City of Portsmouth, New Hampshire Board of Adjustment, 20 Dec 2022

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: 12.20.2022 Board of Adjustment

Description

12.20.2022 Board of Adjustment

A

I guess I don't know yeah we're only missing one.

B

Good evening um my name is beth margeson, I'm the vice chair and acting chair for the night.

B

For the zoning board of adjustment meeting uh welcome to the december 20th meeting uh the.

B

um Just before we start, I do want to make a few announcements.

B

um uh I want to honor and thank our departing aid from the portsmouth planning department.

B

Peter stick: who is going to be moving on to serve the planning board? um He has been an incredibly.

B

Valuable staff member very knowledgeable, a steady hand, and we wish him well in his new assignment.

B

The planning board is very lucky to have him and we're sorry to lose him, but good luck, [applause].

B

And the next thing is the introduction of our new aide, who is stephanie casella? She is from.

B

The she's, the current aid to the planning board and she is going to be our new aid going forward.

B

Starting in january, so I want to welcome um stephanie to the zoning board of adjustment.

B

Back to the board david, graham, who is our new but slash old member, welcome back to david ram.

B

And also, I want to acknowledge the service of jim lee, who was not reappointed to the board.

B

But served on this board, for I think at least five years five years and served well, and we thank him.

B

For his service- and we will miss him- absolutely absolutely yeah yeah, not so insignificant things.

B

Out of the way, well now also a significant thing. So the first item on our agenda is uh the election.

B

Of officers and at the last meeting uh the vice chair was elected. That was me. I was here.

B

um But so jim lee was actually uh was uh elected chair. He is now no longer a chair, so um the office.

B

Of chair is vacant, and so we are looking for um nominations to fill the chair vacant.

C

I'll make a motion to nominate phyllis eldridge as the chair of the boa seconded. Would you like to.

C

In my time, um phyllis has shown a great deal of.

C

Deliberation she doesn't get to exasperated unless motions that need to be made.

C

I get the starry eyes down this way, but uh I think she'd make a wonderful chairman.

B

Anything to your second, mr rossi, uh yeah. It's also I've had the privilege.

D

Of uh working side by side with phyllis on this board for the last year and.

D

Phyllis was very helpful to me in acclimating to the responsibilities and coached me quietly.

D

During and after discussions, I found that very helpful and I know that she cares deeply about.

D

This activity, I think she has a great presence and I'm very happy to support her nomination.

B

Thank you. I just do want to note for people who are not familiar with phyllis she's, going to.

B

Kill me for doing this, but phyllis has served this city as a city councilor on the planning.

B

Board on the historic district commission, and also as a trustee of the trust fund.

B

As well as an employee of the portsmouth school department, she has a very long municipal history.

B

I will need a roll call vote I'll start down at this end, paul mantle, please! Yes,.

B

Mr ram, yes phyllis, yes, mr rossi, yes, mr matson, yes and the acting chair votes. Yes,.

B

6-0, congratulations yeah thanks [applause], but unfortunately I still need to run the.

B

Meeting so I'm sorry for everybody, but uh we actually, mr metal, cannot leave. Oh he's. Okay,.

B

um So the next uh order of business is the approval up to the point of order. Should we.

E

Also elect for a vice chair for next year. That's me. I was elected at the last meeting. Okay yeah, so.

B

We did um because we had vacancies, we had the vice chair and the chair last election last in november.

B

And um the uh I was elected vice chair and jim lee was affected elected chair, so the vacancy.

B

Was with jim lee's chair, understood just normally for the new calendar year, there's a there's a new.

E

uh Election of of both officers for the calendar year, in my experience so just throwing that out.

E

There, okay, all right! Well, I think I mean we did it last week last month, because um we had vacancies.

B

With the expectation that that was the election of the officers for the new calendar year, okay.

C

We've lost two chairman in three months. I know yeah. I don't want to go another meeting without.

C

A chairman, but all right, so the next order of business is the approval of the minutes.

B

The approval of the november 15th 2022 minutes- I was not here- uh david raymond was not here so.

B

um Does anybody have a motion anything I have one minor correction and that is on.

D

Page two, the second paragraph under speaking to the petition, uh the first sentence reads, mr.

D

Rossi asked if the front yard set back as always 15.5 feet, it should read, was always 15.5 feet.

B

We'll make that change. Are you taking that down? Okay? Are there any other corrections additions.

B

Okay, if I could please have a emotion, I moved to approve the minutes as corrected.

B

And is there a second, oh, okay and all in favor right any knees? Okay, the minutes are approved.

B

Six to zero and then the next order in the agenda is, um we have a request for hearing.

B

But before we get to that, we have two requests to pop postpone tonight: they're, both for sagamore.

B

Avenue one is six to fifty three sagamore avenue: 635, sorry sagamore avenue. The next one is 915.

B

Sagamore avenue so, um and the reason for the request to postpone are that there would be.

B

um Five members, because um mr rossi has to recuse on both of those applications. That is correct, so.

B

um Do I have a motion from the make the motion to request uh to postpone.

C

Item b and item g- and do we have a second on that second, and uh is there.

B

Any you know, request postpone, are um typical and we grant them.

B

um And uh can I have a just a not a roll call vote but all in favor aye.

B

Okay and the next thing is 44 46 rockingham street- I don't know if anybody is here that can speak to.

B

That con that petition that application, um it's item j on our our agenda tonight and mr ram.

B

um Has to recuse on that application, leaving the board with only five members and when that.

B

Happens, we give the applicant the option of um postponing their application, so I don't know.

B

You'll proceed: okay, all righty, all right! So now we'll go to old business and the first.

B

um The first and only item for old business is the request for rehearing of 53 green street.

B

This is an application, a um a re-hearing that this board did in october and we have received.

B

A request for rehearing on it, the you know the zba um is allowed to re-hear its own, its own.

B

um Decisions if they find that if we find that era of fact or misapprehension of the law was made.

B

Or that they would, you know any member believes that there's anything that needs to be revisited.

B

um And needs to be reheard, so with that in mind, with that out of the way, uh does anybody want to.

B

Speak to that this will not be a public hearing. We will not be rehearing the application tonight.

B

It's just whether or not to re-hear it at our next meeting or another scheduled meeting. uh I.

D

Would only like to say that uh this has already been heard twice by the board two different on.

D

Those two different occasions there were there was different board composition. uh The result.

D

Has been the same both times, and even though I was in the minority, uh in my opinion, when it.

D

Was last heard I don't see anything in here that would induce me to think it should be reardoned.

B

And is that emotion? Where would anybody else like to be heard before we make any kind of motion.

D

For every hearing is there a second a second okay, and I just do want to note for the record.

B

That mr ram was not sitting on this board at the time that we reheard this application.

B

um uh David, if you could just speak to.

B

How you'll be able to vote on this request for rehearing, please yeah, so I've reviewed all the.

E

Information provided by both parties who have submitted information regarding the request for.

E

Rehearing, I did have an opportunity to go back and re-watch the uh the last meeting. I wouldn't say in.

E

Its entirety, but uh some substantial portions of it certainly uh um focusing on the deliberation of.

E

The board and my impression uh that the the board did a full deliberation, uh heard the information.

E

That was being provided by all parties, and I would my thought is: I would tend to agree with the.

E

With the motion that has been put forward, okay, so could we have a roll call vote on this? Please and.

B

uh I'll start down at this end, uh jeffrey, so a yes is uh to uh to deny the request for every hearing.

B

Mr rossi, yes, ms eldridge, yes, mr am yes, mr metal, yes, and the vice chair acting chair votes, yes, okay,.

B

And now we will move on to the next. The new business part of the hearing, the first.

B

Application that we will hear is the request of ann r, sherpick and walter f stewart owners for.

B

Property located at 88 kensington road, where his relief is needed to remove an existing.

B

Addition and construct a new addition, which requires the following number: one: a variance.

B

From section 10.521 to allow building coverage where 20 is the maximum allowed number two, a.

B

Variance from section 10.321 to allow a non-conforming, building or structure to.

B

Be extended, reconstructed or enlarged without conforming to the requirements of the ordinance.

B

Said property is located on assessor map, 152 lot 22 and lies within the single resonance b district.

B

um And if I I didn't say so before, but the applicant is given 15 minutes to present their.

B

Case and then after that, a public hearing is start is opened uh where those who who.

B

For those to speak 2-4 against the application, so who speaks this application tonight.

B

My name is amy dutton. I am the designer on the project representing ann sherpick and walter.

F

Stewart I work out of kittery and live in portsmouth good evening. I've never been first so.

F

It's been a long time. I've been in front of this board so um tonight we are just gonna.

F

I'm just gonna read through this and then you can ask me answer out answer questions.

F

um The overall gist of the project is there is an existing structure that, to the left side of.

F

The property that is was built in a probably by a homeowner is my guess: that's falling off the.

F

Foundation, we are going to keep the width or the length of that structure, but remove.

F

That pour a new foundation and go five more feet which takes us to the 10 foot step back.

F

And that structure that is existing is unconditioned. It's a sun room and um you.

F

Step down into it, so what we're trying to do is with the addition is actually connected to an.

F

Existing small living room and make that a larger living space and dining space and then taking the.

F

First floor um dining space and making that more kitchen area, mud room so more modern family living.

F

And then, on the second floor, we capture that space as a primary bedroom and rearrange some.

F

Space to get another bathroom, so ultimately the layout of the house will be three bedrooms. Two.

F

And a half baths, we gained a tiny little office and expanding that first floor. Living space.

F

So that's a just a quick overview just to review the variances.

F

um We do feel that the variance would not be contrary to public interest in order to.

F

Comply to building code, we will stay within a required setback, specifically on that left side.

F

In the spirit of the ordinance we will be, the spirit of the ordinance will be observed.

F

What we are proposing is to, like, I said, remove, remove something that is not structurally sound.

F

And gain that space on the um first and second floor, there was a error in my.

F

Narrative that was submitted, we went back and we drew it a few times, but trying to make our.

F

Dollar: go where it needs to go and make the house perform the way that a family of five needs it to.

F

um Substantial justice will be done, we are required, 20 luck coverage and we are currently.

F

At 21 so we're expanding that to 23 percent by adding that five extra square feet and.

F

We do believe that the neighborhood is it's a sweet neighborhood. I hope.

F

You all know it well because it's kind of tucked back in off of middle road and.

F

um A lot of the houses have been renovated and some of them have not. So I do feel like this is.

F

An improvement to the neighborhood and kind of helping ushering the neighborhood into that next.

F

um Decade or lifetime of the house it has not been worked on in. I don't know, um I'm.

F

Guessing the 30s, maybe the 50s, but it's um it's been in some- it needs some work. Some help.

F

um The value of the surrounding properties will not be diminished.

F

We strongly feel that this renovation would improve the other property values.

F

And the literal enforcement of the provision of the ordinance would would result in a hardship.

F

um We feel that this existing structure is a small modest home located in the.

F

Equally small modest lot: the lot itself is shaped in a strange way with neighbors.

F

Kind of close on each side and we wanted to be respectful to not encroach on that setback.

F

um It's it's a it's an interesting lot. As you can see, the neighbor to the left is.

F

um Their lot is sort of shaped around it, um so that we will be able to maintain the exact.

F

Same backyard and for gardening and outdoor dining and then ultimately you know it's my.

F

What I always say to my clients, is we like to love our houses back to life and really.

F

Get um move the house forward and help it live a better life still do you have questions.

D

I do have one question when I was looking at the property earlier today.

D

There's a whole bunch of pink flags out by the area. You know.

D

The sun room or whatever it is called, but they look like they went right up to the.

D

Lot line those pink flags, I guess, are not because they are oh okay. I was wondering.

D

Because I was like boy that looks like it's: not the 10 foot setback, okay, cool! Thank you.

D

Glad I didn't have my shock collar on.

B

uh Any more questions from the board.

B

Okay, um is there anyone here to speak to for or against the application.

G

I'm sorry you'll have to come up to the podium and introduce yourself and give your address. Please.

F

They'll receive a letter. Yes, we have received public comment on this meeting, but I have to see if there's anyone.

B

Here, who wants to speak hi? uh Sorry, I'm christine powell. I live across the street.

G

um And I love the house, uh ken linda, where my neighbors and ann and buzz just moved in and.

G

I think that addition and fixing up the sun room would be absolutely beautiful um and I'm not upset.

G

About you know increasing house value. So could you please state your address? I know you live across.

G

The street sure uh 71 kensington road, okay, thank you, you're welcome! Is there anyone here else that.

B

Would like to speak to the application 2-4 against a hearing? None. I will close the public hearing.

B

Liberation by the board.

B

Any discussion or emotion, I'll make the motion.

C

um Make the motion to approve um item a as presented? Second.

D

As to the criteria uh section 10.233.21.

C

C

um I find as a finding a fact that granting the granting the variants would not be contrary to.

C

The public interest granting the variants would observe the spirit of the ordinance granting the.

C

Variance would do substantial justice looking at the application. uh Everything else is in.

C

The zoning, except for a one and a half percent increase in the building coverage, which, in my.

C

Estimation is small as far as 10.233.24 granting the variance would not diminish surrounding.

C

Property values, if anything, I believe, is a finding a fact it would increase, because now we have a.

C

Renovated house, with more room and as the neighbor eloquently stated, she is all in favor of this.

C

And lastly, granted uh 10.233.25 literal enforcement of the visions of the ordinance.

C

Would result in an unnecessary hardship? I believe this to be true.

C

C

Yeah impose imposing the strict building coverage on this would be an unnecessary hardship.

C

B

I think we're going to need a little more detail here, so what special conditions of this property.

D

I can do that in my second all right and there you go so uh with regard to 10.233.25, I think.

D

The special condition of the property is that it is, has a very small area of 6098 square feet where.

D

The required area is fifteen thousand, so it's already non-conforming the change. That's being.

D

Suggested maintains the lot clear line clearance, but because of the small square footage available.

D

In the lot it easily goes over the 20 maximum permitted building coverage. I think this use is.

D

Quite reasonable for the property and that's those are my findings of fact in support of 10.233.25.

B

And as to the first two 10.233.21 and 10.33.22 graining, the variance would.

B

Not be contrary to public interest, and it would observe the spirit of the ordinance. Do we have findings of fact for those two.

D

Hold on for one second, we will.

D

This is in which zoning district again.

D

D

And so srb, the purpose of that is to provide areas for single-family dwellings at low to medium.

D

Densities, uh approximately one to three dwellings per acre and appropriate accessory uses. uh This is.

D

A single family dwelling, it's not being changed from that use and so granting the variance would.

D

Be consistent with the spirit of the ordinance thank you does anybody else have anything to add.

H

Also add that if uh this lot size was the required minimum size, uh they wouldn't need.

H

The variance for the uh coverage, so it is in the spirit of the ordinance.

D

Thank you all right, so we'll start with a roll call vote. No, I'm sorry.

E

Oh yeah, thank you manager. I I would support the motion um in terms of the finding the facts.

E

Associated with the public interest and the spirit of the ordinance looking through this neighborhood.

E

There's really the adjacent property right next door. On the right hand, side actually has an.

E

Addition that appears to be almost identical to what the applicant is proposing and then there's.

E

A thermally sized home on the other side. So it's not like the what the applicant is asking for.

E

Even with the very small amount of relief that's being requested here um is is out of the ordinary.

E

And I think, as well within the expectations for allowing this board to grant it. So I will support.

E

The motion- okay, thank you and we'll do a roll call vote um I'll start with mr mail yeah. Yes,.

B

Mr ram, yes, ms eldridge, yes, mr rossi, yes, mr matson, yes and the acting chair votes. Yes,.

B

Motion passes uh six to zero.

B

B

Thank you, you have your approval.

B

B

The next application is the request of ryan and kareny baker, owners for property located.

B

At 44 gardner street, whereas relief is needed to replace an existing porch with a sun room addition.

B

Which requires the following one: a variance from section 10.521 to allow 40, I'm sorry to.

B

Allow 34 building coverage with 30 as the maximum allowed number two, a variance from section 10.321.

B

To allow a non-conforming, building or structure to be extended, reconstructed or enlarged without.

B

Conforming to the requirements of the ordinance said, property is located on assessor map 103.

B

Lot 42 and lies within the general residence b and historic district, and who is here to speak to this.

B

Application uh good evening, members of the board, my name is ryan baker and I'm the new homeowner.

I

Of 44 gardner street, you may proceed um okay, uh my name again. My name is ryan baker and my wife.

I

And I purchased the property just a few months ago in august of 2022., this application, probably.

I

Looks familiar to you because the project was approved by the zba and the htc in april of 2020..

I

Unfortunately, for us the approval expired earlier this year in april of 2022. That being said, we are.

I

Resubmitting the application to construct the sunroom or four season porch, which would replace.

I

An existing porch in this new sunroom would provide rear access from the yard and the driveway.

I

uh The existing building coverage is 32.6 percent and I am asking to increase that.

I

Coverage to 33.8 or by 1.2 percent of note 30 coverage is allowed in this area. I want.

I

To point out that I made a few minor updates to the original plans, which include adjusting the.

I

Location of the exterior stairs and placement slash design of some of the windows. If you read.

I

Through the criteria of the variance you'll notice, nothing has changed and I'm hopeful that you will.

I

Reapprove this application. Would you like me to read through the the five criteria? Yes, please, okay,.

I

um The variance number one the variances are not contrary to public interest and that it will not.

I

Affect the adjacent properties, the additions are not visible. The addition is not visible.

I

From gardner street and the views from both mechanic and honking streets are not adversely.

I

Affected number two: the variances are consistent with the spirit of the ordinance, in that it will.

I

Allow these modest this modest addition without impacting the immediate of butters.

I

Substantial justice will be done as this work will allow the owner myself to improve the property.

I

Without adversely affecting the adjacent properties number four, these the variances.

I

Will not diminish the value of the surrounding properties and have and we've had the support.

I

Of the neighbors and this project has had the support of the neighbors in the past, based on.

I

Prior approvals- and I have a few recent emails of support from my neighbors- that I can hand out to.

I

You guys for this as well tonight and number five. The special condition of this property is that the.

I

Lot size and the and the current building coverage and the non-conformity of the existing residents.

I

That's all I have. Does the board have any questions. The applicant mystery.

E

I actually have a question for uh city staff. Sir, that's okay! Thank you, uh madam chair. uh So.

E

um The there was also a board action. It's kind of seems like this comes before us annually, so.

E

We had the 2020 I understand which expired, but in september of 2021 it's similar um variances were.

E

Granted as well, what was the nature of those variances and why are they not applicable to.

E

This case, so those there is the initial sunroom request, which is similar to this one um and then.

J

The prior owners came back again with a different location for a mud room on the side of the house.

J

um That variance is actually still valid, but a building permit has not been pulled on it.

J

um Assuming the applicant gets this approval, um you know he couldn't pull, he couldn't pull.

J

A building permit for both because the building coverage would go way up because.

I

Yeah that one's still valid, I think at the moment, until 2023 at some point in the middle of the year.

I

um I do plan to resubmit that one that was approved as well, um but I would change the.

I

Location of the mud, room and and itself so it would be a net new application.

C

Okay, according to the notes, did the board grant anything.

C

In september 2021, yes, that that was granted okay.

B

I'm just now I'm getting confused so you're saying that you are going to be.

B

Pulling a bolden building permit for the variance that was granted last year. No, no that so no.

