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

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: 7.19.2022 Board of Adjustment

Description

7.19.2022 Board of Adjustment

A

Good evening, everyone present in person or via television or zoom or any other means. Perhaps this.

A

Is the regular meeting of the board of adjustment for this month and we have a full agenda as usual,.

A

And I'm going to uh just briefly explain the format that we follow.

A

Before we get into the announcements as to some postponements or requests for postponements,.

A

When, when we hear the proposal from the presenter, that will be normally 15 minutes, if it requires.

A

More than that, we ask that the presenter of the project ask for a five-minute addition before they.

A

Start speaking for a total of twenty minutes after that and questions on the board, if there are any.

A

uh We'll call for speakers in favor limited to five minutes speakers in it in opposition limited.

A

To five minutes, and then two four are against the third category: two for or against doesn't require.

A

Any has no time limit associated with it, but we simply ask that people be succinct and stick to.

A

The main points that they wish to make in uh in uh you know regard for everyone's time, so that's.

A

Excuse me: that's the general uh proposal and that's the way we'll proceed this evening.

A

The first uh item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes of june 27. Excuse me june 22.

A

This year our last meeting is there a comment on the board? Is there any need to make any changes.

A

Corrections additions deletions, if not, is there a motivation, mr mantle? Thank you very much. Israel.

A

Second to that motion. Second, second, thank you, mr lee, uh mr mail. Your motion to approve please it's.

B

The minutes we have to approve them as written. Thank you, mr lee. It's a very succinct concur. Thank.

A

You both uh those in favor the voice vote, will do on this uh of the minutes as presented to us.

A

Please say aye aye any opposed any abstentions. No thank you very much. Okay under old business.

A

We have a request for 470 lincoln avenue for a one-year extension. This was approved by the board.

A

And has not been constructed or a building permit pulled. Apparently so is there a.

A

Motion with respect to that request for a one-year extension of 470 lincoln avenue project.

B

Make a motion to approve a one-year extension for the applicant at 470, lincoln avenue. Thank you, mr.

A

Mantle uh second on that second, miss ma. Excuse me, ms eldridge, thank you. uh Your motion again.

A

um The board routinely grants one year except uh extensions. I see no reason why we shouldn't grant.

B

This okay is aldridge anything further. No thank you. Okay, a voice vote again, those in favor of the.

A

Proposal for a one-year extension, please say: aye any opposed. None, okay, carried very good. Okay.

A

A a couple of items that I I would propose we take out of order.

A

For the interest of time in case people have just come for those particular items and if.

A

The proposals are granted, they will not be heard tonight. The first of those requests to postpone.

A

Is the request for the property at 108, burkett street and that's a routine.

A

uh Proposed request to propose to postpone that which would normally be one month.

A

So is the rate make a motion. Thank you to postpone it. Thank you. Second.

A

Success yep, mr mr lee, thank you. Okay. You're again, your motion, mr mantle applicants, requesting.

B

A postponement, I see, no reason not to grant it. Okay, mr lee, thank you. Okay, good! All right.

A

And we have another, we have one other request to remember.

C

uh Yes, just for the for the record, a voice vote for that. Please in the favor of postponement,.

C

Hi all right, thank you any any objections. No okay! Thank you and a late request.

A

For a another postponement, that's not on the agenda! The printed agenda anyway, with.

A

The same thing: a request to postpone for the project at 67, ridges court.

A

Is there a motion with respect to that miss miss rogerson? I move to postpone the application.

D

Of 67 ridges court for one month as requested. Thank you. Is there a second to that motion? Second,.

A

Mr rossi, thank you, miss miss rogerson. Your motion, please nothing for the dad okay, mr rossi. Nothing.

A

Further: okay, a voice vote on that. Please all right all right, any any objections: okay, carrie, good, okay,.

A

Those that takes care of the preliminary business that we have to deal with.

A

So that brings us to the first item under all business.

A

Excuse me the second item under all business, which is a rehearing request for 225 banfield.

A

Road for the project that was proposed at that location and and uh approved by this board.

A

And we, as everyone has had an opportunity, I trust to read the.

A

Request for postponement. uh Excuse me rehearing, you're hearing. Is there any discussion on.

A

That this is this is not a public hearing. This is a board decision, discussion, indus and decision.

A

The request is to conduct for this board to conduct a re-hearing.

A

Miss margerson I am in favor over rehearing. I believe that I went back looked at the tape.

D

Of this, and um I believe that the board erred in this um and therefore I would move that we rehear.

D

This application, you, you move a every hearing, be granted yes, okay, thank you is. Is there a second to.

A

The motion to rehear the uh application is there a second I'll? Second, mr mantle. Thank you. Okay,.

A

Miss madison your uh your motion, please! Well I I don't really have anything further to add the.

D

A butter pike industries uh submitted a motion for rehearing that is very comprehensive and I think.

D

Pointed out the ways in which we, as the board um erd in granting this uh variance application.

D

um I, as was demonstrated by the applicant's attorney at the hearing.

D

There really is no hardship with respect to this property and therefore I would move that we.

D

Rehear it to fix our error. Okay, uh mr mantle. um I agree. I don't see how how not having rehearing.

B

Benefits anybody I'd; rather, we hear it at the board of adjustment before this leaves the.

B

City and I'd much rather have us get it right, no matter how many times we have to deliberate on it,.

A

Thank you. Thank you and uh further question further comments from anybody else on the board.

A

Nothing no, mr ross is not present at that meeting, but I do plan on voting on this motion uh when it.

E

You know uh all right when the time comes, uh because I did go back and review the record.

E

uh And uh feel that I am in a position to vote. You feel confident that you've.

A

Had enough information, that's correct all right! Thank you. Okay, uh any anybody else.

A

Have any comments on the motion which is to to grant the re-hearing anybody else? No, no! No! Okay!.

A

That's sure, yes, I'm sorry miss eldridge. I went back over the minutes and I realized that for.

C

Me this was a really difficult decision and I would be in favor of a re-hearing.

C

So that we can kind of get everything out there again and very persuasive.

A

All right, thank you. Thank you. Anybody the motion again. The motion is to.

A

Grant the rehearing request is there any other before I call for the vote is, which should be a.

A

Roll call vote any anybody else have anything to add. Add to the discussion at this point.

A

No apparently not okay, the the motion again is to.

A

Grant the rehearing request and I'll start down at the right hand and mr mantle yes,.

A

Yes, mr mcdonald, yes, mr mcdonald, mr lee, no okay, ms margerson, yes, ms eldridge, yes,.

A

Mr rossi, yes and the chairman, my my vote, is no so uh the motion carries. It carries five five to two.

A

So a re rehearing will be uh scheduled right, we'll put that on the next one's agenda, all right.

A

And the expectation from mr smith is that plan on it being next month's regular agenda.

A

Excuse me regular agenda. Okay, now that that having been taken care of, let's go ahead.

A

And vote on uh discuss the variance requested for one congress street. Mr chairman: does it make sense.

E

To do it in this order, or should we discuss the appeal first? No, this what we're going to do in.

A

This order, I know the last the last time the order of the the appeal and the variance were we're.

A

Reversed from what they are tonight, and maybe once you after you read the record, the applicant can.

C

Have requested that they go in this order, so maybe he can provide some.

C

Information yeah, no, that's a good point, but it was different. Last time: okay, yes, who's, uh presenting.

A

The uh case for one congress greet tonight please good evening, mr chair and members of the board, my.

F

Name is fx bruton, I'm with brutana baraby in dover, and I'm here on behalf of the applicant.

F

One market square llc for the property located at one concur street. So in terms of the order we.

F

Are looking to ask for a variance that I believe the memo that went out from staff today said.

F

They were favorable with respect to that, so our thought is if we did get the variance.

F

Then we would ask simply that the appeal be stayed or continued uh just uh to the extent.

F

uh That we weighed out any appeal period for the grant to the variance. So that's our theory.

F

With that that we wouldn't even have to go to that point tonight, uh if the variance is granted.

F

In any event, um I think I have a question if that's something? Yes, yes, certainly, but if.

D

The administrative appeal were overruled. You wouldn't need to go for a variance.

F

uh That is correct, except that could be appealed too and we'd like to get the variance.

F

uh We'd like to get the board's position on the variants as well we're we're inclined.

F

To ask for the variants and supported by staff, and we think you would support it.

F

And we just preserved that argument. If we had to, I find it very unusual for staff to take a.

E

Position and describe it exactly to the board of adjustment. I feel very uncomfortable with that.

D

So when maybe peter can actually clarify this, when you say staff was in support of the variants.

D

What do you mean? I believe that there's a report where they said that what we were asking for.

F

Was consistent with what the ordinance would provide in that area, uh I don't think they've.

F

Come out to say you should vote for it and clearly, obviously this board is the arbiter of that vote.

D

I'm sorry I'm very confused. Yes, so am I yeah? Actually so you're saying staff said that what.

B

You're asking for is consistent with what's in the area. Yes, even though it's against the zoning.

B

Well, if I can present the case, I think you would understand what that means. What I mean by that.

F

And, and rather than take that, uh if you listen to my presentation as you normally would, I think.

F

You'll come to that conclusion, so I'll leave it. I wasn't even going to bring up the staff.

E

Memo but you brought it up and I I didn't submit it. I think it's part of the record, so I'm just.

F

Talking about what what they said, but in any event the issue of the order um again, we would.

F

Like to present the request for the variants, and if you would agree that the variance is.

F

Granted then, we would not need to ask for the appeal administrative decision be held tonight.

F

And we would just ask that that be continued pending any appeal of our grant of a variance.

F

And and I've done that in the past and other boards and I'm not trying to make.

F

It confusing I mean I'm here and I'm happy to argue that as well, if the variance is denied.

D

I think I would like to ask and I'm happy to switch the order too. If, if the board is.

F

Concerned by that, I'm happy to argue the appeal of administrative decision. First, I that was.

D

The was way it was supposed to be at the march meeting. um I don't know the rest of the board's.

D

Feelings but I I feel that the administrative appeal should come first and then the variance.

D

And you know, I did note that the uh the staff memo was here and I guess what you're.

D

Refunding referring to is the stamp findings. Yes section yes, um and it says the staff would.

D

Respectfully suggest that this board find this application is consistent with the purpose intent.

D

Of the zoning ordinance, you know, with all due respect, it's up to this board to decide.

D

What it is, I completely agree. I I haven't said anything other than that. I totally agree with you.

D

So I I mean it's, uh I don't know if you'll need a vote, but I I personally think that the.

D

Administrative appeals should come first, if you, if you want to make that emotion, why? I think we can.

A

That would certainly be I'm happy to um ask that that be the case. You don't even have to vote on it.

F

So if that's your wish, I don't know how they feel so either one should I just want to present it.

F

It's fine we're going to change the agenda. It should be a vote yeah, okay, so I I would uh move.

D

That we hear the administrative appeal first, all right is there a second to that. Yes, mr lee, okay.

A

As much, I believe that it's more appropriate to hear the administrative appeal, which is I.

D

Understand it from the materials at the february march supposed to be the march meeting, and this.

D

Meeting may negate the need for our variance, so I think it's appropriate that that should come first.

D

All right, mr lee, I'm in complete agreement. I just said we we just got the staff member when.

G

We walked in today, so it's dated today too, by the way. So it's really we haven't had time to read it.

A

Okay, I I suspect the voice vote will be sufficient on this administ.

