City of Portsmouth, New Hampshire Board of Adjustment, 19 Apr 2022

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: 4.19.2022 Board of Adjustment

Description

4.19.2022 Board of Adjustment

A

Good evening, everyone welcome to the meeting for the first meeting for the.

A

Month of april of the zoning board of portsmouth, excuse me uh before we.

A

Go any further, we should explain the ground rules under which we operate this evening.

A

So welcome to those in person and one as are a few people, perhaps on zoom as well.

A

Excuse me, the uh the meeting is conducted in the standard format whereby we read an item.

A

We ask for those who want to speak in favor those who want to speak against and, lastly,.

A

Those who want to speak 2-4 are against. We ask that presenters limit themselves to 15 minutes.

A

uh Private brevity is valued if they, if the presenter feels before they speak.

A

That 15 minutes is not sufficient. They can request an additional five minutes and the board.

A

Will vote that request up or down and then, when it comes to speakers, 2 4 are against uh there's.

A

That's the third call there's no time limit to that. However, those people who come up to speak in.

A

Favor are asked to limit their vote, their comments to five minutes and those who speak it against are.

A

Asked to limit their comments to five minutes and then, as I said again, those the last call is too.

A

Far against there's no time limit at that at that segment, but we do ask people to be pertinent and.

A

Try not to repeat too much of the uh foregoing that the board has already heard, so everyone has.

A

A ample opportunity to uh speak and uh I'll ask mr stiff from the planning department at my left.

A

With respect to the zoom, callers and he'll, advise us if there is anybody on zoom who wishes to.

A

Address the issue, so having said all that, I just want to make one additional request this evening.

A

uh This is to members of the board, uh if you're, making a motion in favor, please.

A

Touch on all five of the uh criteria that we have to vote, assuming it's a variance and the longer.

A

List, if it's a special exception, but I don't think we got any of those this evening anyway, and also.

A

uh With respect to the uh motion, should it be made to be uh denial, please be sure to be very specific.

A

As to which of the criteria you're basing the denial on and comment on, the others that it feel.

A

That you feel that uh it passes as as well just so. This is to help the people who do.

A

The transcription, which is not an easy job and the people who write the letters out to the applicants.

A

Stating the reasons for which the board voted as we did so that that will be very helpful. So I.

A

Ask you to do that, please so having having said all that, let's move on to the uh first item of the.

A

Evening, which is the approval of minutes of the last meeting of this board, which is on march 15,.

A

2022 and is there any comments, corrections requests questions about the minutes as they were.

A

Presented to to us on the board and if not, is there a motion with respect to the minutes.

A

Make a motion to approve the minutes. Thank you, mr mel. Second, second, mr rossi, thank you any comments.

A

Any further comments at all: okay, if not I'll call for the vote- and I think a voice vote will be.

A

Sufficient on this, uh those in favor of the motion to approve as pres as written and presented to.

A

The board, uh please say aye aye, any opposed, none. Okay! Thank you. It's unanimous! Thank you very much.

A

Okay, now uh we're moving into old business, and this evening we have several requests to postpone.

A

And the first of those is the adam, a under old old business, which is lansin and sophie lachance.

A

11 fletcher street request a one-year extension.

A

To the variances which are granted by this board on april 21 2020 two years ago,.

A

And that is this and they are requesting a one-year extension of that approval.

A

Does anyone have any comments on that request aaron? If not, does someone have a motion to.

A

Grant that one-year extension chair I'd move, we grant that extension, which we routinely.

B

Do the first time they asked for one? Yes, yes, thank you, mr lee. Any any comments. Any.

A

Discussion on the board on the for approval to grant the one-year extension apparently not.

C

So I just want to note that um uh this is allowed by the zoning ordinances to.

C

Get a one-time extension also, there was a recommendation from our staff.

C

That, in granting the extension, we acknowledge that the plans have modified slightly because there.

C

Was a change in ownership after the first variance was granted and that we put a stipulation that the.

C

Drainage evaluation for the new modified plans uh be done prior to the issuance of a building permit.

A

Thank you. We could that we could add that as a stipulation as it were to the motion.

A

Is that agreeable, mr lee? Yes, yes, it is thank you, okay and we need us and we need a second to that.

A

Motion as it was modified, ms miss eldridge. Thank you. Okay, anything further, anything at all those.

A

In favor, please say: aye aye any opposed; no, no, none opposed carried unanimously. Okay,.

A

The second uh request is under all, business is also a request for a one-year extension, and this.

A

Is by I'm gonna mess up this pronunciation. I know I am maple. Masjid m spelled m-a-s-j-I-d at 686.

A

Maplewood avenue request a one-year extension to the special exception and variant to the.

A

Special exception and variances granted on april 21 2020 the same same evening as the previous one.

A

And that is for the mosque this to be that they're trying to finance and get.

A

Built out on uh what maplewood avenue is there any comment on that anything from the board on that.

A

Anybody have any comment on that. Any make a motion to grant. Thank you. Is there a second.

A

To that motion to grant a second, thank you, mr rossi. Okay, your emotion is routine.

D

No given what's happened over the past two years, I think it's more than reasonable. That's why I would.

A

Made the motion: okay. Thank you anything anything for any further comment from anybody. No apparently.

A

Not okay again, I think a boy's vote on this will do uh those in favor of the one-year extension.

A

Please say: aye aye aye any opposed unopposed carried unanimously. Thank you. Okay. Moving on.

A

Item c under old business is also a request to postpone- and this is the request of francis x.

A

Brewton attorney for the applicants for appeal of an administrative decision.

A

That the merged lot at one congress is not subject to the height variances.

A

Namely two stories with a fourth short 45 feet in height pursuant to map 10.5 a 21 b and as.

A

Permitted pursuant to section 10.5 a 21.22, a and c of the zoning ordinance said, property is shown on.

A

Assessor map 117 lot 14 and lies within character, district 4, cd4 character, district 5, cd5 and the.

A

Historic district: this is a request to postpone. I read the whole description of this because it's.

A

Fairly unusual, in that it involves both, excuse me variances and uh and special exceptions, so.

A

So so is there any discussion on this, but this is the first request.

A

I believe for this one, this is actually the second exactly the second. Thank you.

C

And it's actually for the administrative appeal and of variance yes and from what I.

C

Understand this is, um I guess, attorney bruton and the city attorney are trying to work out.

C

There's uh they're trying to clarify the status of haven, that's correct: in court: okay, okay, the city.

A

Attorney wrote in in his memo are in the notes somewhere that uh he just needed just needed.

A

More time to deal with it, that's all because of the complexity and the vagueness of the issue. I.

A

Get I guess, particularly with to haven, court? Okay. Well, I think. Okay, we have the. We have the request.

A

That's from the uh attorney for the appellants and uh is there a motion with respect to this request.

E

Die time mr mckenzie, mr eldridge, I think you've got that one.

E

I will move to allow the postponement it's routine. It is a complicated issue and we want everything.

E

Settled before it comes back to us, yes, I would move postponement. Thank you and miss majesty.

A

Would you take the second, yes, I will and I'll say perhaps by resolving it, it won't have to come back.

C

So that's all I have to add. Thank you. Okay, any any further comments on that. One.

A

Oh okay, this is this is of a little bit different nature. I think I'll do all right.

A

Don't ask me why, but let's do a roll call on this one we'll start down at the left, mr rossi,.

A

Is this a yes or no? Yes, either one, yes would be good. Yes, thank you! Miss eldridge! Yes, ms margerson.

C

Yes, mr mantle, yes, mr mcdonald, yes, mr lee, yes and I vote uh the same yes as well, so that is approved.

A

That will be, mr chairman, yes, question for peter sure: is there any limit how many times they can.

D

Postpone a hearing it's up to the board, okay, just curious, whether there's anything in the.

D

Statutes there's language in the ordinances but as as a practical matter, the answer is, I.

A

Agree with peter the answer is no, as a practical matter. Okay item. Do you see a pattern here? Item d.

A

Is a request to postpone this is, for this is with respect to the same property.

A

Request of one market square llc owner for the property located at one congress street, whereas.

A

Relief is needed to construct a three-story edition with a short fourth story and a building.

A

Height of 44 feet, 11 inches, which requires the following one: a variance from section 10.5, a.

A

43.31 and map 10.5 a 21b to allow a three-story addition with a short fourth and a building height.

A

Of 44 feet, 11 inches with two stories with a short third and 40 feet, is the maximum allowed.

A

Said property is shown on assessor map, 117 lot 14 and lies within the character district cd4.

A

Character, district 5, cd5 and the historic district. The request, as I said, is to postpone.

A

Not to a time certain, but to postpone so is there.

A

Any comment with respect to that.

D

I'll make a motion to um postpone it to whenever they like it too. Thank you. Thank.

A

You is there a second to that motion to postpone I'll. Second it. Thank you.

A

uh You you motion mr mantle, um like peter said. This is the second time up. There.

D

If they don't want to present tonight, they have some difficulties. They can do it. Another night.

A

Anybody any anything further, no okay and and similar to the last one, we'll.

A

Do a roll call on this one as well, mr rossi,.

A

Yes, mr eldridge, yes, ms margerson, yes, mr mantle, yes, mr mcdonald, mr lee and I vote.

A

The same way, yes, so that one is approved also, so all four requests to postpone have been approved.

A

That concludes all old business, we'll move right into new business and the first item of.

A

New business reads as follows: you want to take the other first moment. Oh I'm sorry, we could do that.

A

Let's that's a good! Thank you, mr smith. That's a good request. We have a another postponement. That's.

A

Down the ways are a bit on the agenda so in into into terms of helping some people. Perhaps item f.

A

Same save their uh time will, uh where is it oh yeah, right at the bottom quest? This is this: is.

A

Under new business, but it's a request, it reads as follows: item f, under new business request to.

A

Postpone the request of 635 sagamore development llc, the owner for property located at 635 sagamore.

A

Avenue, whereas, whereas relief is required to remove existing commercial structure and construct.

A

Five new single-family dwellings, which require the following one, is a variance from section.

A

10.513 to allow five principal structures on a lot where only one is permitted. Two.

A

A variance from section 10.521 to allow a lot area per dwelling unit of 22 389 square.

A

Feet where one acre per dwelling is required, said property is shown on assessor map 222-222.

A

As lot 19 and lies within the single residence, a sra district and, as I said, the request.

A

With respect to this application under new business this evening is to postpone it.

A

That's the at the request of the owner of the property.

A

So, uh what's your pleasure on this board I'll make a motion to grant the post moment.

A

Thank you. Is there a second to that motion to postpone miss eldridge? Thank you.

A

Mr manly, as reading in the documentation that we had, the attorney doesn't have the time to respond.

D

To a number of comments that were made publicly so granting the postponement is fair and reasonable.

A

Okay, thank you. Obviously, this is a new project, so this is the first request to postpone.

A

uh On the second, you have nothing to do you concur. Thank you. Nothing! Nothing! Further!.

A

Okay, anybody and we'll have a roll call vote on this one uh anything further. No.

A

Being no further comments, let's, let's start down this end, and this will this uh roll call, mr mantle.

A

Yes, mr mcdonald, yes, mr lee, yes, ms margerson, yes, miss eldridge and mr rossi abstain, and I and I.

A

Vote, yes, also, so that one is postponed and if anybody ever wants to know that I should.

A

Perhaps use be useful for the audience if, if anyone ever wants to know what the status of.

A

Something like this is, for example, a postponed item, a call to the planning department just ask.

A

For the planning department ask for mr stith or ask for who whoever is covering that project and.

A

They'll be glad to give you the status over the phone, so it's very easy to get planning department.

A

Is very accessibly, very responsive, so by all means, if you have any concerns about the status of a.

A

Of a project at any time just pick up the phone and call so having said that,.

A

Let's move on to the first item under new business that we're going to consider which reads as.

A

Follows the request of charles dudas owner for property, located at 32 month street.

A

Whereas relief is needed for demolition of an existing shed in construction of a two-story.

A

Attached garage with accessory dwelling unit, which requires the following one.

A

Variance from section 10.521 to allow an eight foot right side yard with 10 feet is required.

A

Said property is shown on assessor map, 143 lot 22 and lies within the general residence. A gra.

A

District who speaks in favor of this project, please.

F

Excuse good evening board, my name is chuck dudas, my wife and I are homeowners at 32 month street.

F

Where we live with our three young girls.

F

This project does have some history in that in in may of 2020, we applied for a.

F

Wetlands conditional use permit because our property is within the wetlands buffer and.