I

um That was approved by the previous owner, the mudra. So there's a sun room, which is I'm I'm here.

I

Tonight for and then there's a mudroom, that's already approved. That is a separate application.

I

That is still valid or a separate approval. That's been approved by the zba and the htc. I do I. I am.

I

Not going to go forward with that particular one because of where they put the actual mud.

I

Room, it's actually right in the driveway, and I I'm not going to go forward with that actual.

I

Project so I'm gonna resubmit for a new mud room in a different location.

B

Well, so I think he's going to submit a completely new application um for a different.

J

Mud room and then that will increase the building coverage on top of what is being asked tonight.

J

um But we can make that judgment when we see it right, that's what I mean it would be a separate.

I

Submission, I think, would you rather do them all as one.

I

We can, um if that's something you you'd want to do. I may never do that. That's the thing. This is more.

I

Important to me than that one, it's understood understood. But if you already said you're.

C

Going to come back to either remove or change location of the mud room, why wouldn't you do it.

C

Do both at the same time, because honestly I want to, I would like to look forward to this.

I

Project that this one completed, okay and then live in the house for a little bit longer than.

I

Say three months that I've I've been there to make sure that that's the right decision.

I

um And and really plan it out the right way by putting them both together. It kind of forces me.

I

To rush through it- and I really don't want to rush this project, I want to move forward.

I

That's this is the one I'd like to do so, in other words, what you're saying he would do.

D

This project, whether or not you've got another variance. Yes, okay, that's good yep! That's cool.

B

Heidi, thank you any other questions.

B

From somebody else on the board.

B

Okay, thank you very much. Is anyone here to speak, 2-4 or against the application.

I

Can I give you the emails? Do you want to see them? Yes, I think we already have.

B

Them, but I never gave them these to you, but okay, we've been even on zoom. Oh thank you.

K

Okay, all righty. Okay, thank you um see no one rise, I'll close the public hearing.

B

Thank you for each of us, so uh discussions motions by any member of the board.

L

Sorry, any thoughts is anyone ready to make a motion.

B

But now I know why arthur used to look this way.

B

I would let.

M

um I would move approval of this of this um patricia. Is there a second? Oh second,.

B

As elders, your motion, please yes, the um the change that they're asking for is so minor. Even you know.

M

30 lot coverage was 33 for many many years, and now it's 34. barely a difference. Anybody would notice.

M

um So granting the variants would not be contrary to the public interest.

M

Because there is really no change to a building that has been there happily.

M

For a long time observes the spirit of the ordinance of the keeping with the.

M

Neighborhood, nothing is going to change and it would do substantial justice as it would.

M

Provide the owner with what they want without any effect on other people in the neighborhood.

M

If it affects the property values at all, I would think that it would be in a positive manner.

M

And literal enforcement for the provisions of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship.

M

There is um nobody who would be hurt by what would be a serious benefit to the owners of.

M

This property and therefore I think it would be reasonable that we approved this petition.

B

In your second, mr ram, uh in addition to agreeing with all of ms eldridge's comments, just in general.

E

I'm normally kind of hesitant to let an applicant come back a second time and bite at the apple.

E

If they really are looking for a total relief of more than what they're asking for tonight, I would.

E

Normally be hesitant to say, you can have this now and then come back and ask for more later.

E

We have seen that as a board in the past, where you know an applicant keeps kind of coming back.

E

And oh, I just want a little bit more. Oh, I just want a little bit more. Oh! I just want a little.

E

Bit more, that said, I do think that the applicant here as a new homeowner, I'm still trying to get.

E

To understand this property, I do think that it is a reasonable request to get this application.

E

Approved tonight and then potentially, if the homeowner sees some other improvements, that.

E

They need to their home coming back and asking for additional relief in the same respect, which is the.

E

The total lot coverage- I would just add a couple of things in terms of findings of facts. Relative.

E

To grand, the variance would not be contrary to public interest. uh The portion of the home.

E

That's being affected here is away from uh any of the streetscape, so it's really not impacting.

E

The overall look and feel of the neighborhood, um the the fact that they are just barely slightly.

E

Over the total coverage requirements again in a relatively dense neighborhood, um I I don't think.

E

Is going to be noticed so certainly in keeping with both the public interest and the uh the.

E

Spirit of the ordinance, and then um you know we- we have previously approved this as a board as well.

E

um With this again, relatively small amount of of coverage increase, and uh so with that.

E

I would recommend approval okay. Thank you any more comments. Okay, we'll take a roll call vote.

B

And this time we will start with mr matson. Yes, mr rossi, yes, ms eldridge, yes, mr williams, yes.

B

Mr mantle, yes and the acting chair votes, yes, your application is approved 6-0. Thank you.

B

We'll move on to the next application: it is the request of karen and rick rosenia, I'm not sure if.

B

I'm saying that right owners for property located at 32 boss avenue, whereas relief is needed to.

B

Allow an art studio for classes up to eight people, which requires the following one: a variance from.

B

Section 10.440 to allow an art studio where the use is not permitted said property is located on.

B

Assessor map 153 lot 5 and lies within the single residence b district and who is here to speak to.

B

This application- uh yes, my name is karen rosagna and, together with my husband, we own 32 boss, have.

N

Okay, thank you. Welcome sorry for mispronouncing, your name nope. That was close. Thank you.

N

um Hello, happy holidays to everybody, and I just wanted to thank you for the opportunity to present.

N

This evening, uh so as I mentioned, my husband and I own 32, boss ave- I am also the owner and.

N

An artist of all of teal arts, which is a new art, studio business that I started up earlier. This.

N

Summer, my art studio is fully contained within our home and I am seeking a variance this evening to.

N

Allow adults and children to come into my studio for small art classes. My studio is already fully.

N

Constructed furnished and passed a full building inspection last year when we did a home, remodel.

N

I'm very passionate about the arts and portsmouth, and this is really the primary reason why we.

N

Relocated to portsmouth my commitment to the arts, even in my even my own business as well, is for the.

N

Long term, so even my request coming today is not a short-term stint here, but rather a long-term.

N

Request- and it really does tie nicely into the fact that I was just voted into the portsmouth.

N

Arts and nonprofits committee by city council, which I'm very excited about that opportunity.

N

To help shape the future of the arts, culture and the city of portsmouth. So my point being that this.

N

This is long term. This is my second chapter in my life and something I'm very excited to.

N

Bring to this city, so I thought I would start by sharing why I believe I meet the criteria.

N

For this variance, followed by pictures of the exterior of our property that I'll take you on.

N

A I guess, a virtual tour inside my studio, and I would also like to address issues that I'm sure.

N

Is on individuals minds such as parking traffic and noise, so I thought I would start if we could.

N

Bring up the five criteria and then I'll get into actually the pictures. If that might be. Okay,.

N

So again, with my business proposal is really to offer small scale art classes in my existing home.

N

Studio to adults and children and actually individuals with different abilities as well.

N

From the community, my studio can accommodate a total of eight people. That includes me, however,.

N

I expect many of my classes to be more in the range of four to six people. Just so I can provide.

N

Individualized attention to the participants of my classes, I propose offering these classes.

N

Between the hours of 11, roughly 11 and 5 p.m, maybe one or two classes per day monday through friday,.

N

And to best accommodate working adults, I'd like to propose offering classes one to two evenings.

N

A week roughly maybe six to nine pm and one day on the weekends, let's say maybe 11 to 1 pm.

N

So as I go through the five criteria for this variance, I do believe in fact I meet all of them.

N

Starting with the variants will not be contrary to public interest. Portsmouth has a deep-rooted.

N

Culture in the arts, as we all know, and even part of the mission of ports, portsmouth 400,.

N

As we embark upon that for next year is to engage and promote local artists, historians and diverse.

N

Communities and I had the chance to really engage with several local artists and art centers in.

N

The area and I believe my areas of focus will be complementary and collaborative with other nearby.

N

Offerings and vice versa, my art studio, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.

N

Or threaten the health, safety or general welfare of the public, and I do believe that my art studio.

N

Will allow members of the community to express and explore artistic interests.

N

That will actually be favorable to the public. The spirit of the ordinance will be absorbed, observed.

N

The welfare of the community will be enhanced by providing exciting and complementary art offerings.

N

Substantial justice will be done. I believe there will be substantial benefit to the community by.

N

Taking our classes with all of teal arts, I have received tremendous positive feedback from several.

N

Local non-profits- this is very much a part of my mission today and well into the future as to.

N

Really get back to the community and I have been teaching off-site for the last several months at.

N

Places like the portsmouth senior activity center and the arts and reach and I've had.

N

Very very positive feedback so very committed to fostering an inclusive, relaxing patient and.

N

Encouraging environment for my students, the value of surrounding properties will not be.

N

Diminished, as I said, my studio is already fully constructed, furnished and completely contained.

N

Within our home and portsmouth has a strong culture for the arts and numerous local arts.

N

Studios, therefore, I do not see any diminished value for surrounding properties. In literal.

N

Enforcement of this provision of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship. There would.

N

Be a hardship to me because if my variance is not approved, it will significantly impact my ability.

N

To earn a living and run a small business in portsmouth, but I think most importantly,.

N

There would be a missed opportunity for the community if the variants were not approved.

N

So, just moving into now, some of the pictures that I submitted just to orient you in terms.

N

Of where our property is located in the west end, a couple things I'd like to point out here. First.

N

Of all, I think we are blessed, um especially by portsmouth standards, to have a significant amount.

N

Of on-street parking right outside of our house, we have 155 linear feet of parking. I don't think you.

N

Even have to be a good parallel parker, but even by portsmouth standards again, you could probably fit.

N

A good five to six cars and directly in front of my house and that accounts for even coming in 10.

N

Feet from the side property lines that we could still fit that many vehicles and then we could.

N

Probably fit about four cars in our driveway as well. I'd also like to say again if this variance.

N

Is approved, I will be reinforcing uh to my fellow students to park directly in front of our house or.

N

In our driveway and I can reinforce that through various communication channels in terms of traffic.

N

As you can see, there are three ways to get to our home either coming down sunset, coming off.

N

Of aldridge or coming from laurens on to boss, I don't anticipate traffic to be an issue at all.

N

The next slide showing our our property itself, and I just wanted to orient you in terms of where my.

N

Studio is it's over there on the far right of the property and the reason I'm also showing.

N

This particular slide is that if I am granted the variance I would like to put in a a porous brick.

N

Walkway just for convenience leading up to my art studio. This will follow the natural configuration.

N

Of our front lawn, I emphasize that again it is porous it will match the brick block way that we.

N

Have already leading to our front entry, the reason why for the next slide, I'm bringing that to your.

N

Attention we do live on wetlands and a good bit of our property is also in the wetlands buffer.

N

This is a bit of an eye chart. This is all work. That's been approved, we've already been through.

N

Conservation, the work has all been complete. The only reason I'm showing this to you is just that.

N

We've really tried to be good stewards of the conservation and the wetlands. You see.

N

A lot of the work we did additionally in terms of adding 25 wetland, trees, planting wetland, seed mix.

N

And wildflower mix and installing a rain garden and again I'm just showing that to you because.

N

Where we would have the proposed brick walkway, if the variance is approved, is really on the outer.

N

The outskirts, it's it's wind, it's within the buffer, but it's the outside edge of the buffer.

N

um Fully in front of the house, but I just wanted to make that known and if we move into the next.

N

Slide, I'm going to take you now into my studio. This wall moved pretty quickly again, it's on.

N

The far right side of the house there, the studio itself, is 216 square feet. When we had the house.

N

Remodeled, I did, I did add, a ensuite bathroom for convenience, bringing up the total to 248 square.

N

Feet for the bath and the studio I figured. This would be a good point to also talk about noise, so.

N

Again, my studio will be fully contained, the the number of people that I'm expecting or or what.

N

I would desire my classes would really be similar to a small family gathering. So I expect the noise.

N

To be pretty much minimal or non-detectable what I do hope you might be hearing and even noise. I.

N

Can you know keep to a minimum, is is laughter, and I think you could all use that right now and just.

N

uh People enjoying themselves and learning uh new art forms- I am a very considerate and responsive.

N

Person so clearly, I would act quickly if there was any comments that came in from uh nearby homes.

N

And just now again taking you in my studio, um I did design my studio actually designed my entire.

N

House inside and out with the goal of making my studio a very relaxing and inspirational place.

N

To try different art forms next slide. Just shows you that safety has always been at the forefront.

N

And is at the paramount of everything I do and certainly something I would be enforcing with my.

N

Students- and you can see some of the things that we added when we did our house remodel.

N

um It's all right there in terms of the smoke and carbon monoxide detector. I have.

N

Illuminated exit signs that I installed fire extinguisher: two entrances. If you go to the next.

N

Slide you see that the exit signs are above both entrances next slide shows the ensuite bathroom.

N

Next slide shows the exterior. uh I think there might be another slide that shows the bathroom.

N

That shows the exterior lights that are wired to the exit sign and then, lastly,.

N

I did add a second set of exterior house numbers to my studio entrance.

N

So I'm going to pause there and um I disrespectfully asked the reward for.

N

Your consideration, improving my variance so that I may offer small classes to children and adults.

N

To come into my art studio and at this point I'm happy to take any questions. Thank you. Any members.

B

Of the board have any questions for the applicant, mr rossi. Are you planning on having any outdoor.

D

Storage of art, materials or finished projects. No, thank you. Then. I have a question for the planning.

D

Department, why is this not a permitted use under 19.10, which is under 10.42.

D

Something or other this whole chart, that's in our.

D

Yeah 10.440 19.1 accessory use to permitted principal use, but not including any outdoor.

D

Storage, why is that not uh give this? Well? Because it's a it's a business use in the single residence.

J

Zone so that I think not because what you're referring to would be, you know what what is.

D

What is it what is meant by this, because I was trying to figure it out from the definitions I.

D

Couldn't get there, so I don't know for residential use. It would be just something that's customarily.

J

Accessory accessory to um residential use and it wouldn't be covered under home occupation. One.

D

Which is 19.2 right, it didn't it didn't qualify for how much there were people coming in for the.

D

Question right: okay, so initially we talked about maybe getting a variance from the home occupation.

J

um Definition, but I think it's clear: it's cleaner to just request a use for the art studio where.

J

It's not permitted so that the variance not a special or whatever it's called for a use.

D

Because there's different criteria.

M

Right so it wouldn't qualify as a home occupation because it does give me that criteria, so it would.

J

Have to be qualified as something else, but it's a variance not a special exception right.

B

A business use in a residential zone.

E

Do you have any questions I do um so uh looking at the new studio area that you just constructed, it.

E

Does appear like you, have exit signs and a fire extinguisher? What was the basis for putting all.

E

Of that, in, if you did not have an approved use for a business use, it's a good question.

N

um This has been in my dream and in my second chapter planning for many many years, and I.

N

Actually had a wonderful mentor who's, an artist in mount vernon, new hampshire, who's, a potter and she.

N

Went through all the appropriate channels within her town to get her art studio, which is attached.

N

To her house approved and- and she guided me as my husband, husband and I were doing, this remodel.

N

She said, while you're doing the remodel, while the electrician is there, you might want to think about.

N

Putting exit signs in you might want to think about. You know putting in your carbon monoxide.

N

So I will say I went at risk um and and at my own at our own expense, with with the hope that this.

N

Would get approved at some point, but I have not had any uh classes in my space, all my classes have.

N

Been off-site okay, and uh I guess that leads to my second question- I mean you are asking, as has been.

E

Pointed out here to have a business use in an area that specifically prohibits any such business uses.

E

um You are, you know, you know, on the edge with another general residence.

E

District, but also no business uh uses are allowed in that district either.

E

um The intent is to separate residential from business you're, now kind of crossing that.

E

Threshold, so why is it that you would want to have your ability to teach students in this location as.

E

Opposed to finding an approved business location, to open up a small art studio to go and and bring.

E

People in in a setting that it's designed for yeah another good question um again I'll just say it's.

N

Always been my dream to have my art studio attached to my house, it gave me the chance.

N

To design it from scratch, a lot of the stuff in my studio has been repurposed or reused or refinished.

N

It allowed me to put my touch on it and my vibe on it and make it a space that was very inviting.

N

And just again from purely a financial standpoint, I'm I'm one person and if, if I want to leave and.

N

Travel for a couple weeks, I can turn the key and go you know versus having to pay overhead.

N

And all that and there are beautiful art spaces, and that was something that I considered. But for.

N

Me, my preference is to be able to bring people into a studio that I that I designed from scratch.

E

Okay and then, in terms of uh your illustration, I don't think the pages are numbered per se, but you.

E

Do have an illustration that shows um where you're thinking that you have four parking locations in.

E

Your driveway again you're now transitioning from a residential use to a business use there.

E

Are prescribed dimensions for required for parking spaces for business use? Do you have anything that.

E

Provides further information on how those proposed parking spots that you're saying that you have.

E

There would actually meet the city's requirements for a parking space and also you know we have.

E

Like turning radius and whatnot again because of transitioning from residential to a business use.

N

I I haven't thought you know I haven't been there. I haven't received guidance to get that specific.

N

I mean I was just roughly looking at the the way we're able to park in our driveway and and.

N

Just kind of go from there, so I didn't have any specific measurements or things like that. Taken.

N

Over our space, um my hope is that people could just park right out in front of our home to.

N

On our side of the street, and that would not be interfering with other people trying to reach.

N

Their homes or we have a pretty wide street, so I don't. I don't see that that would be a problem.

N

With other cars getting by and then lastly, so our hardship criteria, I what you had written here.

E

You basically said it's a hardship to you, because it would impede your ability to earn a living and.

E

Run a small business, however, a hardship criteria, the essence of it is, is what is unique about the.

E

Property uh relative to other properties. So what is the hardship of the of the property itself.

E

um Not necessarily what your situation is. Do you have anything that you could add in respect to.

E

What is it about your property that says that you are different than your all your neighbors.

E

um If they wanted to go and start up their own businesses, why is your property unique.

N

I mean they can start their own businesses. People have local businesses.

N

I'm just trying to do. I don't I don't know again, I'm just trying to fulfill a dream and.

N

Bring people bring people in and inspire and be inspired.

E

And I I mean uh one more question for city staff um you had um in in the notes. You said that from a.

E

Parking requirements standpoint you had um in the absence of art studio, you had said that you went.

E

With health studio for thought and fine health studio in the list of well um applicable, it's.

E

There's like a yoga right, I think it's health club health club.

J

Okay, what was the inspiration for choosing that, as as an attempt, obviously we're kind.

E

Of an uncharted territory, there is no, um there is no allowed use for.

E

Those ordinance here well, the one space per 250 square feet- is typically um the lowest.

J

um Or the highest requirement, um so I figured that that would be and it's only 250 square feet so.

J

There's nothing, I don't think that's less than that as far as square footage in the parking.

J

Okay and my one last question for city staff is: was there any discussion of uh 10 113.42 uh 111.

E

3.42, which talks about in residential districts, if you're using home occupation, which again.

E

um We don't really have anything to go by here, but it does require that um for that kind of use,.

E

Which has probably even less you know, standing parking uh you're required to have setbacks from.

E

Butters and screening, so I was just wondering if there was any discussion or thoughts about.

E

Whether or not that would be applicable, there was no discussion about that, but the board could.