A

On this administrative detail, yeah those in favor of the motion, which is to reverse the order of the.

A

Two issues with respect to the variance and the appeal on one congress street, uh please say: aye.

A

All right any any opposed, not opposed. Okay, there we are done all right. We will.

A

Do it in the same order as it was uh proposed for last time, so one congress street appeal very well.

F

Thank you, mr chair members of the board. My name is fx bruton, I'm here on behalf of uh the applicant.

F

One market street llc excuse me one market square llc and we're bringing forward a request for a.

F

Field of administrative decision- and I think I can simplify this in terms of what we had.

F

Presented to the planning director, who is an administrative officer under your code.

F

And their decision and our response to that and our subsequent appeal.

F

uh Basically, um just to outline the project, um as you know, uh this project involves.

F

The renovation and construction of portions of property, located at one congress street prior to.

F

Submitting our appeal of this parcel, which is now merged, was two parcels just a little bit of.

F

Context, um if you think of uh congress street uh in market square uh behind it, as you may.

F

Understand if you go down high street towards the parking garage there's a vacant lot and so.

F

That lot and the front of that lot into congress street were merged and are owned by the applicant.

F

The project has gone through a lot of work through the htc and a primary consultation or conceptual.

F

Plan review with the planning board so there's been changes in the project.

F

And I'll report to you that, with the work of the developer, design, team, htc and staff.

F

And input from the planning board the request that we present for the variants.

F

Has been reduced in size down to two feet: nine and a half inches in terms of going over.

F

The height restrictions, so it was higher than that, um and so I think that's a good.

F

Thing: that's a sign of the developer, trying to address those issues, but nonetheless, in the zone.

F

The front parcel, which was formerly lot 15, which is depicted on the materials that we submitted.

F

Is in the cd5 zone, the back portion is in the cd4 zone. It's the of all the butters. It's the.

F

Only lot in the cd4 zone, so it's a little bit unique in that respect in the front bop 15.

F

You your ordinance, uses colors to define numbers of stories.

F

And the height of a building, you have a map and it has colors on it and based upon those colors.

F

Around each parcel, you then determine where do you fit so in the front, the color is orange.

F

And the color orange allows for a building to be 45 feet high. The back parcel is green.

F

And green on your table allows a building to be 40 feet high. The way you define your building height.

F

Is to plot every five feet around the building and then come up with an average and.

F

In in our case, this building that we're proposing is 42 feet, nine and a half inches.

F

So for context, the front of the building is around 45 feet. The newly constructed portion would be.

F

About 42 feet, but the bottom line is when we add up all of the numbers again.

F

We come up to 42 feet, nine and a half inches, so one would suspect. Okay.

F

That's why you need a variance because the green says 40 feet and our entire building.

F

Is 42 feet now again remember if you will, in the context that the orange also encompasses.

F

Our building and allows for 45 feet, which we are not going to so that was the work that we did. We.

F

Went through all that process from 49 feet, 11 inches. Excuse me: 45 44, feet and 11 inches.

F

Down to 42 feet, 9 and a half inches, so all that being said, your zoning ordinance also.

F

Has another provision which I've outlined in the document and in it under section 10.5 a 21.22.

F

There's a provision that talks about lots that have two different colors associated with them and.

F

Again, we have orange in the front and green in the back. So how do you interpret that? What does that.

F

Mean what is our allowable height and that's the question that we asked from the city's perspective.

F

They interpret the clause to mean that the front portion can be 45 feet which we're not.

F

uh And then, based on provisions of basically article, a and c of that and and I I did present.

F

That in our documents, uh if it's, if you're within 50 feet from the front lot line or a street.

F

Then you can be whatever that color is, if you will 50 feet beyond that.

F

You would have to also com comply with the front lot line or street the interesting.

F

Thing is that the front lot line definition in your ordinance says where the address is. That's.

F

The that's the building height allowance that you have so in this case we have one congress sheet.

F

Is the address of the building and that's in the orange and our position is that would allow.

F

Us 45 feet all the way back down high street, because that's the that's the edge of the lot.

F

The staff came up with an interpretation that no.

F

You can you can only have a what they called a spillover, which means you can only have the.

F

Orange go into the green in an area that is not within 50 feet of a street, so you get kind of a.

F

An odd interpretation and in a sense convoluted because in the back portion of the lot.

F

You're allowed to have a chunk and I think the staff showed you a picture.

F

Of that chunk, if you will of orange but then the rest has to be green.

F

And that just doesn't make sense in terms of you know, building a building.

F

And it's also inconsistent. We believe, with the ordinance and I'll, tell you why, specifically and.

F

That's because in the ordinance it says, basically, you can measure from a front line or a street.

F

And we've argued we are measuring from the front line one congress street all the way back.

F

If it said and a street, then we would have to do this bifurcated chunking up that the.

F

Staff did, but it doesn't say that and in fact the staff and the city is now going through.

F

A rezoning process to change that language really because we made that argument and I think they.

F

See the merit in the argument, so it's a little convoluted because you got you know, greens and.

F

Oranges and different lots and all that, but but it is simple at the same time, there's a legal.

F

Argument and there's a common sense argument. The common sense argument is: if you have a building.

F

That's allowed to be one height, and it goes to the back, and your provision in the ordinance says.

F

A building height may increase to the highest building height standard designated for the.

F

Lot it does say that if that's what it says, then this entire lot would be allowed to go to 45 feet.

F

Now again, just pointing out the good thing is we're not doing that we're going to 42 feet, 9.

F

And a half inches, but that's within the 45 feet and that's why we don't believe we need a variance.

F

So I apologize if that's convoluted, but.

F

It's uh I tried to kind of boil it down to what our disagreement was with staff.

F

But the common sense is you're going to have a take that chunk. That was identified by the.

F

Staff you're going to have a building, that's 45 heat there, and then you have to drop down for.

F

No apparent reason to 40 feet. It just doesn't make sense. But again, our argument is supported.

F

In the uh variants, excuse me in the ordinance and as a result of that, the city is now changing that.

F

Because of our argument, so I think that's indicative that we we took the right path. There.

F

And that's why we don't need the variance. Thank you it's much. Doesn't the interpretation lie on.

D

What haven court is it's your position? It's not a street! It's the city's position that it is right.

F

So let me talk about that for a little bit um haven, court and and in your packet, you have a plan.

F

That plan was uh commissioned by the city of portsmouth a number of years ago.

F

Because there was going to be a purchase by the city of a small portion of that area, haven, court.

F

That was associated with the j.j newberry building, so they had james vera, go out and survey it and.

F

They- and he indicated with his research that that was a public road. Excuse me, private road, private.

F

Way we understand and I don't think the city disagrees we have. My client has title to that area.

F

As well, I don't think there's any dispute about that. The only question is: is it a street or not.

F

We had john chagnin go out and do the same survey and research and he came to that conclusion. Most.

F

Important that vera plan that was done for the city was presented to the planning board.

F

And signed off so there's a designation even by the planning board that that's.

F

Private way, but let me tell you why it doesn't even matter because our argument is.

F

It's the front lot line or a street, so even if it was a street, we can still measure from the front.

F

Lot line and we can still go all the way back even to a street, and we can go back to high street too.

F

So that is why the issue in a sense doesn't really matter, but the city was going to.

F

Go back and talk to mr vera, but we haven't caught up since then. If we'll put it that way,.

F

But there's nothing that suggests to me that that's a public street and your.

F

Ordinance specifically defines a street in only two ways, either laid out or as depicted on a.

F

Subdivision plan and and again the planning board signed off on a designation. It's a private way, but.

F

I would again emphasize it doesn't matter if this ordinance is written. The way we interpret it.

F

You go from the front of the street where the address is back.

F

Or you can go from a street again they're now changing that, because I think they see that that's.

F

Not what they want, but I don't know why, because again, you're going to have a chunked up building.

F

Yes, actually, I think it does matter, because there really are two separate arguments that you're.

E

Making and I find myself in agreement on the haven court part of your argument, but I read the ore.

E

As an inclusive or not an exclusive or- and I think that is the standard legal way of reading.

E

That text, I don't think that it is standard to read it as an exclusive or.

E

Nor does it make sense in the context of the ordinance the way it is written to read it as an.

E

Exclusive or so I think both of those things are uh to be considered separately, because I and the.

E

Reason I say that is because I think if we agree with that, you know I don't know what the other.

E

Board members feel, but I feel like if we agree that, uh with your interpretation of this being.

E

An exclusive or then that may have implications throughout the zoning ordinance where the word or.

E

Is used and we'll be kind of forced into always looking at it as exclusive, where I just don't.

E

Think it always is, and I don't think it is in this case either yeah I mean again. Our argument is.

F

That, when you're interpreting it it's uh an independent coordinating conjunction.

F

There are coordinated conjunctions and which means that you have to satisfy all of those.

F

But zoro separates that yeah, it's also possible to have written the ordinance as or but not both or.

E

Something like that, which was not the way it was written, so I take it as an inclusive war.

A

Miss margin, I think, returning to the street argument um haven court. So your client owns that.

D

In fee right- and it's a has an access easement for the property next to correct, um I don't mean.

F

To interrupt you, but that's another reason why you would expect that it is a private way, as opposed.

F

To public, because if it was public, you wouldn't need that easement jj newberry wouldn't need that.

F

Easement to go through a public street, but in any event I apologize and cars travel on that.

F

Delivery trucks do but, but again that's consistent with the easement okay so and we're not trying.

F

To take that away by the way we've been in conjunct in discussions and we're fully in.

F

Favor of everything that they do now they can do tomorrow, um and but there is, if you look at.

D

The definitions in the ordinance access way is a privately owned, roadway, sidewalk or passageway.

D

Whether improved or unimproved utilizes, the principle or accessory means of ingress or.

D

Egress in connection with any use, so it shall be classified in the same manner as the use it serves.

H

The public and it serves vehicular traffic yeah. The public street definition, however, is limited.

F

And it's not including the prescriptive legal way that one public street can can occur.

F

It's limited to what is shown on a site plan. Excuse me a subdivision plan approved by the.

F

Planning board, or as laid out and accepted by the city council, those are the only two.

F

Ways that this ordinance defines a street but the definition of street says roadway.

F

I think that's why the staff thoroughfare roadway.

D

Thoroughfare roadway and an access way is a private roadway. Well,.

F

My understanding is the definition or the. Let's put it this way, the the provision.

F

That I'm referring to only refers to public street or street. Excuse me.

F

And that street has that that specific definition, not what you're referring to.

F

There's a definition of street in the ordinance that is limited only to what I described.

D

I think it's a little bit less clear than that um the city paves and meet and.

D

Snow plows that road and the city owns the road in fee going further up correct the city.

F

Owns uh it's not a road per se. As you may know, the area drops off, so it's not width and all that.

F

It's not defined on that plan as a street or as part of the street. I think it was more of a.

F

Just a parcel of land that they they there was no interest in uh from what we understand.

F

From the butter, even no interest in terms of just liability and having it, and this.

F

The city decided to take it over, but they did a subdivision of it. They did excuse me they. They.

F

Did a subdivision for it and that was approved and again the private way designation was was applied.

D

Okay, thank you.

A

Mr mantle, um what was the purpose of merging the two lots? uh The purpose is to build a uh is to.

F

Construct this uh building and and remodel what exists in a historic way.

F

And keep things that are in the front, so the purpose is to have one building.