F

We were proposing at the time and the the the project is very is pretty much the same.

F

As it was when we applied for the wetlands conditional use permit, with the exception of.

F

um A slightly enlarged, slightly enlarged garage footprint that is encroaching on the side.

F

Set back so I I can walk through that that project the the project as it stands is.

F

A demolition of a garage demolition of a existing driveway, in addition to the primary dwelling unit.

F

And then a construction of a new garage and construction of a new breezeway or connector.

F

Between the primary dwelling unit and the garage and also uh you know a new shed as well so.

F

All that was all that was done and and and the wetlands conditional use permit was granted in.

F

In june of 2020 and um and then extension was was granted in 2021.

F

The the plan here showing was really intended to to provide a sort of a master plan of the property.

F

And given, given the cost of construction, um we we were wanting to present.

F

For the wetlands conditional use permit, in particular um the entire um the goal of the entire.

F

Property, knowing that their this, the project might be broken up into phases in terms of when we could.

F

Actually, construct construct it due to due to the construction costs so with that being said,.

F

This plan uh is the the addition on the right side of that, assuming on the left side of the.

F

House um is is currently under construction. The garage the existing garage has been.

F

Demolished an existing driveway has been demolished um and the the existing shed is as.

F

The work on the right side of the house- no work has been done, so the existing shed is.

F

Still in its place and um there's no garage or connector, that's started construction and.

F

We don't have a building permit for that piece of that of the of the project, yet.

F

But in in in doing construction of the addition, I've had a couple of site contractors on.

F

On the project- and they pointed out to me that the and I knew the gas meters there's- a gas meter.

F

Next to the primary dwelling unit on the driveway side, and they pointed out that you know that that.

F

Gas meter was going to require protection um bollards being put up in front of its steel posts.

F

To protect it from vehicular traffic, when, when the drive, when the new driveway gets.

F

Extended beyond it and um and the the plan in the wetlands conditions, excuse me in the wetlands.

F

Conditional use permit was keeping the garage um a little more over 10 feet from the property line.

F

But in in in seeing that this um and bollards that would be required for the gas meter, it's.

F

It's good: it's going to make it a challenge to get that the car into the garage that's closest to the.

F

Primary dwelling unit, because um because these uh because the gas meter, the existing gas meter, needs.

F

Protection so with that being said, that was really kind of that's really kind of driving. This.

F

This request for variants to to get just a little bit more room for that that car um to be able.

A

To get in and out of the garage and that's the request to kind of push that the garage.

F

Footprint a little a little towards the the side setback and and within the within the ten foot.

F

Side setback, so um that's, that's. What's that's what's driving it, and um I will note that you know.

F

The existing shed is, you know within it was you know, two feet approximately two feet from the the.

F

Side that same side set back so um the demolition of that garage of the shed will- um and you know,.

F

With the proposed eight foot, setback would would be an improvement on the existing condition.

F

um I will also note that in the in the original wetlands conditions permit, um that was, we just had.

F

Proposed a garage, but we are looking to build an adu, an attached adu above that garage, so that is.

F

It that is a difference from when we um applied for that that wetlands can experience permit.

F

But that being said you know the footprint within. I will note the footprint within the wetlands.

F

Conditional distribute within the wetlands buffer hasn't hasn't changed. We're proposing to.

F

Expand that garage outside of the wetlands buffer, so that's also driving it- is that we.

F

We want to be sensitive to the you know to the impact in the wetlands buffer, so that is.

F

That's another, you know another thing driving the kind of the placement of the garage and the.

F

The placement of the expansion of the garage, so I can, I can run through the the five criteria.

F

The variances will not be contrary to the public interest, and the spirit of the ordinance is.

F

Observed um as I noted, the existing property is currently non-conforming, with the shed located.

F

Two feet from the side: property line, the demolition of the shed and the construction of the.

F

Garage adu located eight feet from the side property line would bring the property more.

F

In line with the zodiac ordinance, which is a benefit to butters in the greater public.

F

Denial of variance results in an unnecessary hardship, um as I, as I noted that, um with the.

F

With the gas meter, the the you know the location of of needing to put protection for the gas meter.

F

May mean that um that that the proposed two-car garage um can't be utilized as a two-car garage.

F

With that that the car not being able to get in and out of the of that of the garage.

F

Substantial justice will be done by granting the variance.

F

In my opinion, there'd be no harm done to the public by granting this variance.

F

And then granting the variance will not diminish surrounding property values.

F

It's it's my opinion that the you know the values of the surrounding properties will.

F

Not be diminished by granting the variance, and um I I believe that the property is in keeping with.

F

The the character of the neighborhood and um and in the character in of the existing house so.

F

Yeah, thank you any questions from the speaker from the board, any anybody any mr mantle. I have a.

D

Question it may not be for you, it may be for peter um you're requesting a variance for an eight foot.

D

Side setback as opposed to the zoning of ten. Yes, okay right, the information we have on the top.

D

Is for an eight foot side, eight foot front setback where the standard is thirty. Two.

G

F

It might be if you're looking at yeah you're, not saying it's kind of confusing my property.

F

Monty street's there on the on the north side um and the pr the property is kind of like.

F

No, no, no, I understand that I'll go buy the property there. Okay and the the I saw this. The.

G

Current right yard is 32., it's not required. What's that, I'm sorry it's what it is now. Oh, the current.

D

Right yard is the current right yard is fine. Okay, sorry yeah. It's north mill pond to the right.

F

I'm sorry, I'm sorry the right looking it from that way. Thank you. Peter.

A

Okay, any any further, any other questions, any other questions for the speaker, none! Okay! Thank you.

A

Very much thank you. Is there anyone president who'd like to speak in favor of this proposal.

A

Anyone in favor anyone in favor anyone opposed anyone wish to speak in opposition. At this point.

A

Okay, anyone wish to speak to for or against. This is the last call for speakers. Anybody on zoom, mr.

A

No one present in the room: okay, we'll close the public hearing and it's a.

A

One variance request, side, yard setback. uh Is there a uh someone has a motion? I will make a motion to.

D

uh Grant the variance and just presented, thank you. Is there a second to that motion, mr rossi,.

D

Thank you, okay, mr male, your your emotion, please. um As far as five requirements, the variant variance.

D

Is not contrary to public interest the spirit, the spirit of the ordinance is observed, substantial.

D

Justice is done, it's two feet. uh The values of surrounding properties are not diminished.

D

um Not at all and the literal enforcement of the variance would result in an unnecessary hardship.

D

Hence my motion to approve. Thank you, mr rossi. A second, I would just add that uh there are.

H

Special conditions on the property, notably the gas meter location, as well as the wetland setback.

H

Which makes the location the proposed location of the garage very appropriate. Okay, very good.

A

Thank you anything further, any any comments from anybody on the board. No miss margerson. Yes, so the.

C

Actual variance application is for um a right yard. Setback of 8, where 10 is required by the.

C

Ordinance, that's a very de minimis request and therefore I will be supporting this. Thank you.

A

Anybody else anything further, no I'll call for the question we'll start down at the left, with.

A

Mr rossi, yes, miss miss eldridge. Yes, ms margerson, yes, mr mantle, yes, mr mcdonald, yes, mr lee, yes.

A

And I vote yes as well: it's unm your past you're all set! I'm happy good luck with your project!.

A

A

Moving to item b on the agenda this evening under new business reads as follows: the request.

A

Of frederick j bailey, the third owner for the property located at 212 woodbury avenue, whereas.

A

Relief is needed for a lot line. Adjustment on four lots to create three conforming lots.

A

With the existing dwelling and demolition of one existing dwelling instruction and construction of.

A

Two duplexes and four single family dwellings on one lot, which requires the following: one.

A

A variance from section 10.513 to allow more than one freestanding principal structure on.

A

A lot said: property excuse me, said: property is shown on assessor map. 175 has lot one and lies.

A

Within the general residence, a gra district who speaks in favor of this proposal, please.

I

Thank you, mr chairman, members of the board, I'm tim phoenix from hopeful phoenix, gormley and.

I

Roberts here in portsmouth down the hill, I'm here with mike garappy from tuck realty, which is the.

I

uh Proposed buyer of the property and developer peter has put up the plan.

I

You have our full submission, which includes my memorandum: that I'll go through quickly.

I

This property is located at the corner of woodbury and boyd. Just the city side of the holiday inn.

I

Hotel we have four existing lots, as you can see here on. That's the existing conditions plan.

I

If you want to go to the next one peter and the intention is to change lot lines such that.

I

The three buildings at the corners, the lower left, lower right and low and upper right.

I

Excuse me upper right and the one below it will all remain on.

I

Zoning compliant lots the remainder of the lot, which is comprised of about 60 000 square feet.

I

We're proposing an eight unit condominium complex with four standalone units in the north, westerly.

I

Corner and two duplex units that will be occupied accessed. Excuse me uh from boyd road.

I

uh One of the ways we're doing that uh peter should go back to the existing conditions.

I

Is the the building in the corner in the lower right corner, which exits onto woodbury ave will be.

I

Removed and the woodbury ave cut, curb cut will be eliminated in favor of the curb cut.

I

Off of boyd road to access all eight units, as the chair read, we need only.

I

One variance, and that variance is um that we, the ordinance, provides for only one freestanding.

I

Dwelling unit per a lot, we meet all of the other dimensional requirements, including lot coverage.

I

Open space, height, setbacks, etc. This will also have to go through tack and planning board review.

I

For approval, if you would go to the photographs, peter.

I

Number three.

I

There we go so it's hard to see here, but the red dot in the middle is, uh is the lot and see I don't.

I

Know what happened? Oh it's over here in the corner. Somehow um I don't know what happened. It was in.

I

The middle um anyway there there it is so you could it's hard to see from here, but you have in.

I

Your packets, you can see the hotels uh behind and beside it. You can also see the pha project, which.

I

Is a multi-family multi-unit project on one lot directly across boyd road? Forget the name of that.

I

Manor drive and a drive. Thank you. um If you can go, go down some photographs.

I

If you wouldn't mind peter, um I want to show what things look like there today keep going.

I

So there's manor drive, you can see it. There's multiple.

I

Look like duplexes, there may be some single families. There may be some multi-families, but.

I

It's that's the building on the corner of boyd and woodbury. That's the one! That's.

I

Going to be removed, you can see it's in pretty poor condition. Keep going. If you wouldn't mind.

I

um That's, I think I think that's the same one from a different angle and then you'll see these.

I

Are the houses that are there now and part of the project, although these aren't in this application.

I

All of these other three houses are going to be rehabilitated, the houses and the grounds. So the.

I

Whole place will be dressed up compared to what it is today. So turning to the variance requirements.

I

I always do the first two together under the case law, which is the variances, are not contrary to the.

I

Public interest and the spirit of the ordinance is observed, and the cases say will granting the.

I

Variance unduly and to a market degree conflict with the ordinance such that it violates the.

I

Basic zoning objectives, mere conflict with the ordinance is not enough and to do that, as you know,.

I

Because I'm here before you fairly often, uh we then turn to the purposes of the ordinance.

I

Well, there are seven of them which include looking at the use of land, buildings and structures.

I

For business, industrial, residential and other purposes, while the zoning ordinance limits limits.

I

uh One freestanding dwell uh building per lot. We think we have to look at other things.

I

Such as the size of this lot, which is uh 1.38 acres or just over 60 000 square feet,.

I

We meet the density requirement of 7 500 square feet per lot. We also comply with.

I

The underlying purposes of the of the r a which is I'm going to read here, to provide.

I

Areas for single family, two family and multi-family dwellings, with appropriate.

I

Accessory units uses at moderate to high densities, ranging from approximately five to twelve dwelling.

I

Units per acre, together with appropriate, accessory uses and limited services, so we believe this fits.

I

In well because we have eight units on about 1.4 acres, which is right about in the middle.

I

Of the gra underlying purposes of five to eight, we next look at the intensity of land use, including.

I

Lot size building coverage, height and bulk, as I've mentioned, we comply with lot size building.

I

Coverage height yards open space and again we meet the general requirements of the gra of 5-12 gen.

I

Dwelling units per acre, we think that this a proposal is a good proposal for this area, because.

I

Of what's around it, you've got single-family homes nearby on boyd and across woodbury. You've got the.

I

Manor drive, pha and you've got these large hotels, so these are going to be market units, but they are.

I

In an area of portsmouth, which will be a little more affordable than some of the other downtown.

I

Areas closest to closer to downtown and the schools, and what have you.