J

Simply could um easily add those as conditions if they feel um there's setbacks or buffering.

J

Screening is yeah, we talked about 10 feet from the side and rear property lines which it appears.

E

Obviously, we don't have any dimensions going here, but it would appear that the driveway is probably.

E

Tight to that, so take a look at that: okay, david. What what uh what session.

D

Are you exciting right now um on 11-11 of article 11, uh paragraph 10.113.42.

E

And toxin residential zoning districts uh upstreet parking spaces in particular, is talking to home.

E

Occupations use but again we don't have a an art studio, use, that's defined in our ordinance.

E

So I was just trying to see if there was any consideration of that. That's all I have thank you.

B

Any other questions from the board.

B

Thank you all over the public hearing now is there.

B

Anyone here would like to speak to for or against this application.

B

Forward and state your name and address for the record.

O

I'm, oh excuse me, my name is sarah lynch I live across the street. um The map was just up at 19.

O

Sunset road, I'm also an artist, an art teacher. I teach at sacred heart in hampton. I taught.

O

At portsmouth middle school last year and when karen first moved to the neighborhood, she had.

O

Me tour the space and kind of got my feedback on class sizes and appropriate projects and.

O

um For different age levels, and so I can confirm that it's a very excuse me. Could you please just.

B

Move closer to the charge of microphone. Sorry, oh there we go. Did you hear any of that? I'm sorry.

O

I'm also getting over laryngitis but a long time ago last week. But um did you hear that first part.

O

I did, I don't know if the record did, but no I did so do you want me to repeat it or perhaps, if you.

O

Could okay, so my name is sarah lynch. I live across the street 19 sunset road, I'm the art teacher at.

O

Sacred heart, in hampton I taught at portsmouth middle school last year as the long-term art.

O

Substitute and when karen first moved in, she had me, come see your space and we went over.

O

um What she was thinking of offering class sizes projects what's appropriate for different age.

O

Levels- and I can just attest that it's a small space, very modest- she wouldn't be.

O

Able to have anything big or disruptive in the space, so I think it's very modest and.

O

In keeping with the neighborhood thank you is there anyone else who wishes to speak? Please.

B

Come up state your name and address for the record. Oh, I think you're gonna have a fight.

P

Hi there I'm linda leland from 26 thaxter road and when rick and karen moved in and renovated their.

P

Home, I really believe that they've already really greatly increased our neighborhood in so many ways.

P

Then I got to meet them and go in and tour this lovely studio and I was so excited at the prospect.

P

um Not just personally, but for our whole neighborhood um one of the greatest things I think.

P

We could all agree to about the west end. Is the button factory art studio and to have a place in.

P

The community, where we can go actually and create art from a professional somebody, who's, passionate.

P

And as talented as she is, is just very exciting and it's a small intimate setting um we'll get.

P

To come together as a community, we'll get to create art and a lot of her creations are made.

P

I think she said from things that are repurposed, so it's also just really great for the planet.

P

um And I just see only great, you know great things, I don't think it's going to be.

P

um A nuisance in any way, this is going to add value to all of us. Thank you. Yes, please.

L

I'm a little shy. My name is sachiko akiyama. I live at 161 aldrich um and I'm so I'm her neighbor and.

L

I'm also a art professor at unh. um I just want to set echo what linda just said. I think what they.

L

Did to their house already increased the value of our neighborhood and karen and rick are so.

L

Responsible and responsive- and I have no worries about there's so much parking on the street and.

L

um Another thing I wanted to say: I know that portsmouth has so many art venues and like.

L

There's the button factory, but I think it's really difficult for artists to actually live.

L

In portsmouth and to run a business like that's, why I teach at unh like I can't afford to live in.

L

Portsmouth, if I tried to rent a studio like even the button factory, is really expensive now to rent.

L

A space, so I do think it's really cost prohibitive to run a business as an artist in portsmouth and.

L

And she's been so responsible the way she set everything up. Thank you. Thank you.

Q

Hi, I'm sandra traverse and I'm here in my role as a board member for arts and reach. We are a youth.

Q

Development organization empowering underserved girls and gender expansive teens through free.

Q

Access to arts programming to mentorships and to creative community, we just celebrated our 25th.

Q

Year, I don't know how many of you are familiar with us. We do have a presence in portsmouth for.

Q

Those who of for those of you who are not, we don't have any physical art space, so we rely.

Q

On the generosity of artists, like karen excuse me, who donate their time and their space right now, we.

Q

Are experiencing alarming rates of depression and anxiety in teens and air, specifically using art, as.

Q

A vehicle for mentorship for very needed mental health services and life-changing opportunities.

Q

Needs educators, like karen to help assist us in this crisis. Karen, is that caring mentor and.

Q

Her incredibly warm and inviting space offers teens a safe place, a familiar setting and most.

Q

Importantly, it offers consistency, these teens don't have that and it's what they most need.

Q

She recently conducted a very successful workshop for air and our teens and moving forward. They.

Q

Will have the option to try other mediums under her instruction? We are very, very grateful for.

Q

For karen, in summary, granting karen's request to hold small workshops in her studio would amplify.

Q

Access to creative media and to their much needed benefits for this community. I respectfully request.

Q

That the board approve karen's application. Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you.

A

Hi, my name is sharon hartford. I live at 59, boss avenue and I want to say that all of this sounds.

A

Really wonderful, I do have some concerns, however, as a pretty much a direct neighbor on the street.

A

I'm wondering about the parking that end of boss tends to be particularly congested with.

A

People who live there that park on the street and getting through there can be very tight.

A

I'm also concerned, since this is not zoned as a business district, that it sets a precedent.

A

Going forward for anyone else who wants to have a business in their house now, if this is approved.

A

How are you then, going to deny anyone else who wants to have a business in their home in a.

A

Neighborhood that's district as a residential, it all sounds fantastic. I think she definitely adds.

A

A benefit to the community. I have nothing at all against arts, nothing at all against providing a.

A

Platform for youth and teens to experience art, I'm just questioning whether this is the right venue.

A

To hold this type of a thing, thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else who would supposed to speak.

B

I don't need you apologize. Hi um met me earlier, uh christine powell, I live on kensington.

G

um Sorry, I just want to make sure that I remember what I wanted to say because I get nervous when I.

G

Speak um so obviously, I'm speaking on behalf of my friend karen, who is petitioning for the.

G

Ability to hold classes in her house on the side of her home um personally, I've been a resident of.

G

Portsmouth for 43 years, um 10 years removed, I lived and rye for 10 years. We can't hold that.

G

Against me, I live on kensington with my husband and I'm a professional over at liberty, mutual and.

G

Anyway, that's just to reference who I am um this past spring. I had the pleasure of meeting karen.

G

And rick, I learned that karen was a wonderful artist and a talented director, uh decorator.

G

She showed me her studio, which was a beautiful, welcoming, peaceful space. I mean it was. It was.

G

Gorgeous and her touches were amazing and she does refurbish things which I think is amazing.

G

Again for the environment. Personally, when I was in there from a size and safety perspective, I.

G

Felt that our studio was plenty big enough to support the art classes that she's proposing.

G

um It also had an easily accessible exit. It was like literally, if you turn around.

G

You're out the door, so um there was no fear of being able to get out, etc.

G

um If there was a problem, um their driveway is fairly big and deep um and their people park on.

G

That road all the time and it is very wide at the bottom- I walk my dog by there every day, not.

G

That that matters- um let me see here, I hope you do grant this uh request, because I have plenty.

G

Of friends that would love to attend her classes um and on a personal note, my grandmother was an.

G

Artist over um on the cape, cape cod and she had classes, and it really helped the community there.

G

The older community, um oh and I wanted to make a comment about um your comments or david. I think.

G

Is your name, um what makes her place unique is, as you pointed out, she actually has proactively gone.

G

And put in a fire extinguisher and made sure that she had a bathroom for people who come there and.

G

Make sure that the exit is easily accessible and she's putting in a walkway, and she has a.

G

Fire extinguisher, so that is what makes her place unique from the other neighbors around the place.

G

And karen is actually being conscientious and going to you guys and asking for support and.

G

Petitioning the right way- and I gotta tell you there are some other people in the community that.

G

Do have businesses in their home that have not done such so anyway. Thank you very much. Thank you.

R

Good evening eric weinrib uh nine nine middle road- um I didn't come here with the intent of.

R

Speaking on this on but listening to it- and I really wanted to come and support it. But as I'm.

R

Hearing it I am struggling, I obviously live in the neighborhood. I walk my dog in the neighborhood. I.

R

Drive through the neighborhood daily and they've done a fantastic job with their renovation in the.

R

House out of the second floor, it was it's amazing what they've done from the outside. I haven't been.

R

Inside but I'm struggling with the location and the use sunset that it drops out into is one.

R

Of the steepest streets in the city and it's an incredibly dangerous intersection, there's.

R

A lot of kids in the area and as they start to park more and more on on boss, I think that and.

R

Increase the traffic there that I think it's going to create a safety issue, and I think that I want.

R

To support it, but I'm really struggling with the vehicular safety, the parking, um so I just leave.

R

It at that, thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak to for or against.

B

Stephanie is there anyone on zoom.

B

uh Seeing no one rise, I will close the public hearing.

B

A board any thoughts deliberations. Well, I feel a little bit like the grinch who stole.

D

Christmas, but uh I am having a hard time, seeing hardship uh criteria satisfied in this case.

D

Is the only issue here the fact that it would be a commercial enterprise? In other words, if.

D

The applicant just decided that, because of her sincere love of the arts, she wanted to have people.

D

Over to her house to engage in the arts, there would not be any permit required right. I mean.

D

That's that's up to her to have people in and do whatever the artists do. Is that not correct.

J

Right, I mean and not paying for classes or sure I mean anybody could leave a.

D

Donation to the person they like in a jar, but they don't have to be.

D

Charged for what they're doing, I'm just speculating out loud so, in other words,.

D

This person could fulfill her dreams of engaging with the local, our community if.

D

It's not a commercial enterprise, and that would be permitted in this area.

D

That's what I'm asking you I mean, I would say, that's probably true, I mean anyone could have.

J

Friends over and you could make art you know, that's. You can even have enemies over a peter.

D

And make them into france later, okay, so yeah, okay, just I just wanted to clarify that. Thank you.

D

I also actually wanted to clarify one other point and it's something that.

D

We've encountered in the past when we've had to make difficult decisions that were.

D

You know seemingly not very friendly, but the if permitted this stays with the property. So the next.

D

Person who wants to come in and form a commercial enterprise there has the permission to engage in.

D

A commercial activity in this residential building in the future, even though it may not be or it may.

D

Not be the same kind of art it could be, it would have to be what is approved to if you approved.

D

If you approved this request, there's a lot of part. Have you ever been to like a big mechanical.

D

Sculpture grounds, I mean people do welding and hammering- and you know all kinds of stuff.

M

But if it were an accountant, it would need to come back.

D

But if they did it, but it stays with the property, it's not just the courses. Experience tries to.

D

Wrap it up that firmate is still there. It lives with the property. Is that is correct.

B

Mr madison, did you have anything um yeah? I guess I would just add that I.

H

Am struggling a little bit with finding the unnecessary hardship for the property itself.

H

um Regarding the spirit of the ordinance, I know this is a single family, residence zoning.

H

um But there are also other parts of the ordinance that promote the arts and whatnot. So the aspects.

H

Of the ordinance, it could still be in the spirit of the ordinance, but there's still the issue of.

H

The unnecessary hardship for the that specific property. Thank you. Any concerns from the peanut.

B

Gallery over here, I think I'll start with no go ahead. Dude he had a sander yeah. Okay, thank you.

E

um So my impression of this case is is that we have a very wonderful person, who's, probably doing.

E

A very wonderful thing: um our concern for this board is: is this wonderful thing being done in.

E

The right place- and that comes back down to our zoning ordinance, which is you know, put together.

E

um Suggested by the planning board approved by our city council, based off of lots of public input and.

E

One of the fundamental tenets of our zoning ordinance is that we do distinguish between.

E

Residential areas and business areas there's good reasons for it um and when you buy into.

E

A residential area, your expectation is, is that your neighbors are going to be doing uh things.

E

That are associated with residential use and that you're not going to be seeing as the applicant has.

E

Asked for here a pretty steady time frame where they're going to be expecting what are essentially.

E

Customers coming again to perform something and in in that space that is, is for the intent of.

E

uh Furthering on maybe both themselves, but also for the for the owner of the plate, that is what.

E

uh That's what the applicant is asking for here so so with that we are we're basically trying to.

E

Create something here where perhaps our ordinance should recognize art studio as a uh as a city.

E

That prides itself on on being um receptive to artists. um I I would tend to agree that.

E

um That's something that maybe we should figure out where, on what an art studio is and where it.

E

Should go but at this point in time we don't have anything like that in our ordinance and we see him.

E

As a board to be being asked to kind of create a whole new area of our zoning ordinance, we're.

E

Going to create this new use called an art studio, we're going to decide that it can be allowed in.

E

Residential districts we're going to create part working requirements for it where we're kind.

E

Of like trying to say well, four spaces is that enough? The applicant has already come before us.

E

And basically said yeah, I'm pretty much expecting people are going to have to park in the street.

E

Well, okay, maybe there is adequate parking there, but at the same point in time, if you're in that.

E

Neighborhood, your expectation is that when you are are coming home or when you do have friends.

E

Over for whatever it is that you want to go and do that, there would be that ample parking, because.

E

Again, it's a residential, neighborhood and you're not having to share that with with any business.

E

Uses so uh that that's my concern here, going back specifically to our criteria again spirit.

E

Of the ordinance, it's tough to say when we don't have this defined in our ordinance, when we don't.

E

Really have it worked out in terms of parking um when, when again, the applicants application here.

E

Really doesn't define what off street parking will really be provided. We do have very strict.

E

Requirements especially for businesses on on the orientation on the size of parking spaces.

E

All that's done for very good reasons, because people that are visiting that space, unlike the.

E

Residents who live there all the time and know how to finagle their way into that little corner in.

E

The in the parking lot you're now expecting people who are unfamiliar with it to have be able to come.

E

In effectively use the parking not collide with other vehicles on the way out, etc, those are all.

E

The things that are built into our ordinance to to help protect both both property owners and and.

E

The people that are coming to use their property for a business purpose, so all those things I just.

E

Think you know from the spirit of the ordinance that we we're not meeting and then a hardship.

E

Really hardship what has been brought before here. I know one of the neighbors and again I appreciate.

E

Everybody's support of your of your neighbor again, a wonderful person doing a wonderful thing, but.

E

um That's not a hardship saying that I'm going to build something on my property that so I can.

E

Create a hardship so that you have to grant me the ability to go and use the thing that I just built.

E

As a logic that we can't follow, anyone can go and do that right, I'll, I'll, go and build.

E

A sawmill on my property and say hey. Oh, I got a song, though that's my hardship.

E

um Grant me the ability to go use. My sawmill doesn't doesn't work that way um so with with.

E

All those things consider I I can't support the idea that we could go and say that this meets the.

E

Criteria that are before us to allow this to take place in a residential area. Thank you. Thank you.

B

Okay, so I think I'm gonna call the question: um would anyone like to uh make a motion on.

B

This application uh I'll make a motion to deny okay, and do I hear a second.

B

Awesome second, by phyllis, okay for the incoming chair, you have to be a little.

B

More assertive uh the reasons for your denial, mr room yep. So, as I just went through in some.

E

Detail we have five criteria that we need to have satisfied if you fail on any one of them.

E

um Then your app application cannot be granted. In my opinion, this fails on on the two of them.

E

As I indicated, one is grand theft variance would observe the spirit of the ordinance.

E

So the facts there again art studio is not recognized by our ordinance in any way shape.

E

Or manner it's not like it's it's not allowed in this zone. It's just simply not recognized period.

E

Even if it were recognize that I find it very difficult to believe it would be in this zone.

E

Against residential uses, if you go through our table, there is essentially no business uses.

E

That are allowed in this district or even in the most adjacent one of the general residence uh c.

E

um And then, in terms of unnecessary hardship, I just don't see anything in particular with this.

E

Property that would say that it has any anything, that's unique about it. Relative.

E

To anyone else's property that would be in the same or similar district, that would say.

E

That it is uniquely qualified to go and have a business use place on it, where all those other.

E

Neighbors shouldn't get it because they don't have that very, very unique thing. The applicant.

E

Hasn't hasn't demonstrated that I can't find it um in in the property, so I think it falls down.

E

On both of those uh I'm presuming, we don't have to find statement of facts for the other areas.

E

That we, we don't know, I think, for denial. So with that for denial, um that's my recommendation. Okay,.

B

Thank you, uh ms elders, do you have anything to add? I agree with everything that mr ruam.

M

Said but it's also from the very first time I joined this board, I knew there would be things.

M

That common sense says yeah. This is a good thing, this makes sense and it would be good.

M

But it just doesn't meet the criteria, and so I have to support the motion to deny.

M

And if, if I may, I'm sure just one more thing about, I mean we do again have that legislative process.

E

Of creating our ordinance, our ordinance should be fluid, but it has to go through that legislative.

E

Process of the planning board looking at it looking thoroughly balancing the needs of all.

E

Of the butters balancing the needs of all of the neighborhoods and making sure that it all makes.

E

Sense and then making those recommendations to the city council who again they are looking at it from.

E

A legislative aspect of yes: we want to promote the arts. Yes, this is something that is a good.

E

Compromise for our community- yes, as neighbors, we should all be willing to live with these kinds of.

E

Of things, but that to me is beyond the purview of this board. Just reviewing this and this one night.

E

For this short period of time, that's a much more lengthy process. Yes, absolutely, mr metal. um I just.

C

Want to add my two sets: I have no problem with the application. I think it's wonderful. uh The parking.

C

I'm just judging from the pictures I believe you can get at least eight cars, if not more in your.

C

Driveway, so that's for me: it's not an issue, but as mr matson brought up early, I can't square the.

C

Hardship, I don't see the hardship and, for that reason I'll be supporting the motion. Okay, so.

B

Thank you. The motion is to deny as presented and advertised, and I will start with mr mantle. Yes,.

B

Mr ram, yes, miss eldridge, yes, mr rossi, yes, mr matson, yes and the chair votes.

B

Yes, acting chairs for us. Yes, I'm sorry, the application is denied.

B

Okay, so the next application is 96 chestnut street. um The application is, I'm sorry just I.

B

Need for people to move out of the chambers? Just if you want to speak, please go out in the room.

B

The request of rudy's story- lazy, holding llc owner for property located at 96.

B

Chestnut street, whereas relief is needed for conversion of an existing office into.

B

Residential which requires the following one: a variance from section 10.5841 figure.

B

10.5841.10A to allow a a lot area for dwelling of 2046 feet or 3 000 square feet is required and b.

B

14 open space or 25 minimum 25 minimum open space is required. Two, a variance from section 10.321 to.

B

Allow a non-conforming, building or structure to be extended, reconstructed or enlarged without.

B

Conforming to the requirements of the ordinance said, property is located on assessor map 116 lot.

B

24 and lies within the character district 4l1, the 4l1 and historic districts, and who is here.

B

To speak to this application uh good evening, madam chair and members of the board, I'm chris mulligan.

S

From bozen and associates here in portsmouth on behalf of the applicant rudy storlazzi holding.

S

Llc with me is tina bozen, one of the principals of rudy storlazzi llc attorney john boson could.