B

Okay, you could have done all that without merging the two lots.

F

You typically don't do that. You merge the lot.

F

So that you have one lot and you have one building on the parcel, you don't.

F

Want to cross lines because you have an issue of setbacks and things of that nature: okay,.

A

Okay, any but miss elders. No! No! Oh sorry! Anybody anybody else at this point, any any comments. No.

D

I just one last so looking at the map I mean the the reality is: is that the back of this lob 15.

D

The lower building height and then all the surrounding properties.

D

Have lower building height, they're, all green.

F

But in reality, if you look at the pierce building, it's in excess of what we're proposing, if you look.

F

At the obviously, the the the parking structure is in excess of what we're proposing the existing.

F

Building is in act is in excess of the 42 feet, so everything around us is generally higher than us.

F

And I and I think, even in the staff's memo on the variants they mentioned, that everything around us.

F

Is either between 44 and 48 feet again, we're we're going to be asking if we have to for 42.

F

Feet: nine and a half inches four reasons that relate to you know ada, and things like that.

F

Not because we want a big building, but again I mean this. The the massing of this building.

F

Completely fits within that area, but it also is something that is favorably received by the hdc.

F

Which is important to us and that's why we were able to try and bring it down to.

F

You know the bare minimum, what we needed, which is for ada purposes, which I can describe later.

F

So we're not trying to max this out per se, we're just we're. You know we're we're dealing with very.

F

Unique situation too: uh it's it's two zones. It's it's two height colors, it's very unique. I don't.

F

I'm not sure this exists in the city, otherwise, there's there's other lots along marcus square.

D

That have the same issue. They have orange in the front and green in the back, and the city seems to.

D

Have been very deliberate in making sure that the ones right off of market square were green.

F

I I can tell you that, in a workshop related to the zoning changes, I think mr cracknell.

F

Indicated there wasn't much thought with respect to this designation for this lot.

F

But nonetheless, I still think the arguments stand on their own.

F

Okay, any can I just have one shuttle. Yeah, certainly point you, you know, portsmouth has and.

F

And I obviously you have it: portsmouth has a list of public roads and um obviously haven court is.

F

Not on that, so I think that's indicative that it's not a public way, but in any event, I I just wanted.

F

To point that out, I know I put it in the materials and you have it so. Thank you. I think I think you.

A

Would have to realize I I think you can agree that has been used as a public way for decades.

A

It has been, I can tell you that. Well, it's not a public road, but believe me, it has been used.

A

As as, as, though, were what we, what that, what we want to do is we want to enliven that area and.

F

We want to encourage that use, so we're not opposed to that. This is us getting down in this minutia of.

F

What these definitions are and what these very kind of difficult regulations are that are now.

F

Being changed because the city sees them as that, but the overall use here is going to.

F

Be spectacular and it's going to be open to the public, and we want to encourage that. And we want.

F

To respect the rights of jd newberry and we've had those discussions face to face with them, so we're.

F

Not we're not trying to knock this. You know close this off at all, we're at completely the opposite.

F

And those plans that you see show that show all the lighting and.

F

All the wires going from building the building to really liven this place up.

A

Okay, any any further comments from the board or questions or anything at this point, just yes, yes,.

E

Mr rossi, just so that clear on the appeal: uh if for the two elements of the appeal, uh if we.

E

Were to interpret war as being exclusive, then the haven road question is really not relevant.

E

Because what's happening right because yeah uh what's happening, is that the interpretation of.

E

The city staff is that you have to have that 50-foot setback right, I mean the streets. This.

F

Is the plan right here where you see that little chunk? So if only if, if the interpretation of or.

E

Is, though, that it is actually inclusive and that it could mean and like and or then.

E

The haven road street issue becomes important because that's what's limiting your extension.

E

To that spill over to the back of the lot line, I agree with you. That's that's going to make sure.

F

You're correct.

A

Okay, any anything mr mantle one, more you're calling the entire project one congress street.

B

Yes, okay and the red zone is three stories 45 feet with a short fourth or the orange zone.

B

And the green zone go ahead, yeah just to be clear, and I would have clarified that I can.

F

Clarify this man, okay, this map shows the blue is, um and these colors were not they're not on any.

C

Zone we just did it for this. Map represents the um 45 foot high buildings, three stories.

C

Short fourth, 45 minutes, the yellow is three stories 40 feet, the back. That's two stories.

B

And a short third three stories, two to three stories, two to three stories: yes, 40 feet: okay,.

B

Yeah, but what we're discussing and considering now isn't whether or not the project has merits.

E

And should be, you know that the variances should be approved. What we're discussing is what is.

E

The spillover zone yeah do I need is do I need a variance, correct okay. So none of the other aspects.

E

Of it are currently under consideration, and I'm just want to fill in those questions, be responsive.

A

Miss margin, so I I I don't look at with all due respect to mr ross. I don't look at it.

D

So narrowly as to just or um I look at it in terms of the zoning ordinance, the zoning map.

D

The fact that I do believe haven court is a public street there's rsas 674 that say that.

D

If a city maintains a street, it's a public street right, um so a city maintains that.

D

Street, so I look at it more globally and probably not surprised. I I'm going to vote to uphold the.

D

City's administrative decision on this, but I I I think it needs a variance. Can I just add.

F

That that provision is why I said that your ordinance does not include that prescriptive.

F

Element which is in the statute, but is not in the ordinance as to how public street is defined. But.

D

Rsas talk about the rsa state and it's in or our lands here that um you know to me: it's it's a it's.

D

A public road because the city, the city, maintains it so okay, and I just I also just think that.

D

You know it's very clear that this was supposed to be shorter height, based on the zoning map.

F

Yeah and just for the record- and I think you would agree that that public maintenance and.

F

Use has to occur 20 years prior to 1968.. I'm not aware of that. That's that the statute says.

F

And we don't have any evidence of that.

A

He said this had one kind of general general comment, the uh the way I read this all all of this.

A

Is that the the term street inc in common usage, not not narrow legalistic things is, is that it's.

A

A pretty generic term, we have streets, roads, byways circles, you know all alleys, all kinds of things.

A

Which some people call streets? Other people call by a more specific name but as a street is in my.

A

Way of looking at it is a very, very much a generic term, and it doesn't even mean public street.

A

You don't have to say public street and private streets, you just say street, so that that's the way.

A

I I guess that's the way I'm looking at it, so any anyway been an interesting discussion. Any uh thank.

A

You any any anything further. No thank you all right all set. Okay, I was just gonna clarify one.

C

Thing you know despite, I think the city's position is that haven court is a public street, but if.

C

It wasn't, you would still have. It would be the city's position that you'd still have that 50-foot.

C

Setback from high street that wouldn't that would you know, come to here where the gray box is right.

A

Okay, we have, we have a question before us board with respect to the. uh I think we.

C

Offer public comment for people you want us, you want something we did. Yes, we did.

A

I think so: yeah, okay, all right. Okay, we have uh opportunity for public comment.

A

Okay, this is this is an unusual situation. Obviously, does anyone wish to address the board.

I

Elizabeth bradder property owner 159 mcdonald street, I believe, you've gotten my letter in.

I

Describing the difference between orr and orr, um I did want to make a comment um about the changes.

I

Being proposed by the city, the changing is not going to get rid of the word street. It's joined.

I

Just going to define it to include- and I don't have it with me- but it includes private ways.

I

Small roads it it became even more descriptive so that when there's an easement by the city.

I

Which haven court has that it's also included in the word street, so they're not changing street.

I

To be more broad, they're changing street to include every single, solitary opportunity.

I

The other thing about the the street list is the street list is pretty old and now a days when.

I

You're, when you look things up online, they refer you to map geo for zoning heights and street names.

I

So that includes haven court. So I understand that a survey was done, but it's my understanding when.

I

You pull up haven court on map geo. It shows a city easement for a portion of that just to.

I

Put that out there and if you look at 10 140, it specifically deals with the concept of easements.

I

I did want to say one more thing as you look at this as to whether they need a variance. I do.

I

Support that they do need one, and there are a lot of other developments going in right now. 131 and.

I

203 maple maplewood is all one lot they created one giant lot out of. I guess it was three or four.

I

And they have three different heights on there. 105 bartlett street um combined a whole bunch.

I

Of lots, they had all kinds of them down there and they have three heights as well, and they have two.

I

Different zones, one's the highest zone allowed in the west end and one's the absolute lowest.

I

Zone allowed so they have two very extreme zones on their property, which they've dealt with quite.

I

Appropriately, so that's my two cents for this, I do think they need a variance. Thank you. Thank you.

A

Anyone else wishing to address the bullet on this particular subjects.

A

Anybody last call anybody too far against any in any fashion. No okay.

A

In that case bullet, I guess it's up to us to someone. The request obviously, is.

A

A appeal of the board: the position taken by the planning staff planning department.

A

Is someone prepared to make a motion, mr rossi, I move that we deny the appeal of.

E

The city staff's uh judgment: all right is there a second to that motion. Mr mcdonald, thank you, mr.

A

Rossi, your your motion, please, I move that we deny the appeal on the on two bases: one that.

E

I'm not in agreement after hearing the full discussion in the appellant's position.

E

On haven street and whether it's a street or or not, I believe it is a street and the other.

E

Is that I believe that reading the wording of the ordinance, and particularly in that context,.

E

And reading it as an exclusive or is not the right precedent for this board to endorse.

E

And so, for those two reasons, I will not be supporting the appeal all right. Thank you.

A

uh Your second who's, the second miss mcdonald. um After after having heard the discussion so far,.

C

My conclusion is that this is a project. That's intended to go ahead and do some things which are.

G

Exactly what the ordinance is trying to restrict um it's, it's not part of um what I know as.

C

The direction for the city of portsmouth to be heading in the new century.

G

And so there's a lot of verbal gymnastics that you can go through to justify things that are.

G

Not really consistent with the objectives of the ordinance, but those are things that we.

G

Shouldn't have to say, oh gosh, guess we got tricked on that one. We should just say no.

G

And so that's what I intend to do is vote. No all right. Thank you. Any anybody else any comments. The.

A

Motion is to essentially uphold the position taken by the city staff.

A

Yes and deny the appeal yes and deny the right, which denies the appeal: okay,.

A

So any any further any further discussion, I'm stretching this out. No okay, I'm stretching.

A

Time to move all right, everybody understands what we're voting on right: okay, okay, mr rossi,.

E

I vote yes to deny the yes, okay, uh I'll, go I'll! Just go on the order on on the page here. Mr.

A

Mcdonald, yes, okay, mr lee, yes, miss margerson! Yes, mr eldridge, yes, mr rossi, uh I already voted but yes.

A

Yes, I'm sorry- and I and I vote yes as well. I'm sorry, mr mantle sorry get out of order. Yes, thank.

A

You, okay, the vote is you is too obviously to uh deny the deny the appeal of the position taken by.

A

The planning department okay, so that leads us to the next item. Guess what it's on the same subject.

A

Namely, the variance for the building in question proposed building in question so.

A

Let me get the get on the right page here: okay,.

A

The request of one market square llc owner for property located at one congress street.

A

Whereas relief is needed to construct a three-story addition with a short fourth.

A

Story and a building height of 44 feet, 11 inches, which requires the following one: at variance from.

A

Section 10.5 a point: 43.31 and map 10.5 a 21b to allow a three-story addition with a short fourth.