I

We look at the design of facilities for access circulation parking. It's all met again, we'll.

I

Go through tac and planning board impacts on property of lighting noise, vibration, runoff.

I

Again will be looked at through the planning process, but these are single-family homes.

I

So shouldn't be a problem, preservation and enhancement of the visual environment.

I

Peter went through the the proposed uh architectural elevations and floor plans and.

I

We believe they are quite aesthetically, pleasing um uh that uh what I call the derelict building.

I

That old, one on the corner will be removed and all of the grounds will be upgraded. So we think.

I

That the visual environment will be enhanced preservation of historic districts, we're not.

I

In the historic district and in the preservation of natural resources- and we think since we meet.

I

All the requirements of the ordinance, except the one building limitation that were protective of.

I

Natural resources, so then the case law says for those first two would granting the variance, alter.

I

The essential character of the locality, it's what I call eclectic right now. You've got those four.

I

Four buildings, some of which are in total disreport pair, some of them need rehab.

I

You've got the single families nearby you've got some multi-family or duplexes at least many more.

I

Than one building on a lot across the street and then you've got the hotels and, beyond those the.

I

Traffic circle etc. So um replacing um tearing down one building and replacing with these eight units.

I

Is not going to negatively affect the character of locality since we meet the density and all other.

I

Dimensional requirements, neither will we threaten the public health, safety or welfare. Everything.

I

Will be built to code and, as I mentioned, even the existing three remaining will be brought.

I

Brought back to life, including their grounds, the third of the five variance requests is granting.

I

The variances will not diminish surrounding property values because we are cleaning up the.

I

Area, removing that one old building moving the access from mape from excuse me woodbury on to.

I

Boyd road at the beginning, which is essentially across the strike street from the manor, the manor.

I

Driveway are not going to diminish property values, we're going to upgrade the whole area.

I

Which we think will have a positive impact upon surrounding property values compared to.

I

What's there today, the fourth requirement is the hardship. It's a three-pronged test. As you know,.

I

The first is, the special conditions, distinguish the property from project from others in the area.

I

uh Unusually, usually, I'm in here saying this lots smaller than the zoning ordinance requires and we.

I

Can't do anything about that! It's been that way for years. Here, we've got a lot, that's larger.

I

Than the ordnance request requires at 7 500 larger than many of the other single-family house, lots.

I

Around it, and is somewhat in keeping with the size of the lot that is across boyd, which is the.

I

Housing authority, which has multiple units on one lot and then you have the hotels.

I

Behind the building, which have an effect on on its overall value, so we believe that the parcel size.

I

And its location near the hotels and the duplex project across the street, combined to create.

I

Special conditions, then we look at the whether there's a fair and substantial relationship.

I

Between the public purposes of the ordinance and its application in this instance, so what.

I

Are the purposes of one freestanding dwelling unit per lot? It's to prohibit overcrowding to.

I

Allow for air light separation between neighbors sight lines and storm water treatment. So since we.

I

Meet the density requirement of 7 500 square feet per unit and meet open space and all setbacks and.

I

Height requirements, there is no overcrowding, we just have a large lot that could stand.

I

To use a number of dwelling units in the condominium form of ownership on it.

I

Since we have the the manor drive development project and the two hotels in a diner.

I

We think that granting the variants will violate none of the underlying purposes of the of one's.

I

Freestanding dwelling unit per lot uh and in in doing so gives, as I mentioned before, um the.

I

Ability for families to move into portsmouth in an area where it'll be at least a little bit less.

I

Expensive than if you're trying to get closer to to downtown the the final uh requirement for.

I

Hardship is the proposed use, is reasonable and the law says if the use is permitted. Then it's.

I

Deemed reasonable, this is a residential use in a residential zone, so it's reasonable and finally,.

I

The fifth of the requirements for variants is that substantial justice will be done by granting it.

I

And the test is, if there's no benefit to the public, that would outweigh the.

I

Hardship to the applicant, this factor is satisfied. Any loss to the applicant, not.

I

Outweighed by a gain to the general public is an injustice I go through the constitutional.

I

Language, as I usually do, but the bottom line is because we meet all setback lot coverage open.

I

Space requirements because we abart about a large apartment complex because we have but two hotels.

I

In a diner- and there are other single family uh dwellings nearby on lots that are on average, would.

I

Would be around the 7 500 square feet per unit? This is not going to cause any harm to anyone in.

I

The public, we think it is a good thing for portsmouth and a good thing for this area.

I

Particularly compared to what's there today, on the other hand, if it's denied, then the owner of.

I

The lots who wants to sell it to us will uh not uh realize a as quite as good as return.

I

um The developer will not be able to develop it as proposed, and some uh eight families.

I

Current or future families in portsmouth will not have another choice of a place to live.

I

In in portsmouth, relatively close at least biking distance to to downtown so for all of those.

I

Reasons we think this is a really good project for this area of town. We think it's relatively.

I

Modest, the homes aren't huge they fit in well with the with the neighborhood, particularly with.

I

What's surrounding it, and we hope that you will uh grant the variances to allow this project to go.

I

Forward, I don't know if mike has anything he wants to add to that, but.

I

That's all I have um sir we're both here to answer any questions you may have. Okay, thank you.

A

Any questions from the board, mr mantle, I get a question good evening tim. um I don't know.

D

Whether it's you it's a technical question for peter the application is for 212 woodbury avenue.

I

uh I mean, as opposed to something void. Well, it says 212 woodbury avenue and there's one lot.

D

On 212 woodbury avenue, I see the design so and so forth, you're just an oversight that the city.

D

You know should have been the application, 212 214 and 216 woodbury avenue. Well, I won't blame that on.

I

Peter I'll take responsibility for that. um I think that that you're- probably right, they probably all.

I

Should have been been listed, I you know, I guess we all missed it. My response or comment about.

I

It, however, is that um you know the purpose of the notice is to people put people notice that.

I

Something's happening: if they came down, they would see the plans and see exactly what's happening.

I

It probably should a better way to do. It would have been to list.

I

Each and every address whether on woodbury or boyd, because when I was driving around today.

D

Looking for 212 I'm very familiar with the mansard roof house, I don't you know, then I'm looking.

D

At this, and I'm like okay, you have you know a three-quarter acre lot that runs down boyd road.

D

Are you cutting up that lot and then, when I looked at the plans, I realized it was 212.

D

214 and 16- and I don't know if that's a problem, the way the way my further response to that is.

I

I'm I don't, I have my application is over there and it's all uploaded now, but my memorandum.

I

Which is what I was using as a guideline here identifies each of them by tax map and lot number.

I

I don't know if the note, if the, if the um the notice that uh uh chairman parrott red did that.

D

No, you know I like, like I said I didn't when I went around, because I always do and realize what.

D

The property was, and then I just holding the uh the new business and I couldn't figure out without.

D

Looking at the map, what you know you have one lot and you're doing it into three.

D

With an existing structure- and I was trying to figure out what's the existing structure because.

D

That's coming down, and then I went back to the map in the application realize it's three lots.

D

That you're trying to make right so I mean this- might hopefully declare I thought I already did.

J

I'm mike garappy uh with garabby planning consultants um here um on behalf of tuck realty.

J

So hopefully this clarifies the the notice requirement for if that's the question, because.

J

Really we're here tonight to talk about 212 woodbury as reconfigured per our plan. We.

J

Still have to go to planning board, obviously to for a lot line adjustment plan, subdivision plan.

J

But it is, it is strictly just 212 we're talking about tonight, because.

J

Six boyd, 214 and 216 are going to. They don't require any relief from zoning. So, if that, if that.

J

Helps hopefully it does basically what I'm trying to say is: if you go forward, you don't want a.

D

Technicality to sink you correct. No, as we go forward through planning we'll have to all of the.

J

uh At least three of the lots will have to be on on uh on record as right when this notice.

G

When the subdivision application comes through, it would include all the parcels correct, correct.

I

But I but paul, I think your home point is well taken. um The the sixty thousand dollar.

I

Sixty thousand square foot lot is primarily is connected to the address on the corner.

I

But it's taking some of the the land that used to be with the other.

I

Of the lots to create it, I understand everything I was just questioning that that's all.

A

Okay, thank you. Anybody anybody else anything on this anybody question ms miss rogerson.

C

Oh yes, uh thank you attorney phoenix, so just this is, I think, a question that just sort of.

C

It's good to get on the record, but you're going to planning board so you're subdividing this correct.

I

Yeah in the form of a lot line revision. But yes, it requires subdivision of review by the planning.

I

Board. Okay! So if you, but if you subdivided all of these into lots, wouldn't you not need a variance.

I

If we tried to subdivide them into lots, that would hold either a combination of duplexes.

I

And or single family on on their own lot, yes, then, you would not need a variance. No, we would.

I

Need a variance because there's no way we can do that because of uh road frontage and access and.

I

Setbacks and all that, if you, if you do it that way and that's because you're sort of tucked in behind.

C

Boyd and woodbury exactly so what what what we've tried to do here is take advantage of the fact.

I

That we have a lot that meets all of the density requirements that the portsmouth sets up. But the.

I

Way it's where it is and the way it's located with woodbury, boyd and hotels behind it, there's no way.

I

To you know, create cookie cutter, lots that each have whatever 100 feet of frontage and all that.

I

Okay, it's landlocked basically essentially yeah, except that one I just wanted to sort of clarify.

C

That that, when subdividing a lot, you need to have street frontage right, okay, good question.

A

All right did, I understand you say this is going to be operated. Is it going to be a condominium.

A

Association, yes, project, yeah, okay, they're, all on the one. The lot will be commonly owned.

I

The standalone units will be, the unit will be, each unit will be the building and the duplex units.

I

Will the unit will be really each side but they'll share in things like the roof right? Okay, all right.

A

All of them, even though it's even the single families we haven't worked that out yet, but my.

I

Usual um experience in doing these is that the single families would be responsible for their own.

I

And the duplex together, each two owners would be responsible for theirs other than common things.

I

Like plowing landscaping and all that which would be shared amongst everybody, okay, so that would.

C

Be sort of so crazy, I'm sorry, no go ahead. Would that be sort of a homeowner association? Are you.

C

Just doing a condo, it would be a condominium association, okay, okay and one of the things.

I

That what will typically happen is the planning board and the staff will require us to provide.

I

Draft condominium documents for their review and approval in order to get the project approved. Okay,.

E

Okay, I have another question again may not be for you tim, it's probably for peter.

D

um Reading it, where relief is needed for a lot line, adjustment for four lots to create three lots.

D

Conforming to yadda yadda yadda we're not doing that relief. We're you the only thing. The three.

I

Lots that are going to remain with houses are need, no relief whatsoever. They are going to let.

D

Me finish, the construction. You know two duplex four single hand. One lot, so the only variance.

D

You are seeking is to allow more than is for the proposed condominium lot correct, correct.

D

Wouldn't the process have the lot cut by the planning board. First.

I

No in my in my experience, not necessarily in my experience, the planning board will say we.

I

Can't approve your subdivision because you need variances, go, get your variances first and come.

I

Back and see us, mr just for information just for discussion this, this has come up many times there.

A

Is there is no required sequence understood no matter how many boards an applicant has to see.

A

They they, uh you know, it's your flavor of ice cream, you, you can go where you want. First and.

D

Second, the only reason I asked were asked a grain of variance on a lot that doesn't exist.

A

Yeah, that was my my since, when I read it: yes, that they had okay, yes, so that's a very another.

I

Very good uh point: we would submit that if you are inclined to approve this, that you.

I

Make condition that the subdivision approval is granted by the plan board, which we have to.

I

Do anyway, but it would clean up the record okay. Thank you good good point, mr mcdonald.

K

Did you say earlier that you still have the planning board and the tax.

L

Yes, okay, so a lot of the nitty-gritty details are going to get ironed out there.

I

Things like um road, construction, building, location, making, sure we comply with height storm.

I

Of that will be reviewed, you know first by tax, so all the department heads will.

I

Comment uh and peter, I think he chairs that now, but fire will be there. Planning will be there.

I

Public works will be there to address any issues such as construction related issues, where's your.

I

Water going to go where's your sewer, where's, your electric and all that, and they will also.

I

Look at how you're dealing with the grounds, and as I mentioned before, how.

I

You're dealing with condominium documents to protect the future owners. Thank you.

E

Okay, have a quick! uh Yes, mr ross, I have a quick question for you uh when you make an assertion.

H

That it's going to provide moderately cost housing on what basis do you make that assertion? Well, I.

