, full capacity
[2:34:11] in terms of the hardship.
[2:34:13] Where else is the applicant supposed to go?
[2:34:16] There's no permitted use of group residents in the town.
[2:34:20] When we look at the district's writ large, the commercial
[2:34:24] GC GC district has, is the best district
[2:34:28] that retains, you know, to the sphere of the ordinance.
[2:34:30] It's a versatile district that caters
[2:34:34] to residential and commercial.
[2:34:37] In terms of special conditions, you know, as we stated,
[2:34:40] this is close to the Dairy Friendship Center
[2:34:42] where the residents can walk to without getting vehicles,
[2:34:45] which is of course getting outta treatment
[2:34:47] is a serious concern.
[2:34:50] And it's, you know, there's a commercial
[2:34:53] building if you're facing, revived from the street
[2:34:56] to the right I believe is State Farm.
[2:34:58] There's residents rule behind them.
[2:35:01] So this is a mixed use block
[2:35:04] and we think the central character in the
[2:35:06] neighborhood doesn't change.
[2:35:08] So, you know, for the reasons we stated in terms
[2:35:10] of the criteria and addressing the words in opposition,
[2:35:13] we feel that this is a permitted, a permissible use.
[2:35:17] You know, before the board.
[2:35:19] And we, you know, thank you for your consideration.
[2:35:24] Is, is the board to consi to
[2:35:28] consider this just
[2:35:29] because there's no other approved location in the community
[2:35:33] for such a, such a use?
[2:35:37] Or is is
[2:35:41] case law indicating that this
[2:35:46] should, should be approved for that?
[2:35:50] Because there's no other place in the community for it?
[2:35:54] If I understand your question you're asking does,
[2:35:57] is is there a reason for the board
[2:35:59] to prove this based on there's no permitted use, right.
[2:36:03] I'm not exactly sure on the question of that.
[2:36:06] It's perfectly within the court's capacity.
[2:36:10] You know, obviously to hear this variance and,
[2:36:14] and the reasons we're bringing this in,
[2:36:15] this strict district, we think are, you know,
[2:36:19] dispositive in our favor
[2:36:20] because of the reasons outlined of the versatility
[2:36:23] of the GC district.
[2:36:26] There are a lot of, you know,
[2:36:28] the applicant didn't just look here,
[2:36:30] they looked else elsewhere.
[2:36:32] This property popped up, the proximity
[2:36:35] to the friendship center was attractive
[2:36:37] and everything else seemed to fall into place.
[2:36:40] So to answer your question, I don't know on the case law,
[2:36:43] but this is a variance before the board
[2:36:47] and they have, you know, it's,
[2:36:48] that's the way it's positioned right now for,
[2:36:50] for acceptance or denial.
[2:36:53] What is the, what are the other, I guess,
[2:36:58] locations that are being sought
[2:37:00] after for this type of application?
[2:37:03] Not just in this community, but, but elsewhere?
[2:37:06] Why is it this parcel here becomes so,
[2:37:12] becomes a motivation for this with your
[2:37:14] Client?
[2:37:15] I think Jessica can probably speak better to that,
[2:37:17] but she's welcome to come up.
[2:37:19] Jessica, you can come up if you want.
[2:37:21] But I, I will say, I mean the Manchester for example,
[2:37:25] as you heard, the the the center, the,
[2:37:30] the West Manchester location was attractive for
[2:37:32] that group residence because the proximity to the center,
[2:37:35] they're gonna be, you know, walking to AA meetings,
[2:37:38] engaging in, you know, education.
[2:37:41] So keeping it urban
[2:37:43] and confined is attractive to my client.
[2:37:46] But I'm sure Jessica can also speak to,
[2:37:47] to that consideration as well.
[2:37:49] Yeah. This, this location in particular,
[2:37:53] this was like the fourth location
[2:37:54] that we looked at here specifically in dairy,
[2:37:57] it was closer to businesses.
[2:37:59] So for our residents to get to work,
[2:38:02] this would've been the most convenient location out
[2:38:05] of all four places that we looked at.
[2:38:07] It was also the closest location
[2:38:09] to the Dairy Friendship center that we looked at.
[2:38:12] It's smaller in size than other buildings that we looked at,
[2:38:15] believe it or not, which we thought would be more manageable
[2:38:18] and create less hardship on the dairy community than,
[2:38:21] you know, the million dollar buildings
[2:38:23] that we were looking at elsewhere.