A

And building height of 44 feet, 11 inches, where two stories with a short third and a 40 foot.

A

And 40 feet is the maximum. Allow said property is shown on assessment map.

A

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

A

The historic district and who speaks in favor of this request, please thank you, mr chair. My name is.

F

Fx bruton, I'm with brutan invariably in dover and I represent the applicant one market square llc.

F

um Originally, we had requested two variances. We um have as we've gone through the process.

F

That I previously described in terms of the hdc, the planning board and working with staff.

F

And reviewing the project ourselves with the design team, the project was revised.

F

In terms of the request and again originally, we came in with a request for a height of 49 excuse.

F

Me keep saying that 44 feet and 11 inches and we revised that to 42 feet. 9 and a half inches.

F

Again, I might repeat myself a little bit, but this.

F

Just for this record, obviously this is a project located at one congress street.

F

And we're looking to renovate and or construct new structures on the property and.

F

Right now, when we came in prior to that change, we were looking at needing a fourth.

F

Story short, we don't need that now: we've created a hip-mancerd roof with dormers and the building now.

F

Does not qualify its as a fourth short, and you have those provisions in your ordinance that.

F

Exclude certain structures like that from a story, so this is a three-story building, so the only.

F

Request that we're looking for is again the 42 feet, 9 and a half inches and the most restrictive.

F

Height requirement allowable is 40, so we're asking for that two feet: nine and a half inches.

F

um As as I indicated previously, the building is um very unique, obviously in terms of its location.

F

With respect to having a parking lot in the back located next to the parking garage, which is very.

F

Tall also being in an area where the buildings are tall, uh also being down basically high street.

F

Which is, for all intents and purposes more of an entrance to the garage than an active way.

F

And, in addition, the building has structures that are of a historic nature that are very important.

F

To maintain, obviously in the facade on congress street and what we want to do is we want to create.

F

A uniform building and we want to extend down to high street, and in so doing, we have to um provide.

F

For elevators and stair access on on levels that are consistent and in order to meet the ada, those.

F

Levels have to be consistent, and we essentially are doing this so that we can bring the levels.

F

Based upon the different grade, changes on this slot to a point where they can be consistent.

F

So we can provide for that access for the staircases, as well as the elevator towers,.

F

So we're really looking for a variance so that we can satisfy that.

F

The massing we've identified the massing in our materials and we believe, as does the htc.

F

Very well supported project very well supported design that the massing fits within this area.

F

And then it's appropriate in terms of being able to accommodate the needs we have for the ada.

F

So, in any event,.

F

We we provided a map to you more to put things into context, and I think you might have this page.

F

uh This is h516 if you want to pull it up here, but basically it's a it's. A footprint of the building.

F

With a lot of numbers on it, and what we wanted to do is so, even though we're treating it as one.

F

Building and yes, we're looking for 42 feet, 9 and a half inches, we wanted to show you the context of.

F

Things that would stay and then things that would be built and how, in the I'll call it the cd5 zone.

F

But it's again the orange zone that we comply completely in the front. It's just in the back.

F

uh Again, that's the green zone, which limits us to the 40 feet, but for a lot of the building, we're.

F

Within the 45 feet zone or the orange zone, so you know we're again unique in that respect. That.

F

We have that structure and we have that zone that permits.

F

More than what we're asking for in terms of the entire building, so I just wanted to point that out.

F

A lot of what I was going to say about the variants I've already said in the.

F

Other application, but again I I do want to emphasize that we've been through.

F

Quite a lengthy process with other boards to get to a point where this design is really crafted. As.

F

A result of a lot of that input- and I think that's really important in this case again, just as an.

F

Aside, there is a current pending zoning ordinance change to permit this portion of high street to.

F

Be raised to 45 feet again we're not looking to go to 45 feet. There are other changes that are being.

F

Proposed throughout the city for height, but in a sense, if this variance is granted- and you know you.

F

Have conditions that we stay within what we're asking for, and obviously that would be the case.

F

You kind of lock this project into that 42 foot. Nine inch as opposed to you know that zoning.

F

Change which was promoted by the city council and may be passed. You know that that provides higher.

F

Height, the the variance here in essence, locks us in at that that lower height and I think that's.

F

Just something to point out that's kind of interesting and unique in this case.

F

And again, we would accept that because that's what we want to do and we wanted- we want that.

F

Extra height so that we can basically on the interior level off those floors of what exists.

F

In terms of a historic building and bring that into one building so that it flows as one building.

F

I'll go through the tests somewhat quickly, because my limited time and and brian white is here with.

F

Me he was a master appraiser and he's just going to talk about diminishing property value. Very.

F

Quickly, but in terms of granting the variance for the height that we requested will not be contrary,.

F

To the public interest, we do not believe that we will alter the essential characteristics of that.

F

Area again, those surrounding buildings and the property of garage actually proper. The garage is.

F

Right there we, our massing, fits perfectly within that, and we believe that we would certainly not.

F

Do that the other test is, are you you know addressing the health, welfare and safety and.

F

Obviously, if we're ada compliant, you know, that's goes a long way towards that goal.

F

The spirit of the ordinance is observed again. That test is similar to the public interest test.

F

But again I will emphasize that when, when we go up this fairly de minimis amount that.

F

Really is not going to change that that characteristic of that neighborhood at all.

F

um We um were able to satisfy that ada safety component.

F

uh The the granting of the requested relief will do substantial justice. That's a balancing test.

F

Between uh the benefit to the applicant, which again is to create um an exciting building.

F

From our perspective, but also one that is congruent and consistent with the historic that.

F

We'd like to preserve and at the same time create that consistent consistency internally, so that we.

F

Have level grades so that we can provide for those elevators and all the staircases and all that.

F

There's no negative aspect in our opinion to the public with respect to this request.

F

This request is not large. A lot of people come in with pretty significant requests. This is two.

F

Two feet: nine inches and given the size of the building, it's really more related to the internal.

F

Consistency of the building than for us to be reaching, if you will to create something that.

F

Is inappropriate an area? I don't think this is a reach and I hope you would agree with that.

F

The diminution of property value again, I'm going to have brian white come up and just briefly talk.

F

About that and the hardship, I think that this is as I've outlined in my materials, any unique.

F

Property again it's in the historic district to begin with, and I think that's the most important.

F

Thing for us is to protect that, but by doing so and by adding um floors that are consistent with.

F

That historic aspect, then we get into a position of trying to create a consistent building that has.

F

A natural flow to it and I think our building does that. I think the htc agrees with that.

F

And also one that's safe and one that provides for ada compliant staircases and those elevators.

F

So I think it's unique not only in that regard, but historically this was a parcel. The vacant.

F

Parcel where the dolphin hotel was located, which was in excess of what we're asking to.

F

Put in this place, that was, I think, burnt down in 1969, but it had been there for 95 years.

F

So this massing is historically accurate if you look at it in that context as well.

F

So I think that's unique about it. Those are the special characteristics of the property.

F

um The uh the two and a half the two feet, nine inches. Ultimately, the question is: um is there a.

F

Relationship between the ordinance and having to apply it to that height allowance that variance.

F

And we don't think that there is. We don't think that there's a need to deny the variance.

F

In order to protect the spirit of the or the general purposes of the ordinance, in this context,.

F

We think is very unique and again we're not coming in and asking for seven feet or ten feet.

F

We're asking for two feet: nine inches and again it's to comply with a lot of those special.

F

Aspects and remember- and I always like to say that the hardship and you say the hardship. It's the.

F

Phrase is really: is there an unnecessary hardship or is it necessary to impose the restriction.

F

And in this case I don't believe it's necessary. It would be an unnecessary hardship to the applicant.

F

To not be able to have a consistent building, one that meets again that facade with the historic.

F

Building that we want to preserve and one that's been well received so again I'll.

F

Have brian come up quickly and just talk briefly and we'll be here for questions thanks. Thank you.

G

Mr chairman and members of the board, I'm brian white, I operate white appraisal, uh commercial.

G

And residential appraisal firm out of dover, new hampshire, I've been appraising commercial and.

G

Residential property for 39 years in portsmouth and in the seacoast area of new hampshire.

G

I have the mai and sra designations, which are the highest commercial and residential uh designations.

G

Awarded by the appraisal institute, which is the largest appraisal organization in the country,.

G

I was asked to investigate the impact on value of the abundant properties for the.

G

Proposed development, you all have received my uh report, I'm just going to touch on some of the the.

G

Highlights and uh maybe more bullet point items from my report and then I'll answer any questions.

G

If that's okay, yeah, yes, please be succinct as you can. I will thank you. We all know the existing.

G

Development, it's a 50, 15, 000 square foot, mixed use, building with a 19 space parking lot to the rear.

G

The proposed development is going to consist of retail restaurant.

G

Mercantile and professional office uses the neighborhood it directly abuts two.

G

Multi-Tenant commercial buildings to the west on 13 congress is a small one-story retail building.

G

And the hanover parking garage is the major improvement in the neighborhood. That's.

G

The four-story structure to the north, there are three factors that typically.

G

Impact value of surrounding properties and that's changes in noise view and use.

G

So I considered all those as this would impact the property if the property was uh to be constructed.

G

Now the subject's, a mixture of retail restaurant apartment space with the rear parking lot.

G

This is the noise consideration. There's a 19 space parking lot to the rear. The proposed development.

G

Is going to have a lower level parking contained parking garage that will face the hanover parking.

G

Garage there won't be any exterior parking on the site of opening and closing of doors.

G

So with that in mind, a self-contained building is going to emit much less noise than an.

G

Open parking lot on the view issue the subject's.

G

Proposed development will be no larger in size compared to that of the surrounding properties.

G

Permitting the subjects building as proposed will be keeping with the historic sizing of the parcel.

G

Views of several nearby commercial properties will change, but not to the extent that any negative.

G

Impact would result, it could be argued that the views of the nearby commercial developments.

G

Will be enhanced by replacing the view of a rear, older development and asphalt parking lot.

G

With a new construction, modern structure in very good condition, as far as use goes, the proposed.

G

Development will have commercial development with no residential uses and the.

G

The use of the subject property will be retail office space will, which would mix in very well.

G

With the abundant uses, almost which are almost entirely commercial in nature, in this immediate.

G

Neighborhood I, as for part of my analysis, I spoke with roseanne maurice lentz, the city.

G

Assessor to see if her office has ever done any studies on the impact of such changes of.

G

Height and properties and surrounding properties where additional height was allowed were.

G

Shorter three say: three stories was permitted. She indicated that they've never done any such study.

G

But she did comment that this is a quote, that she did not anticipate any diminution and value.

G

Of the abutting property values in the surrounding area, if this was to be constructed in general, the.

G

Addition of new commercial and residential mixed use development will result in upgrading the.

G

Overall condition of the neighborhood, therefore enhancing the overall desirability of the area.

G

The property will be developed with a mixed-use building that will not result. In my opinion,.

G

Diminishing the value of the abundant properties, in fact, the addition of this proposed property.

G

Will add a modern commercial development to the neighborhood that very well could enhance the.

G

Values of the surrounding properties, as it will add, new commercial space to a location. That's.

G

Currently, under improved for the area, the rest of my report is pictures, notes and attachments.

G

And I'll take any questions you might have. Thank you very much other questions, mr mantel.

A

um Just curious: what is the square footage floor? Footage of the building? That's currently in cd4.

B

You know average, you know what I'm going to suggest is that the architect tracy kozak.