I

Don't know what that price is, I don't think that's been been set up, but you know we all know that.

I

Housing in portsmouth is is quite expensive and the closer you are to downtowns, like the richards.

I

Avenue uh area they're very, very expensive, so I I think I'm right on this. If you have houses that.

I

I'm making the number up that if this house was down on richard avenue, it might be close to a.

I

Million dollars well, when you put it here in an area, that's not as totally residential as.

I

Richard's, it's going to be go for a more modest price because of the things around.

I

In its proximity, the traffic circle and the hotels and whatnot um I've experienced that.

I

Personally, meaning professionally a couple of times on other projects that I've done where.

I

uh Subdivisions were granted and variants were granted for to allow homes on lots. The most reason.

I

I can think of is um on. I forget the name of the street northwest street it's over by the bypass.

I

That was subdivided, and you know those that's house isn't going to sell for as much there as it.

I

Would you know over off richards somewhere, that's so it's whatever the market will bear, but because.

H

Of the location, you don't think it will bear as much as a private or premium location. That is.

I

My experience, I'm not a realtor, but that is my experience and that is the basis of my comment.

H

Are the two? uh Not not the house, that's going to be torn down, but the other two.

H

Are they occupied? Now? I don't know the other, the other, the three houses that are there.

J

Should have a microphone over there? um Yes, the other three houses are.

J

Currently occupied the house to be torn down is unoccupied for obvious reasons.

H

And those those houses are going to be renovated right, the occupied ones, the homes and grounds.

I

Are going to be renovated? Yes, so the expectation would be that they'd be more expensive to live in.

H

After this thing previously- and they are today- yes there's- I I don't know- I've never been inside them.

I

But you can just see from the outside pictures they're relatively dated, so it's gonna, it's gonna.

I

Take some some what I call serious uh investment to bring them up to current 21st century standards.

H

Thank you, okay. Anybody else, any other comments at all at this point. Okay, thank you. Thank you.

A

Anyone president who'd like to speak in favor of this proposal. Anyone in favor please come up.

A

And for the record, your name and company or address anybody, anybody, yes, please.

J

Good evening, good evening, john maldisari, 121 boyd road, I'm considerate and a butter. My wife.

J

And I have lived on boyd road for nine years now. Many of my neighbors still consider us rookies.

J

But I've seen this home for nine years. Just declined become more and more dilapidated year.

J

After year, I walk my dog every day. I first look at it went around the corner and I've examined this.

J

House I eyeball thoroughly up and down side to side and obviously at first I wonder how.

J

Someone could let such a beautiful structure that had beautiful architectural bones get to.

J

This point, but here we are it's at a point now. I believe where, if this home were in many places,.

J

In the area in new england, it would be condemned, so I believe, as long as a plan like this.

J

Is is subject to the approval and the variances and that the plan itself is abided by um then I.

J

Think it brings positive value to the neighborhood. It brings positive value to property values.

J

And it definitely fits in uh with the vibe and the atmosphere of the neighborhood. We have mixed.

J

Use properties mixed mixed-use, residential mixed-use, commercial in the in the neighborhood. I.

J

Don't believe this property is any different than some of the other properties. I see example being.

J

The pocket neighborhood on islington the property developed on the corner of denet and woodbury.

J

This can only add value to the neighborhood. I know that some concerns may be traffic.

J

But I know from experience and the neighborhood knows from experience a couple years ago when.

J

The woodbury bridge was under construction. uh Boyd road took a lot of that extra traffic.

J

And honestly, at the time I thought it was going to be disruptive, but life on the street really went.

J

On it really was not a big deal and my opinion. The woodbury bridge closure added a lot more traffic.

J

On my street boyd road than this could ever add. um So that's all. I really wanted to say.

J

As I said right now, I believe the property is an eyesore there's squirrels living in the house. They.

J

Go in and out of the open eaves and um you know I welcome this project and I hope that the variances.

J

And the plan goes forward. Thank you. Thank you very much next speaker in favor. Anyone and.

A

Miss mr zu, no, no, mr smith, on the zoom. No, nobody on the zoom. Nobody present! Nobody, president.

A

Wants to speak. Okay is anyone president wish to speak in opposition to this proposal? Anybody in.

A

Opposition, please come up and if we could have your name and address please for the record, my.

M

Name is sharon kempi? I live at 55 boyd road. Thank you. My family has owned that home since 1967 and.

M

He has a rookie because that house on the corner of boyd road and woodbury ave.

M

Was a beautiful duplex and bailey's family has owned that house for 16 years and.

M

Let it get to the condition it is right now, so that everybody will come up here and say yeah.

M

Tear it down it's an eyesore if they would have taken care of the home.

M

When they bought it, it wouldn't be an eyesore and there's nobody from six boyd road.

M

Or from uh 214 or 216, that's going to come up here and fight this because they're renters and that he.

M

Owns those properties- and they are not going to say no, we don't want four houses in our backyard.

M

For condos, I'm sorry they're, not gonna, because they rent there, they don't wanna.

M

Go against who they're paying their rent to. um I don't like the fact that they.

M

Are going to have this funnel onto boyd road and be right across from manor drive.

M

Boyd road does not have any sidewalks woodbury ave has sidewalks if they want to funnel this.

M

Funnel it to woodbury ave because they have sidewalks and boyd road does not.

M

Manor drive has no multiple family units. Manor drive was built in 1963 for elderly housing and we.

M

All know that portsmouth has changed and that now it is mixed with um the people that are disabled.

M

Along with elderly housing, so that would create, I feel, a hardship on them to have more traffic. That.

M

They have to deal with when they're leaving their homes at the end of manor drive. I also.

M

uh Feel very very sure that if they want to tear down 212, that was a duplex and put in a duplex.

M

I'm all for it go ahead. That's your property! You want to tear the house down and rebuild a great.

M

Great another duplex go ahead, but I am against taking down one duplex and putting in two.

M

That's too much for I feel for our neighborhood that they want to turn three.

M

Parcels into eight condos, the the math doesn't add up to me, because these are all single.

M

Family homes that that are there now and they want to split it up and make condos.

M

It and we live in a neighborhood like that has been pointed out. We have to deal with. You know the.

M

Hotels that are on either side and- and I I know that it's their property and they have a right to.

M

Build on it, but I don't think that they should be putting in a condo association right there, because.

M

These are all and have been ever since I've lived there. Single-Family homes except for 212, was.

M

A duplex- and I I just think that it's going it is going to change the the value of our homes. It will.

M

Affect it because he pointed out their dated homes, I've been in every one of those homes and they're.

M

Nice homes, but if they want to go in and change those homes, all along that whole corner and then.

M

Say that that's not going to affect the value of our homes that are right across the street.

M

I disagree because we all know that portsmouth is changing and we all know that they are going to.

M

Try to get as much for their money as they can it's a business deal. We all want to do that.

M

But from my side of the street, I would like that to stay single-family homes. I would like that to.

M

Be a one-for-one if you want to tear down a duplex and put in a duplex, I'm all for it. But you want to.

M

Tear down a duplex and put in eight units, I'm not for that that that's not what I think is.

M

Conducive to single family homes and and again, I I just think that we need to take in consideration.

M

The people that live on manor drive- those are not multiple, those are not multiple family homes.

M

Those are single units, there's four units there that have two bedrooms. All the rest are single.

M

Bedroom units- these are elderly and disabled people living there that are going to have more.

M

Traffic funneled to them, which is not right, and it's going to be more cars going up and.

M

Down boyd road that has no sidewalks, so you know somebody that's walking their dog is going to have.

M

To deal with more cars, and he even said that when they did the construction of the bridge, we had to.

M

Deal with more cars and in the normal circumstance we don't have to you, know we're tucked behind the.

M

Motel and we do get some traffic, but not not a lot, and I don't want that. To increase for the people.

M

In my neighborhood, because we want to be able to walk around and not have to worry about more cars.

M

And I I don't think that um it. I don't think that it's gonna help the neighborhood. I think it's.

M

Gonna hurt, as far as making condo association in in our uh neighborhood that's already dealing with.

M

The construction that's down over at the end of bartlett street has caused.

M

So much traffic that we can. We can't get through those traffic lights anymore, on on the end of both.

M

With av, all those apartments have already changed the dynamics of our neighborhood, and then this is.

M

Going to change more, and so I stand here and ask for you not to give this variance. Thank you. Thank.

A

You any questions from before you go any questions from the board for the speaker. No apparently not.

A

Thank you very much. Thank you. Anyone else to speak in opposition any please come up, and your name and.

A

Address, if you would please and and if you live nearby, would you kind of give us an indication.

A

Of how where your house is located with respect to the uh property in question, I'm phyllis randall 99.

E

Boyd road, so I'm a kitty corner across from number six, which is on the uh where some of the land is.

E

Being absorbed into that single lot, okay! So going down from what brielle you're from woodbury house.

E

After wood after woodbury manor, I'm house number three: okay, okay, thank you! um I am not of the.

E

Opinion that anything would be better than what is currently than what currently exists at 212.

E

Woodbury avenue, nor do I share the view that, because the multi-unit manor drive exists.

E

This proposed project is therefore a good fit. The petition is representing the owner.

E

Want a variant saying that a hardship exists, I question what constitutes that. This hardship.

E

Our neighborhood has suffered for close to 15 years due to having a once lovely property.

E

Neglected to the point of being deemed derelict, this property sits at the head of our street and.

E

Has been an embarrassment for many of us now, the owner and his agents want to ask for consideration.

E

Where was his consideration towards us in all his time? This is the second home he has neglected the.

E

First, property is now a parking lot at and that's at the far end of void road right next to the.

E

Circle further, I have concerns as to the placement of the access road onto boyd road.

E

The turn from woodbury avenue onto boyd is tight and, being so close to woodbury avenue, I think, is.

E

Potentially hazardous do I want some sort of project to go forward which will improve the.

E

Overall attractiveness of the neighborhood- yes, I do, but I feel as proposed this one is too much.

E

Despite the claims that fits requirements as to density.

E

All one has to do is go a few streets over to kate street to see what excessive excuse me excessive.

E

Density looks like thank you for listening to my concerns. Thank you. Any questions from the board.

A

Mr speaker, no thank thank you. Thank you. Any anyone else are there other speakers in opposition, please.

E

Good evening, good evening, uh I'm martin ryan with I live at 221 woodbury avenue.

G

It's the house directly across the street from the property in question here.

G

I've lived there since 1996 and when I first purchased my home, 221 or 212 was a beautiful home.

G

And since then, I've seen it neglect, uh neglected and overgrown with weeds and abandoned and just.

G

uh Just deteriorate over time- and this home, like I said, was a beautiful home at one time and what.

G

I'd what I'm mainly concerned is that something that something does occur: that revitalization of.

G

That property does occur, but I can't support what is being proposed. It's out of character.

G

And the the houses that are being offered up are very subpar, they're they're, a catalog style.

G

House that uh there's a website where you just pick out uh the type of house you want and.

G

They'll put together a set of drawings for you and just there you go it's instant architecture.

G

You know I like I said I don't mind this property being developed, it needs to be developed. I just.

G

Would hope that we could find a way to table this and come up with a better solution, because right.

G

Now we're losing a very what once was a grand house for a very subpar, very subpar architecture.

G

So I don't really want to kill this project and I want the developer to make the most of it.

G

But I want the can the neighborhood to be in consideration when he does.

G

uh This is, this is part of our neighborhood. This is a. This is a feature home.

G

And uh you know, like I said, I'm I have mixed emotions about this. I would just hope that I'm.

G

An architect I'd be willing to offer suggestions about uh what could go into the to the.

G

Into that property, I it's not the density that upsets me, it's not the uh it's, not the intensity.

G

Of of the development, it's more of the quality of the development, so um I would just ask that.

G

The board, or maybe the developer, the the uh the owner, could uh table this and we could go back to.

G

The drawing board and find a solution that works for him and for the neighborhood. Thank you. Thank.

A

You I have a, I have a question: does anybody else on the board? Have a question you said you've been.

A

In your house, since 96, did you say, sir, uh at that, when you moved in was was the how the 212.

A

House occupied, it was okay and, and so, and do you happen to know how long it has it's not occupied.

A

Now I understand correct, uh it is no, it is not not even officially or unofficially it is. It is.

G

Not occupied, it hasn't been occupied for probably over a decade. That's that was my question. How long.

A

Okay, thank you all right. Thank you. Thank you very much. Martin. Yes, question question. Yes,.