[2:38:26] And also it's the Crystal Ave being a main route.
[2:38:31] We thought with the public parking being an option,
[2:38:36] you know, in case people had visitors, lots
[2:38:39] of things in the area pizza places
[2:38:41] that people can get jobs at.
[2:38:44] There is the community
[2:38:49] action, sorry, the, there's a partner like directly
[2:38:54] adjacent to us at Sal's.
[2:38:56] There's other nonprofits in the area
[2:39:01] on the road to wellness is not far from here.
[2:39:03] So if we were having someone that was struggling
[2:39:05] with mental health, we would call
[2:39:07] our friends over from there.
[2:39:08] If it was something we couldn't manage, we really thought
[2:39:11] that this would be the best location for us for
[2:39:14] what we were looking to do.
[2:39:15] Given its travel ability, you know
[2:39:20] how it's located with other things.
[2:39:22] There's parks in the area, there is a little bit of,
[2:39:26] you know, grassy area that is pretty private so
[2:39:31] that like if you know residents are outside,
[2:39:34] you can't really see them congregating 'cause there's fences
[2:39:37] and the shed in the way.
[2:39:39] We also like the idea of the shed
[2:39:41] and we're hoping to be able to kind of renovate
[2:39:44] that a little bit into some staff offices in a group room
[2:39:48] where people can come from all over
[2:39:50] and participate in our meetings
[2:39:53] and being able to utilize the dairy friendship center.
[2:39:56] So if case in people don't like the meetings we're doing,
[2:39:59] there's an option for them to go to there
[2:40:02] and it's walking distance
[2:40:03] where they don't have to find rides.
[2:40:06] We do intend on providing transportation.
[2:40:08] So if people do need to get places,
[2:40:10] it's not like they're gonna be walking around
[2:40:12] or calling Lyft rides.
[2:40:13] We'll be providing them the rides ourselves.
[2:40:16] We really thought this was the best fit for us.
[2:40:19] Okay. Have you, have you talked with a designer
[2:40:22] or engineer or had designs for this space and you think
[2:40:26] Yes, Warren Street Architects is here with us tonight
[2:40:28] and they have done preliminary drawings for us.
[2:40:31] Okay. Any other questions from the board?
[2:40:35] Seeing no gestures, Mr. Tripp. Okay.
[2:40:39] Mr. Ello said that there was what,
[2:40:43] three bedrooms and two baths.
[2:40:45] So are there other, any other amenities
[2:40:50] that are available within the house?
[2:40:51] Like a, a dining area, kitchen?
[2:40:54] There will be an accessible dining room in kitchen area.
[2:40:57] There'll be a group communal like TV room
[2:41:01] space on the first floor.
[2:41:03] We anticipate having at least one a DA
[2:41:08] accessible double bedroom.
[2:41:10] That little off to the side to the right there.
[2:41:14] That will be our staff bedroom
[2:41:16] that also has its own bathroom.
[2:41:18] We will be installing another bathroom,
[2:41:20] so there will be three in there.
[2:41:23] And then I mentioned
[2:41:25] how we intend on converting the garage into a shared meeting
[2:41:28] space as well as staff offices
[2:41:31] and the three rooms upstairs will all be
[2:41:35] one we know will definitely be a double
[2:41:38] and then one might end up being a single depending on the
[2:41:40] space, but we don't intend on crowding the area.
[2:41:49] Okay. All set Mr. Trip? Yep. Thank you much. Alright
[2:41:53] Folks.
[2:41:54] All set? Okay, anything else you wanna tell us?
[2:41:57] Thank You. Okay, with that we'll take a motion.
[2:42:00] Go into deliberation.
[2:42:02] So moved. Mr. Trip motions. Mr.
[2:42:05] Donlin, you wanna help out? Second. Thank you.
[2:42:09] All in favor of deliberation, say aye. Aye.
[2:42:12] Aye.
[2:42:17] Anybody wish to lead off in discussions? Mr.
[2:42:22] Dietzel, you have anything you wanna say?
[2:42:25] Well, It's well established
[2:42:30] that because something is a good idea is
[2:42:35] not in and of itself sufficient to grant a variance.
[2:42:41] I would be hard pressed to say that this isn't a good idea.