F

Come up and just answer that question okay, get a better answer than from her than me.

C

Good evening, tracy kozak arkov architects. um To make sure I understand the question the square.

C

Footage of the portion of the building- that's in the cd4 correct, I'm looking at the same map.

B

There it doesn't give anything as far as I don't think I have that number with me.

C

Okay, um it might be on the civil plan.

C

One moment please.

C

uh John chagan from ambit engineering. I think that uh one way to look at that is the.

C

The the zone line is the historic property line between the two lots.

G

And what you're asking about is the portion of the building closer to congress street no.

B

I'm asking the building the proposed building that will be in the cd4 district. Yes, I'm sorry, uh the.

C

Scene all the way forward. What is the approximate square footage of a floor? The rear is the cd4.

C

I'm sorry, it doesn't show the rear. That was my sort of question okay. So if you looked at the.

C

Historic lot, where the zone line uh bifurcates that lot area was, it was 8 840 square feet, but.

C

That includes the area, that's in the right-of-way of haven court. So if we were to take out.

C

1500 square feet then we'd be talking roughly about 7 300 square feet, 7 400.

B

Yeah for four per floor. Okay, thank you. That's all! I can get you by yeah. Looking at the old survey.

B

That's just one floor, 7, 400 square feet right.

B

Okay, any anything for any other questions for the uh speaker, no okay. Thank you very much. Thank you.

A

A

Anything anything else, mr bruton, all set yes, sir okay. Thank you. I just I have a question. Yes, mr.

D

Rogerson, so the um since we are, since we are using the visual depictions. That's now a requirement.

D

That those are conditions upon which the grant you know denial or variance granting is made um the.

D

It's true, though, that the it will not be all one floor because of that one little.

D

Building in the middle that uh the existing I forget, what it was I have to bring on my.

D

The building you're sort of building around.

D

I'm opening up defer to tracy and how that's incorporated into the building yeah. We um we.

C

Affectionately call that the opera house there was an old sanborn map which had that listed.

C

As that it has had many uses in the past, that is really the crown jewel of the project and we've.

C

Gone through a lot of work with hdc to set the building back behind it, we've pulled away the.

C

Addition to the right to recreate a setback which is it it corresponds to the historic photos where.

C

There was a little alleyway to the right side of that, but we are redoing. The interior floors behind.

C

That building so that the entire building will be handicapped accessible on each level.

D

So in terms so you know obviously when we are in the historic district part of the zoning.

D

Objectives is that we are to observe you know it's different is an extra purpose that we have.

D

To abide by when we're in the historic district, um so you know looking at this. I am a little.

D

Surprised that the htc has found this sort of favorable, because it is very massive- I mean the.

D

If you look at the sort of visual the the bird's eye view of it, it's it's a very big building and.

D

um You know, I know that nick had said that you were trying to protect the street streetscape as.

D

Well, however, the context around it is much shorter and even though, for their taller buildings, they're.

D

Much lighter they're, not as sort of heavy as this building we've. I I understand your.

C

Question we've gone through many months with hcc we've made significant revisions based on.

C

Their feedback we're totally confident this is subservient to its surroundings, in accordance.

J

With the secretary of the interior standards for additions to historic buildings, upon which the.

J

Historic guidelines are created. You can see that in the dimensions noted where we have our building.

C

Aligned with the fenestration and the banding of the historic building, but a little bit smaller, so.

C

That you can tell the difference between what's new and what's old, but what is new still is.

C

Compatible and relates to what is there also the original building that was there for 100 years.

I

The dolphin hotel was, as fx mentioned, larger than what is here. This building is smaller than a lot.

J

Of buildings around it, so we think it is. It is a good little sister to what it's attached to.

A

Okay, anything else from the board anything else.

A

No getting ready to close the public hearing here. Well, I'm sorry.

A

Okay, yes, yes, come up! Please.

A

Yes same yes, too, foreign yeah doesn't matter we'll well, we'll do we'll do pro con and two foreign.

I

Elizabeth bradder property owner 159 mcdonough street, I'm going to speak twice just to give.

I

You a heads up this first one is just to give you that paperwork, because I'm going to speak.

I

About it later and what I found is you can't listen to me if you're looking at the paperwork.

I

I did want to clarify a few things. First of all,.

I

The building that was there, the hotel- if you look at my old things in public comments, you.

I

Can see that the hotel that was there, the dolphin which later changed its name to the national hotel.

I

Was actually only three stories and around the corner and around the corner was.

I

Around the corner was a mechanic shop, so that shows up on the pictures that I presented so the.

I

First, building on the front side of high street was a three-story hotel and, on the back side, was a.

I

Two-Story mechanic shop around the corner, so there was more than just there wasn't that much building.

I

It was two separate smaller buildings. I also wanted to clarify something that they stated, which.

I

Further definitions from my book that I brought with me a short story is either number one: a top.

I

Story that is below the cornice line of a sloped roof and at least 20 percent shorter in height.

I

Than a story below it or number two, a story within a mansard roof with a pitch no greater than 30 12.

I

Ratio so in this case the mansard roof story counts as a short fourth, just to clarify that.

I

I will speak after. Thank you all right. Thank you. Anyone wishing to speak in favor of this proposal.

A

Please anyone wishing to speak in favor anyone wishing to speak in opposition to this proposal.

A

Yes, let's let her first for first time, first time, first-timers.

C

Good evening, everyone, esther kennedy, 41 pickering, f,.

C

um I've been watching this building, not only here or not only um at the historical.

C

Committee, but also at the planning and listening to the attorney the other night at the planning.

C

I think there's two different things here. I think you're here just for.

C

Looking to see whether you give a variance, I commend the company coming for a variance.

C

Because I think what they're trying to do with planning is consider spot zoning.

C

Trying to change zoning to get a building in so I commend them to come to get their variants. However,.

C

I do not agree with the variance, I think we have to take and really look at our historical downtown.

C

And I have not found in hearing them tonight, speak on what the real hardship is.

C

But I do worry about putting a building of this magnitude.

C

There I worry about it and its effect on the smaller little shops.

C

um Right around it, and I think that it's up to you folks to really make sure that whatever goes in.

C

Supports our historical nature in our downtown and not detract, and I think.

C

In looking at this building, some of the stuff that sounds like you just got was not online.

C

Recently, so I'm hoping that the most recent information does get up online, but looking.

C

At the building, as it sits, it overshadows some of our historical buildings right there.

C

And I do believe it'll overshadow sister buildings around it, so I would ask you not to grant this.

C

Variance, but I want to also put on the table that I commend them to come for a variance.

C

Thank you. Thank you, others other speakers in opposition, other speakers, in opposition.

I

Elizabeth bratter property owner 159, mcdonald's street- I was going to speak too far against, but we.

I

Seem to be doing things a little differently than I'm used to. um I did want to state that um at the.

I

Planning board meeting it was shared that a lot of people were in opposition to this being to haven.

I

Court being changed to green, I mean being changed to orange and it's been taken off the table as.

I

Of last week that that consideration is no longer going to be presented, it's only they're only going.

I

To do the public areas that haven't been that have no designation and that's my understanding.

I

Anyway, I'm going to go on this is an application for a variance for an extra story.

I

And 2 feet 2 inches more than the maximum allowed height. There are a lot of different ways to look.

I

At this the first would be to consider article 1, section 10 140, which specifically defaults.

I

To the more restrictive ordinance in the case of the word street,.

I

The height of two to three stories and the maximum of 40 feet for 50 feet from the both streets.

I

Considering that the next height is 45 feet, it's hard to say if any wiggle room should be allowed.

I

Looking at the zoning as zoning as a whole picture, it gets a lot more complicated which will be up to.

I

Each of you to decide were this building presented with any kind of roof other than a mansard.

I

It would be considered a three-story in this case 35 feet, 3 inches. If a short story were added to.

I

Any other roof it would be measured for the entire height of the short story. In this case, the final.

I

Height would have been 49 feet. Mansard roofs are are different in two places: a mansard roof.

I

Is defined as a short story as long as it has a pitch no greater than 30 to 20 to 12. I'm sorry.

I

Having this pitch provides special dispensation by not counting the whole.

I

Short story towards its height and moves the mass of the building away from the edge of the building.

I

The reward for using this pitch is only requiring it to be measured at the midpoint.

I

Which is presented as the average roof height in this case 6 feet 10 and 7 16 inches.

I

This mid mid point is then added to the height of the building.

I

Making the final height 42 inches 42 feet, 2 inches still higher than than the 40 feet allowed, and a.

I

Short story: more: the mansard roof is a good reason to spend a little extra more money to add a roof.

I

To a building to provide something other than a flat roof. By doing so, the builder.

I

Gets an extra story and it's counted at half the height. It is truly a bonus for the building.

I

In theory, most of the mansard roof is not really visible from the street below due to its pitch. In.

I

This case, whatever is put on top of this building, can easily be seen from the parking garage.

I

And the condos on high street without the mansard roof there would be five to fourteen feet of open.

I

Area above that third story, even if the midpoint of this roof were lowered by two more feet,.

I

The short fourth would still need a variance where the mansard roof not added to the rear.

I

Of this building, the elevator for handicap access would still be accessible by the whole building.

I

Because the spillover area, and if you look at the piece of paper, I gave you on the bottom, it.

I

Shows you that little spillover area that was on the map that you looked at previously and it.

I

Says it's called spillover area, that's where the elevator is going to be, which would allow it to.

I

Open up either to the fourth floor on the other buildings or the third floor on this building.

I

There is a lot to consider, but what it boils down to is, should a variance be given for a short.

I

Fourth and an extra two feet: two inches of height, where only three stories 40 feet are allowed.

I

I did want to make one more final comment, and that is, if you look through these.

I

The front of the building- actually, I think you can see it on here- is actually 45 feet.

I

It's not 42 feet. The congress street side is 45 feet. The haven, court and high street side is 42.

I

Feet just to clarify that. Thank you. Thank you. Any other speakers in opposition. Any speakers to.

A

For against to anybody any one, okay out, the verve sorry elsa's in the audience, let me see, let's see.

A

If it's in any last call two four against no all right, yes, yeah! One speaker, yes come up! Please.

K

Each 280 south street, as I sit here and listen to the proposer.

K

I noticed he was high, relying heavily upon zoning changes have which have not been made yet.

K

Which have not, which are in the proposal stage what has not gone to the council. I urge you, as a.

K

Board to look at the zoning requirements that are currently in place when you look at this project.

K

Also he's relying heavily on the htc looking at this and the approval I personally do not.

K

Believe this belongs in the district as the height that they are requesting, and I would.

K

Request that you not approve this variance. Thank you. Thank you. Last call too far against okay.

F

I just um thank you uh for hearing this and you for all your time and attention to this. I just.

F

Wanted to emphasize you know, we're really here again to get ada compliant. The htc asked us to.

F

Push that elevator toward the back of the building, not in the middle, and I think what ms kozak.

F

Mentioned is important: we're trying to preserve things like the opera house, but we're trying.

F

To also make this a safe building, there's there is some comments that don't relate.

F

To the actual request that we're asking for which is just that two feet: nine and a half inches.

F

Those comments can be made at the htc and have been as well as the planning board.

F

What we're asking you to do is just look at what we're asking for and we're doing it in conjunction.

F

With the hdc asked us to do, which is to move that elevator toward the back of the building.

F

So we're trying to do this for safety.