D

Because of the mansard roof house and as you said, you live right across it and I think it's a.

D

Was a beautiful house, uh would you be happy.

D

If they did the development with the six units and rehab the mansard roof house into a duplex.

G

I think that's a compromise, that's very suitable uh for the neighborhood for me personally, yeah.

D

The cost of rehabbing that house is probably a lot more than building new, oh of course, okay. Okay of.

G

Course, but I would say that um that lot deserves a grand house you deserve to to. There should be.

G

Remnants of that how or at least a duplicate of that house at the end of thornton street.

G

Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Are there other speakers in opposition? Please.

A

Anybody, uh mr stiff anybody on the we've lost nope or one uh we have lost the one we had. Okay.

A

Anybody else in opposition- okay, last call this last now too, for and against last call. There.

I

You go. Thank you, mr chairman. Tim phoenix again I'll, be very brief. um I know you all know it, but.

I

I just want to make sure for the record that um I've heard the comments about the current owners.

I

And how they've treated the property, notably 212, but where I just want the public know we're not.

I

The owners who have let this get to this place we're trying to if you will uh rescue it.

I

Many of the issues raised by uh the neighbors who have concerns with it will be vetted by the.

I

Planning board and by tac, uh and they, I believe, playing board even even looks at you know, design.

I

What it looks like and all that kind of thing um mike said we're open to to speak with mr.

I

uh Mr brian, uh without we're not gonna rehab it that's just it's just too expensive to do, but.

I

We don't want to be bound to anything we would do, but we certainly are open to.

I

A discussion about you know: what's the look of the building, that's on that corner, it's just that. We.

I

Can't have any discussions unless we know we have the right to build something which means we need.

I

These variances, unless you have questions for me, that's all. I have any any questions at the moment.

A

And mr rossi yep I do have a question: could you go back over the rationale for not subdividing it.

H

Into a number of lots that could be used for adding structures like one structure per lot,.

I

Yeah because the I mean the the developer is in business to to earn a living to develop property.

I

And this project came along um and at the the cost and the one for one: it's not a project that would.

I

Be worth doing so we felt or they felt- and I agree that this is a somewhat unique circumstance in.

I

That you have an area, that's big enough to support these in terms of the um in terms of lot area.

I

Density, setbacks, height, open space, all of those things, but you don't have the street frontage.

I

To to create a new subdivision for all these lots, so swapping one for one just isn't, isn't feasible.

I

Going forward and for the reasons that I've stated previously, we think this is an overall a very, very.

I

Reasonable project for this area of portsmouth- I guess my concern is that when it comes to density.

H

By doing it, this way there, it seems to me that, like if there were separate lots, there'd be.

H

Additional side, yard setbacks and whatnot that would spread the units out more and that the.

H

Density is actually a lot more when you get a variance for multiple structures on one lot than.

H

If you had, you know taken that lot and dividing it up. Isn't that isn't that what you're saying I, if.

I

I understand your question correctly. Yes, if you had a big square lot that was had surrounded by.

I

Streets that had 7 500 square feet per lot with the required frontiers. They might be spread out.

I

A little more but condominium form of living, I happen to live in another town and something.

I

Not it's much larger, but not dissimilar. Usually these condominium forms of ownership, uh the houses.

I

Are closer together that it's it's very common and I believe that that this board and the town.

I

Have have approved somewhat similar developments in the past. I can't chapter and verse right now.

I

But again um I understand the question. I understand the concerns, but you know we're looking.

I

At a a plan, when you get out on the ground, uh what are they 30 feet between them? Something like that.

I

Each unit some are 20 feet, 24 feet and that's not unusual. In.

I

A condominium form of ownership in my ex just in general, in my experience.

I

I don't know if I answered your question but and then traffic wise.

H

If you go out boyd road toward the hotel, you know like on this map. Instead of turning to my right.

H

In other words, instead of turning left out of the driveway turn right out of the driveway.

H

Which is how I got out of there yesterday uh or the day before: it's it's pretty much a choke.

H

Point getting out to the traffic circle is it kind of like a weird dog leg? Yeah I I've it's.

I

Been a long time and I drove down in there myself, but I didn't go all the way to the end. I think I.

I

Probably did when they're redoing the bridge, but I don't remember it specifically, but traffic and.

I

The effect of of number of cars, timing of cars, turning of cars where they go, is all a planning.

I

Board issue: they will vet. All of that in planning board may or may not require a traffic engineer.

I

Again from my own personal experiences, um you know eight homes there, I I dare say most of them- are.

I

Going to be going towards turning towards woodbury, I don't know that for certain, because I'm not a.

I

Traffic engineer, but that's just my hunch, because that's the busier area, unless they're going to.

I

Boston or something, I suppose, but again that will all be vetted. I would think that, with the.

I

Manor drive units and the existing residents that adding really seven more residents isn't going to.

I

Be a significant traffic impact again I say that being around it, not being a traffic engineer.

I

But thank you yeah jim did you have a question for me any anybody else. Mr lee.

B

I just had a curiosity question about the size of the units. Do you know the.

B

Kind of roughly the square feet the average square feet of the units. uh I think I have that.

I

Do you know mike off the top here you know, if you don't have it that's fine here we go.

I

The duplexes living area second floor is 1100.

I

Living here, they're about roughly 2 2100 for the duplexes.

I

The single family is about the same about the same. That's fine, um yeah. I've got a single family here.

I

Well, I don't see the that's close enough to him.

B

Thank you yeah a couple thousand square feet: yeah. That's fine!.

A

Anything else, uh ms modison. Oh yes, just a question on the existing building.

C

You said that it was uh not economically feasible to rehab it. Is it capable of being rehabbed if you.

C

Were willing to spend the money just curious, I I've never been in it. I see what it looks like.

I

Outside I think, anything's possible, if you want to spend the money um mike, might know better what his.

I

Condition is I you know, I see it more, as I don't know, if the studs are any good, you'd probably have.

I

To take it down to the foundation, but that's just a guess on my part, you haven't anything to add.

J

We uh we didn't evaluate the structural integrity of the of the 212 residents. um We did do home.

J

Inspections. Excuse me please, please, please right into the mic. It's very directional sure thank you.

J

um So we did, um we did uh inspect the other three homes and they're all they're. All you know in good.

J

Shape as far as structural integrity goes, so the the three other homes that we we intend to keep.

J

And rehabilitate uh are in good shape; they just need some tlc, uh the the the residents on on 212. I.

J

We I haven't not even been inside the structure, um it wasn't, it was not our intent to rehabilitate it.

C

It was just sure anything anything can be renovated. For certain I mean that's, that's.

J

Without question, but that's not our intent yeah I just I'm just I mean it's not within the purview.

C

Of the sport I hate to lose that building it just may have you know? Certainly the developer is going.

C

To make money off of the rest of it, um and it may have been something to talk to the neighbors about.

C

To sort of keep that um and then develop the rest of it, so it's just just an observation. Thank you.

C

Yeah and we're we're not opposed to working with the neighbors and working with our architect to.

J

To come up with something that may look more similar to what's there now we were trying to.

J

Our intent was to try to fit these homes into the the neighborhood to the to did the.

J

Best that we could and we're happy to make further revisions as we go through planning. Thank you sure.

I

Anything else any any. Last ques last last questions for the speaker. No.

A

Last call for speakers you're welcome two for our against anybody at all too far against.

A

Still, uh no, no action on the zoom side; okay, all right! Good, too far,.

A

Against lost call seeing nobody will close the public hearing board. Okay,.

A

Is anybody uh inclined to start to start the conversation.

A

Mr chairman yeah, mr mantle got a question for peter.

D

um Given the conversation and the subject house, the mansard roof for 212.

D

Is already a duplex granted, it's not the size of the duplex you're proposing, but.

D

If we grant this variance, as is, does that give the developer the leeway to rehab 212.

D

Into a duplex, which it already is.

D

Since they're, not asking our permission to demolish their home they're only asking if.

D

They can have multiple units on that proposed lot. I think you would want to add a clarifying.

G

Stipulation to that effect um same time, I don't want to hamstring them if they.

D

Can't rehab it either well, you could had some language that allows them to.

G

If that, if that is feasible to rehab, that in place of the one duplex, that's in that location,.

D

Because you know, if that's going to be a duplex, it would give them the same number of units.

D

Of course it could be the same. One it'd be a lot smaller, so a lot less money to rehab yeah.

A

I have a solid question: do we know is that a legal duplex on according to the city.

A

Successor, we have do, we know that or not.

A

I I only ask it because a lot of informal things have been done over the years.

I

Just as you were asking that question, mr chairman, mike was looking it up and based upon what he.

I

Sees is that the tax records tax card says it's a single-family home, so uh-huh yeah. Oh surprise,.

A

Not saying it wasn't a duplex no, but the tax card says well, that's what counts. Yeah.

A

And that's why nobody lives there anymore. That's probably one of the reasons yeah.

A

Yes, thank you for checking them. They were all related.

A

H

Okay, I find this to be a difficult one, because I feel that after you know, driving through and.

H

Inspecting the area, I do see the benefit of doing something in that location for sure, but I feel.

H

Like there's an attempt here to just cram too much into a very tightly bound and small space.

A

Okay, anybody else got an initial initial thoughts to move the uh process. A lot.

A

More miss miss elders then miss much. I feel that, while this is a huge change for the property, it's.

E

Not a huge change for the neighborhood, I mean it's. A mix of single and multi-family units.

E

And while we keep talking about density they're on legal lots, I mean these houses are going to.

E

Be built on lots that are approved by the city for homes. I think it would be.

E

More out of the norm to just put one home on 60 000 square feet in that neighborhood.

E

I can see that the traffic is of concern and we can't really bring back the beautiful mansur.

E

Building, although we've all watched it with heavy hearts over the years.

E

And the traffic is going to be considered by another board. I could support this and I.

E

Agree, the architecture you know would be great, but that's also not something that we can influence so.

E

I'm in favor of this project. Okay, thank you, miss miss margerson. I I do think that this is.

C

Probably one of the most difficult projects I've had since I've been on this board.

C

I I really regret the loss of that house and I just wish there was some way.

C

That I realized this is not our purview, but we are really starting to see a lot of really beautiful.

C

Buildings coming down in portsmouth, and I really wish they had been able to sort of rehab that.

C

And then do the rest of this this project, um but within the things that are our purview.

C

uh You know I I do think that this property does have special conditions.

C

I'm very aware of the impact of the to the neighborhood. I I really am I I I think it does.

C

Have special conditions? I think that multi-family dwellings are allowed in the general residency.

C

District um to the one of the abutters points, um it's this, the this variance is not for.

C

This variance is about having multiple dwellings on one lot. um It's not about single.

C

Because multi-family homes are allowed in this zoning district. um However, that said I, I don't.

C

Well, I think attorney phoenix did an excellent job for the applicant. I don't also can't say that.

C

This property cannot be used with just a single family dwelling on it. I don't see any compelling.

C

Reasons why it can't be why there can't be a single dwelling on it. Even as I recognize that.

C

There would be special conditions for um for putting multiple.

C

Dwellings on that I mean the zoning ordinance. I mean it's very clear. It's supposed to be.

C

Not an ex marked departure from the zoning ordinance. The zoning orders is very clear.

C

You're supposed to have one dwelling one building on one lot, um so I said I am.

C

Still very much up in the air, I find this a very, very difficult application.

A

Mr mcdonald, um in in listening to everything, that's been presented on.

K

This application- I was kind of struck by the need to do something that benefits the city overall.

K

And I think rehabilitation of a property like this one is just exactly what the city needs.

K

K

So we need to be careful because we can, if we act too fast or don't think it all the way through.

K

We can kill this baby in the cradle and we don't want to do that.

K

Because this is what the city needs, so the process isn't over with this board, there are other steps.

K

In the review process before a final decision is made.

K

And I think they should be allowed to run their course.

K

And there will be public input in all of them.

K

That will hopefully bring this this project to the bullseye, where it where it needs to be.

K

So, for those reasons I intend to support a motion to approve.

K

This request, and that's really all I have to say thank you, miss no, I'm good. No okay,.

E

Mr lee I'll wait for the [ __ ]. Well I'll just say you know, I'm really kind of sad.

B

Too, that uh it's necessary to tear down the existing house there, that is a beautiful house, but.

B

There comes a point in the life of a house where it goes too far to economically.

B

Refurbish it into something that's livable, and apparently this house is at that point and.

B

You know the economics just aren't there to rehab it. So for that reason I think.