[2:42:46] The need for this type of service is, is
[2:42:51] indisputable and well known.
[2:42:54] But I have concerns with the location
[2:43:00] and the general overall purpose of the ordinance in
[2:43:04] that we want to, to create a,
[2:43:09] a more vibrant business
[2:43:13] community in that area that'll
[2:43:15] generate business activity.
[2:43:22] So while I, I certainly
[2:43:28] admire these folks for their, their commitment and,
[2:43:33] and certainly the people that they're,
[2:43:35] that they're helping are, are fine examples of, of
[2:43:39] what these programs can accomplish.
[2:43:42] I just, I don't think any of the five criteria met
[2:43:45] and I can't support this.
[2:43:50] Mrs. Moore, My biggest
[2:43:55] concern was advertising.
[2:43:59] I understand that we have to compete
[2:44:03] with something like Woodmont, but it's postage stamp.
[2:44:08] You can't put Kmart there.
[2:44:09] You can keep it as a, a house.
[2:44:14] I know a family of six that lived there,
[2:44:16] so I know it's suitable housing,
[2:44:21] but if not there, then where
[2:44:25] that's what's going on in my head.
[2:44:28] I do know that on the news last night it said Manchester
[2:44:32] didn't have a have an overdose for the whole month,
[2:44:36] for the first time since 2015.
[2:44:39] So addiction, I know it's everywhere and it, it's hard.
[2:44:46] Mr. Donlin. Yes sir.
[2:44:50] Well, I don't completely agree with everything
[2:44:54] that's been said so far.
[2:44:55] I am struggling with a couple of points here.
[2:44:58] I'll start with mainly, this is obviously
[2:45:03] an admirable idea,
[2:45:06] but I'm trying to think about it as like a,
[2:45:11] the burden on the lot.
[2:45:12] So let's say when they're so successful
[2:45:14] that they're moving on to a bigger
[2:45:16] and better establishment with 20 beds.
[2:45:18] God willing, if we, if we were,
[2:45:23] if they were proposing someone bought this property
[2:45:26] and was proposing to put, to turn this into a three family
[2:45:31] with two, three bedrooms
[2:45:32] and a four bedroom, it,
[2:45:35] it would certainly shine a different light.
[2:45:38] Right? Can we agree on that?
[2:45:41] That would be 10 beds if my mats correct, it is late.
[2:45:45] So what's, what's to happen
[2:45:48] to the property later down the road?
[2:45:53] We are just gonna have a single family house
[2:45:55] with three bedrooms in it that's now a hotel basically.
[2:46:03] Not sure I get the correlation there.
[2:46:06] Well, I'm just saying that there's nothing, the, the,
[2:46:12] I'm not necessarily opposed to the use variance.
[2:46:16] I'm struggling with the, the quantity of
[2:46:20] quote unquote beds. I
[2:46:22] See you're making, you're drawing an equivalence
[2:46:27] to what, what kind of house size would have to be there
[2:46:31] to accommodate those beds?
[2:46:34] Certainly in just, I guess it may not necessarily be
[2:46:40] relevant, but I'm trying to think about the,
[2:46:43] just looking at it from a different angle was like if this
[2:46:46] was, you know, if they were just saying, oh, I want
[2:46:50] to convert this to a two family and,
[2:46:52] and have a third as an A DU
[2:46:54] or what have you, how many bedrooms would you think is
[2:46:57] appropriate for that size house and lot?
[2:47:01] I struggle to get to 10.
[2:47:04] Well, I think when you look at a DU configurations radius,
[2:47:09] wheelchair radiuses, water bubblers,
[2:47:13] those kind of considerations.
[2:47:16] Similarly, how many beds can fit in a hospital room versus
[2:47:21] what's the minimum bedroom size requirement
[2:47:24] for a residential bedroom.
[2:47:27] The A DU specifications are different
[2:47:30] and come with certain qualifications and specifications.
[2:47:35] A-D-A-A-D-A,
[2:47:36] I'm sorry.
[2:47:38] Yeah. And,
[2:47:40] and so in that regard, it's not impossible to consider
[2:47:45] that perhaps 10, 10
[2:47:49] beds could fit in in a similar facility.
[2:47:53] I'm not a DA specialist,
[2:47:55] I've only dabbled in it at certain times in my work life,
[2:48:00] but usually it has certain criteria to it
[2:48:04] that is unusual from a normal residential bed.