F

And for compliance with the ada, which, obviously we need to do so- we're hopeful that the changes have.

F

You consider them as de minimis as we can make them, which is true, and that we've worked over the.

F

Process, starting with a larger request, to bring it down, which I think is what you want to see.

F

Applicants do when they hear comments from boards, either here or through the city. So.

F

Hopefully, you'll agree that you can see the the reason we're asking for this request.

F

And again recognize that this will be consistent with that area. Again, the average the heights.

F

In the surrounding properties are between 44 and 48 feet and we're below that. So we're hopeful that.

F

You would consider that a reasonable request. Thank you. Thank you.

A

Too far against last call last for real this time. Okay, public hearing is closed board. We have the.

A

Request- and the proposal has been explained says there: someone wants to start the discussion.

G

Mr chair, mr mr lee, I'd like to say I will not be supporting this request for.

G

Variants for a number of reasons, I think it fails on several of the criteria, but.

G

If I'm out I'd like to read just one paragraph from the letter that we've got in opposition to.

G

This from a citizen- yes, it says well, housing- is in short supply everywhere. I feel the price is.

G

Too great to allow this to happen, the skyline and atmosphere of downtown portsmouth should.

G

Be kept, as is to preserve what is left of the charming portsmouth. We all know and love.

G

Please don't be short-sighted on this. Portsmouth is special for a reason.

G

And that reason should be preserved to continue its charm and vitality as a destination.

G

For charming coastal beauty and history for all to enjoy, there's a number of other comments in.

G

That same vein, but I think that kind of sums it up pretty well: okay, uh anybody, who's who's. Next,.

A

Drawstraw miss madgeson, so I I also will not be supporting this variance request um respectfully. I.

D

I believe that the applicant hasn't demonstrated hardship um uh for going up further than uh is.

D

Allowed by zoning a lot of conversation about the zoning in terms of the administrative appeal.

D

um I I I do not think there is hardship. I also don't think that uh I think it fails the spirit.

D

And intent with all due respect to the staff's conclusion today, I think that mr cracknell had.

D

It right when he wrote the letter saying about protecting protecting the streetscape. I look at.

D

The zoning map and it's clear that they meant for lower building heights along that edge.

D

And I I think that uh the opera house is is, is you know, this is the historic district that is an.

D

Extra uh purpose that we have to take into account when we are doing variances in entertaining.

D

Variances in the historic district- and I I do not think that this protects the historic district or.

D

Its structure, the opera house- seems very kind of squeezed in there, so um I will not be supporting.

D

The various applications all right, thank you is there, is there another anybody else have a comment.

A

At this point, or if not a motion, perhaps mr mantle, no, no okay. Anybody else have a comment to move the.

A

Discussion along, I do have a comment. Yes, I'm not going to make a motion. Okay, that's fair!.

C

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding.

C

All the animosity toward this building, I mean we can't control the size of it. We're talking.

C

About under three feet in height, we're talking about five percent difference.

C

And the mansard roof may be a positive thing for the developers, but it's clearly something.

C

The city wants, they put it in place, so they would get an answered roof, so they.

C

Would retreat from the top level, so you wouldn't be looking at flat roof buildings.

C

What else I don't see how it's affecting the streetscape there's a feelback there's nothing. There.

C

I think the htc did a good job. The building is full of windows.

C

And light, even though it's quite a large structure.

C

I do have trouble seeing the hardship, though, and and for that, and even though.

C

Two and a half feet is not very much. I'm not completely convinced that.

C

That there's a real hardship, but I just want you to speak up because.

C

I don't understand quite all the anger directed toward this. I think there was.

C

I know I'm sorry. It was a real effort to do this to do this well and there's only so much.

C

We have before us to control tonight, so I just wanted to say thank you. Well, I'd like to make.

E

A related comment to that as well. I personally like the design of the project. It looks like it.

E

Would draw pedestrian traffic into that area and liven it up, as the applicant has claimed.

E

What I don't particularly like is the references to pending changes in zoning and so on, and so.

E

Forth that may or may not happen, and I also think it's important for us to acknowledge that there is.

E

A fairly uh substantial amount of public animosity toward the project as you've said, and I think that.

E

If the city council wants to change the zoning- and they are really the ones who are in the best.

E

Position to be responsive to public sentiment, then they can go ahead and do it. But I would not.

E

Be supporting this variance in the meantime, all right! Thank you. Okay, um mr mantle.

B

I won't be supporting the motion. If there is a motion on the table, I won't.

B

Be smart and granting the variants for a couple of reasons number one.

B

I believe the lots were merged to take care to benefit from the cd5 height, as opposed to cd4.

B

Number two, as presented the elevator space to the attorney's argument, is in the cd5, which has.

B

45 feet so there's no problem with that. He doesn't need the variance for the elevator.

B

Now, if you're changing the plan, that's all well and good, but we have to look at what's presented.

B

um And while there's talk, it's only two feet: nine inches and we grant variances for setbacks for a.

B

Lot of things two feet: nine inches times. Seventy four hundred is nineteen thousand square feet.

B

That's a big ask: that's a huge ask.

B

um So I will not be supporting granting the variance all right all right. I'm sorry! I'd.

E

Like to make one more comment, yes, yes, that is that, and it's really a process comment.

E

And that is considering how many times this discussion has been postponed and delayed.

E

I think it's very difficult for us to absorb a new staff report that comes in hours before.

E

A complicated matter like this is to be considered it's hard to follow the bouncing ball really about.

E

What is the actual proposal, what is the height and all of the various considerations? So that's really.

E

It's a process issue, it's neither here or there, but something maybe to consider for the future.

A

All right, thank you. I'll! Go ahead, I'll, make a motion to deny the variance to try the.

A

Applicant's variance, okay, all right is: is there a second to that motion sister rossi.

A

Okay, your your applica, your motion, uh granting the variance would be contrary to public interest.

B

Not granting the variance um would the spirit of the ordinance would be observed.

B

Not granting the variance substantial justice is done, granting the variance, I believe, could.

B

Diminish surrounding properties and uh number five unnecessary hardship. There is no hardship.

B

The zoning has been there for eight years. um Clearly, you don't need it for the elevator.

B

Access according to what we've been presented, that's already has a 45 foot height limit.

B

So, um for those reasons- and everything mentioned before um I'm making a motion to deny all right.

A

Mr rossi, you have a second. uh I concur with everything that mister okay. Thank you.

A

We can see which way for what it's worth I I will not be supporting the motion. I've set.

A

I've stood in that back corner there by the garage and looked at that mishmash of odd.

A

Buildings add-ons roof lines, all that's homely, to put it in friendly terms, and I and I tried to.

A

Picture whether this would be an improvement- and I guess I had to con conclude that it would be a.

A

Substantial improvement and the reduction in height to a very small.

A

uh Number of two and a half feet, plus uh it to me is- is a sort of a reasonable request. So.

A

For what that's worth so anyway, this is one of the ones that.

A

Has uh been on our docket for a while, so we'll we're. Finally, at the point where we have a motion.

A

And the motion is to deny the uh variance. Excuse me, uh mr mantle. Yes,.

A

uh Mr mcdonald, yes, mr lee, yes and I'd just like to also comment that you know number five on the.

G

Criteria says the applicant must establish if the property is burdened by a zoning restriction.

G

In a matter that is distinct from other similarly situated properties, and I submit.

G

That they did not do that. So I vote to deny that okay eric's as well all right, uh miss madison.

A

Yes, miss eldridge, yes, mr rossi, yes and the and I vote. No, so the variance has been denied.

A

And what is the time? Oh, not not! Nine o'clock, nine o'clock, nine o'clock; okay, all right.

A

We've gone through a page has uh previously announced the uh 108 burkett street uh has been.

A

Postponed until next month, we'll take, we will have no action on it uh this evening whatsoever.

A

That takes us to one walton alley.

A

And that item reads as follows: the request of james williams, woods, william woods.

A

And anna roline minardi, please correct my pronunciation if it's wrong for property.

A

Located at one walton alley, whereas relief is needed to construct a one-story 12 foot.

A

By 18 foot detached garage, which requires the following, one variance is from section 10.573.20.

A

To allow a a a 1.5 foot side yard, where 10 feet is required and b a 5 foot, rear yard with 13 feet.

A

10 inches is required, said property is located on assassin's lot 27 and lies within the general.

A

Residence b, grb historic district who speaks in favor, please excuse me. Thank you, mr chairman.

L

Members of the board, I'm tim, phoenix attorney from hopeful phoenix norman roberts here in portsmouth.

L

I'm here on behalf of the property owners, james woods and annika minardi. I think you did a good.

L

Job because I'm guessing at how you pronounce it too, thank you- they couldn't be here tonight.

L

They're out of town also with me is john shagnan from ambit engineering, whose plan you see up here.

L

As existing conditions- and you will see in a moment as proposed conditions,.

L

And mark giannini from mchenry architecture who has done the architectural renderings and.

L

Drawings that are in the packet that we will look at so what we have here is one walton alley. You're.

L

Probably familiar with it, it's one of the most narrow streets, uh speaking of streets um in the.

L

In the south end, um it's the lot is 5 672 square feet and, as you can see, it's a reverse. L shape.

L

It's got an 874 foot footprint, two-story, building towards the lower left of the lot and below that.

L

Is the existing driveway? You can see a large open area to the above, the building and an open area in.

L

The backyard behind the building next plan, peter so from a site plan, perspective the intention what.

L

They want to do is build a garage. The garage is 12x18. You can see it's here tucked to the.

L

Rear of the um of the lot where peter's cursor is we're. Looking for the ordinand, the uh the.

L

What was published said 1.5 feet, but we've got it at 1.6. It was also published. That's from.

L

The sideline it's also published at five feet from the rear lot line and via discussions with.

L

That closest neighbor, who has sent a letter of support, we have moved that to nine feet.

L

So we're looking for nine feet from the front, not five feet, what what the project.

L

Entails is to the back of the home attached to the home, is an 8 by 14 addition in that will.

L

Be a mud room and a powder room on the first floor with a full bath on the second floor, as.

L

You can see here the existing gravel driveway and we'll see pictures of that in a couple of minutes.

L

Will be removed in favor of the cobblestone driveway, with riverstone in the in the center.

L

um The plans also also show riverstone a look to the left against the house.

L

um I've been advised that if the board would prefer to see plantings there, we would do it we're.

L

Just worried about snow removal and what have you so the location of the garage is what's driving.

L

The overall request for relief and looking at this plan, there's really no other logical place.

L

Or a practical place for a garage, one could argue that it could go up in that northerly.

L

Area, that's that's open at the corner of the two streets or back behind the house.

L

Moving it behind the house is impractical because it would one take away essentially their all their.

L

Backyard and number two: we would need at least one essentially their all their backyard and number.

L

Two, we would need at least one of at least a rear setback and probably still need a side setback.

L

Variance if we moved it there, so it is in the most logical location we believe we could put the.

L

Garage in that front corner and meet the setback requirements, but we would need other relief.

L

Which would include you can't have a an accessory building between the main building and the street.

L

Plus we think it would be um it wouldn't. Even he, the owner is not even willing to try that he.

L

Would not want anything put in that uh area. We've described that as a character, defining area for.

L

Both the street, the neighborhood and the lot and the the owner has gone so far and it's included in.

L

My submission to place a conservation restriction on that area which would prohibit any building. We.