B

This project makes perfect sense to me. You, you know, repurpose the lots into a.

B

Small condominium project, which you're certainly allowed to do and there'll be ample space between.

B

The houses to you know for the light air and the sun requirement and all that sort of thing.

B

So I'd be I'm on board with this uh with uh his elders in supporting this application, I.

A

Certainly agree with the comments that this is one of the more difficult.

A

Issues that's been before us for for quite a while, and it is it's very unfortunate that.

A

That handsome structure, which I and I share everybody's concern, because I've driven by it.

A

For years and years and years, and said what a? What a wonderful structure that when that was fixed up.

A

What a handsome it still is uh building it was, and it's just it's very unfortunate when owners just.

A

Neglect and have no just have no regard for their own property and and their neighbors and.

A

When you, when you treat a house like that, you're you're affecting more than you're just yourself,.

A

In your own pocketbook you're affecting neighbors, whether you, whether you think about it or not so.

A

But that's not before us, unfortunately there's nothing. We can do about that at this point,.

A

uh I think I think this is a little ambitious for the. I think this is. The proposal is a.

A

Little ambitious for the property, but it does meet the letter of the law.

A

Excuse me as as proposed, and the further action required by tac and the planning.

A

Board, I hope, will uh refine some of the some of the issues and uh again uh we.

A

We aren't in charge of uh appearances and our architecture of the of the proposed new houses, so.

A

And the uh the zone does allow multiple families as exists and has been pointed out, and it is very.

A

It is very much a mixed use area with the commercial nearby restaurants, hotels and.

A

And multiple units over at uh on manor drive. So it's it's a it's an odd little neighborhood and I.

A

And I really appreciate the comments of the people. Who've lived there for a long time and enjoy it.

A

uh But uh I think I will have to uh if there is a motion to approve it. I think I will.

A

Have to approve it so does anyone feel uh inclined to make a motion either way.

A

With or without stipulations- and I think the stipulations that we had before that.

A

uh It would be fair to say that if we approve it it, it is dependent upon approval by the.

A

Planning board, even though we don't need to we don't need to say that, but it wouldn't.

A

Do any harm to make that a stipulation as well so the uh mr chair missed this, mr stiff. I would.

G

Add that if, if the board is um in favor of them working on different architectural designs, yes.

G

You know we have a section in the ordinance that the materials that are presented to the board.

G

Such as features of proposed buildings or structures are deemed conditions of.

G

The approval so, if you're open to them modifying the design that you would just.

G

Add some language that would allow them to change um the design of the buildings if they're open to.

G

Working with the neighbors, yes who've expressed the desire to do that very thing. So, yes, thank you.

A

That would be appropriate. I think that would be another good stipulation. Mr chairman, mr mantle.

D

To peter's point, because we're approving multi-units could be two could be eight.

D

It's up to them correct at the planning board. No, no well you're approving! What's before! What's.

A

Exactly what's proving exactly what what's in front of us, yep.

D

As presented as presented so that duplex is going to be on the corner of boyd and woodbury right, yes,.

B

But there's nothing that preclude them from doing anything they. If we approve this, the.

B

Variance as they applied for it there's nothing that would preclude them from making changes. If.

B

They wanted to to the appearance or whatever that's correct. What I'm saying is the planning.

D

Board can say you know you got the approval for the variance you know. We'd rather see a single.

D

Family home on that corner, you know with the same architectural style as the what they're replacing.

A

They'd have to come back to us. Well, it depends I mean if it's less so say the duplex went to.

G

A single yeah and they only did end up with seven units as opposed to eight, and they take.

D

That duplex and put a single, a single condo there and put the duplex where the single was in back.

G

um We would I mean we have to take a look at it. I mean they might have to okay.

G

But if, if they change, if they make substantial changes to the design.

G

Because, what's presented to you are deemed conditions, including the house designs.

G

Where we have we're having we're running into this quite a bit recently, where you're going.

G

To have some coming back to you because they're completely, um we have one next week. That was the.

G

Design is completely changed from what was approved and presented by the to this board.

G

So if you're open to them working on changing the design by working with the abutters or mr ryan, I.

G

Would just add some language in there that allows them to do that, so that they wouldn't have to come.

G

Back if they do make those sub changes subject to changes and approval by the planning board.

B

But wouldn't they be allowed to do that anyway, if we grant the variance.

B

Without any stipulations, they would be able to make maybe some minor changes, but I mean if it's.

G

What they're applying for is a variance to allow more than one freestanding principle structure.

B

A lot period, but anything about anything well section 10.235 of the ordinance says.

G

Representations made of public hearings or materials submitted to the board by an applicant.

G

For special exception or variants concerning features of proposed building structures.

G

Parking or uses shall be deemed conditions upon such approval of a special exception or variance.

B

So, okay, the way I'm reading this they'd be subject to those regulations.

B

Anyway, yes, anyway, right whether we said said so or not right, but if you wanted to allow them to.

G

Make changes without having to come back? I think you should add that as a stipulation.

G

What would that language look like.

G

You would allow the applicant to to make modifications based on.

G

Working with the butters to the architectural style.

G

Of the buildings something to their feeder, but to the architectural styles, it wouldn't change.

E

The overall square footage or a lot of coverage you could specify to stay within the same yeah.

G

Okay, footprint or square footage of what was proposed. Okay, and maybe there will be more.

E

Satisfaction with that, if we right and whether they do or not, you know they could come still.

G

Do what is proposed in this application, or if it would allow them flexibility.

A

Anybody up for a.

A

Incorporate that into a motion we have a excuse. Do we have a motion open right now? No, there is no.

A

No motion on the floor. No I'll move to it. Thank you to approve this variance. It's.

B

Probably being advertised okay, mr yes, thank you, mr lee, and anything further on your motion.

D

I'll second, it, okay! Now we need to add this further further discussion. We just had.

B

Okay, well, I move we approve. This uh application is presented advertised.

B

And I'll go through the criteria first and then the stipulation, oh okay, uh grand interference is.

B

Not contrary to public interest, and it's not, it certainly observes the spirit of the ordinance.

B

Yeah this is a kind of a complicated project, but I think it's it's fairly well thought out and.

B

I understand the need to do what they're doing to make this project economically feasible, so that.

B

Checks, the first two boxes. I think this variance would grant substantially do substantial justice.

B

uh Certainly speaking as a real estate broker, it wouldn't diminish the values of any surrounding.

B

Properties, quite to the contrary, if you have eight new new and rehabilitated units.

B

In the area, I think it would enhance the values of the surrounding property greatly.

B

So the unnecessary hardship test, if the detriment to the applicant, is.

B

I always get those two mixed up. If the benefit to the public is not outweighed by a detriment to the applicant, then.

B

That meets the special conditions test and if the property can't be used in a reasonable way in.

B

Support of in conformity to the ordinance, then that would be a special condition and then it's an ore right so to the representations on the.

B

The three year, let's see certain representations representations made at public hearings, submitted.

B

The board concerning features of proposed building structures, parking usage are subject.

B

To regulations pursuant to subsection, 10.232 or 10.233 or conditions and those conditions would.

B

Be that the we'd ask that the applicant work with the neighbors or anybody that wants to give some.

B

Input to to determine if, if some modifications to the facade of the proposed development would.

B

Be feasible economically and if so, you know to try to incorporate those into the project so.

B

I would add that, as a condition of granting the variance, okay miss mr mantle um everything that mr.

D

Lee said you're adding the stipulation about the planning board correct. Nobody mentions planning.

D

Okay, uh I would add, with your permission, uh upon uh approval of the planning board of.

D

Any changes um as peter said, minor if there's eight units there, ain't units, okay, um looking at.

D

This, the just the layout, the square, the footprint of the building everybody wants saved.

D

Is a little bit longer slightly smaller than half of your duplex, that's occupying the same space.

D

Maybe you can just build two replicas, so so you have one unit there. You have.

D

Two units there, you still got your duplex, maybe a little smaller, whatever, okay, um as.

D

Another board member said the issues that people are bringing up as far as traffic and things like.

D

That will all be dealt with the planning board. It's not in our curve. You wish it was, but it isn't.

D

um Add the stipulation for um approval of.

D

Attack, we don't need to ask yep; they have to do that anyway. I think well.

A

Yeah yeah, so that's kind of I would also add the stipulation the approval of demolition committee.

D

You're demoing a house in town- I everybody here, you know- hasn't been in that house for.

D

At least a decade I don't know what's in it, I don't know if there's anything of value in.

D

It but it'd be nice to catalog it because it is a very old house enforcement. That's.

D

Possibly going to no longer be there.

D

So those would be my only three stipulations to the approval, planning board tack and the.

D

Demolition committee approvals- if that's okay with you, is that not something they'd have to do well.

B

You wouldn't have to go to the demo committee unless someone objects to it.

G

Someone objects to the demolition, and then it goes to demo review committee.

G

um Right, it will have to go to attack and plan a board anyway, so making that a stipulation is.

B

Kind of redundant yeah that doesn't do any harm. Okay or the stipulation that.

D

We go to the demo committee if somebody objects, that would happen anyway, correct.

A

Okay? Okay, you concur okay, good, any any further comments on the motion to approve.

A

With those stipulations that we just went through, did somebody read back the motion.

D

I don't even know what's in them, what do you say.

B

Well, we, the motion, was to approve it as presenting advertise subject to.

B

The representations uh mentioned in section 10.235 excuse me, mr lee, could you turn on your microphone.

B

Okay, sorry, I think it was on. I was, I was kind of far sorry. I was a little far back from it.

B

So the motion the motion is to approve the application that's presented and advertised.

B

Subject to the representations claim are cited at the end at section 10.235, which have to do with.

B

Concerning features of proposed building structures, parking usage.

B

And then, mr manning mantle added a another stipulation that, if there's an objection to.

B

The demolition, then it go to the demolition review committee for review and approval.

A

I would just add: any anyone can make uh and.

A

Anyone can take objection to the demolition any any citizen.

A

Okay, anything further, no okay, we'll we'll have a roll call vote on the motion, which is to approve.

A

With stipulations, we'll start down start down at the left, mr rossi, no.

A

Miss eldridge, yes, ms margerson, no.

A

Mr mr lee, yes, mr mcdonald, yes, mr mantle, yes and the chair and I vote no, so the it's a.

A

Four to three, the vote carries and the permission the motion is approved to.

A

Approve the project with three stipulations, so you're welcome.

E

A

What's your pleasure about proceeding or not yeah, this is for 240. We have one two. You have.

A

Four left three four four left is any wait: what want to do one more and then take a break.

A

Yeah yeah, okay, all right! Let's do! Let's do this! Okay, very good! All right! Our next.

A

Project is, excuse me item c under new business and the crowd has uh thinned out.

A

Which reads as follows: the request of amanda blanchard owner for the property located at 240.

A

Hillside drive, whereas relief is needed to extend the existing deck, which requires the following one.

A

A variance from section 10.521 to allow 22 percent building coverage where 20 percent is the maximum.

A

Allowed said property is shown on assessor map lot. 233 is lot 43. 231. Excuse me as lot 43 and.

A

Lies within the single residence b, srb district, who speaks in favor of this proposal. Please.

N

Hi I'm amanda I live at 240 hillside drive. I am looking to build a deck over.

N

What was um used to be a pool that was removed, so the deck would go to.

N

Cover the existing part of the pool which you can see in one of the photos, further down.

N

So part of the pool was underneath an overhang, so it couldn't be brought back all the way to.

N

The house to be filled in so I'm just looking to add the deck over what is already existing there.

N

For safety purposes, as well as just to obviously make the lot look better and be more usable. um The.

N

Pool was an exemption from the total uh building coverage because it was under 18 inches. It was an.

N

In-Ground pool and the deck obviously would be over the 18 inches and therefore puts me.

N

About 1.8 percent over the allotted coverage, um so with the in regards to the five criterias the.

N

Variance will not be contrary to public interest, and the spirit of the ordinance will be observed.

N

There's many houses in the neighborhood that have recently been renovated for the.

N

Betterment of the neighborhood and have sought different variances, mostly for setback relief,.

N

And my addition to the deck won't will maintain all the um setbacks. It's just the again. The total.

N

Building um coverage that would be needing the variants. um Substantial justice will be done.

N

The proposed deck is within existing conforming footprint and will not increase the conforming.

N

Setbacks as well as maintaining safety in the current spot, obviously there's a big.

N

Hole in the ground that I'm hoping to cover up and make it safer for myself.