[2:48:11] Just putting that out there, you know, so certainly
[2:48:14] with a residential bedroom, you know, prisons for instance,
[2:48:19] I think you can have an eight inch step whereas
[2:48:22] re residential and any commercial are sevens or seven
[2:48:27] and a halfs up to seven and three quarters.
[2:48:30] So there's that, that specific difference.
[2:48:32] And in design criteria
[2:48:35] for structures and buildings.
[2:48:40] And I think one of the areas that I wrestle with
[2:48:44] and I get I can reflect here is the transition
[2:48:48] of the district and where it is going.
[2:48:52] And even though there were residents along this roadway,
[2:48:58] a transition has happened where buildings are being removed
[2:49:03] to start to meet the criteria
[2:49:07] of our zoning ordinance for this.
[2:49:11] And there's businesses on both sides of this property
[2:49:17] that, that are functioning.
[2:49:21] And so anyway, that's my point,
[2:49:25] counterpoint to the residential aspect
[2:49:28] that you were pointing out Mr. Donley.
[2:49:29] And I agree. And in tying into that,
[2:49:31] it's like if this was, if the, correct me if I'm wrong,
[2:49:34] but I believe if you go a couple houses down,
[2:49:38] you would be in high density residential.
[2:49:41] So I think this would play a lot different, even two,
[2:49:45] two more houses down Howard Street or Laurel, whatever.
[2:49:47] Yep. Whatever one it's on.
[2:49:50] So I, I completely understand that.
[2:49:52] And the GC aspect
[2:49:53] of it does change things in my mind relative to say a house
[2:49:57] that was a couple, you know, a couple mailboxes down.
[2:50:02] I still don't think it changes the overall,
[2:50:09] I'll just say B burden on the lot.
[2:50:12] Okay. Anything else?
[2:50:18] Not at this time. Mr. Trip.
[2:50:21] Well, as, as everyone has said,
[2:50:25] this is a admirable in endeavor.
[2:50:30] The, I don't believe that it's a workable endeavor though.
[2:50:37] It's, it's located in a good spot, you know,
[2:50:42] so that the people that are in recovery
[2:50:48] would be able to go to where the other people,
[2:50:53] the other organizations in the town are, are located,
[2:50:56] you know, so that, it's one of these things that the,
[2:51:04] I I I believe that the,
[2:51:06] there wouldn't be any real treatment done being done at
[2:51:10] the building because the, there's a number
[2:51:13] of other organizations like the Friendship Center,
[2:51:17] the new futures, the On the Road people, you know,
[2:51:21] that would be, you know, assisting in
[2:51:26] the resident's recovery.
[2:51:28] So the building would be essentially just a,
[2:51:33] a place to, for them to live while they're
[2:51:38] going through their recovery.
[2:51:40] Three hots and a cot.
[2:51:42] Yep. Well they, they got a place they can eat,
[2:51:46] they can get cleaned up and they got a place to sleep,
[2:51:49] you know, so no, it's just a matter of is,
[2:51:54] is the building they chose suitable for
[2:51:59] that use?
[2:52:02] And I think as others have said,
[2:52:07] you, it's, I don't think it meets the requirements.
[2:52:13] So it's, and as
[2:52:17] as others have said that there's, you know,
[2:52:22] area is, you know, redeveloping,
[2:52:27] you know, and the building could be used actually the,
[2:52:30] I don't know if they'd actually used the building,
[2:52:31] but the, the land could be used for,
[2:52:35] you know, more productive use.
[2:52:37] So, and that
[2:52:40] after all is why we have zoning ordinances, right?
[2:52:43] To, so
[2:52:46] That is, Well I find that, again,
[2:52:51] I am, I'm perplexed here between the use
[2:52:56] and its admir admirable direction versus
[2:53:02] what we're, what we're to preside over, which is
[2:53:07] what the town's direction is for this strip
[2:53:11] and how far it can get there.
[2:53:13] I'm not sure, but I'm not sure
[2:53:15] that I really think this is the best fit for this
[2:53:20] property location.
[2:53:22] I can see that it can be functional for the purposes.
[2:53:26] I think the arguments
[2:53:27] that we hear is whether is the load on the lot, the,
[2:53:32] the bed load, the so on and so forth.