L

Would still want to be able to put hardscape landscaping that kind of thing in there, but.

L

That would protect it from anybody even trying to put another structure there forever.

L

The other things that are important is that this garage is part of an overall comprehensive project.

L

um That includes, can you go to the um to mark giannini's plans, a3 or b3.

L

Keep going keep going right there, so there's well one more up.

L

We'll we'll start with that one: that's the side of the building the left side as you're facing it.

L

I'll point out that there's two windows and a door there there are no windows and no doors.

L

To the rear or to the other side, if you can go to the front view here, no it's up up up.

L

It's before those.

L

There we go, so that's what it looks like from the front from from the architectures.

L

Architects, elevation it's about a little over 10 feet, high measured to the center of the roof. The.

L

Next image shows you and it's in my papers that I've mentioned that one keep going, um that there's.

L

It's going to be next to us, an existing six foot fence, which is in pretty poor condition.

L

That fence is going to be replaced, so you can get an idea of what uh it looks like.

L

uh With what I call the you know, the roofline peeking over the fence.

L

um There is al right now, there's some vegetation there. If you can go to the photographs, keep going.

L

So um these are the uh are renderings mark has an additional rendering that I want to point out.

L

The renderings I want to make sure you know, don't exactly represent. What's on the what's going to be.

L

On the ground, because if you look at that top left one the side of the building, it doesn't pro it.

L

Doesn't address, there's a there's, a grade change, so um there's going to be a retaining wall. There.

L

And I think it came up at the historic district commission, you know: what's the.

L

Face um the un uh covered face, gonna be, and that's gonna, be a a stone veneer making. It look like a.

L

Historic building, but the reason mark handed out that new page a6 is because the top right was the.

L

Original rendering- and it shows essentially the driveway all the way across being the cobblestone.

L

And through discussions with nick um cracknell uh hdthc, he thought it would be better having sort of.

L

The two strips with the riverstone, so that plan you've just given, shows you that change. It also.

L

Shows you the addition to the rear, um so you can go to the the actual photographs which is exhibit.

L

D, so I'm going to go through some of these shots, here's the front of the building and that's a.

L

Picture of the area that we're uh willing and offering to put a conservation restriction on.

L

That will all be uh sort of redone and beautifully landscaped next one. This is. uh This is very.

L

Important this is from the essentially where the driveway is um and you'll notice, that on the roof.

L

Is a shingle roof with skylights, which certainly aren't very historic, so um some of the things that.

L

They are going to do, is they're going to repair and replace the wood clabbered siding as needed.

L

They're going to restore the wood, double hung windows on the front and left side on the street.

L

Side where it's possible they're going to remove the existing skylights entirely and the existing.

L

Roof and replace the asphalt shinglers with cedar shingles they're, also going to be cedar. Shingles.

L

On the garage roof they're going to renovate the entire home, the entire grounds extend the driveway.

L

With the cobble that we've mentioned and clean up and landscape the entire grounds, including.

L

To the rear behind the the new, um the new garage, if you can go to, let's see.

L

Yeah, if you can go to uh exhibit d well I'll, keep going through these just to get to get a look.

L

um You can see what it looks like now. That back is where the garage is going to go.

L

Keep going that's similar um again, you can see the poor quality of the.

L

Renovations that have been started in the past. um It's all going to be fixed, that's another shot of.

L

That front yard that we're going to protect um and now peter, if you can just take them to.

L

Exhibit d: this is just photographs of a few nearby homes, the the.

L

I can't read it from here with my bad eyesight, but the addresses are listed.

L

There are numerous homes and garages in the south end that are um on or near property lines. In fact,.

L

The defining quaintness of the south end is how close the homes are to the streets.

L

To the lot lines and to each other, um and with many of them historic homes, these are just.

L

Examples um there's one and I think, that's from um the family that gave us a letter of support across.

L

The street at the northwest corner- um here's some more um and if you just go to the um go to the.

L

Tax map yeah there's one of the letters, so uh we took a look. You can see the lot. The else shape lot.

L

Is outlined in in blue, we looked at this and, if you just just a quick look, tells you that many.

L

Of the homes and many of the outbuildings in the south end are on or close to the lot lines.

L

We showed you a few garages, there's many here. In fact, we counted um 65 of 99 lots on the.

L

On that plan that um in some way appear we didn't go out and measure, but just eyeballing. It appear.

L

To be on or very close to, the lot line and not in compliance with current uh zoning requirements,.

L

um So that's the that's the plan. um In summary, we think that um it fits in with the neighborhood.

L

Because there's many others like it in the neighborhood, including some that are close, we.

L

Think that there's no other reasonable place for a garage, the garage will get one more car off the.

L

Off the driveway and covered, and will also provide some storage, which is limited on the site.

L

And overall, in return for what we think is pretty minor variance in an area where it's very similar.

L

um To get all these benefits of uh renovating the property and making it look true, like.

L

The truly historical building that it should look like is worth the trade. So um turning to.

L

The variance requirements, as you know, I always do the first two together from the maliki glenn case,.

L

From the supreme court, that's the variances are not contrary to the public interest and the spirit.

L

Of the ordinance is observed and as always I do. I look at enforcement. Zoning ordinance section.

L

10.121, which is the general purposes, I'm not going to belabor them all now given limited time, but.

L

There are six or seven requirements, you know the use of land and buildings.

L

The use is a permitted use, um it's consistent with the neighborhood, it's beautifying um and.

L

Making more historical, this house, and thus the area the grounds will be improved um greatly, which.

L

Will enhance uh everyone's view, walking through there or living near there. The intensity of the.

L

Use doesn't change, it's going to be a single family home and remains. We meet both open space.

L

And a lot coverage requirements we're at 21.77 percent of building coverage where thirty percent.

L

Is permitted and we have fifty eight percent open space where only thirty percent is required. um We.

L

Won't impact other properties in terms of lighting noise, etc. There's one small light uh lighting up.

L

The garage door that is placed down pointing down we're maintaining forever the open space on the.

L

North side and and cleaning up the open space on the south side, I mean on the east side.

L

We are preserving the historic district, those first two sections.

L

Which are public interest and spirit of the ordinance have also been determined.

L

By the supreme court to include a couple of analyses will granting the variance change.

L

The essential character of the locality, the answer that is no the character of locality.

L

Is exactly what we are doing here, both by the uh renovations and by placing a garage when there's.

L

Numerous other lots in the same area where we have garages that are tucked in the back corners.

L

I would also mention that we've been to the.

L

Hdc for preliminary I unders- I wasn't there, but I understand it was well received. We will.

L

Have to go back for additional review, the second prong is: will granting the variance.

L

Threaten the public health, safety or welfare, we submit that this entire project protects it.

L

A garage to get a car off the off the driveway also helps to protect it and provide storage. So.

L

There's no violation there. The third prong is granting the variance will not diminish.

L

Surrounding property values a small 12 by 18 foot garage under circumstances where we're going to.

L

Beautify and bring to historic condition the entire lot and buildings is going to increase.

L

Significantly the value of this property and should drag up the value of other properties. It.

L

Won't diminish surrounding property values because there are numerous homes and lots in the area that.

L

Have the same situation, the fourth prong or test is denial of the variances results in.

L

An unnecessary hardship, as you know, three prongs. First, at their special conditions of the property.

L

Again, it's relatively small, it's it's not bad size for for the south end, but it's relatively small.

L

At under 5700 square feet, it's l-shaped, which kind of limits um how you can operate on the lot. um The.

L

Existing home is where it is in the driveway, where it is so that it limits uh where a garage can go.

L

For the reason we've stated, we don't want to fill it fill up the backyard which would.

L

Require the similar variances, we don't want to fill up the front yard because it makes no sense.

L

So there are special conditions: it's driven by the lot size and shape and the location of.

L

That house and driveway the second prong of the hardship test is there's no fair and substantial.

L

Relationship between the public purposes of the ordinance and its specific application in this.

L

Instance, so why do we have setbacks? We have them for adequate air, adequate light, adequate space.

L

Between buildings for for sight lines, storm water treatment and the like.

L

Well, as I said before, the the the joy of the south end is that that it's everything is close together.

L

So um this is fitting in well with that. There is just no reason to impose the.

L

The setbacks when you can't meet them in any reasonable fashion and there's no harm to the.

L

To the neighbors or the public from granting the variance.

L

I've cited some case law regarding hardship. I won't belabor, that is, there's walker versus the.

L

City of manchester, which basically says hardship, may be found where similar non-conforming uses.

L

Exist within the neighborhood and the proposed use will have no adverse effect on the neighborhood.

L

And that's exactly what we have here. The final prong of the hardship test is that the proposed.

L

Use is reasonable. This is a residential use in a residential zone. So it's reasonable. It's.

L

Reasonable to have a garage in 21st century new hampshire, especially when it fits in well.

L

With other uses and other lots in the area of the south end and then the final test is that.

L

Substantial justice will be done. That's a balancing test. As you know, the test is, if there's.

L

No benefit to the public that would outweigh the hardship to the applicant. This factor is satisfied.

L

Or any loss to the applicant not outweighed by a gain to the general public is an injustice.

L

For the reasons we've stated, it's pretty clear to us at least that this variance in support of.

L

An overall renovation project is reasonable, uh that its use is reasonable, that the garage is.

L

Small and not uh overburdening or overpowering any anyone who would happen to look down that driveway.

L

As I said, did you hand out the coleman you have it so you also got a letter of support from.

L

The coleman family, who is directly behind it on mechanic street, uh who would be most of affected.

L

By it and we've agreed to give them some strong landscaping um behind the garage etc, so there is.

L

The woods the woods family will be greatly harmed if they can't have their garage. It may lead to.

L

Not doing the project at all because they want to be able to park a car inside and get some.

L

Storage inside but the public isn't harmed in any fashion whatsoever. I think that's all. I have.

L

Is this telling me that I still have three minutes? Is that what that's telling me no you're actually.

L

Over, oh well, that was a stupid question to ask them three minutes over well. Thank you for the.

L

Extra time without me asking for it ahead of time. um So with that I am done I'll. Try to answer your.

L

Questions- and we have john and mark here to do so as well any questions from the board at this.

A

Point any questions at all anything at all: no miss modderson, just a clarification, um so the.

D

The garage could have gone, you said it could have gone. This is a very weird property. um It.

D

Could have gone in what is sort of next to the house, which is the front of the house.

D

On gate street, without zoning relief correct, no, I except they would have to no matter where we.

L

Put the garage, we need zoning relief, what I was trying to say, maybe an artfully that is, if we put.

L

It in front of the house, we think we can meet the setbacks, but you would need that, but the ordinance.

L

Says you can't have a an accessory building between the main building and the street, so we.

L

Need that variance anyway and more important than that is just that it doesn't make any sense to.

L

Ruin that area for both this lot and the public in the neighborhood to put a building in front of the.

L

House, so we wouldn't even try and we were willing to make sure that nobody else can try by this.

L

Restriction that I've mentioned- and we don't want to put it behind the house in the back, because.

L

It takes away the backyard and we still need at least a rear setback, variance and probably a side.

L

Setback variance, so that's what I just want to clarify so any other place in the back, so to speak.

D

It's really the side um would require a variance. That's that's correct and one more thing.

L

We know it's pretty close to the lot line. You know on the side lot line, but we can't slide it.

L

Over anymore, because then the garage door, entry to the god's garage door starts to interfere because.