S

Not be here tonight he's handling another matter, so I drew the straw today. 96 chestnut.

S

Street interesting property: this was actually the former home of my law firm for a number of years.

S

um And uh is subsequently been the home to darcy creative, which vacated the property. A couple of.

S

Months ago and advertising in uh digital arts firm, um the uh relief we need this evening is.

S

To convert the property back into a single-family residence because of the zone, we're in we're in.

S

The cd4 l1 district, we do not have the required lot area per dwelling and because, in order to.

S

Facilitate the conversion of this property back into a single-family residence. We would like to.

S

Install a very small deck off the rear of the property to access the existing stone patio. The.

S

Amount of lot coverage the amount of open space coverage increases. It's already non-compliant and.

S

I just handed out some photographs, um but the purpose of the photographs is to demonstrate.

S

A couple of things this property is on chestnut street, where the african burying ground memorial.

S

Is so it's between state street and court street? The first picture shows the court street side of.

S

The building and you'll notice that the brick parking driveway takes up the entirety of the.

S

Area between the building itself and the neighboring building, which has frontage on.

S

Court street, the other side of the building is essentially on the lot line. So um beyond the.

S

Building to the rear is this um stone patio, which you can see some pictures of on the second page.

S

um The first and second picture show the area where we would like to install a deck that.

S

Would come off of that bump out on the building and allow us to access the directly access the.

S

Stone patio that is approximately 60 square feet of decking. That's the open space that the city.

S

Would be sacrificing if you approve this, you can see it's. It's currently housing, two hvac condenser.

S

Systems and you know it's being used for storage for uh recycling bins, so the loss of open space in.

S

In this particular instance to me is really a case of losing the sleeves off your vest. That is not.

S

Usable open space by any common sense definition, there's never going to be any landscaping or you.

S

Know lawn attractive plantings gardens anything like that. The fact that there's open space at all.

S

To me is a little mystifying because the rear of the property, the backyard, is almost entirely taken.

S

Over by this stone patio, but apparently that is considered open space not impervious surface but.

S

Be that as it may, the properties in the cd4l1 zone directly next door to it. The neighboring.

S

Property towards the state street side is in the cd4 zone, where there is no um minimum lot area per.

S

Dwelling requirement at all, so if we were just one property over, we wouldn't need that relief.

S

But the lines are where they are and that's why we're here so again the goal is to convert.

S

The property to single-family residents: this is a structure that was built in the 1840s or 1850s as.

S

A single-family residence long before there was any zoning at all, and it's since been converted.

S

Over the years to office, use what's significant and that what has changed in the last several.

S

Years is that the african barium ground has now taken over this portion of chestnut street. That.

S

Has resulted in the loss of seven parking spaces on chestnut street, and it also has created a bit.

S

Of a pinch point on chestnut street for people who would be visiting the establishment if this were.

S

To remain a commercial building, the um the problem with the commercial use of this property number.

S

One, I think, which was alluded to in our materials commercial office space is just not in very high.

S

Demand right now as a result of the pandemic, but with the the placement of the african burial.

S

Ground, it's very difficult for people who are not familiar with the area to be entering into and.

S

Getting out of chestnut street in this you know in the way it's currently configured I'll just.

S

Give you an anecdote. I live in this neighborhood on state street right around the block and during.

S

One of the recent holiday parades- I think it might have been the halloween parade. I saw some people.

S

From out of town, obviously you can see those massachusetts license plates try to try to beat.

S

Traffic and get away from the parade crowd, go down chestnut street and have no idea what to do once.

S

They got to the end of the african varying ground, so good, neighbor, that I am, I coached them on how.

S

To get out and go through the td bank parking lot to relative safety, but um I think it's symptomatic.

S

Of why this particular property is no longer really appropriate for a commercial use, and why.

S

A residential use where you would have permanent residents who know the area very well, would.

S

Would find the the placement and positioning of the monumentation there not to be that.

S

Big a deal because they would understand and be very familiar with them, so that is.

S

The project, in a nutshell, just to address the criteria necessary for granting the variance.

S

um Granting the variances will not be contrary to the spirit intent of the ordinance, nor will.

S

They be contrary to the public interest. These are considered together under relevant case law,.

S

Here the test is whether or not the essential character of the neighborhood would be altered.

S

By granting the requested variances, this is a very mixed. Neighborhood you've got a residential.

S

Apartment buildings on the corner on state street you've got a single family residence.

S

Next door on the corner of court street you've got public housing across court street. You've got.

S

A mixed commercial and residential building right across the street you've got eric weinribs office.

S

Building on the other corner, so it's a very mixed neighborhood, adding a single family residence to.

S

The neighborhood does not change the essential character in the neighborhood health safety and.

S

Welfare of the public, I think, is going to be improved by the variances. That would facilitate.

S

Transitioning this property into a single-family residence. For the reasons I just discussed, you.

S

Won't have of the traffic conflict with the african burying ground when you have permanent.

S

Residents living in the space, so health, safety and welfare, I believe, will be augmented by the the the.

S

Change that these variances will facilitate. I will also point out that this project, at least the deck.

S

That we're proposing requires historic district approval, so the welfare of the public will be.

S

At least aesthetic welfare of the public will be adequately looked out for granting the variance.

S

Would result in substantial justice here the loss to the applicant far outweighs any gain to.

S

The general public, if you were to require strict compliance with the ordinance we can't possibly.

S

Meet the lot area per dwelling requirement, the lot is just not big enough. It's a pre-existing.

S

Non-Conforming law for this particular use, but there's no way to comply. We can't make the lot.

S

Any bigger so that to me is is kind of a hardship per se and it's not as though the neighboring.

S

Properties are significantly bigger than the one we have here. As far as the open space variants.

S

That we're requesting it's a minimal deck that we're talking about approximately 60 square feet.

S

And it's covering open space, that's open space in name only, there's really nothing about it! That.

S

That you would normally consider to be open space, so substantial justice would be done by granting.

S

The requested variances the proposed use and the variances would not diminish surrounding.

S

Property values, single-family residences, are permitted by right and the cd4l1 zone. Again I.

S

Believe that the uh the gain to the public and the gain to the surrounding properties as a result of.

S

Converting this to single-family residents and taking some of the potential traffic burden off.

S

Of the african burying ground monumentation will improve the values of surrounding.

S

Properties, you'll have less aimlessly misdirected traffic going into this part of chestnut street.

S

um Then, as far as unnecessary hardship, I think there are a couple of items about this property.

S

That are unique. First, the lot size is uh smaller than is required for this particular zone. It's.

S

A small lot as it is, it's essentially fully developed, basically lot line to lot line with.

S

Either, structures parking, you know impervious parking or this you know fairly impervious patio.

S

Configuration to the rear of the property, so those are unique characteristics of the property.

S

That I think separate it from the others in the neighborhood. I think the fact that the african.

S

Burying ground since this property was converted to office, use the african barrier burying ground.

S

Has been uh has been instituted on chestnut street, removing all of the off street parking.

S

On chestnut street again, that is a unique factor that impacts this property. So there.

S

Is no fair and substantial relationship between the purposes of the lot area per dwelling in the.

S

Open space requirements in their application to this particular project, it's a reasonable use.

S

It's a residential use, that's permitted in this zone. It's it's got residential uses on both sides.

S

And across the street, and I believe it meets all the criteria and you should grant the variances.

B

Thank you attorney mulligan. Are there any questions from the board.

B

Mr ram um just just statement, I I think I remember that kevin guy used to have his insurance office.

E

In the building in this building as well a long time ago that I feel like I went there, yes, like.

S

That wouldn't be before me and lauren, then yeah, uh but that's a long time ago. God rest his soul.

E

um So I'm I am concerned, however, about. um I guess I would have appreciated more information in the.

E

Original packet on this, this planned deck because it did cause me some confusion and.

E

I scribbled some notes on here regarding it uh now you you said it at 60 square feet, but.

E

um We're actually showing a change from 19 down to 14 open space which, by my calculation, is roughly.

E

100 square feet: do you know, um is the intent to like bridge the gap between this opening and and.

E

This sort of this wall here and have steps on the opposite side. Yes, so um the pictures that I just.

S

Handed up david, you can see, there's this curved bump out it would. There would be like a sliding.

S

Door installed there and it would basically be a deck over the hvac condensers to the.

S

um To the the uh patio okay, thank you yeah, because you're showing about eight eight feet, five inches.

E

By seven feet, which you know, that is roughly 60 square feet. But if you're going a little.

E

Bit further plus your steps, you might actually need the full 100 square feet that we're granting.

E

You so, okay, any other questions or concerns. I was told there'd be no math on this quiz dave.

E

I was going to have some engineering questions as well. You would have been sorely disappointed.

B

You're an engineer: aren't you david yeah? I would just add a comment as well that.

H

uh For possible consideration, if this were approved, uh I'm not exactly sure that you.

H

Can have condensers under a duck without the appropriate clearance uh just for airflow and.

H

Everything, so it's a something to consider that was the engineering question. Oh yeah.

E

Please double check that yeah foreign.

B

Okay, thank you. Thank you. Is anyone here to speak, 2-4 or against the application.

R

I'm back I'm eric weinrib nine middle road, but my office is right across the street 133.

R

Court on when I bought my office building 20 some odd years ago, that was actually the mro.

R

District and I actually lived in half and I got it converted to office for the other half.

R

And I've seen a lot of change in the area. I've witnessed the change with the african burial.

R

Ground and one of the things and transformation from meat and lauren. But I don't remember a guy.

R

Being there that that was before me, um one of the things I have seen in downtown is that we've lost.

R

A lot of vibrancy because we've lost ground floor residential living. We have a couple.

R

Apartments above on behind my building, I'm across the street from this one, I think that.

R

Converting this to residential ad vibrancy on to the african burial ground area. I also think.

R

That, as on stated that it's an interesting area to access, I mean I park in there. I feel.

R

All these years later, I still feel we are driving through there, but I come in. I haven't routine. I.

R

Pull in actually into their driveway, primarily and then back into my driveway and park there and for.

R

People not familiar with the area, it's an awkward movement. So if you were to create a situation.

R

Where it's going to be a residence going to be the same people going in and out of there, I think.

R

It's going to improve safety, we have a lot of pedestrians. There um it'll remove that transient.

R

That field, I think it's a great solution to uh convert it to residential. Thank you. Thank you.

B

Anyone on zoom stephanie, I don't see anyone, I'm seeing no one rise. Oh no, one! Okay, I'll.

B

Close the public hearing um board is there anyone who would like to make a motion.

E

um I'm jared moved to uh approve as presented and advertised. Thank you. Is there a second a second.

B

Thank you, mr madsen. Your motion, mr ram yep, um so I think the applicants made a good case here that.

E

um The situation that was really kind of out of anyone's control, and uh certainly particularly as.

E

The property owner, um no one could have expected that there would be an african burying ground.

E

um In the in the street, in front of your uh property that did change the dynamic, I think.

E

Of of this, and and does contribute to some of the criteria, um that's here what the applicant.

E

Is asking for is a permitted use uh in the cd4l1. It's simply that they're a lot size is.

E

Not quite adequate and then the request for the additional lack of open space or they're already.

E

Non-Conforming uh and changing that somewhat, to allow a um from for residential use to allow a way.

E

To go directly from your house out to a patio area without having to go down a a relatively.

E

Narrow and crowded driveway also makes some some sense as well, so with that uh relevant facts here.

E

Granting the variants would not be contrary to public interest, uh so the certainly the the.

E

Public, I think there is actually a positive public interest here in that, um with the with the varying.

E

Ground being there now, having a business in this area is going to invite that much more traffic.

E

um People trying to come in uh to use the use the business perhaps unsure you know using their.

E

um Their app on their phone to go and try and find it and thinking there's going to be parking right.

E

Up front only to find out that there isn't. uh I do think that there's actually an interest on the on.

E

The public's uh part to have this being converted into a residence both contributing positively to.

E

Our our need for additional residents um type structures, but also to eliminate some of the.

E

Confusion that could be associated with this. You know significant change to uh chestnut street.

E

Granted, the variance would be observe the spirit of the ordinance again. We do actually have it's.

E

An allowed use, it's an existing structure. Sure it's an existing watt, that's been there for a.

E

Long long time to say that an existing structure on an existing lot, that is non-conforming can't.

E

Have a revised you use that is a permitted use, would would seem to be against what the ordinance.

E

Is really trying to accomplish here and then in terms of open space already non-conforming.

E

Making it somewhat more so but at the same point in time, within within allowable limits,.

E

um It is to the rear of the property. The the loss of open space is not anything that the.

E

Public is going to be perceiving and with that for for facts for the substantial justice again.

E

The property owners ability to convert this into a residential use, adding in a a way to.

E

Get over to an already existing open patio area makes more sense as part of that conversion to a.

E

Resonance use, there's really no public need here. That would prevent us for allowing the.

E

um The current property owner to take full advantage of that grant and variants would.

E

Not diminish the value of surrounding properties. Again, these are relatively minor changes. It is.

E

From it looks like a residential building is fact that it was actually an office use was.

E

Probably more awkward and more of a negative consequence for neighboring properties, I think.

E

This will bring it more into overall conformance and, and uh certainly it probably helped, probably.

E

Values, but certainly not negatively impact them and then uh the the hardship. So this.

E

Property does have special conditions against an existing lot. It has had a structure on it for.

E

um Many many many many years um that that structure looks like like a house was.

E

Probably a residence when I was originally built almost certainly was, was converted at.

E

One point in time to an office use, but converting it back um is certainly within the possibilities.

E

um Unique so this unique lot here um is is the way it was, even though the ordinance now would.

E

Require a little bit more, if you look at the other properties in the neighborhood, they probably are.

E

Closer to conforming, whereas this one does not and then again the minimal loss of open space um is, is.

E

Not a significant loss here and then lastly, it is a reasonable request to um going and request.

E

That additional loss of open space to make this a full residence use. So with that, I would recommend.

E

Approval anything any when I add anything to your second, mr madsen uh nope. That's good [laughter].

B

Any other comments before we take a vote. Okay, so the motion is to approve, as presented and.

B

Advertise it and mr matson yes, mr rossi, yes, ms eldridge, yes, mr ram, yes, mr mantle, yes and.

B

The chair votes, yes, application is approved, it's very odd to speak of myself in the third person.

B

um So we usually take a break at nine o'clock. um I think we have a. I just want to see what.

B

The board is thinking uh 39 homes. Court is the next application. It's somewhat.

B

Straightforward, I don't know if the board would like to hear that application take a.

K

Break and then go to 43 homes court. So let's see what the board wants to do and go now.

E

Yeah, my thought is those two applications are kind of linked in some ways. I don't.

E

Know if we want to try and deal with them consecutively together, but that's just.

B

um Okay, well, why don't we take a break now and then uh we'll.

B

Come back and we'll hear we'll start off with 39 home support. Thank you.

M

Welcome back to the uh december 20th zoning board of adjustment meeting uh we the next.

B

Application for consideration is uh the request of stephen, a and catherine l singler owners for.

B

Property located at 39 homes court, whereas relief is needed for addition of a shed dormer heat pump.

B

And new paved area which requires the following. One variance is from section 10.521 to allow a a.

B

Two feet: rear yard: where 25 feet is required and b 22 opens 22 open space where 25 is the.

B

Minimum required a variance for number two, a variance from section 10.515.14 to allow.

B

A zero foot setback where 10 feet is required for a heat pump number three.

B

A variance from section 10.321 to allow a non-conforming building or structure.

B

To be extended, reconstructed or enlarged, without conforming to the requirements of.

B

The ordinance said property is located on an assessor map, 101 lot 13 and lies within.

B

General resonance b and the historic district, and who is here to speak to this application.

T

Madam acting chair members of the board attorney derek durbin, I'm here on behalf of the uh owners.

T

Of the property steven singular and catherine singular, who are also the applicants, I also have.

T

With me, eric weinrip from altus engineering, who's seated behind me, um steven singler is.

T

Here in attendance, I believe brendan mcnamara should be on um virtually as well from australia.

T

um To answer any uh questions you might have about the design that's proposed, um so the.

T

Property, we're talking about is a unique property in the respect that the public portion of the.

T

Right-Of-Way that you see is holmes. Court actually ends at the front boundary of the property.

T

After that, it turns into a private drive that runs directly through the center of the property to 43.

T

Homes, court, which is also owned by the singulars as well. The property does contain a non-conforming.

T

Single-Family home that was constructed in the early 1900s aside from the asbestos siding.

T

That's on the home essentially remains in its original form. The home is in need of a full-scale.

T

Renovation as a result of the bifurcation, the property by homes, court or the private drive.

T

That runs through the middle of it. The building envelope for this property is very small, as.

T

You'll see from the plans the home really can't be expanded without obtaining variance relief.

T

From the ordinance, it encroaches into the side and rear yard setbacks in its existing condition.

T

um So the proposal before the board, necessitating the relief is um for a dormer to the uh to the top.

T

Level of the home to create more headroom, more livable space for the for the existing home, also.

T

For a heat pump to the rear that you'll see on the site plan that would be locating close proximity.

T

To the rear property boundary shared with 43 homes court, this would be obviously to provide central.

T

Heat and air, the shed dormer that would be added to the east facing or the rear section of the home.

T

Would maintain the existing 2.1 foot, rear yard setback? Actually because it's recessed it'll be.

T

Technically speaking, step back in a little bit further from that, so it will not encroach any.

T

Further into that non-conforming setback than what exists with the house, the heat pump is also.

T

Proposed in the rear yard of the property, um so with that particular issue, um you know that.

T

There is really no other logical location for the heat pump that would work on the property.

T

It is in close proximity, but still a considerable distance away from the the um house at 43 homes.

T

Court, unless there are any questions at this stage, that simply turned the variance criteria, because I.

T

Know you still have some other items on the agenda as well as our other application before you so.

T

Okay, grant the variance would not be contrary to the spirit of the.

T

um And intent of the zoning ordinance or the public interest, I would submit to the board.

T

That the minimum building setback requirements are inactive for the purpose of creating and.

T

Preserving separation between buildings, on abutting properties, maintain light air and.

T

Space also to protect against the spread of fire. In certain instances, uh the proposed shed dorm.

T

Room will be situated considerable distance away from the home at 43 homes court. So none.

T

Of those light, air space concerns are presented by that or any privacy concerns. Same can be said.

T

Of the heat pump, as I pointed out as well, it is defined as a structure of the zoning ordinance.

T

By definition, it's really not a structure and function, though, if you think about it, it's not.

T

Like a deck or something that really would potentially be imposing upon a neighboring.

T

Property, it is designed to run very quietly the figures that I got. I didn't have a spec sheet.

T

To present to the board tonight, but the figures that I got from the spec sheet is 54 decibels.

T

When it's cooling, 58 decimals in its heating mode, so it is designed to run very efficiently quietly.

T

The heat pump will be adjacent to the left side yard of the property at 43 holmes court, which.

T

If you were, if you did go out to the property you're, looking from that back at 43 homes, court.

T

In the water, it's basically just open space all the way, the water from the heat pump, the.

T

House at 43 homes court is situated slightly. It's inset from that. If granted, the variance.

T

Does not altered the essential character, the locale, the architecture and size of the home.

T

Will remain consistent with the others on holmes court and those surrounding it on abutting streets.