[2:53:35] But, and so it functions in that way,
[2:53:40] but I fail to see the hardship on this that
[2:53:46] that directs
[2:53:51] that the argument is being produced about.
[2:53:54] I I certainly understand the,
[2:53:58] the public service aspect of it as, as we dig into our
[2:54:03] criteria, the substantial justice to it.
[2:54:07] I don't even really know if the values
[2:54:10] of surrounding properties are diminished by it.
[2:54:12] I can't quite wrap my head around that.
[2:54:16] And even if I saw a date on it, I don't know that I could
[2:54:20] correlate with that either.
[2:54:24] The spirit of the ordinance, I certainly,
[2:54:28] it can't wrap my head around on this either.
[2:54:31] So I'm feeling those frictions in this regard.
[2:54:38] Let's jump ahead and start,
[2:54:40] Mr. Chairman, may I interrupt?
[2:54:41] Yes, sir. Mr. Make a motion to extend this hearing,
[2:54:44] another 15 minutes
[2:54:46] and we also should consider tabling our last item.
[2:54:50] Let's go to 10 15 by Mr.
[2:54:55] Diet's motion. Could he have a second please?
[2:54:59] Second Mr. Donlin seconds.
[2:55:01] All in favor of that extension, say aye. Aye. Aye.
[2:55:04] Any opposed? Hearing none. Thank you Mr.
[2:55:06] Dietzel, did you have anything added you wish
[2:55:10] to say on this matter?
[2:55:12] Mr. Dietzel? You all set? I'm all set. Thank you. Okay.
[2:55:15] All right. Well let's get into structuring the
[2:55:20] motion on this.
[2:55:22] And Mr. Chair, we do have one more case.
[2:55:27] Yeah. Yes, I know we do, sir, but we're in deliberation
[2:55:30] and we'll have to that afterwards.
[2:55:32] I, I appreciate the extension though.
[2:55:35] Let's make a note on this that we're actually changing this
[2:55:38] to 1 65 32 1 A.
[2:55:42] Am I correct? Can you confirm that Ms. Owen? Correct?
[2:55:46] Sounds right. Okay.
[2:55:48] This was subject to obtaining all State Town permits
[2:55:51] and inspections and it was subject to planning board,
[2:55:56] site plan, amendment approval.
[2:55:59] Is there anything else anybody would like to consider as a
[2:56:03] condition on this motion hearing?
[2:56:07] No gestures there.
[2:56:14] We're all set. I guess we can come out of deliberation.
[2:56:17] I'll make that motion to come outta deliberation.
[2:56:21] Second Motion by Mrs. Moore, second by Mr. Tripp.
[2:56:26] All in favor of coming outta deliberation, say aye. Aye.
[2:56:29] Aye. Any opposed?
[2:56:34] Mrs. Warren, you have a motion to read?
[2:56:36] I do. Thank you. I make a motion on case number
[2:56:40] two six dash 1 27 to grant a variance
[2:56:44] to the terms of Article six, section
[2:56:48] 1 65 dash 32 1 A
[2:56:53] of the town of dairy zoning ordinance
[2:56:57] to permit the operation of a 10 bed level three
[2:57:01] men's group recovery residence within the
[2:57:06] existing structure on the property parcel id.
[2:57:09] 3 2 2 0 zoned GC
[2:57:14] as presented with the following conditions, we have two.
[2:57:18] One subject to obtaining Allstate
[2:57:20] and town permits and inspections.
[2:57:23] Two, subject to planning board site plan,
[2:57:26] amendment approval.
[2:57:28] And that concludes the reading of the motion.
[2:57:30] I need a second, second
[2:57:34] That motion's on the floor, any,
[2:57:40] any adjustment amendments there to that motion.
[2:57:43] All right, moving on to the finding of fact.
[2:57:46] Case number 1 26 1
[2:57:50] dash 1 27.
[2:57:55] Did you change that on that motion?
[2:57:58] She did. Okay, thank you.
[2:58:03] The, this application is in the general commercial zone.
[2:58:08] This application is for a recovery resource center.
[2:58:13] The applicant wished to have 10 beds as part
[2:58:17] of its residence.
[2:58:24] Sorry, I'm doing this one on the fly here.
[2:58:32] And
[2:58:38] the property, the parcel is a
[2:58:43] 0.08
[2:58:46] size lot.