N

And anybody that comes over um the values of surrounding properties will not be diminished.

N

I think maintaining this property is just going to make the values of the surrounding properties.

N

Increase um also from any angle, you can't even see the deck other than from my own house, because.

N

The yard is entirely filled in I mean gated in and then literal enforcement of the provisions.

N

Of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship um because of the cement footings.

N

That you can see on the edges of that picture that support the overhanging second floor. The.

N

Former pool was unable to be fully filled in, and so I really limited options um to again make this.

N

Safe without doing the deck and then I'm seeking the variance for that.

N

I think that is it okay, any questions from the board mr rossi yeah. I was just.

H

A little confused by the photograph and uh yeah do you have a pointer or something.

H

Is there a pointer up there that you can point out? Where is this area that you're referring.

H

To as the pool that can't be covered, because I mean I don't see anything- there was a pool.

N

In that empty spot that extended out, it's been filled in yep, um so that that empty area.

N

Is what is existing? I mean what is left from where there was a pool so like that this was.

N

A pool deck that was surrounding there's just not a pool there, so the intention is to fill in that.

H

Area between correct the deck will just go over top, um but because the pool went further and.

N

Was in ground and so continued to slope with the grade of the land, um most of that in ground pool.

N

Was under 18 inches, the land isn't level like isn't graded level. So the further the pool went.

N

Out the lower it um the decking around it was so the majority of that was well below the 18 inch.

N

Building coverage requirement, so the pool didn't need the variance and the level and I'm sorry.

H

Excuse me, the level of the deck is just going to be on the same plane as what I see there. It's just.

N

Going to literally fill across the top, and it will end where the cement footings end. Thank you. Yep.

E

Okay, anything anything else for us! No! No! Okay! Do you want to touch on briefly on the five.

A

On the five criteria, I think I did that already did you, you already did. Did you.

N

Did you speak, I must have been thinking. Did you speak to uh evaluation? No, you did.

N

Yes, okay, yeah, okay, the last one was a doozy okay, it's been, it's been a minute.

N

um This house has been in my family too. I bought it from my grandparents.

N

um And so they had had the pool, and so I've just been looking to um maintain the property value. I.

N

Don't have any intention of leaving- I grew up here, um so I'm just hoping to continue to do.

N

Things to maintain the property value and keep it a place that, hopefully I can keep in my family for.

N

Years to come, okay, thank you very much. Thank you, mr mantle question. When was the pool removed.

N

Pre-Pandemic so 2019, maybe okay, 2020, is an in-ground pool considered.

D

It doesn't have building coverage. No, no, it's not it's under 100 inches.

G

Anything under 18 inches doesn't count towards setbacks or coverage. Okay, okay,.

D

Just want to make sure she needs the variance.

A

Thank you very much. I've gone about every which way I could to avoid needing the variance and.

N

It was told to me by several parties that I definitely needed it, and this was the best.

N

Way to go about it. Thank you very much. Thank you. Anyone else present who wants to speak.

A

In favor of this proposal, anybody in favor anybody, mr mr zoom, there's no one on zoom.

A

Anyone speaking anyone present wants to speak in opposition too far against any speakers at all.

A

No okay. Public hearings. Closed. What's your pleasure board, someone have a motion.

H

Mr rossi yeah, I was going to move that. Will you prove the variance as requested as.

A

Presented. Thank you second. Second, thank you, mr mantle, mr rossi. Your your motion, please.

H

I believe that the requested variance is within the spirit of the ordinance uh it doesn't create.

H

Any crowding because it is very close to the ground, uh it is no loss to the neighbors.

H

So that substantial justice is done, you can't even see this from outside of the yard.

H

I tried and it's totally invisible to the neighbors. I do not believe there would be.

H

Any negative impact on the surrounding properties, the neighborhood seems to be very consistent with.

H

This type of you know this type of proposal and the literal enforcement of the code.

H

Would create a safety and aesthetic problem within the property that is not justified, so that's it.

H

Thank you very much, mr mantle. Mr mr ross, you just said okay, thank you. Anybody any further comment.

A

On the no we'll call for the vote, the motion is to approve, as presented mr rossi. Yes, mr eldridge, yes.

A

Ms margerson, yes, mr lee, yes, mr mcdonald, yes, mr mantle, yes and I vote yes as well, that was nice.

E

Okay, you're all you're all approved you're all set. Thank you.

O

A

Oh okay, it's just a few minutes before nine. Why don't we take five? No more than ten minutes max.

A

A big break: okay and we'll be right back we'll be right back.

A

Next item on the agenda is item d under new business and it reads as follows: request of.

A

Sandra l smith weiss owner for property located at 138 gate street, whereas relief is needed for.

A

Construction of a one-story rear mudroom with one half bath edition, which requires the following.

A

One variants from section 10.521 to allow 36 percent building coverage where 30 percent.

A

Is the maximum allowed to a variance from section 10.321 to allow a non-conforming building or.

A

Structure to be extended, reconstructed or enlarged, without conforming to the requirements of the.

A

Ordinance said, property is shown on assessor map, 103 lot 54 and lies within the general residence b.

A

Grb and historic districts who speaks in favor of this proposal, please good evening, ann whitney.

E

Architect for the project before I get started, um I'm just gonna hand around. uh They had their.

E

Neighbors, take a look. Yes, please yes started with mr mantle. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

E

And on that, the the two properties of budding them.

E

On either side of gate street have have reviewed the plans.

E

So basically, if you look at the site plan here, gate street's running vertically, it's.

E

A very small lot um and there's a big brick driveway with a gate and then there's a pretty.

E

Good size, brickstone patio, so this addition would be kind of nestled into the corner.

E

Between the main structure and an l that was put on.

E

I don't know when it's fairly old too, but it was definitely added after.

E

Take a look uh second page, you know, show some photos, um that's right.

E

The view from gate street, you would pretty hard to actually get a view of this edition. As you.

E

See it from great gate street, the lower two photos show the sort of niche where we'd be.

E

Putting this addition and then that's the rear elevation of the l and the floor plan just shows.

E

You know we're recreating the entry a little bit of a mud room, a half bath and then the other.

E

Addition is just expand a little bit of the kitchen space. At the same time,.

E

Third page, um you know, shows the elevations of this that right side, elevation is viewed.

E

From gate street and then that the addition sits behind there and then the rear elevation um shows.

E

The addition, on the left hand, side we're also doing some window changes, but that's for the hdc.

E

In terms of the criteria.

E

Very not contrary to public interest, and that many properties in this neighborhood are.

E

Non-Conforming to building areas and setbacks, the addition is tucked into the corner created by the.

E

Rear of the existing house and the second story, l that extends into the rear yard. The addition is.

E

Just partially visible from gate street and is within the required yard setbacks. Variances are.

E

Consistent with the spirit of the urine, so that it will allow this small addition to add needed.

E

Living space without adversely affecting the butters and the neighborhood substantial justice.

E

Will be done is this will allow a small this small addition again on this, undersized property.

E

The addition will be built over an existing patio and the landscape. Rear yard will not be affected.

E

These variances will not diminish the value of surrounding properties and the special.

E

Condition of this property is the non-conforming nonconformity of the existing residence and the.

E

Lot the lot at 2, 24 39 square feet is less than half the required 5 000 square foot in this zone.

E

um Are there any questions, anybody anything at this point? No, no, apparently, not. Okay! Thank you.

A

Is there anyone president who would like to speak in favor of this proposal? Anyone in favor.

A

Please come up and uh if we could have your name and address for the record, please I.

O

Thank you for this. Yes uh rick wiese, I live at 138 gay street. uh My wife owns it. We're.

O

In good relationships, so I live there too. So I'm speaking on our both our behalf.

O

Why do we want this addition? um We've downsized. We have two huge dogs and.

O

We would like an xy way where we can bring the dogs in let them dry off, uh whatever. Also the.

O

House doesn't have any classes and we really need a closet. So there's going to be a closet in there.

O

Which will be helpful for our needs and the existing bathroom is probably smaller than.

O

A cruise ship bathroom, it's tiny, and this will allow us to move the bathroom out of the kitchen.

O

And into the addition, it'll be updated, it'll be a little bit easier, it'll be handicapped, accessible.

O

um This is our final home, although we said that before, but this is definitely our final.

O

Resting place- and we would just like to get this a little bit up to snuff, for our living conditions.

O

Particularly with our dogs love it here, the addition will not impact the the actual yard.

O

I know it will impact the driveway so just tucked in that little area and I believe with.

O

Our butters I've spoken with them all directly, and everyone is okay with it. I think you realize.

O

Most of the properties in this neighborhood are um non-conforming, uh we're not uh doing anything.

O

Wild and crazy- it's just hopefully to help us out as we age in place here. So thank you. Thank you.

A

Anyone else to speak in advance. Excuse me anyone else to speak too far against too far against any.

A

Speakers at all anybody on the zoom this time, mr nope, no zoom interest tonight at all. Okay,.

A

Okay, we'll close the public hearing, uh you've heard the request board. What's your pleasure.

K

I'll offer a motion, mr mcdonald, thank you. uh The motion.

K

Will be to uh accept the application as presented? Thank you. uh There's a.

A

Second to the motion, mr rossi. Thank you, okay, mr mcdonald, your your motion, please.

K

um I've got to get my five criteria. um The variance is not contrary to the public interest.

K

um This proposal doesn't change any uh pedestrian or vehicular patterns. It doesn't narrow down.

K

Any streets it doesn't it, it simply doesn't do anything outside of the boundaries of its own lot.

K

And so, uh therefore it um it can't isn't able to be contrary to public interest. The.

K

Spirit of the ordinance is observed. um I think that kind of speaks for itself. The the same.

K

K

Apply in item in.

K

Number one are also at work in number two, the spirit of the ordinance is observed. There's no.

K

Change to the neighborhood.

K

Resulting from this, except for temporary construction.

K

The value of the surrounding properties are not diminished.

K

It's this is one of those unprovable but obvious things. What what they want to do with their houses.

K

Not going to hurt any neighbors property values, if it were, I expect the neighbors would be here with.

K

Excited looks on their face.

K

um Number five, the little the literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary.

K

Hardship, uh which means, because of special conditions of the property that distinguishes.

K

From other areas, there is no fair and substantial relationship between the general public purpose of.

K

The ordinance uh ordinance provision and specific application of that provision to the property.

K

What they are proposing is an extremely limited.

K

Increase in square footage that.

K

And if you go and see the property, as I'm sure most of us have done, you realize that what they.

K

Are asking to do is not going to spill over onto anybody else. It's all on their lawn.

K

The proposed use is a reasonable one. um I think that there's simply no question that adding.

K

Small additions that improve the convenience and usability of the property for the owners.

K

Satisfies the hardship that they need to add facilities and space.

K

To the house to accommodate their lifestyle.

K

And so I think they satisfy this requirement and therefore I'm proposing that we should accept this.

K

Application, thank you you second choice and mr rossi. I would only add that I would not normally.

H

Be in favor of a variance of this magnitude in building coverage. However, since it's only one.

H

Story a short uh height addition: uh it really doesn't affect the sense of crowdedness or.

H

Encroach on light or open space and the surrounding properties, and that's why I support it.

A

Thank you very much any other further comments before we take a vote. Those the motion is miss.

A

Margerson, um I I guess I struggle with this a little bit too in terms of the building coverage.

C

It's a fairly significant increase for such for a lot that is itself undersized. However,.

C

I you know at the end of the day, I don't really think that the public is harmed by.

C

By yeah, this variance request. Okay, thank you. Anybody else last call for comments. Okay, not we'll.

A

We'll take a vote. uh The vote is to approve, as presented uh mr rossi. Yes, ms eldridge.

A

Yes, ms margerson, yes, mr mr lee, yes, mr mcdonald, yes, mr mantle, yes and I vote yes as well,.

A

The vote is unanimous to approve it you're all set. Thank you. You're welcome.

A

Okay, moving right along we're at item e on the agenda, which reads as follows: request of trisha.

A

And kevin anderson owners for property located at 328 aldridge road, whereas relief is needed to.

A

Demolish an existing garage and construct a new 12 foot by 16 foot shed, which requires the following.

A

One, a variance from section 10.573.20 to allow a 5 foot left side yard where 10 feet is required, said.

A

Property is shown on a separate map 166 as lot 97. Excuse me it's lock, 49 and is located within.

A

The single residence b srb district, who speaks in favor of this proposal, please please come up.