T

um Heat pumps are not uncommon, as this board is aware throughout the south end of portsmouth. It.

T

Will be unnoticeable to other properties, except for 43 homes, court, which the applicants also own.

T

I would submit to the board the renovation the home is in the public's interest.

T

um The uh the home, those parts of the home that are renovated, which will consist of.

T

Most of it will be brought up to current code, so that is a benefit to the public. In this case,.

T

Substantial justice will be done in granting the variants the dormer will allow for the headroom.

T

Needed to really make that a functional top floor attic space living space, I should say, and the the.

T

Heat pump will allow for the provision, essential heat and air. None of these improvements will.

T

Impact a budding properties, therefore, there is really no loss to the public that would outweigh.

T

The loss to the applicant in this instance, if the variance relief were denied surrounding property.

T

Values will not be diminished by granting the variances the improvements proposed for the.

T

Home are designed to be in keeping with those in the in the neighborhood and consistent there with.

T

If the variances are approved tonight, this will still need a approval from the htc.

T

It has already gone through that preliminary process, a work session.

T

um Did was met with favorable reviews, which is the reason why that design is before the board tonight.

T

So that process does add an additional layer, protection for the public and the protection of.

T

Surrounding property values denying the variances would constitute unnecessary hardship as you'll.

T

See the size of the property is quite small, 2 672 square feet. Looking at that, coupled with.

T

The fact that it's bisected in the middle by the private portion of the homes court right.

T

Away our special conditions that distinguish it from surrounding properties. There is no way.

T

To add on to the existing home or rebuild it or any portion of it without requiring zoning.

T

Relief, so for those reasons, it also can't be used strictly, in conformance with the ordinance.

T

um I would, um I believe, it's fair for the board to also conclude that there is no.

T

Fair and substantial relationship between the general purpose of the ordinance and provisions, particularly the setback provisions here in their application.

T

And finally, the variances and the proposed use of the property is reasonable. It'll be.

T

The same as it exists now, single family use just slightly more functional use. So, for these reasons.

T

I hope you'll approve the variances are sought tonight happy to answer any questions you have.

T

um Eric on any engineering brendan, hopefully, is on and can answer any of the designer architectural.

T

Related questions, so, okay, thank you brendan is on via zoom any questions from the board. Mr, I am.

E

Thank you, uh I'm chair, so I'll start with my lawyer questions um and then we'll move on to.

E

The engineering ones so holmes court do we know where holmes court actually stops, because the.

E

Zoning map and the tax map don't agree. There's only map has a stop at the property, went up from.

E

The one that you're talking about right now, yeah the tax map, has the home score, going all the way.

E

Down to the next property yeah, I know it's, it is confusing to the best of our knowledge and for the.

T

Research that I did it ends right at the front boundary of 39 homes, court, the property, we're.

T

Talking about and then becomes private through there, which makes sense, if you think about it, it's.

T

Not references public or private when you look at the deeds to the properties, um but I that's.

T

What we were able to ascertain from the title research was okay, um yeah, uh the the to answer.

T

The question about, though, the maintenance, um the we do know um maintain privately.

T

um I think 39 and 43 maintain privately except the city does push snow back through 39, basically to.

T

43, I think, out of convenes, primarily it's just easier to get it back there and off to the side.

E

Yeah, unfortunately, we're this we're dpw, actually plows stuff tends to have almost nothing to do.

E

With actual city streets, well it does, though it's uh sometimes it it can. um Unfortunately, I've had.

T

To litigate that issue of the supreme court in new hampshire, but but in this instance um I I we.

T

Feel fairly confident that the um the uh that it ends legally speaking at 39., is there an easement.

E

Across 39 for access to 43, I mean obviously I know the circumstances. Your client owns both pieces.

E

Of property, but yes, there is okay, because it's not shown on the on the plan that you provided.

E

um And then I guess uh architectural question, maybe it'll be easy enough that you can answer.

E

It so uh the description was that the the roof dormer was going to be set back two feet from the.

E

Wall, which in turn is two feet from the property line, but you're asking for a two foot setback.

E

um Why would four feet not meet there? Your needs for four foot setback from the property line.

T

I think the short answer to that is the closest point of the building's two feet.

T

um I I think it was done out of abundance of caution in that respect, but um I think it could.

T

Be an interpretational thing I um my understanding is, is that, yes, we will be slightly recessed in.

T

um But still, I think we were just doing it out of you know, yeah. It didn't turn into a debate.

T

Over you know whether we applied for enough early, okay, yeah and really the only evidence I have for.

E

Making that is the black and white photo listed as page 5a. There's a note with the nice little.

E

Taped over this is actually very like uh mid 20th century. I kind of like it, but uh new recess shed.

E

Dorm or two foot from sidewall and four foot from gable ends, so so two plus two equals four.

E

So I was just curious if there's something that isn't made clear in that description, that that.

E

The board needs to understand about the setback or, if we do generally think it'd be something.

E

Closer to four feet, rather than something closer to two feet for that yeah. I I believe that that's.

T

um Accurate and then brendan, if you want to, um if there's anything inaccurate about that, certainly.

T

Speak up, but I do believe that that's accurate. um I just know that we're you know, because the.

T

Existing home does is 2.1 feet from the boundary we're just being safe with it, with the request.

B

Okay, so brendan mcnamara is on zoom and we'll. Let him speak. Yes, that is correct. The um the setback.

U

To the door does end up being technically 4.1 feet, um and uh but that was uh not so much generated to.

U

Get it outside of the setback, but it was a visual approach so that the dormer was was a visually.

U

Recessed from the continuation of the sidewall, so that it wouldn't be so impactful on the overall.

U

Building so in a sense, that's you know, driven by um appeals to the htc rather than the boa.

K

Is that clarifies yep and then my engineering question- um and I really I bring this up because.

E

It actually was a problem on a property on rogers street, maybe like a year or two ago.

E

um We had an applicant that was doing virtually the same thing that you're doing here, which is.

E

Putting a condenser on the side of the house right up against the property line and it ran.

E

Into an issue, so I guess the first question is: is what's driving it being on the side of the house.

E

I guess technically the rear property line, but essentially on the side of the house versus having.

E

It on the the back of the house or what would technically be the side of the of the property.

E

Like like, why do we have to have a zero foot setback? Why couldn't we have it on the bat.

E

On the other, where we would have at least a little bit of setback to the property line.

E

Are you prepared no actually, okay, yeah yeah, uh so brendan here again? Yes, so we.

U

Reviewed uh putting it on, you know what would be kind of the rear of the house.

U

um But in terms of the possibility that it could uh produce some sort of annoyance, and that would.

U

Be annoyance to those neighbors, whereas by putting it on the water side of the house, in that narrow.

U

Setback zone, any annoyance that would be coming from the heat pump would be directed towards.

U

43, which was a common owner, so therefore um that would be more accepting of it. If that was the case,.

U

um So it was really um to focus the annoyance to the common owner rather than to somebody who was.

U

Not involved in the property, okay and and then um the slightly more technical question is and.

E

This is what happened on roger street. It was an issue because the applicant had not included the.

E

um Space that needs to be between the condenser and the actual building like you need to have.

E

Some free space in there for air there's actually specifications that the manufacturers typically.

E

Include do we know, has that been considered, and is that part of the design that you have here like.

E

We're confident yeah when you include that space you're not going to be over the property line.

E

Yes, yes, we've accounted for that, so it does end up being on the outside face of the unit.

U

Itself is on the property line, but there's just sufficient space between it and the.

U

Building for it to function normally, okay, all right! Thank you any other questions from anyone.

T

Thank you very much. um Would anyone like to speak 2-4 against the application.

B

Seeing no one rise and is there anyone on sale, nope, okay, I'll close the public hearing and.

B

Could I have a motion or discussion on this? Anyone from this side of the dance.

D

I would like to move that we approve the application as as presented and advertised.

D

Is there a second I'll second, that okay, mr ram seconds, mr rossi in motion, please.

D

Granting the variance would not be contrary to the public interest, which is supported by the.

D

Fact that the uh the design, the uh the design calls for the edition of dormer, which doesn't.

D

Really change the footprint of the structure itself and the only place where that change is.

D

Really going to be the most visible is in the adjacent property nearer to the water.

D

Which is owned by the same homeowner, so there's really no um no impact on the public interest.

D

um There's no public interest in preventing the the the construction of a of a shed dormer.

D

It would do substantial justice because there's no gain to be had to the public by.

D

Denying this request from the property owner there is uh basically uh advantage to the.

D

Property owner and the value of the property by uh by uh approving the requested variants.

D

Granting the a variance would not diminish the values of the surrounding properties. I think the.

D

Main supporting fact for that is that the most closely effective property is owned by the same.

D

Property owner and the person is in the best position to make a judgment as to whether or.

D

Not the changes they're making on one of their properties would diminish the value. Evidently.

D

They have concluded that it will not the special provision, the special conditions of the property.

D

Are that it uh it's already non-conforming, there's really nothing being done here that.

D

Changes the degree of non-conformance other than heat pumps, and maybe this fact is more.

D

Along the lines of the first, the first criteria, but I do not believe that the intent of the.

D

Ordinance is to prevent the modernization of hvac systems in antique homes and therefore I.

D

Don't think there's any relationship between what they're trying to do. There's no there's.

D

No relationship between their uh escalation of heat pumps and the intent of the ordinance.

B

Right additional comments for your second, mr aim, I do thank you. um I just in general, um this type of.

E

New englander lends itself to these types of roof. Dormers, you see them on many different properties.

E

All over the city, it's a very common way for homeowners to add just a little bit of extra.

E

Usable square footage those addicts are generally pretty tight without having the dormer out and.

E

It's often typically seen as a one side, usually it's a side away from your neighbor um that you.

E

That you go and do because uh then that allows you to because you might have proper setbacks to do it.

E

um In in this particular case, um you know what we are concerned about with setbacks is typically.

E

Light and air to budding properties to the welfare of the use of the property by your by your.

E

Neighbors, in this case, conveniently as mr rossi has pointed out, one of the big factors is is.

E

The same owner happens on both properties. So a lot of our many many time concerns that we have for.

E

um For for close, setbacks like what we're seeing here are, are immedially related to a great effect.

E

um By the fact that uh that that it really is common ownership among the two properties.

E

um As can be seen in the picture, in page 5a window units are perfectly allowable generally.

E

Tend to be a lot noisier than these uh more modern um heat heat pump, condensers that are.

E

Put on the outside properties, zero foot setbacks, something that normally makes me pretty nervous.

E

But in this particular case again because of the property ownership but in in addition.

E

um It does sound like it's been been researched through and they are incredibly quiet. So I really.

E

Don't think it would be even it was put on the back side of the house, probably wouldn't be a.

E

Concern to the neighbor, but I I do recognize that the applicant is trying to be a good neighbor.

E

And have whatever noise it is making going towards their own property. So um you know I.

E

Think that is very little in the public interest here. That would say that we shouldn't grant this.

E

And that again, one of the unique uh facts here is that there's a common ownership across this.

E

Boundary that is impacted by the request. With that, I would concur and recommend approval. Mr mantle.

C

We should add a stipulation pending approval of the htc.

B

It's not a necessary stipulation, I mean the property is in the htc, correct, right and they're.

J

They're before the htc, um it's already been approved. Well, no, it's they've been to a work.

J

Session and then they have to come and if the variance is approved, then they can go for full.

J

Public hearing before the htc and the the material I mean, the visuals of their edition are included.

B

In our in our packet they deviate from that. Then they have to come back to us. Come back correct.

B

Okay, anything else all right, so the motion is to approve, as presented and advertised.

B

um Mr mantle, yes,.

B

Mr am yes, ms eldridge? Yes, mr rossi, yes, mr matson, yes and the chair votes. Yes,.

B

Application is approved, 6-0.

B

The next application is for 43 homes court, and this is the request of stephen, a and catherine l.

B

Zingler owners for property located at 43 homes court, whereas relief is needed to demolish the.

B

Existing dwelling and construct a new single family dwelling, which requires the following.

B

One variance is from section 10.531 to allow a a lot area of 5 353 square feet where 20 000 square.

B

Feet is required fee zero, free feet of street frontage, where 100 feet is required c 75 feet.

B

Of lot depth were 100. Feet is required d, a 17 foot, front yard, where 30 feet is required. E, a 14 foot.

B

Left side yard, where 30 feet is required and f a 14 foot right side yard, where 30 feet is required.

B

Two, a variance from section 10.440 use number 1.10 to allow a single family dwelling where the.

B

Use is not permitted, said. Property is located on assessor map, one to one lot 14 and lies within the.

B

Waterfront business and historic districts, and who is here to speak to this application? Madam vice.

T

Chair members of the board attorney derek durbin again on behalf of stephen and catherine singular.

T

Who were the applicants in the last application before you? They are the owners of 43 homes.

T

Court as well so the property we're discussing does contain a single family home constructed.

T

um For the city's assessing records in the year 1749, it has a dysfunctional floor plan in its.

T

Existing condition, my understanding from speaking uh to those with um that have been in around the.

T

Property is it's in very poor structural condition, as I think stephen would point.

T

Out to the board, you can poke your finger through some of the framing in the in the uh in the house.

T

So it does have very few qualities, so it would make it worth saving in this particular instance.

T

um It has two bedrooms, um one bathroom, um that's, unfortunately, the bathroom that is in the existing.

T

House is on the first floor, um which is uh obviously inconvenient having the bedrooms.

T

Upstairs uh the home is located within the ae flood zone. It has a flood elevation of eight.

T

Feet and for those of us that don't aren't engineers or don't look at flood elevations.

T

A lot it just basically means extremely prone to flooding from the due to the close proximity.

T

Of the piscataqua river the home is uniquely situated. There are no other homes immediately.

T

Butting it to the sides or to the rear to the rear. Obviously it's the piscataqua river.

T

uh The budding property of the front at 39 homes court is also owned by the singulars. All the other.

T

Properties on homes, court r zone grb: this is the only one that zoned um the waterfront business.

T

The property is technically speaking, landlocked safe for the private access that we just talked.

T

About in the last application that runs from the public portion of the homes court right away,.

T

From the front boundary to 39 homes, court back to this particular property.

T

The existing home cannot be raised, meaning like physically raised up to mitigate the current.

T

Flood risks, while also meeting building and life safety codes, really the only feasible plan for the.

T

Property to mitigate those concerns, as well as to modernize the property, is to demolish the existing.

T

Home the applicants are proposing the construction of a new two-bedroom um two bath single family.

T

Home uh it would be of a slightly larger dimension, um but it would be essentially equivalent to or.

T

Even smaller than some of the other homes that are on homes, court, the ceiling height of each.

T

Floor would be raised right now. It's uh like uh you, know it's a very low ceiling. So it's a very.

T

Difficult home to navigate around there are a lot of safety issues as well with the existing home.

T

The finished product would have approximately 1300 square feet of finished living space. We're still.

T

Talking about a very small home, there would be an additional bathroom added to the second floor.

T

Of the home to make it a little more functional, the new flood elevation would be 11 feet. Thus.

T

Mitigating the the future flood risks. I know you know with any type of application like this.

T

There's always going to be the you know why: why do we need to demolish the existing home? Does it have.

T

Historic quality is it worth saving I've alluded and touched upon some of the the reasons why.

T

It should be demolished, but again since we have brendan on zoom appearing from australia, I'd like.

T

To just have him at this point just discuss some of those, some of the reasons behind the demolition.

T

Of the existing home and it's rebuilt because I think it is important for the sport so brendan.

U

Yes, yes, I'm here, um the this house ends up being caught in a bit of a catch-22.

U

um Because there's a technical requirement uh once you've exceeded a level of expenditure on.

U

The house that it must meet um current code, which would mean it would mean, need to meet the coastal.

U

Flood zone requirements, so um so you could sort of say well, we could just lift up the existing house.

U

But the act of lifting up the existing house would exceed the expenditure that would then initiate.

U

The rest of the house to meet current code, which dimensionally the existing house cart so.

U

um That's what we've proposed is is a a rebuild of a slightly expanded version.

U

um Of the appearance of the existing structure and we've reviewed this quite extensively with.

U

The htc- and they were you, know in the end, you know we all realize that it'd be nice to maintain a.

U

Historic structure, although this one has been quite savagely, cut into and changed over time.

U

But um the generalized appearance of the existing house would be preserved in a a.

U

Slightly larger envelope that allows the dimensional requirements of the current.

U

Code to be met in terms of stairs headroom requirements, etc, etc. All within the context.

U

Of this raising up for the floodplain coastal floodplain requirements, which is essentially.

U

You know causing a lift up of at least two feet. I think it is so that's the generalized approach.

B

I actually have a question. Well I'll, let you go through your application. I have a question on.

B

That on that point, okay, um so uh despite the relatively small um size of the law, I mean a.

T

Lot of these um properties out there relatively small long homes court, it will comply with the.

T

Building coverage requirements for both the wb waterfront business zoning and the grb zoning.

T

Which is interesting because, with waterfront business zoning, it's a minimum lottery, a 20.

T

000 square feet and grb is significantly less, but it will comply with both with the reconstruction.

T

At home they are proposing several offsetting improvements on the shed that's located in the.

T

Left side yard step back along the northerly boundary will be demolished. In addition, there's.

T

A stone patio to the rear of the existing home that extends pretty close to um what you could.

T

Consider the bank to the piscatica river that will be removed. There will be a deck added to the back.

T

Of the home, but that will be under inches above create, so it doesn't require any type of relief.

T

Those changes may seem minor, but they are overall improvements to the property in its existing.

T

Condition, as brendan pointed out, this will need htc. Approval has gone through that work session.

T

That's where the determinations have been made. Really the only feasible option is to demolish.

T

And reconstruct here um it has received favorable feedback for the htc, which is the reason we're.

T

We're here tonight um the applicants will need a wetlands permit as well for the work that's done.

T

On the property the it has been designed to comply with the wetland requirements which mitigates any.

T

Environmental related concerns, um it does appear like a lot of variance, has been applied for on.

T

Paper, but I would point out that they all relate to existing non-conformities of the property.

T

The only non-conformity- that's arguably increasing, is really related to the front yard setback which.

T

Is is really an interesting point um if, if you look at my narrative and some of the.

T

Foot footnotes in there front yard setback is, is measured from the edge of the public street.

T

In this instance, you know we've applied for variance release, but the reality is is that if.

T

You were to apply that definition as it reads in the ordinance we don't have a front yard.

T

um It's so it is a very unique situation. We did apply for the relief rather than have it admitted.

T

In and end up in a debate um over whether it's needed, but the reality is, there's no front yard.

T

Here so it is a very unique situation. um I also um at this point just need to to raise.

T

An issue which I've discussed with the city in the past, but there's never been, I think at least.

T

Any consensus between myself and the city that relief is needed for the dimensions of the lot.

T

um We have applied for frontage lot area relief, all those things, but the reality is is that.

T

This is an existing lot of record with vested rights under the law. We don't feel that any of.

T

The variances related to the dimensions of the lot itself, as it exists, are applicable here and should.

T

Be required, so I raise these issues because I'm about to address the variance criteria, so I didn't.

T

Know if the board, I know beth has a question that may be related to design, but I wanted to.

T

Raise those as preliminary issues, because I didn't know if the board wanted to possibly discuss that.

T

And really when they talk about dimensions, front, yard, setback, lot, area, depth and also there's the.