[2:58:52] The parcel has, I believe, public water and sewer.
[2:59:02] And with that I'm going to go to the board
[2:59:08] and I'll lead off with Mr.
[2:59:10] Donlin. Mr.
[2:59:12] Donlin, in regards to public interest, what do you,
[2:59:16] where do you think there,
[2:59:24] I would say that the vari in the, in the GC district,
[2:59:29] generally speaking, the variance would not be contrary
[2:59:33] to public interest.
[2:59:35] Okay. Mr. Trip,
[2:59:44] The,
[2:59:50] Would You, this is a, this is a tough call
[2:59:52] because the,
[2:59:57] the services that the,
[2:59:59] the organization would be providing are definitely in
[3:00:05] the public interest, but I,
[3:00:10] I don't believe that the, the, the building
[3:00:14] would make that would enable them
[3:00:19] to achieve those goals.
[3:00:22] Okay. I I believe that you know that
[3:00:26] as it is in the general commercial different district,
[3:00:30] that the property could probably be used for something that
[3:00:35] once again is in the, the public interest.
[3:00:39] But like I said, I don't believe that the, the building
[3:00:42] that exists would enable them to achieve that goal.
[3:00:49] Okay. Mrs. Moore,
[3:00:55] you concur on interest?
[3:00:57] I do, I concur on what Mr. Tripp has stated. Okay.
[3:01:02] Mr. Dietzel? Well, I believe that
[3:01:07] the public interest in the context
[3:01:09] of this particular ordinance is, this is
[3:01:14] contrary to the public interest in
[3:01:15] that the general commercial district is supposed
[3:01:19] to be general commercial
[3:01:20] and the interest is derived from more business,
[3:01:24] more business tax revenue, more jobs and so forth.
[3:01:27] And I just don't see how this is consistent with that goal
[3:01:32] and therefore it's contrary to the public interest. Very
[3:01:35] Good.
[3:01:36] I I will say that I, on the compassion side,
[3:01:41] I do see that this meets the public interest in,
[3:01:45] in the regard that of the service that it provides
[3:01:49] the spirit of the ordinance.
[3:01:50] But I, I see the majority of the board
[3:01:56] does not feel that there, that this is contrary
[3:01:59] to public interest spear the ordinance, Mr.
[3:02:03] Donlin,
[3:02:12] This one's always tough on this side of the road
[3:02:15] because it is gc
[3:02:16] but it is residential, so the spirit of the ordinance is
[3:02:21] already obscure.
[3:02:26] Well, if the ordinance allowed certain specifications,
[3:02:30] and though you have still have,
[3:02:33] I understand you still have non-conforming uses going on.
[3:02:40] The question is, is this so grossly outta line with
[3:02:44] what the intentions of the district were?
[3:02:48] And so your answer to that would be is it grossly outta line
[3:02:52] with the intentions of the, of the ordinance or not?
[3:03:00] I would say no. Okay. Mr.
[3:03:04] Tripp, what say you on that spear of the ordinance?
[3:03:07] I, Mr.
[3:03:14] Donlin answered that it's not gross
[3:03:19] to the spirit of the ordinance or the intended ordinances.
[3:03:26] Would you feel the same? Well,
[3:03:28] The, the issue here is if you do look at the
[3:03:33] approved uses for the general commercial,
[3:03:39] none of them are
[3:03:44] of this type, you know, all the,
[3:03:47] or the uses are, you know, some type of
[3:03:51] commercial organizations with the exception of
[3:03:56] multi-family dwelling, which is essentially probably a, a,
[3:04:00] a holdover from what the district was
[3:04:05] 125 years ago. So,
[3:04:10] So in past cases the board evaluates certain uses
[3:04:15] that are not, or that are prohibited
[3:04:18] and sometimes they're seen as oversights.
[3:04:22] The use is an oversight, perhaps an a FL
[3:04:27] license to, to sell firearms.
[3:04:32] I it's possible that sometimes the designers
[3:04:36] of our ordinances may not have considered
[3:04:39] that the federal government may want
[3:04:40] to do something checking.
[3:04:42] So in this regard, does this use, is this gross to the,
[3:04:47] to the listed ordinances
[3:04:49] or is it something that it was an oversight?
[3:04:56] I wouldn't go so far to say it was an oversight.