P

Good evening, everyone hi, my name- is tricia anderson. I live at 328, aldrich road. um I.

P

Own it with my husband, kevin who was unable to be here tonight because he's not feeling well.

P

Unfortunately, um we live there with our three children. We have an eight-year-old a six-year-old.

P

And my baby just turned three last week and the reason that I'm here is, we have we bought the.

P

House about three and a half years ago and we bought it. We bought a house that had a garage.

P

That was in disrepair when we bought it. It has continued to sit and disrepair if you've passed.

P

It you can see it's it's pretty ugly, it's falling apart. um There are boards falling down, there's a.

P

Visible rot um on the structure inside and outside the ceiling is kind of caving in and every time it.

P

Rains the garage floods, um but really so it's pretty ugly, but the biggest thing honestly is.

P

It is a safety concern for my children they play in our backyard. They attempt to run.

P

We have an oversized when we bought our house. We bought a two family and we've converted it into a.

P

Single family, which is what it was originally when it was built in 1910, um so we have an oversized.

P

Garage from when a house was a two family, I'm sorry an oversized driveway from when the house.

P

Was a two family and now it's a single family again, so um we have this garage that runs at.

P

The end of an oversized driveway and kind of sits in the middle of our backyard, so our children in.

P

Order to run and play in our backyard are running around this structure that is literally rotting.

P

And has nails and is quite awful, um so what we'd like to do is tear down that structure. Remove.

P

um All the foundation work with a contractor and build a custom.

P

Shed that matches the look of our home and is very aligned with the look and the feel of other.

P

Sheds in the neighborhood, we just need a shed to store bikes and toys and all.

P

The sorts of things that we can't currently store in our garage as it's it's not working.

P

The other thing we'd like to do- and this is not really necessarily related to the variance.

P

But I'll just mention is that we want to. We want to cut back our our oversized driveway a.

P

Little bit and plant additional grass again to give our children more space to run and.

P

Play in our backyard um and we'd like to put this shed that I'm proposing that we build.

P

um Closer to um the side of our property, the side that abuts our neighbors at 312, aldrich road.

P

They have been very, very supportive of this plan. They're lovely people.

P

um They wrote a letter, that's in in your in materials, suggesting their support for this plan.

P

And it doesn't affect their them and their house, um I don't think it'll affect any other neighbors.

P

I try to talk to all the neighbors. I could about this just to make sure everybody was.

P

Comfortable with it and nobody had questions, we wrote notes, we put things on.

P

You know we tried to talk to everybody um just to make sure we had our bases covered.

P

We'd never done this before so maybe we did overkill, but we really wanted to make.

P

Sure that people were comfortable with what we proposed and everybody seemed very supportive and.

P

Frankly, excited to have the disgusting um garage: that's a kind of an eyesore taken down.

P

So I guess in conclusion, um we think these changes will not be in contra, contrary to.

P

The public interest um and the spirit of the ordinance will be observed um and substantial.

P

Justice will be done um for the reasons I just mentioned and that we think that we are.

P

um We are just building in, um we are replacing kind of again an unneeded, unsafe structure.

P

With a smaller um one, that's in line with the neighbors and and character of the home.

P

And we think that the value of the surrounding properties will not be diminished by us doing this.

P

And that literal enforcement of the provisions would result in unnecessary hardship.

P

Specifically, we would have to put a replacement shed where our current garage sits, which again.

P

Only sits there because we have this old, long, driveway um and that is again kind of right in.

P

The center of our backyard, where our children would play so we're just trying to push it off.

P

The side so we have uninterrupted yard space and I think that's all I have to say thank you. Thank.

P

You any questions for the speaker, mr mantle, um so you're, basically replacing the shed. That's been.

D

Called a garage with another shed, it is, I think, I think it's a legal garage, my understanding with.

P

The city- I don't I'm not sure if I'm using the right terms, um I drove by the house today.

D

There's a huge tree right in front of your shed correct.

P

um It's it's off the side of it, yeah just to the left, who owns the the other shed. The mayor, family.

P

The mayor family on their property is that what you're talking about right? Next to your shed? Okay,.

D

Is a smaller dark green? It almost looks metal yes, so that's on the other side of the retaining wall.

D

So it looks like it's on your property. That's why I was asking so there are two things just.

P

I'm sorry just to be clear, though so the mayor family has a garage um for their cars way farther.

D

Back in the house, yes, it's further back and that abuts our property um and then we have currently.

P

Because again, we literally can't store anything in our current garage because because you know.

P

We have children's toys and stuff. We have like a temporary. Like a, I don't know, it's like an.

P

Eight by eight uh correct, but that's yours as well, it is, but we will not keep that.

P

Like that, okay, that we absolutely we have no intention to keep that. That's not our style.

D

That's my question because I saw two sheds there yeah. No, that is just literally because we can't.

P

Keep our kids bikes in the garage because they get disgusting every time it rains. So this is the.

O

Solution, yes, thank you any questions on this down here, nope all right. Thank you very much. Thank you.

A

Anyone else to comment two for against four pro anti 2 4 anything nope, no, okay, crowds thinned.

A

Out all right, anybody on just for the record, anybody on zoom, no, no, no one's, obviously, no.

A

No, I no, I said the crowds thinned out yeah, they didn't want to speak. I just asked okay.

A

Yeah, oh okay, yeah! No, just checking it out yeah! No! I just I disinvited them. Okay, all set okay.

A

Public public hearings closed what you. What's your pleasure board, the.

A

uh Proposal is pretty straightforward here, yeah I just just before we have a motion. I.

H

Just want to say how much I appreciated seeing the letter from the neighbors we often get.

H

Contentious uh neighborhood disputes coming to the board, it's very nice to see uh two neighbors who.

H

uh Enjoy cooperating with each other, it's kind of uplifting, so I appreciated seeing that yes,.

A

And I'd like to comment that speaking of trees, I saw, I was glad to see on the plan that that.

A

Handsome big tree on the uh near the retaining wall is going to be be retained because it's.

A

On the plan, so that's good in front in front of the temporary the sheet metal shed: yeah, okay, okay,.

A

We got that I'll square it away. Does anyone have a motion please missed? Oh did. Did mr rossi make.

D

A motion no idea, no motion yet waiting for one then I'll. Do it make a motion to.

D

um Approve as presented, thank you and mr rossy second. Thank you, mr manly. Your motion, please. um I.

D

Believe the variance is not in uh contrary to the public interest. Spirit of the ordinance is.

D

Observed substantial justice is done, the values of surrounding property are not diminished, it only.

D

Would enhance it considering the condition of the car's shed and little enforcement of.

D

The ordinance would be an unnecessarily hardship. Therefore, I will support this.

A

Thank you, mr rossi. I have nothing to add. Okay. Thank you. Anybody any further question before.

A

We take the vote. No, no questions, no comments. Okay, very good. The motion is to approve, as presented.

A

This was that down here, mr mantle. Yes,.

A

Mr mcdonald, yes, mr lee, yes, ms martinson, yes, miss eldridge, yes, mr rossi, yes and I.

A

Vote. Well, yes as well! Thank you. You're all you're approved you're all set you're welcome; okay, okay,.

A

Okay, as previously announced the next item on the agenda, excuse me, which is item f, request.

A

To postpone 535 635 sagamore avenue has been already addressed and passed by the board so.

A

We don't need to deal with it now. That brings us to item g.

A

Which is a request of savannah mary faudero and if I mispronounce, please correct me and tyler jacob.

A

Fourth offer please again: please press request correct my pronunciation.

A

For property located at 629 broad street, whereas relief is needed for.

A

Upward expansion of an existing garage, which requires the following one: a variance from.

A

Section 10.521 to allow a two foot front side: front yard, where one fifteen feet is required.

A

To a variance from section ten point three to one to allow a non-conforming building or structure.

A

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

A

Said property is shown on a session map 221 as lot 13 and lies within the general residence. A.

A

Gra district who speaks in favor, please my name is tyler fordhofer, I'm the owner of 629 broad street.

L

I live there currently with my wife, savannah. We've owned the property since may of last year. 2021.

L

We currently have about a 400 square foot garage that roughly half of it lies within the setback.

L

So it's an existing non-conforming structure, as is today, um if you can go to the second page, please.

L

um So the garage today currently has a flat gravel roof uh that gravel roof has deteriorated beyond.

L

The point of repair in its current condition and and architectural style, it's also just.

L

Roughly a bad design for new england roofs, so it currently leaks directly into the garage and then.

L

It also drains uh down the back wall, which causes a rust stain um that you can see from.

L

The jones outside, so um the picture you're viewing right now, is standing on jones ave.

L

The existing height of the roof is eight feet, um and the proposed height would be 12 feet, so we're.

L

Replacing the flat gravel roof with a pitched asphalt roof to match the existing style and.

L

Look of the roofing on the rest of the house, so that's that's overall kind of what we're trying.

L

To do with the garage, um the criteria for the variants is um the variant's not contrary to.

L

Public interest and that many properties in the neighborhood are also not conforming to building.

L

Area and setbacks: it's also a modification to an existing non-conforming structure.

L

And that it's a repair, the variants consistent with the spirit of the ordinance.

L

And that will allow this modification which allow further improvements. We also have various.

L

Fireproofing to do inside the garage, since it is just open construction, open, studs, open ceiling.

L

Lack of outlets, lack of lighting, some other various improvements that need to happen inside.

L

The garage as well substantial justice will be done as this work will allow the owner to improve.

L

The property without affecting adjacent properties it it, if anything, it makes the house look better.

L

And it fits the garage style and structure, that's actually directly across the street on the jones.

L

Side, the variants will not diminish the value surrounding properties and little enforcement.

L

Would cause unnecessary hardship since the existing roof does currently leak, as it is today.

L

That's all I have. We appreciate brevity, that's good.

A

That's it and we give you a lot more privacy on your deck. It sure will, I hope so.

A

uh Any any comments from anybody, any questions, none any anything for the speaker. No apparently.

A

Not thank you. Does anybody uh have a motion ready? Perhaps you have to you know. That's too.

D

Far against I gotta close it: okay, yeah I'm going to skip that. I will make the motion to thank.

D

Mr chairman, I would make the motion to uh approve the application as presented. Thank.

A

You is there a second I'll. Second, mr lee, thank you, mr mantle. Your emotion, if you would please.

D

Make sure I'm doing this by the numbers um to the five criteria? The variance is.

D

Not contrary to the public interest, spirit of the ordinance is observed. Substantial justice is done.

D

Values and diminishing values of diminishing properties, the values of surrounding properties.

D

Are not diminished, in fact, by the improvements of the area and literal enforcement of the ordinance.

D

Would result in an unnecessary hardship? I am familiar with your house. I've been inside it many.

D

Times my daughter was a friend of the owners there. uh It's a cute place, uh never liked the garage.

D

And I looking at the house, I suspect the garage was an add-on.

D

um Considering what the house looks like um yeah, it's I'm surprised. You didn't ask for more.

D

As far as second story or whatever, but for the garage- yes, I like it.

A

Thank you very much. Do you want to do you want to touch on the.

A

Points on the criteria, just for the record you did, I just did. I went through all five. Ok.

C

So I just I want to note uh just for the record that the there really is no increase in the.

C

Variance request here, because the existing secondary front yard is already two feet.

C

um And so you know it really there's it's just really allowing a non-conforming structure to be.

C

uh Reconstructed so yeah, do you want to call this request yeah? If you want to call it a.

A

Mini vertical expansion, you can, I suppose, yeah okay, you mean like a nuisance variance. Yes, yes,.

E

Strictly strict around here administrative areas, right, yes,.

A

Anybody anything further before we take a vote, the last the favorite vote of the evening.

A

The motion is to approve uh mr rossi. Yes, ms ms bro.

A

Yes, something's not working tonight, mr lee. Yes, mr mcdonald, yes just the mantle, yes and I vote.

A

Yes as well, thank you anything. Any anybody and you're you're all approved and you're all set.

A

Thank you, you're, welcome any anything before we close up shop. Anybody wants to comment.

A

On or add, or any any comments on, the uh new technology that you haven't given to mr stiff. Yes,.

C

Just so the public knows if, if at least I seem distracted, this is our first meeting with her.

C

New ipads I was listening. I was just trying to make sure I was working this. Thank you.

E

Correctly, no disrespect to any of the applicants or butters.

A

Okay, someone has a favorite motion. Does someone have a favorite motion of the evening.

D

Motion to adjourn is there a second lots of them lots of impressions, those in favor, aye, aye.

C