T

Issue of the front yard. I know I don't like to throw complicating factors in the application.

T

But I mean it, it makes it look like we're applying for a tremendous amount of relief when the reality.

T

Is is that that we're not, um and I I don't think, there's ever been a legal determination at least.

T

Maybe peter knows better than than I do from the city, at least on paper that says you do need this.

T

Relief, I think it's just generally been accepted by applicants that you do, but I I've I, I think.

T

In most other municipalities, you define what a lot of record is, and city of portsmouth does not.

T

um You know where you have vested rights, whether to start and where they end and.

T

I we're dealing with that for lack of better words in ancient property. Here.

T

So I don't that's not to say that the use rights are allowed because we're in wb zoning.

T

And we definitely need to use variance, but the dimensional variances, um I think, are questionable.

B

Well, it is a non-conforming building, so it's a non-conforming lot which year so I think- and this.

B

Is the way portsmouth has handled this, so I I'll address them yeah. I think it would be better just.

T

To address them yeah I will yeah I and again, it's not my point to put the board on on the spot here.

T

On with that those issues, but it I mean hopefully it's an issue- those are issues the city can work.

T

Through in the future, but we did apply um with the reservation that we don't feel necessary so.

T

um Beth, I know you had a question so before I think we should. Let you finish criteria.

B

Because I think how many okay sure you only have three minutes left so got it okay, so why.

B

Don't we at this point with the board, uh allow uh attorney durbin in additional five minutes? Okay,.

T

um Granting the variance does not be contrary to the spirit and intent of the zoning ordinance.

T

um uh So, as I pointed out um with the last application, um with respect to the building's.

T

Setback requirements really intended to preserve light air and space between.

T

Buildings on the budding properties: this will accomplish those goals, it won't add any.

T

Additional burden on surrounding properties, it only extend two feet closer to the front.

T

Boundary- which, of course, is a property that's commonly owned by the single hours.

T

um Most, if not all the other houses on homes, court are located um closer than 20 feet to their front.

T

Boundaries we are making improvements to the site, removal of the patio removal of the shed in the.

T

Left yard setback. I would submit to the board that the wb waterfront business zoning designation for.

T

The property isn't reflective of the character of this particular neighborhood, which is the.

T

Remainder of the homes of zone grb, where the setbacks would be five feet from the front 10.

T

Feet to the size and 25 feet to the rear, so it's done consistently with the other properties in the.

T

Neighborhood, the rebuild arguably wouldn't require any of that dimensional relief.

T

So in this case, the grand variance is not altered, the essential character, the neighborhood and the.

T

Construction of a new code compliant home on the property will observe the public interest.

T

Life safety goals of the ordinance, as well as the aesthetic goals of the ordinance. We will be.

T

Providing, I think, an overall improvement that will benefit surrounding properties.

T

Certainly not diminish their values uh with respect to substantial justice, it will be.

T

Done by granting the variance relief, the demolition of the home reconstruction on a.

T

Slightly larger footprint will allow for a more functional home, mitigate the flood risks and.

T

And we'll meet meet current life and safety codes, denying the variances would constitute.

T

An unnecessary hardship, it does have a number of very prominent special conditions that distinguish.

T

It from surrounding properties, very small buildable envelope on the property property.

T

Is already non-conforming with respect to the setback, slot area, frontage and depth.

T

um It's the only property and otherwise residential area that is zone, waterfront, business.

T

And I would also submit to the board that the waterfront business designation was really.

T

Intended to apply to these larger lots, it could be utilized for for true marine purposes, which.

T

This could not, um in any case um properties also landlocked in theory accessed by a private drive.

T

So it doesn't have that typical front yard that we talk about which front yard setback provision.

T

If you were to look at really to design to promote a sort of a more uniform or consistent streetscape.

T

With properties to make sure they're kind of equally set back so that there's uniformity.

T

On the street um in this instance that those considerations really aren't present.

T

um So um finally, the property is also butted to the rear by the piscataqua river, which is a.

T

Unique circumstance that really sets it apart from many other, at least the other properties on holmes.

T

Court itself, so for these reasons there is no fair and substantial relationship between the general.

T

Purpose the ordinance provisions their application, the property. The use itself is the historical use.

T

Of the property, which is single family residential, that use is inconsistent with waterfront business.

T

Zoning but is consistent with the other uses in the surrounding area. So for those reasons.

T

We believe it's reasonable and I will conclude my presentation this point: to try to comply with.

T

Your time requirements- and I thank you and I'm happy to answer any questions have brendan and.

T

Eric is here, here's wall to answer, questions and steven singler as well. So thank you. Any questions.

B

From the board yeah, I'm confused about one thing um with reference with regard to uh what lots.

D

In the area are zone waterfront business, I'm looking at the map that you finally provided.

D

I don't know the pages aren't really numbered. So it's kind of hard for me to point to a page, but.

D

Perhaps you know which one I'm talking about. It's got a kind of a mustard colored area and.

D

Shows the zoning in the area correct, aren't a number of those aren't all those grayed out.

D

Lots waterfront business uh they're not used for waterfront business purposes, but they're all.

T

Yes, zoned consistently as waterfront business, so basically everything along the shore 1017 actually.

D

Is used as a waterfront business? I'm sorry which number the one there is um just right next to it,.

T

uh Not exactly right next to it, but um yes, if you were to look um if you're looking at the.

T

Property 43 homes court from the front um to your left. If you look out a ways um towards the water.

T

You would be looking at a property that is used for waterfront business purposes. Yes, I believe.

T

That's owned by the sanders. Yes, am I yeah that's correct. Yes, I mean from my view of the area. Yes,.

T

The property right, I think, the property, though that's right next door to the left, is.

T

um My recollection, that's single family residential. Is it oh, okay, yeah like if.

K

You absolutely I mean it's hard to say it's a little. The left, because.

T

I think you know it the coastline jogs but yeah yeah, 101-18, yeah.

B

Any other questions 101-18 is used residentially, but it's waterfront business owned. That's.

D

After what you're saying that's correct, so 101.101-7 looks like it has some commercial.

J

Use that's commercially used. I I guess so you know I'm just kind of scratching my head.

D

um Thinking about the intent of the waterfront business zone, there's.

D

Not that much waterfront to be had to preserve for business uses and.

D

um You know, by granting this variance, we would be continuing to restrict the little amount.

D

Of waterfront that's available for business use and I'm struggling a little bit with the.

D

Propriety of that sure yeah just to address that particular concern. Obviously, if the.

T

Variances were denied, it would continue to exist the single-family residential, but I.

T

Think the the risk that we run there is is that you're trying to then work with a home. That is.

T

um Dysfunctional for lack of better words, and not I mean they will they'll, continue to use it.

T

For single-family residential purposes, but I think improving it um in a way that makes sense becomes.

T

Very challenging it also doesn't mitigate the flood risks and I think they'll try to.

T

Just work with what exists, because, financially speaking, it wouldn't make sense to abandon the.

T

Use if that makes sense, yeah so you're, saying that the fact that it's already in residential.

D

Use is a special condition of the property. Correct creates a hardship, basically that.

T

um It's it's one of yeah, several. Yes, I would. I would. I would argue that yeah.

B

Any other questions looking to this side of the dentist any questions, mr brown, any questions.

B

Okay, all right, so my question is: the flood zone is at eight feet. The city's flood zone.

B

As an extra other foot over it nine feet nine. So um why not apply for a variance.

B

For relief from that extra foot of of the height the to get it out of the flood zone.

T

I I think you know in terms of looking at the property and what exists on it as a whole.

T

um I think that the true intent really is to improve the property and really to.

T

Eliminate it may be nine feet, but I think the reality is looking ahead at the future and what.

T

Risks potentially are posed with respect to the property, the existing structure, I think.

T

um The the best, I think, the most appropriate approach for the property is to to demo and and.

T

Build at a higher um elevation just to mitigate, um I think, probably what I mean we have minimum.

T

Standard faric wants to address, but we have minimum standards. Obviously we want to try.

T

To go and look proactively at the at the future. Rest era. Coin rub altus. uh If I'm not mistaken,.

R

Flood ordinances, if there's substantial renovation, that it actually has to be lifted to one foot.

R

Above the canoe construction, it's actually two feet above, and I think that gives us some what.

R

I'll say the what derek was trying to say is the buffer for not just you know the new fema.

R

Ordinances that came out on the maps that came out in january 2021, but also climate change. You.

R

Know we are looking for resiliency and trying to protect our waterfront properties and by raising.

R

That up we're not looking at just the next 10 years, we're looking at the 30 40 50 years.

B

I mean I asked because you probably don't know this: we had an ordinance request for the school.

B

What was that? The the one lady bell yeah for the barn it was for for ex uh a variance requests so.

B

That 16 of it would not have to comply with our nine foot uh flood zone. So that's that's where.

B

That question came so I'm not familiar with that one and I'm not sure as a barn. It's a little bit.

R

Different than an occupied structure, where you're, having on all your mechanicals and and everything.

R

Inside there, so the iron may not be I'm fully occupied in the same manner. Okay, thank you and.

B

um So I realized the demolition of this property is going to be dealt with by the historic district.

B

Commission, however, one of the criteria that we have when we are in the historic district.

B

Is the preservation of historic structures sure- and that is something we have to deal with when.

B

We're in the district, not when we're outside of the district, so um you know I I I guess the.

B

Property is in some rough shape, as are a lot of historic structures in the city and the the.

B

You know development of the historic district was to make it so that they were not demolished.

B

um And I was wondering if you could address that and why it really needs to be demolished. Yeah.

T

um I I know um we have brennan on as well, um since he went through the hdc process that.

T

Can speak from personal knowledge as to what that board favors, but I um some of the things obviously.

T

That I've touched upon um is it is in um and beth you're right in pointing out that a lot of these.

T

Historic homes obviously have a lot of features that are would be very difficult to salvage.

T

um You know, and people still try to work with them and salvage them.

T

um In this instance, my understanding is, it is in such rough shape. There's there is not a lot.

T

um To salvage um as well as um you know, we're also balancing this. um The the flood elevation.

T

Issue and trying to mitigate future flood risks um brennan. If you want to speak to.

T

The htc process, my understanding from the htc process as well as is the htc favors, a demolition.

T

um In this particular instance, but verona, if you want to speak um specifically to that.

U

Yes, um so we did a sidewalk with the htc to do to review the um the situation of the structure.

U

um Even though um the original structure is, you know, said to have been built in the 1700s.

U

And that certainly is undeniable. When you go into the basement and the um the first floor.

U

Floor structure has evidence of the original hand-hewn beams and you know catalog beams.

U

um But um the actual exterior appearance um is of the late 1800s. It has those you know, gothic.

U

Kind of dormer things that are happening so it's it's been reworked a number of times.

U

And there's very little, except in the first floor structure of the original structure left.

U

The um the foundation is there, however, that has been back poured with concrete against the.

U

um The original stone foundation and that's all kind of falling apart um so in terms above the.

U

First floor, it has been, you know, bastardized. You know for the last 150 years really.

U

um And so even the roof structure on that you see on the building at the moment, even though.

U

We're we're replicating that roof structure would not have been original to the house. um It's re.

U

That was really just in reference to the visual expectation of the neighbors in the neighborhood.

U

So and the other issue is that so we're working on a design flood elevation at 11, which was the.

U

Requirement of the ae zone in that area, so the floor, lift up is actually technically it's 14.

U

Inches one foot: two, but again we fall into this issue, which we address with the htc that the the.

U

Requirements under the building code because of the extent of the expenditure, even just to lift.

U

The existing structure, which wouldn't be worth it, it means that you are going to being forced to.

U

um Adhere to current code on all other aspects of the building.

U

So that's what drives the need for demolition that essentially it's either.

U

Do nothing with a structure and just allow it to fall down around the owner's ears or.

U

Or actually do something, but once you do something you exceed the the expenditure.

U

Level that forces you to meet code requirements, so you can't keep it at the same dimension.

B

Okay, thank you. It's a it's! A real problem for coastal buildings for sure and the htc.

U

Recognized that as well and you know, saw had an extensive discussion on it.

B

Thank you and my last question is the waterfront b. um It is true. That's that the city has has.

B

Zoned this- and this is slightly different from the other- the art studio, in that this is an existing.

B

Non-Conforming use, um however, why can't I mean just think of hardship? Why can't you convert.

B

This building to a commercial use, I mean there are other waterfront businesses in that area.

B

There definitely are, and there are further down on off of you know further up sure I mean it would.

T

Have to be a very number one, it has to be a very small um waterfront marine related use. I mean it.

T

Certainly doesn't lend itself to the storage of boats other things of that nature, um even to the.

T

Extent that it did you are, if you walk down to the property, you are really feeling like you're.

T

In a residential neighborhood, you don't feel that you're in a waterfront business area, which again.

T

Looking at the minimum requirements for wv zoning dimensional requirements, you're dealing with what.

T

Was intended to be much larger tracks of land tracks of land that are nearly four times the size.

T

Of this really designed to promote those marine truly marine uses, not just the passive sort of.

T

Hey, we sell clothes that have a mooring on the front or something a buoy um to the extent that.

T

You could put a marine use in there. I would argue it would probably constitute a nuisance um to the.

T

Neighbors, you would need to access it through a private right away through a residential property.

T

I'm sure there's um at least I can think of a number of potential legal challenges to that.

T

um And then the you know, other issue is to the extent you're, storing anything outdoors or in.

T

Having any type of volume of traffic up and down that right away, I, I would argue.

T

You're, probably that use of being consistent with the general prevailing character, the.

T

um Of that particular neighborhood, I think it is kind of like you can't just look at the whole area.

T

I think in this instance, you got to look at holmes, court and sort of like the yeah, the streets that.

T

Run um parallel to it as well to the newcastle side, and it really has a residential feel to it.

T

um I think the right-of-way access is, it would be a big problem. I mean yeah. I went down there with.

D

My truck uh earlier today yeah and it's tough- I can only imagine backing a boat trailer down that.

D

That yeah it'd be terrible yeah, it is tough, um you know I, you know, I have a little car and it.

T

Was yeah I mean there's yeah, there's no way it's an interesting um situation. There's also.

T

Not obviously a lot of um parking out there, we can. We have enough to park the cars for.

T

The house, but it's not a lot out there- um a big big enough land area really for that.

T

You know it's, it is, it is a I mean. We say this they're special everybody comes up here and argues.

T

Special conditions, this says a lot. Actually um it's a it is truly unique in its environment.

B

Any other questions or concerns to the board.

E

Sorry to disappoint. I have no questions uh-oh. I must have done something wrong.

B

um uh Okay. Thank you. Yes, thank you very much. Is there anyone.

B

Here, who would like to speak two for or against the application.

B

It's no one's rising. Is there anyone on zoom? No, no all right, um then. I will close.

B

The public hearing and I will look for a discussion or a motion from the board.

D

I was concerned about the residential use in the wb district, but I think.

D

The argument that it's already in residential use and will remain so.

D

uh Regardless is compelling- and I just think that makes the wb issue kind of superfluous.

B

Ram yeah, so you know waterfront business, as the I think chair pointed out um really very precious.

E

Obviously, only so much many properties that uh that could even potentially fall into it. It's.

E

It's a relatively small presence right along the waterfront in this area in general, I'm a.

E

Big advocate of protecting every every potential square inch of that that we can- and I think this.

E

Board has done that in the past and I've I've been someone to try and defend that. But that said.

E

um This particular property, I think, is just so different and so isolated.

E

um You know, I, I think the attempt when we included it and the neighboring property into the.

E

Waterfront business was thinking that there might be some way, some somehow of of redoing it, but.

E

Just from a practical standpoint has been pointed out, I I just think it would be a negative overall.

E

Try and say that we want to try and squeeze some actual business in a place that hasn't had one and.

E

Certainly, some very long period of time- uh maybe maybe it was a you know- a place that a fisherman.

E

Lived and somehow got to see by um you know right off of their own property, but that that used in.

E

That type of use is long since uh passed. I think really realistically the sanders use and is you.

E

Know, there's some more open space in there that once you come down partridge street, you can kind.

E

Of sort of access that more open area, it makes more sense here. You really have a property that is.

E

Completely isolated from the others, I I do think that just the nature of homes court is such that.

E

It would be impractical to come up with something that would that would justify saying that it's.

E

Really contributing to the characteristics of the waterfront business because you know and all the.

E

um Charettes and things that I've participated in when we come up with our master plan. You hear.

E

It repeatedly- and I think it's a great thing for our city to to want to try and preserve as much of.

E

Our waterfront and keep it as a business, you know, keep that vibrancy aspect to our waterfront. Still.

E

um You hear it, but just in this particular case it just it just doesn't work so and in that sense.

E

I think this this property makes makes sense to remain a residential use and within that confine.

E

Then, if you really do look at if it's not truly a waterfront business, then a lot of the parameters.

E

That are called for in that zone with the 30-foot setbacks, with the large lots right. It's assuming.

E

A much larger lot than what we have here, twenty thousand square feet, it's assuming with that that.

E

You you can't afford the the 30-foot setbacks that, with this much much smaller lot, it's really much.

E

More like it's residential neighbors that are in the uh the gr uh grb zone um and probably would be.

E

Better suited with that and as the applicants uh you know attorney has pointed out the the what is.

E

Being proposed is actually fully in compliance with the grb, in fact, they probably could could.

E

Make a bigger structure, but I don't want to go and allow them to do that. I mean I think what they're.

E

What they're proposing is a reason relatively reasonable size for a waterfront property and and.

E

And shouldn't be any any larger, but I do believe that it's allowed and then you know in terms.

E

Of demolishing historic structure, I'm the first to always lament losing a historic property, but.

E

um I also trust the expertise of the htc members sounds like they're doing their due diligence.

E

And going through the property looking at it, understanding it from a truly. What is what is.

E

There left historically, uh you know, certainly looking at at the building. I would agree with.

E

um With the applicants architect that it doesn't doesn't have any distinguishing characteristics.

E

That make me say: wow, that's a that's something! That's really unique, really historic! It preserves.

E

All of these really uh great things that we shouldn't get rid of- it's really kind of at this.

E

Point been converted into sort of this mishmash of styles, mishmash of conversions, mishmash of a.

E

New uh new appendages on it and and it's true historic value to us other than saying it's.

E

This old thing from 176, 60 or some portions of it are is, is not realistic. So those are my thoughts.

B

Mr metal, do you have any thoughts? um I am going to say? Is there anybody else, because.

B

I speak before everybody else. I will not be supporting this application.

B

um I recognize that demolition was in the is within the purview of the htc. I did not find.

B

With all due respect, the applicant's arguments against for demolishing the building, persuasive.

B

There are many buildings that have different elements of it from different time periods.

B

um The foundation there are many buildings that, in the south, end, have had to be lifted and put.

B

New foundations, on top of it, underneath it and so um in that I feel like it does fail.

B

The spirit and intent, um I think it's a nifty little structure. I think it's very appealing.

B

um I uh so I will not be supporting this application.

B

um And I would I don't know, but the the sense of the board is but I'll await emotion or.

D

Well I'll test the waters I I would move to approve the application as submitted and.

D

Advertised we'll see what kind of support there is for that. A second, a second, uh your motion, mr rossi,.

D

Well, I think the overarching issue here is the fact that we're trying to judge the compliance.