[3:04:59] Okay. So I would, it would therefore be
[3:05:05] Not gross.
[3:05:06] Not gross. Okay. Very good. Mrs. Moore,
[3:05:09] I feel that it doesn't meet the spirit of the ordinance.
[3:05:13] I know we can't take different cases and compare them,
[3:05:17] but recently I had stated previously
[3:05:21] about it being commercial and keeping it at commercial.
[3:05:27] Okay. And Mr. Dietzel,
[3:05:31] I don't believe it's in the spirit of the ordinance.
[3:05:33] The spirit of the ordinance is to generate commercial
[3:05:37] businesses along that quarter.
[3:05:39] Okay. And I would concur with Mr. Dietzel on that.
[3:05:43] So, and in regards to substantial justice, Mr.
[3:05:48] Dietzel, you wanna lead there?
[3:05:50] It, I believe it's sort of a break even there,
[3:05:53] there is a harm to the community
[3:05:55] and that we're, we'd be losing commercial property
[3:05:58] and there is a benefit obviously to the applicants.
[3:06:02] So I would guess substantial justice is not done
[3:06:05] because it is an outweighed it's sort of a, a balance.
[3:06:09] Okay. Mr. Donlin?
[3:06:11] Yeah, I believe substantial justice is not done
[3:06:14] here either.
[3:06:16] Okay. Mr. Tripp? I agree with everyone else.
[3:06:21] Okay. Mrs. Born I do as well.
[3:06:26] I would say that sub substantial justice
[3:06:38] is not as well.
[3:06:43] And then the val values
[3:06:44] of surrounding properties are not diminished.
[3:06:49] Mr. Dietzel,
[3:06:54] This is difficult, but the,
[3:06:56] the burden really is on the applicant to show
[3:06:58] that it is not, which is kind of a difficult thing
[3:07:02] to prove proven negative, but I am sorry to say
[3:07:07] and, and kind of ashamed,
[3:07:08] but there is a, a sort of not in my backyard attitude
[3:07:12] and I, I think it would diminish the surrounding properties
[3:07:15] in that people would be less attracted to move into
[3:07:19] that area if we had that type of facility.
[3:07:22] All right. Mr. Donlin,
[3:07:34] Mr.
[3:07:34] Trip, I'll come back to you. Mr. Donlin. Thank you.
[3:07:38] I believe that the,
[3:07:47] the potential value
[3:07:49] of the surrounding properties will be diminished.
[3:07:52] Okay. Should the, the variance be approved.
[3:07:57] Very good. Ms. Moore?
[3:08:00] I like how Mr.
[3:08:01] Tripp worded it because I know I would let everyone live
[3:08:06] with me, so it's not, not in my backyard type of thing,
[3:08:09] but the potential for that lot is
[3:08:13] being taken away.
[3:08:16] I, I would concur on that as well.
[3:08:18] I I think that it's unfortunate
[3:08:21] and, you know, versus the friendship center,
[3:08:24] its location versus this, you see
[3:08:28] possibly an effect on, on that neighborhood
[3:08:31] or even perhaps some potential businesses.
[3:08:35] Mr. Donlin, you wanna weigh in?
[3:08:37] Yes. No, I thank you. I was having a hard time
[3:08:39] articulating that, that was well said.
[3:08:43] All right. Very good. And,
[3:08:48] and then to the hardship,
[3:08:49] literal enforcement creates an unnecessary hardship.
[3:08:54] Mr. Dietzel, what do you, what do you think?
[3:08:56] Well, the point was made earlier that they,
[3:09:00] they entered into this real estate deal knowing
[3:09:04] that what they were asking was not in compliance with the,
[3:09:08] with the ordinances and,
[3:09:09] and the fact that they had to hurry through the closing is,
[3:09:13] is unfortunate, but the hardship is sort of self-imposed
[3:09:17] and I just don't see anything particular about this piece
[3:09:20] of property that makes it literal enforcement
[3:09:27] And the property be used in strict
[3:09:29] conformance with the ordinance.
[3:09:31] Yes. Thank you. Very good. Strict conformance would not
[3:09:33] Alright.
[3:09:35] And no, and in that regard, just to expedite, Mr.
[3:09:40] Dietzel has well spoken on the little enforcement creates
[3:09:44] unnecessary hardship.
[3:09:46] He disagrees with that. Mr. Donlin, what?
[3:09:50] Say you, you concur? I do.
[3:09:53] And for reason stated at deliberative
[3:09:55] Session.
[3:09:56] Okay, Mr. Trip? I concur. Okay, Ms. Morin?
[3:10:01] I do. And the chair will agree with that as well.
[3:10:05] And in regards to,
[3:10:06] can the property be used in strict
[3:10:08] conformance with the ordinance?
[3:10:10] Mr. Donlin? What? Say you,
[3:10:15] I'm sorry, Mr.
[3:10:16] Chair, can the property be used in strict conformance?
[3:10:19] Yes. Mr. Tripp,
[3:10:24] can the property be used in strict conformance?
[3:10:28] No. Okay.
[3:10:30] Well, well it could, can it be used
[3:10:34] utilized in a different way
[3:10:35] that's approved, an approved use?
[3:10:40] Yes. Okay. Mrs. Morin?
[3:10:42] Yes it can. All right.
[3:10:43] And I will concur with that as well.
[3:10:46] All in all in favor of moving this motion for a vote.
[3:10:49] Say aye. Aye. Aye. In the opposed Mr.
[3:10:54] Donlin? No. Mr. Dietzel? No.
[3:10:59] Mr. Trip? No. Mr. Mrs. Warren
[3:11:04] Voting no as well.
[3:11:05] For what? For the reasons
[3:11:08] for denial was stated in binding of fact. Alright,
[3:11:11] Very good.
[3:11:14] That decision is a unanimous No, the applicant.
[3:11:19] I'm sorry. Your application has failed in this regard.
[3:11:24] You have 30 days to ask this board for reconsideration.
[3:11:28] After that recourse would be a superior court.
[3:11:33] Alright, next case is
[3:11:36] would be Andrew Depel.
[3:11:41] Folks, we're we've already done one extensions that you Yep.
[3:11:45] Okay. And we scheduled to terminate at 10:00 PM
[3:11:50] We can put you onto the next meeting
[3:11:52] and if, if we'd finished 20 minutes ago, I,
[3:11:56] I could have opened up and let you have,
[3:11:58] take your opening remarks.
[3:12:00] But I think in this regard, we'll, like to table you,
[3:12:04] does the next meeting, scheduled meeting work for you,
[3:12:07] Is that two weeks?
[3:12:08] Am I correct? It is, yep. The third Thursday
[3:12:13] Airplane.
[3:12:14] I that seven work for you. Okay.
[3:12:19] We need a date certain, so we will, Ms. Owen,
[3:12:23] any reason they won't be first on the agenda?
[3:12:26] No, there'll be a tabled case so they'll be number one.
[3:12:28] Okay. Very good. Alright, motion to table case number
[3:12:34] 26 dash 1 28.
[3:12:36] So move. Thank you Mr. Trip. Second. Second please.
[3:12:39] Second Mr. Donlin seconds. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye.
[3:12:43] Any opposed? Folks, you'll see you in two weeks. Okay.
[3:12:47] Alright, next up we have approval of minutes.
[3:12:52] I haven't reviewed August 20th and Mr.
[3:12:55] Corbett's not here for seven 16.
[3:12:59] So I table a motion both mo, motion
[3:13:02] to table both of those please.
[3:13:04] So moved. All right. Second. Second by Mr. Donlin.
[3:13:07] All in favor of tabling those minutes. Say aye. Aye.
[3:13:10] Any opposed? Hearing none Ms. Owen, we all set
[3:13:14] how many cases next time?
[3:13:17] 537? All
[3:13:19] Of them.
[3:13:20] We have, I know I'm trying
[3:13:20] to count. I think we have three cases.
[3:13:22] Three cases. So including this one. Woohoo.
[3:13:24] This would be four. Okay.
[3:13:25] Very good. All right. Any other business for the board
[3:13:30] For them operating this due?
[3:13:31] I'm tired. Do you want to Yes, I will sign up.
[3:13:35] You wanna sign off? Yeah. Okay.
[3:13:37] You gotta mo make that motion.
[3:13:40] Motion To adjourn.
[3:13:42] I'll make the motion to adjourn. I'll second it.
[3:13:46] All in favor of adjournment, say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed?
[3:13:49] All right. Have a good night. We adjourn.