D

Of this residential use property according to the standards of the waterfront business, use its zone.

D

Criteria and for all practical purposes, that is just a misapplication of those standards. This is.

D

Not a property that lends itself to the intended purpose of waterfront business and therefore I.

D

Think it should be judged more in accordance with the residential use in the surrounding zoned areas.

D

And that's, I think, that's the relevant fact that speaks to essentially all of.

D

The variance evaluation criteria and I'm not going to repeat them uh one by one.

N

Well, we do have to go through the, but I would just be saying the same thing over and over again.

M

I agree with everything you know mr rossi said, um and while we don't need to go over all of the.

M

Dimensional variants needs we do have to, I believe, say why we think a variance based on those. Yes.

M

Is desirable um and I do think it is because it's almost first of all go back to the waterfront.

M

Business- I I I agree with um with david that it's very impractical on a private road to have a going.

M

Business concern that one street over is entirely different situation, but here I believe that it.

M

Would be almost given that it is a residential use and we believe it should be judged that way.

M

There's really no way it can meet these criteria being on the lock that it's on and therefore.

M

Do you want to go back into it, therefore granting the variants would not be contrary.

M

To the public, because this residential use and what's basically a residential.

M

Street area um seems appropriate, it observes the spirit of the ordinance and there would be no.

M

um Granting it would do substantial justice to how this property has been over many years.

M

And suggesting that it really belongs in another.

M

Zoning district just doesn't seem to me to be just.

M

Given the concerns the private road of the neighborhood, it would not diminish the values.

M

Of the surrounding properties, in fact, it would probably increase the value, and while this.

M

Is a sweet house, I do believe that floodplain concerns and the weakness of the structure.

M

And the fact that the the body that allows demolition has ruled it's okay would.

M

um That's okay with me. I think that there's a reason that this building can be torn down.

M

And a new building will increase property values. The hardships are, um are many. It's.

M

Dump all that on you, I think the special uh condition of the property uh is that it is.

D

Essentially, landlocked and the access to it is extremely restricted and that prohibits the use.

D

In the way that the zoning ordinance speaks to, which is as waterfront business and that.

D

That is the hardship. Okay, thank you. Is there any additional discussion or I'll just throw on the.

C

Mic well since we're talking about the waterfront businesses, um if this was the streets next,.

C

Door, which is the loop around prey or pickering mechanic I'd agree with preserving the waterfront.

C

Area if the applicant came in and needed variances in order to change this back to a waterfront.

C

Business, in my estimation, they probably fail on at least two, if not three, of the five criteria, even.

C

Though they could do the waterfront business by right, because the surrounding areas have changed.

C

So dramatically and you're on a dead end street. So I hope the sporting application.

B

Thank you. So um the motion is to approve as granted and as sorry presented and advertised.

K

Yeah, mr rossi, yes, ms eldridge, yes, mr ram. Yes, mr mantle, yes and the chair votes. Now it passes five.

B

To one um we have reached our witching hour, it is uh 10 o'clock and we have three more applications.

B

To get to the end, so I'll just need a motion to go plus 10 o'clock so moved. Second, everybody in favor.

B

Right, okay and the next application is 653 greenland road. It is the request of luke j.

B

Brindamore and sarah c brendamore for property located at 653 greenland road, whereas relief is.

B

Needed to add an eight feet, tall fence, which requires the following one: a variance from.

B

Section 10.515.13 to allow an eight foot tall fence along the property line and not adhering.

B

To the required yard setbacks said, property is located on assessor map, 259 light 30 lot, 31 and.

B

Lies within the single residence b district and who is here to speak to this application.

B

Hi, uh this is luke random. More by zoom. Sorry, I'm finishing a 12 hour drive back from west virginia.

V

uh So this is my first foray into variances and boards of adjustment and stephanie and peter.

V

Have been uh instrumental in sort of guiding me through this process, my wife and I moved from.

V

Rhode island to portsmouth her family's, been in rye for the last 30 years, and we.

V

Both came here to work at exeter hospital, and so we purchased this.

V

House on 653 greenland road and when we purchased it, it had an existing.

V

Respective and that was eight foot tall along the border between 42 harvard and our property and.

V

Then there's a six foot bent piece of fence: that's discontinuous! With the eight foot fence, a former.

V

Being around 100 foot, the six foot being around probably 50 foot between that and 623 greenland.

V

And so you know we're hoping to essentially reuse repurpose. The existing piece of eight foot fence.

V

For the majority of the perimeter and continue it and then leverage the existing piece of the.

V

Six foot fence to taper it appropriately to to the street. The intention is to maintain the integrity.

V

Of the neighborhood aesthetic, uh with cedar fencing, um we've spoken with both neighbors.

V

um uh Presencorth uh and her mother at 42, as well as uh christie uh who is at 623 greenland, um well.

V

They're, probably not present, uh they, you know both are in support of all of uh of this work, and you.

V

Know the hope is to sort of totally contain the yard, uh with a fence eventually, uh so that our.

V

Dog can play our future family can play and it's all safe and contained while maintaining privacy.

B

Mr brenda moore, if you could please address the variance criteria, uh could you provide.

V

Some guidance on that. I apologize okay. Well, we can follow your submission. um The first page.

V

uh Yeah, that's correct, I don't think it'll be contrary to the public interest.

V

uh I think the spirit of the ordinance is definitely will will certainly be observed.

V

um You know to to not leverage the existing fence would create some degree of hardship.

V

Financially speaking, um uh any other ask: can you, is there another patreonia.

V

I yeah, I definitely believe so and I I believe substantial justice will be done. I think it will.

V

uh Certainly benefit us without adversely affecting our neighbors. um If anything, it.

V

Would be probably property value, positive or neutral? It certainly wouldn't take away from.

V

From it uh from ourselves or our neighbors, um I certainly don't think they'd be diminished.

V

And I don't, uh I don't think it would result in any kind of unnecessary hardship to anyone else.

V

Sorry, if I'm not doing this 100 correctly,.

B

Okay, um I will ask if the board has any questions for mr brindemore.

M

Well, you have somebody. Oh sorry, I started looking.

B

Over there I was patient. Mr mantle will start with you.

C

um Mr brindamore, um yes, sir, if I'm reading your application correctly, you're not putting a new.

C

Fence, no, he is up around the back side of your property you're, connecting the gaps.

C

In your fence that were basically from your abundance, correct, uh yes, and no essentially.

V

We would be using the existing parts of the fence that already exist. We would.

V

Want to use all of the existing eight foot fence in all of the existing six foot fence.

V

uh For the length that they currently exist, you know I've talked to fencing.

V

Companies- and they actually would you know we wouldn't have to waste anything essentially.

V

um We would make the predominant height around the perimeter of the property, eight foot and taper. It.

V

Appropriately to to six feet uh where it, where it's required to be shorter towards the actual.

V

uh Front of the roads, so we would be connecting it. It would if, but it's mostly sort of uh patchwork.

V

And tetrising but pieces where they really would belong. So it's not. You know. Eight foot.

V

Six foot: eight foot: six foot: eight foot: six foot: it's you know six foot tapers up to eight foot.

V

Tapers down to six foot, so it's uh you know: okay, much more natural, much more natural look! You know.

C

Okay, thank you, mr ram. Yes, I think this is uh board member dave rams so um on one of your photos and.

E

Unfortunately, there's no page number or reference here, but um one of your photos that you have here.

E

Shows your current eight foot fence that I believe, is a budding against your neighbor's uh property.

E

And it does say new line from surveys, so you had a survey done and it now shows that you have at the.

E

Far end of four foot gap there is that what I'm to understand yeah, so we had um when we.

V

Moved in uh as part of sort of the due diligence for any future work, I thought it was appropriate.

V

To perform a survey and have it recorded with the city and then inform my neighbors of the findings.

V

Of the survey uh to then propose future work, you know in the spirit of neighborliness, um and so yes.

V

The survey was done recorded where the, where it's delineated, that's the perimeter that you see in.

V

Orange there, the survey actually, where that eight foot fence currently exists, uh it's really just a.

V

Few from where the street is that's actually the best picture that represents sort of the change.

V

Really, where the eight foot, that top one of the two that you're referencing, so it really is you.

V

Know taking the back of that eight foot, fence and sort of swinging the tail end out slightly so at.

V

The back the maximum is four feet at the front. It's essentially no change at all, so it's sort of.

V

Hinging out very slightly to it with into uh well, I guess it's on our property line, but um betsy.

V

From 42 harvard and her mother, whose property is are aware of that, and it's staked out currently.

V

um And there are okay with with the fence going there, but we would use the existing fence there.

V

And just sort of hinge it to that area. Okay, so your intent is to encompass that area. Excuse me.

E

Right, your intent is to move your fence closer to the property line. As you now understand, it.

E

Following your survey, correct, that's, correct, okay and then heading through the treed area.

E

um Looking at that same photo sort of as you go towards the left also again see some stake. Markers.

E

There that look like they're on top of a tree, but your intent is to uh continue along that property.

E

Line with your eight foot fence, as as close as practical, is that what you're you're looking at.

V

That's correct and we would remove the a tree. That's in the way.

E

Okay uh and then there's sort of like some topography elements there, where it does.

E

Appear like there's a little hill and valley. Is it your expectations? The eight feet will.

E

Sort of mimic that um topography or are you going to try and keep like a level eye level.

E

um To the fencing, uh so the actual height of the fence will be shorter, where the topography.

E

Would have it um where it kind of goes up and then dips back down again? Does that make sense.

E

It does make sense, we have a landscaper uh who is able to sort of work with uh defense. Folks.

V

To eventually level things out, if they were to sort of undulate like you're, suggesting.

V

um The intention is to make it as uniform as humanly possible.

E

Okay, thank you. Any questions from yeah the the eight foot fence. That's going to be.

D

Rotated, I'm sorry, no! No go ahead. uh The eight foot fence that's going to be sort of rotated.

D

Around uh is that your fence or your neighbor's fence power offense. That's your face. Okay, and I.

D

Still don't quite understand the logic of why the new fencing has to be eight feet and not six feet.

V

Well, it's it's a stretch of like essentially a hundred feet of existing eight foot fence.

V

um In you know, having spoken with our neighbor christy at 6 23, she supports and prefers actually.

V

Eight foot fence, um you know her mother, I think lives in a detached cdu. She has young children.

V

uh We have a dog we're going to have a young family soon and I think she's prefers it as well.

V

um There are 42 harvard's, also going to be having, uh I think, an apartment. That's getting put there.

V

That's sort of on the second level um and so being in the yard, from a privacy snake.

V

That extra two feet, when you're looking at an angle, does provide afforded privacy to us and.

V

Our neighbors actually support it too. It's not that we're not nearly at all. Like you know, we.

V

You know, I think, when I introduced ourselves to the neighborhood we wrote this letter. I gave our.

V

Contact information, they said that was kind of the most people have communicated with one another in.

V

A while, so I think it was, uh it was welcomed and the purpose of the fence height is not to to you.

V

Know fracture uh us, uh but really I think you know you utilize the existing height and have.

V

It be uniform, aesthetically speaking um where there's a hundred feet of it and 50-ish feet.

V

Of the shorter fence that makes sense to having spoken with defense, people and the landscapers to.

V

Use that to sort of taper it uh down to the uh you know the picture, that's below it, where there's the.

V

Gate it would taper down to that six foot height, probably two to three panels of the 50 foot on.

V

That side and two to three panels of the that 50-foot section um where it's going to connect.

V

To the side of the house uh on the other side, so um it's really leveraging what exists um just to.

V

Repurpose as much as we can and it sort of has the positive externality of a bit of a privacy benefit.

D

Would he would he still require a variance if it was a six foot fence in this exact way? I'm not.

D

Talking about moving the existing a foot fence, I'm talking about the six foot fence, would that.

D

Still require a variance not along the rear of the property. There's a new section, I'm talking about.

J

Right so there's a whole there's several new sections of eight foot fence along the rear. If.

J

They were six feet, they would not require variance. So the only reason he's here for a variance is.

D

Because he wants eight feet instead of six feet correct, but there is also there is also a portion.

J

That's going to taper to six feet, that's in the front yard, if that was if that was four feet,.

J

In fact, to 30 feet from the front that wouldn't need a variance. But since it's.

J

I mean eight feet is pretty tall for dog containment purposes. Eight feet is actually.

D

The standard, if you want to keep deer from jumping the fence you're generally speaking,.

D

Much more agile than jumping fences than dogs, even wolfhounds have a hard time with.

D

An eight-foot fence, so I'm kind of having a little bit of a a difficulty grasping. Why.

D

Why a feet is is allowable ms eldridge. I have. I have a question here that confused me a bit. It's.

M

An eight foot fence- I know that's too tall for, but it said not adhering to the required yard setback.

M

So it's not just the height, so if he it should be inside, so four foot fence can be in the front.

J

Yard doesn't have to adhere to front yards, and a six foot fence doesn't have to adhere to side.

J

And rear yards so it can be on the property line, but anything over that has to adhere to.

J

The yard requirements the setbacks. Okay, I think, okay, okay, and I could believe that your neighbors.

D

Are okay with it, because people do seem to love their fences in this neighborhood? Are we still.

M

In a problem we haven't opened it yet yeah. We.

B

Haven't we're just asking africa any other questions.

B

um So mr brindle mart just a question: how big is your dog.

V

I mean she's, she said she's 6, 60, 70 pounds, she's very active she's run away a couple times. uh We've.

V

Got her back, I know the department of public works is sort of back there. uh We've we've had.

V

To find her a couple of times, but uh you know really, you know with with the amount of fence.

V

We have that's all um to go eight to six. It just is less burdensome to go to eight to six to four.

V

uh You know so it really, it is a large part of it. Is you know when we bought the home, it was here we.

V

We like it, it's functional, we've talked to people about reusing it. um You know we're not we're not.

V

Wasteful people uh and it just sort of seems it seems logical and common sense for us to reuse and.

V

The height is the height, and so that is sort of what prompted a lot of this. It seems silly to not.

V

To use it and it'd be quite unattractive to sort of have it be multiple, multiple heights. You know.

B

Thank you. Are there any more questions from the board? Okay, so, at this point, I'll open.

B

The public hearing is there. Anyone here would like to speak to for or against the application.

B

Don't all rush? uh Is there anyone on zoom, no okay and seeing no one rise.

B

I'll close, the public hearing and I'll turn it over to the board for his consideration.

B

Yeah just to provide some clarity, I think, on this.

E

um When I first started on the zoning board, we didn't have any. There was nothing in the.

E

Zone of ordinance that talked about heights of fences that did get added by the planning.

E

Board, I think, based off of a few different things that had occurred and some concerns.

E

They came up in in far more enclosed spaces than than what we're looking at with this.

E

Applicant, where people were putting up like some pretty tall fences and some pretty compact.

E

um Properties that you know good fences make good neighbors, but really tall offenses sometimes can.

E

Also be, you know, somewhat intimidating and we also didn't want. I think, the four feet for the front.

E

Yard kind of came from a desire not to have like a wall right. We didn't, we didn't want you to have.

E

Your walled off compound that you were living in behind. um I was starting to see some of that and.

E

In certain areas as well, so I think that's the genesis of some of this uh height requirement.

E

So I just want to give the board that perspective. I mean, I think, in a large property like this, with.

E

You know a fair division between properties, uh the the difference between a six foot or an eight foot.

E

Fence is is probably not that tremendous if the applicant wants to you know, seems to be making.

E

A reasonable use of different heights of fencing for for appropriate purposes and my impression so.

H

Yeah, I guess I'll just add that I imagine the intent was also in terms of so-called spike.

H

Fences- and this certainly doesn't doesn't seem to be a spike fence. So that's worth considering.

M

And it is a very public house, it's on busy streets, so in this case it seems to.

M

Makes sense that the former owners put up a tall fence.

M

For some privacy, it's not taking light from anybody; it is a big open area, so.

B

Anyone else I'm good, um I will not be supporting the application, because I don't think that the.

B

Applicant has demonstrated hardship, and I think, as mr rayam has described, the history.

B

Of the zoning ordinance it's clear so but anyway um do I have a motion uh from anyone.

B

D

Don't look this way because I'm not supporting it either yeah.

H

Give me about the hardship.

B

Okay, well, I mean seems like there's some flux, so perhaps a little bit more.

B

Discussion or if it is, if anybody's ready for emotion, we'll, certainly entertain it.

B

This along, so we can get on to our next.

E

Case I will uh make a motion to approve, as presented and advertised do I hear a second.

M

I'll second, mr ram, your mushroom all right, thank you um so granted the variance would.

E

Not be contrary to the public interest, so what are the public interests uh here?.

E

um You know general conditions of the neighborhood. um Again we were talking about a relatively large.

E

Lot with um substantial separation between this, this house and its neighbors, um a six foot fence.

E

Would be allowed by right we're talking about two additional feet again over the course of.

E

A long distance, I just don't think that the net effect out of that would be substantial. There is.

E

um You know someone going by still from from um you know the greenland road, which is actually sort.

E

Of now partially truncated off and of course, the newer road is, is even farther away and.

E

um You know is a sense of noise, a source of noise, although I don't think the eight foot fencing is.

E

Going to help the applicant very much in that regard, but um in terms of of the public saying.

E

Hey you know this. This fence is is bothersome to me in general. I I don't see where that would.

E

Be the case for this two foot difference and um there is indication that um that you.

E

Know neighbors also uh would be in favor uh of supporting additional privacy, um as noted even.

E

With dogs and kids and whatnot I mean there is a noise element associated with that that uh just a.

E

Little bit of additional fencing could potentially help with ameliorating some of that or or the.

E

Visual nature of some of that um grand variants would observe the spirit of the ordinance again.

E

um You know for a long time we didn't control fences at all. We put it in place to really kind.

E

Of prevent what was, I think, possibly to properly excuse me properly termed as fight fences,.

E

um Amongst neighbors, I don't certainly don't see anything along those lines occurring here.

E

There is a an existing fence already that that the applicant is trying to take advantage of.

E

So I do believe that it's trying to meet what we were originally hoping for when the uh when this.

E

Ordinance was created uh growing, the variants would do substantial justice. So what is the.

E

Public's um benefit that they would get that would outweigh the applicant's desire to have.

E

The higher fences to uh you know ensure that additional privacy over long distances again.

E

um From sight lines and perspectives and whatnot, I don't think there is anything especially in.

E

This sort of wide open neighborhood, where the public would be gaining any benefit that would.

E

Outweigh what the applicant would be gaining, so I think they win that balancing test granting.

E

The variants would not diminish the values of surrounding properties again with, uh with the.

E

Large lots that are involved here and the and the ultimately amount of fencing. I don't think that.

E

uh That there's a concern with a loss of property values and no indication that anyone from the from.

E

The neighborhood, or the public in general thinks that that would be the case either. So this this so.

E

Hardship, what do we have for hardship that that is coming in here so um again, special conditions.

E

This is an ordinance that applies all across the state city right. We have it's not just like an srb.

E

It's not just like a gra. This is a fence ordinance all across the city. So when we put this in place.

E

um You know you're talking about itty bitty little properties to relatively large properties.

E

um Enforcement, you don't the itty bitties tend to uh way outweigh the the fairly large properties.

E

So I do think in terms of applying it back towards the ordinance that the one of the conditions that.

E

We have here is, is this is probably essentially one of the bigger lots that you're going to find.

E

In portsmouth and so in some ways diminishes some of the impact of this very broadly broad brushly.

E

Applied requirement out of our ordinance, so I do think that that is a that is a factor here.

E

um The applicant has indicated that they do have. um uh You know a long-standing fence.

E

That was there again a use that has been in place for a long time without seemingly.

E

Causing negative aspects to harm on either side of the fence, where either neighbor.

E

Was was concerned about it, the general public was concerned about it. So I think with that, um there's.

E

There's no substantial relationship between trying to say that reducing this down by two.

E

Feet in those areas is going to make that big of a difference considering the the breadth and scope.

E

And size of the property, and with that I think it's reasonable and uh and should be approved.

B

Okay, anything else from any members of the board. Okay, uh mr mantle. Yes, I'm sorry, I should say the.

B

Motion is to approve uh the variances presented in advertising instrumentals. Yes, oh in that case,.

C

Yes, [laughter] mr ram, yes, ms eldridge, yes, mr rossi, no, mr madsen, yes and the chair votes now,.

B

Motion passes for always over there motion passes four to two okay. Thank you. Everyone.

B

The request of paul and joe lewinsky for property located at 187 union street, whereas relief is.

B

Needed for renovation of the existing dwelling, including demolition of a small addition and.

B

Expanding the existing structure, which requires the following one: a variance from section 10.521.

B

To allow a zero secondary front yard, where two feet per section 10.516.10 is required.

B

To a variance from section 10.321 to allow a non-conforming structure or building to.

B

Be extended, reconstructed or enlarged without conforming to the requirements of the ordinance.

B

Said property is located on assessor map, 135 lot 68 and lies within the general residency district.

B

And who is here to speak to this application? uh I'm joe lewinski owner of 187 union, along with my.

W

Wife, paula of 35 years, we moved from pennsylvania. I want to thank the committee, and I want to thank.

W

Our neighbors, our new neighbors crystal and kerry, for uh showing up and supporting us. um Thank you.

B

You probably feel like you've been here 35 years well, yeah, exactly uh lovely lovely town, um so I'll.

W

Be brief, I think the um our project requires us to um rebuild a structure that is essentially.

W

Wood on on the ground- and it is essentially subterranean of the coffin's court road level.

W

That it really is underpinning the road surface, with its uh its wood foundation, so that needs.

W

To be replaced and and shored up and in doing so we're going to be um raising the um the structure.

W

Two feet: to bring the roof lines together with the second section of the house along coffin's court.

W

And uh that's essentially that part of the project that is we're seeking relief for.

W

um The variance would not be contrary to public interest it would. The improvements would be.

W

Good for the road surface of coffin's court and would also improve um the the the water repelling.

W

um Into our basement, because it's kind of drawing it's it's a siphon of water into the crawl space.

W

Area and the second structure into the basement of the first structure, um the spirit of the ordinance.

W

Will be observed or we're remaining within the zero foot setback that is uh grandfathered in and.

W

um We're not extending the uh the structure along conference court we're only going up um in height.

W

um Substantial justice have begun. We believe um uh the values of the surrounding properties will not.

W

Be diminished, we believe our project will improve the values of the properties in the neighborhood.

W

um Literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would would result in.

W

Unnecessary hardship, we believe um with the zero the second front.

W

um Setback that were afforded on coffin's court and the zero setback that exists.

W

um Kind of puts us in a tight bind that we're trying to deal with fairly any questions.

B

Any questions, yes, um thank you. uh Do you have a I'm looking through your package and there's.

E

Certainly, a lot of lines that are being drawn here that kind of act like they are survey marked.

E

Lines, but has there actually been a survey done of the property to validate the zero foot line.

W

uh No, I we uh we're going off the. uh I guess, the gps maps that um we were guided by the.

W

Public works department, okay, yeah. I mean this is a really interesting neighborhood. um There's.

E

Buildings in here well that that certainly butt right up against um property line, streets, etc. I.

E

Guess a question for city staff: a follow-up, if I may uh do, is this going to trigger the need for.

E

A survey I know and some other applications that we've had we've said for really tight.

E

Property lines when they're yeah literally end up getting a survey you like for the foundation yeah.

E

um Or because there's no fountain, I wasn't sure, if we're not doing anything, two of the structures.

W

Have proper foundations, if you can call them proper um with in stone and the brick uh this this.

W

Section does not have a proper foundation right, so you're going to be installing a foundation. Is that.

W

Correct correct so with that, that's typically in conf, in consultation with the inspections.

J

Department, um yeah and it likely will get it get an as built yeah. I would. I would expect to have.

W

Someone inspect the the uh yeah the foundation just for the supporting for this edition.

J

Correct the other thing that runs along coughing right, the other part of the project that doesn't.

J

Need really yeah the garage right, but but that could trigger that. We need to validate.

E

That line from a survey or standpoint correct right: okay, yeah all right! Thank you. Thank you.

H

I have a question for peter hi. Sorry, I don't know if there's any other, I'm sorry could you.

B

Just stay up here, just in case there's. I also want to thank peter for helping us uh with our.

W

um Our application so very helpful, and I guess my question to peter might also then go to you- is.

H

uh If the uh edition along conference court were reconstructed or just rebuilt, and it was set two.

H

Feet from coffin's court, so it met that setback. Would it still need a variance because the rest.

H

Of the home is uh zero feet. uh No, if that portion that they're working on was moved in two feet, then.

J

They could use that that averaging of the existing alignments- oh the average iron, which is what so.

J

Normally it's a five foot setback, yes, but taking the average, it ends up being too yeah, but they're.

J

Right on the line, even though the main dwelling is not conforming, though the main dwelling is.

H

Non-Conforming so but drawings knocking for me, but that's not being uh altered, altered okay, uh so I.

H

Guess my question to you is: did you consider uh when you read when you demolish the cold storage.

H

If you, when you rebuilt that small rear edition just moving it two feet um uh from coffin square.

W

Yeah we we actually considered that, but uh we from an aesthetic perspective, we decided to.

W

Keep uh in a long conference court uh and uh with the rest of the building keep the same line. Okay,.

B

Are there any other questions.

B

I'll open the public hearing, if there's anyone here who would like to speak to.

B

For or against this application, uh please come to the podium.

J

Foreign, my name is carrie feingold. I live at 199 union street, so I am a butter right alongside.

X

um And this is just a I mean I feel like the need for the variance is such a little sort of piece.

X

Of what is a really big project? And so you know it seems to make sense to go with the aesthetic.

X

Of keeping it where it is, um it's you know just part of the growth and change that's happening.

X

In this neighborhood in all of portsmouth and um like I said, I don't think it's it's such a in the.

X

Big scheme of what is going to be developed and happening, I think it's a little sort of.

X

Piece to it and I think it's gonna, it's gonna be a big project and it's just it's. I don't.

X

Know I think it's gonna look great. So um sorry, I think I might have been coherent a little bit.

X

More a couple hours ago, that's all I've got for now stay with us. Okay done! Thank you. Thank you.

B

Is there anyone else here who would like to speak to for against the application.

B

Assume, oh all right! So uh with that I'll close, the public hearing I'll await discussion or motion.

B

From the board, mr mattel uh I'll make a motion to grant as um presented a second that your motion.

B

Mr mal uh interesting house and I've driven by several times, but I had forgotten that there's.

C

A little road there um granting the variants would not be contrary to the public interest.

C

um It would not be. I find that, if anything doing your improvements, um especially on the.

C

Side of the house, nice connection uh would be a benefit to public interest.

C

um Granting the variants would observe the spirit of the ordinance. Yes, it would, as you said before,.

C

We're only asking for a two-foot variance for the back um demolition of the house, whereas the.

C

Entire rest of the house is going to be right there, so I agree with that assessment um and.

C

To uh granting the variants, we do substantial justice, as I just said, it's a small request on.

C

uh To line up with the rest of the house, granting the variants would do substantial justice.

C

Granting the variants would not diminish the values of the surrounding properties if.

C

Anything, this surrounding properties would increase in value just from.

C

Proposal you're doing, as I said, it's a unique property.

C

um From justice, location on union street, but its location in the corner of union street and.

C

A public access way makes it even more unique and to that effect, going into the hardship.

C

Provision, the property of special conditions that distinguish it from other properties.

C

In the area that is true owing to these special conditions, fair and substantial relationship does.

C

Not exist between the general public purposes of the ordinance provisions and the specific.

C

Application of that provision to the property and the proposed use is a reason one. I agree it.

C

Is and I believe that that hardship does exist because of the special conditions of this house.

B

Any additions to that, I would just add that, uh with regard to uh observing the spirit of the.

D

Ordinance, uh the purpose of general residency is for a single family. Two family multi-family.

D

Dwellings, etc, etc, and there's nothing about this plan that diminishes the suitability of.

D

The property to meet that purpose and therefore it does comply with that requirement and with regard.

D

To special conditions of the property, the property already has zero clearance. All the way up, uh all.

D

The way up, the the outline of the building along coffin street and the only other thing I would add.

D

Is if you find some general motors blue paint on your little chain link fence post? Can you please.

D

Return it to me, I appreciate it, it is not. It is not an alley. That's suitable for my vehicle.

E

Quests uh yeah nothing about automotive paint here, but um I am going to be the. I think I'm going to be.

E

The contrarian on this one, mr madison's line of questioning, actually um has me concerned.

E

I and I I I I I agree that it's only two feet, but I think it's a really important two feet.

E

um You know zero foot, setbacks, we try and avoid them. Wherever we can, I mean the applicant really.

E

In this particular case is digging a brand new foundation, I think it's actually going to trigger.

E

The need for survey, which a is going to cost money and b, I'm not entirely sure certain that you're.

E

Actually going to appreciate what you what you find in the survey, um if, if you have to go and.

E

Do that personally, I think you'd, be you know the aesthetic of sort of this continuing wall along.

E

The uh the street escape- I don't think, is all that critical for this relatively short little.

E

um You know stubby outcropping, it's a pantry and laundry. I know you would lose like a couple.

E

Feet of your cabinetry in your kitchen. um In in that direction, you could maybe make up before a.

E

Little bit with a big lazy, susan or something on the other side, but I I just think that that.

E

A zero foot setback here when you could have a no need for variance whatsoever at the two foot mark.

E

Is is a big enough? Ask that I'm going to vote against it? Okay, any other comments, questions.

B

So the motion on the table is to prove the variance request, as presented and.

B

Advertised I'll start with mr matson: uh yes, mr rossi, yes, miss eldridge! Yes, mr rain, no.

B

Mr mantle, yes and the chair votes. Yes, the application is approved by a vote of five to one.

K

He left you out there and all right, so the next application, the next and final.

B

Application is 4446 rockingham street. Mr ram is recusing himself from this application.

B

um And uh well he's gathering himself up so um the request of linda j mayran for property located. I'm.

B

Sorry at 4446 rockingham street, whereas relief is needed for f for an after the fact variance.

B

For rear deck expansion and stairs, which requires the following one variances from section 10.521 to.

B

Allow a and eight foot side yard where 10 feet is required and b 46 building coverage for 35 is the.

B

Maximum allowed two: a variance from section 10.321 to allow a non-conforming, building or structure to.

B

Be extended, reconstructed or enlarged without conforming to the requirements of the ordinance.

B

Said property is located on assessor map, 144 lot 14 and lies within the general residency district.

B

And who speaks who's speaking to this application? Thank you bart. My name is brian barrington of the.

Y

Coolidge law firm, I spent 10 years as a city attorney for the city of somersworth, so I.

Y

Apologize to my request for finding a fax follows the somersworth order instead of your water, but.

Y

I'll relay that, over to your order, um linda mayrant purchased his property in 1994. This.

Y

Property was built in 1830, so the size of the structure, the setbacks, you'll notice that there's.

Y

Zero setbacks on either side and all we're talking about is a back porch. The back porch is necessary.

Y

Because the way the slope of the property goes away from the building and there has to be ingress.

Y

And egress to the back of the property for life and safety code reasons, in fact, back in 2002 at.

Y

The time there was permits and inspections, there was a a a porch put in then doors. It's a duplex.

Y

And so the doors on either side, so physical nature of the building, that's pre-existing can be part.

Y

Of your your hardship criteria and those doors require decks. Those decks must be big enough for.

Y

Life and safety code access so that the doors can swing open, especially if there's a fire an.

Y

Emergency also, the deck has to be big enough. So in case there's any handicapped person living.

Y

Within the property that needs a wheelchair or a walker, they can't just have a door bounce against.

Y

The banister, when you look at the pictures, you can see that it's, it's very modest these these.

Y

Two doors on either side are pre-existing. The setbacks are really inconsequential that the.

Y

Lawn is actually fairly big uh compared to the ones we've seen, but next to the city parking lot.

Y

When you look at this sketch the one, that's yellow the city parking lot, it's eight feet. Instead of.

Y

um 10 feet, but it's eight feet to a city parking lot. So you're not talking about the porch being.

Y

Closer to a neighbor, that's going to cause any aggravation and then it's 13 feet on the other.

Y

Side in terms of the size of the porch and the coverage, when you look at the picture.

Y

You see, there's still an awful lot of backyard, so we're not talking like we did heard earlier.

Y

We're almost the entire backyard is being filled up with a porch. So let's go to the exact findings.

Y

That are required, so my number two is your number one: granting the variance will not be contrary to.

Y

The public interest, the public interest for side lock setback is to protect the butter to give air.

Y

In space, as we've talked about here, you have a parking lot. um It's obviously no one in the.

Y

Parking lot is going to be offended because this deck is too close to the side. The public interest.

Y

Isn't going to be offended, the public using the parking lot isn't going to notice the second.

Y

Criteria is my number five that granting the variance is not contrary to the spirit of the.

Y

Ordinance, the spirit of the ordinance again is to protect the butters from crowding from an outdoor.

Y

Deck, it's also the spirit of the ordinance is that you just don't just fill up your property with so.

Y

Much stuff, I think, we've all seen that it's very fashionable now to have some decks and some of.

Y

These decks seem to be the size of a football field coming off in the back of the house. This.

Y

Deck is proportionate to the size of the house is proportional to the exits and it's proportionate.

Y

To what's required in order to have fair and safe access from the building, the third criterion of.

Y

Substantial justice justice says to be allowed to allow this to be there. The the renovation plans.

Y

Were approved by the city, um this technicality was only discovered at the end of a two-year.

Y

Renovation process she spent two years trying to get this one unit um renovated and then someone.

Y

Really has a complete after thought: did some math and figured oh you're off by two percent um and.

Y

But the the the layout of the decks is related to the doors. The doors is related to the building. The.

Y

Building is a duplex and it's necessary. The unnecessary hardship is owing to the special.

Y

Conditions of the property the supreme court has ruled if there's no fair and substantial.

Y

Relationship between the general public purpose and the ordinance and the specific, the ordinance.

Y

Indicates that the general public purpose is to protect the abutters, but there's no butter in part.

Y

Impact the proposed use is a reasonable one, the rear of the building, but you know.

Y

Reasonableness is something that goes to all the law. Reasonable allows. It's defined.

Y

Simply is you have to have a reason you have to have a reason for why you're doing what.

Y

You're doing what we're doing what you're doing is because it's a duplex it has two.

Y

Exits then the deck must be wide enough and deep enough to allow access and egress. So.

Y

The unnecessary hardship is owing to special conditions of the property special conditions.

Y

Are this are the way this 1830 by the way that was 1830s when this was built.

Y

um It has been, and it has to be big enough to to accommodate it um and we filled and then.

Y

And in terms of uh number four, which is my number one, um we don't see any um effect on the budding.

Y

Properties, because the only abutting property that's affected by the deck is a parking lot.

B

Any questions just one quick question: could you run that by me again? How did it turn out to be an.

D

After the fact, variance request clarify that so there's no all right. This is linda mayron,.

Z

Linda marion owner of the property and two I'm going to say around 2002 and I'm not absolutely.

Z

Sure about that time frame their was um some taking down. Of course, air plaster putting up.

Z

um Sheetrock between the two common units, there is just I didn't tell you what I can remember.

Z

There were discussions with this. One of the city. Inspectors was trying to find his business card.

Z

I couldn't um very helpful explaining the fire rated the one hour, fire rated sheetrock, that.

Z

Needed to be up and we had expanded the deck and moved the back door at that time.

Z

I had mistakenly- and this is ultimately on me and I take full responsibility. I had given the.

Z

Card to the contractor, I thought the paperwork was done for the permitting and when we started this.

Z

um Process two years ago, with a renovation of 46 rockingham street, it was discovered that.

Z

The four foot extension of the back deck that happened around 2002, there's no paperwork to.

Z

It I don't have it, the city doesn't have it. All. I have is the business card, which I can't even.

Z

Find out at this point, so that's why it's an after the fact. So again my apologies. Thank you.

B

Any other questions from the board: yeah. Okay, thank you very much and thank you for staying.

B

So late, um I there's no one here, but I will open the public hearing. If there's anyone here to.

B

Speak to for against the application someone's here is there anyone on zoom just us justice.

B

No one speak. No, um so I will close the public hearing and I will ask for the board's discussion.

B

Or a motion, I moved to approve the variance as submitted and advertised. Do I hear a second.

B

One second, second, second by ms eldridge, mr rossi, your motion.

D

D

I'm trying to even scratch my head about what relevant fact would apply to diminishing uh sorry.

M

Yeah go ahead. Did you second, this one? Okay? Yes,.

K

Don't hold it against me, granting the parents would not be contrary.

M

To the public interest and it would observe the spirit of the ordinance.

M

You know the deck needs to be there. The doors are up high. If this person wants to.

M

Leave our house, she needs to build a deck and um we're only talking about a two percentage.

M

Difference increase in the building coverage. um I can't see how this would be contrary to.

M

The public interest- and it's also behind the house- it's behind the right. It's not it's.

M

It is covering the lot more, but it is not taking up a huge part of the law. There's plenty of open.

K

Space and the neighbor is the parking garage. Do you want to do this? It's not your motion, mr metal,.

M

um Granting the variants reduce substantial justice. Clearly, the deck is an essential part.

M

Of the structure and the size of the deck, um a smaller deck will not allow for safety concerns.

M

um Granting the variance will not diminish the values of surrounding properties. The.

M

Deck has been there and there is no reason why. Anyone would think that this would take away.

M

Enforcement of the provision provision results in an unless.

M

Two percent is a very slight change to the property coverage and the size of the decks.

M

Are necessary to the safety of the residents of the building, and I think that the hardship is.

M

That, in order to create a deck that meets those safety standards, a lot of coverages increases.

M

And therefore, I think that we should prove this request. Mr rossi, would you like to add anything.

B

To your emotions, that's the best motion I've ever crafted. I am really impressed with my emotion.

M

I think we're getting a little [ __ ]. Yes, we are.

D

Oh no, I have nothing bad. Thank you any further consideration or or discussion. Okay, then, I will.

B

Call the question the motion on the table is to approve, as presented and advertised mr mantle. Yes,.

B

Mr ram is recused um ms eldridge, yes, mr rossi, yes, mr matson, yes and the acting.

B

Chair votes, yes, the motion to approve is granted by a vote of five to zero. Thank you.

B

Thank you tell somebody um so anyway, our business is conducted, so uh I would just.

B

Need a motion to adjure so moved so move. Second, okay, we are adjourned nominated bye.