L

Of the the proximity of the that side of the house, so we've got it pretty much where it can go.

L

While still having the whole garage door open for a car to get into.

C

Okay, thank you, missed metal, um okay, going back in the same area.

B

I understand you can't slide the garage up. Okay, can you slide it to where the um edition is.

L

Well that, then, you, because you already have a door into the house on that side. The addition doesn't.

B

Have any at least I can see if you slide it up, you don't need the variance for the back you're.

B

Going to need the variants for the side, yachts, no matter what the south end. I think I'm correct here.

L

And I'll ask my experts to comment, but we can't slide it up enough to meet the 25 foot setback.

L

Requirement we'll be interfering with the edge of the garage and the edge of the house. And if we.

L

Move it up to the corner of the new edition, then you're interfering with access to the backyard.

L

Through there, anybody want to embellish that yeah. I have that same situation.

G

If I understand the question, are you saying that uh proposed right posed five feet off the rear.

B

Yard, correct, yes, nine! It got moved up uh in uh consultation with the butter. Okay, so is: is this.

B

Is is that drawing accurate? That's not the work. Yes, that's not drawing exactly so. If you move it.

B

Up another four feet: you're in the very you don't need the variance. Oh, we need 25. You.

L

Need 20.? Actually you only need 10 feet, 2 inches, because it's based on the height of the structure.

L

That's from the sideline, though, but you would eliminate sorry the the ability of the driveway.

C

Run off to get to the backyard you you, okay, okay, that was one of the problems, and you can't put it.

B

In the in the front, because of why the front of the in front of the house well, I mean I'm looking.

B

At the house- and you have this the l-shaped lot, why can't you put at the top of the out.

L

Because because well we will need, we would need other variances. We would. We think we could meet.

L

The setbacks yeah, but we would need variances because you can't have a subservient structure.

L

Between the main structure and the street, and and that's the address of this property, one walton.

L

Avenue it's not it's! It's not it's a corner lot, so it has two streets. So there's two two fronts.

C

Close to gate street in the front faces there's this price and the address is one walton, but it.

C

Has two fronts as a primary and secondary front yard and and to again to sorry for repeating, but.

L

We just think it would make absolutely no sense to put a garage there for one you're blocking the.

L

Front door of the house and you're filling up an area that is, that is a okay. I just I, when you set.

B

It in front of the house- I I know where the front of the house is, but the address is that yeah oddly.

L

The front that what I would call the front of the house faces gate street, but the address is on okay.

L

I guess that's because that's where the driveway was that that's why they did it. I'm.

L

But that's a guess: okay, anything else, any anybody else at this. No all right! Thank you. Thanks.

A

Anyone president who'd like to speak in favor of this proposal. Please.

A

Please come up if there's anyone wishes to speak in favor, anyone favor, no okay, any seeing nobody.

A

Excuse me, I think you mentioned another letter of support and I don't think we have that one.

C

From the coleman family- and I don't have that and coleman is behind on mechanic street okay.

C

Oh, it wasn't sorry, I was looking for. We do sorry and in my packet, um when I submitted was the.

L

Letter of support from patrick and judy nirvan at 189 gate street, which is just across the corner.

A

Okay, last call for those who speak in favor anyone present wishing to speak in opposition. Anyone in.

A

Opposition, mr smith, anybody on zoom no just raise their hand. Oh we have. We have one speaker. Yes,.

A

Come up please, mr chairman, members of the board, um I'm david adams, 11210 gate street. I'm a director.

M

Butter, my house is on this property line on that side of the building actually on two different.

M

Property lines on this inside of that l of this lot um and to answer mr mano's question a little.

M

Bit out of order, uh the building anything on the front of that house, I would think, would.

M

Be a non-starter it's a very unique situation, um but the backyard is tiny and just recently.

M

There's been approval to build a eight by 14 foot, two story: addition in this tiny little back lot.

M

It's it's probably important for modernizing the house and making the house more useful to the new.

M

Owners whom I've met, they seem like lovely people, they're very excited about becoming.

M

Part of the city of portsmouth no question about that um and mr phoenix spoke of the improvements.

M

That they intend to make to the house which was sorely needed and uh going to be really largely.

M

Appreciated but the garage in the back lot is tight. Squeeze there's very few places for the.

M

Driveway to target a car, so this pretty much makes sense in terms of planning layout where the garage.

M

Would go, it makes the back lot very crowded. It's a tiny little view in from my house, but the thing.

M

That bothers me, the most is I've made a couple of comments to mr cracknell who's very active in.

M

Managing insi internally, these things to either ease things if they can be eased and very little.

M

Of that has gone anywhere, um I'm not terribly concerned about it, ruining my property values.

M

But the thing that disturbs me most is katie miller, who is on the other side of this much.

M

Closer to the garage than I will be um she's wild about this thing and I thought she'd get used to.

M

It I thought that the the some changes that they did make uh would help. It hasn't calmed her down.

M

It hasn't made this make more sense to her she's against it, and I don't think that's a good thing.

M

I know that you are not the katy miller board and it's not the primary concern of yours, but I would.

M

Be concerned, if it were mine sitting up there, that katie didn't think that this was a good idea.

M

I'm kind of on the fence so to speak, but katie is really adamant um and I respect her opinion.

M

Thank you very much. Can you thank you. Thank you. I'm sorry. Could you remind me what property.

E

uh You reside in 210 gate street. I think I said that sir. I just didn't I'm on the inside of what.

M

You'd think of as the l of this property, my property sits in the owl. I can point to it.

M

There it is right there. Oh okay, all right! Thank you sure. Thank you. Anyone else in opposition.

A

Anyone else, yes, we have. Oh, we have someone katie miller. Thank you all right. All right.

C

Hi there can you hear me yeah? Yes, we can.

A

Go ahead, please, um I am katie miller and I have um I.

C

And I didn't send a letter to you folks. Yes,.

C

This is our only green space.

D

That would be exactly what we look right at our back windows at an 18 foot, long garage.

C

Miss miller, miss miller, I would say the hardship is more for us.

C

Yes, can you can you do you have the um youtube channel on in the background.

C

Yes, please we're getting some feedback from that. If you could.

C

Mute that or pause it or while you're speaking, that would be helpful.

C

Is that better? Yes,.

A

Yes, go ahead, go right ahead! Please.

C

Is that better? We can hear you yes,.

C

Okay, can you you can hear me now? Yes, okay,.

C

um So you all have a copy of my letter and it basically.

C

And it basically explains my view of why we would consider this a hardship for us.

C

Versus the minorities and the woods, that's the only.

C

Green space, the only view of trees and birds that we can see.

C

To put that there, it will just add to the denseness of this close knit community in.

D

Keeping with the words of mr phoenix, the joy of living in the south end is trying to maintain.

C

The historic quality- and I don't feel a garage- is needed. It's not a hardship and, as david was.

C

Pointing out too- and I thank you david for speaking up- it's just it's a tight squeeze.

A

And thank you very much anything further.

A

Okay, thank you for calling in.

L

If there's no one else I'll rebut briefly yeah too far against last call too far against anybody at.

A

All anybody else on mr sith, no, okay, okay, thank you! um Well, first, I commend david for um sticking up.

L

For one of his neighbors, um as I interpreted his comments, he was didn't have any real concerns with.

L

It um as for ms miller, I frankly, was not aware that she had sent in a letter today until now, but.

L

I asked for the reader's digest version. I think it was. The letter is pretty much what she. What.

L

She said I would ask the board to consider that she's, not a director butter, she's, two lots over.

L

On that side, she will see the the roof, but most of what she sees right now is a fence.

L

That's been pretty bad repair, that's going to be replaced, there's going to be heavy landscaping.

L

Behind behind the building, there's a little bit of the roof that you're going to see. um It is a.

L

Tight area the whole the whole south end is tight areas. I I want you to please keep in mind what I.

L

Mentioned about there being this situation in on numerous lots in the area where you've got.

L

Garages that are tucked in the back corners of of the lot. We showed you a few photos and we.

L

Showed you the tax map that shows them all over, and I would ask you to balance the rights of a.

L

Of a property owner to do what's reasonable, with their property uh against the rights of.

L

um A a neighbor not in a butter directly but but a neighbor with respect to their views and.

L

And my client's view of the world is that it's reasonable in an l-shaped lot with all the other.

L

Improvements they're given to uh to have a garage, and we think the garage is a necessary part of.

L

The project, and so would ask you to approve the variances required to build it. Thank you all right.

A

Thank you last call for real, too far against clear on zoom, clear, clear. Thank you. Okay. Yes,.

A

We need our nine o'clock. We need a nine o'clock break board. So what's your pleasure on this one.

A

Someone have a comment or a motion, perhaps.

E

I think the suggested use of the property is reasonable. I think it basically fits in with the.

E

Character of the neighborhood, particularly if you look across the street and around.

E

You know sort of maybe a 500 foot radius.

E

So I will be supporting this application for variants is that is that a motion.

A

Could that be a motion? Yes come on? Yes, yes, yes, yes, who's, who's got the second I'll say. Mr.

A

Lee thank you, mr rossi, your motion and thank you for making it uh I I move that we approve.

E

The variance on the basis that it will not be contrary to the public interest to do so.

E

uh The house will be significantly improved uh the alternative location.

E

Of the garage in the other part of the l-shaped lot is uh one that would be a detriment to.

E

The area because it would obscure a view of a very interesting uh part of historic property.

E

And I think that's in keeping with the spirit of the ordinance, as has proposed.

E

I think there's substantial justice here in that I do not see uh harm to the surrounding.

E

Area outweighing the benefit to, and I'm not sure if I'm affording that right.

E

Outweighing the benefit to the homeowner, I don't believe that granting the variance would diminish.

E

The values of surrounding properties have been no evidence present to suggest that, and I do.

E

Feel that it meets the unnecessarily unnecessary hardship test in that the property has special.

E

Conditions for that area, it's actually kind of a larger property and it can support the additional.

E

Structure with no problems, but just because of the shape of it, it's impossible to find a location.

E

That does not require some kind of variance so going to those special conditions. There is no.

E

Real relationship between complying strictly with the ordinance and reasonable use of the property.

A

Thank you, mr lee. I think that was an excellent motion. I have nothing to add. Okay, thank you. Ask if.

C

You would consider the stipulations that the rear yard shall be nine feet, since it was advertised.

C

As five feet and they changed it and that um since it's still under htc review, that the final design.

C

May change as a result of their review and approval. Yes, I agree to add that to the motion. I.

E

Agree great great, thank you. Okay, good any further, any discussion at all before we take the vote. The.

A

Motion is to approve, as presented with the nine foot and and this and the two stipulations, okay.

A

Any anything further, no apparently not okay, uh mr mantle. Yes, mr mcdonald, yes, mr lee, yes.

A

Ms margerson, yes, ms ms eldridge, yes, mr rossi, yes and I vote yes as well. It's all it's uh you're.

A

All approved, thank you very much. You're welcome. Okay, it's well past our nine o'clock break time.

A

Let's take our traditional five, no more than ten minutes, which should be right about half fast.

A

Thank you, everybody for the break, we're back in session. The next project.

A

Is at 64. haven road, and it reads as follows: the request of j anthony clark owner for property.

A

Located at 64 haven road, whereas relief is needed to demolish an existing garage and porch and.

A

Construct a new garage and addition, which requires the following one: a variance from section 10.5 to.

A

1 to allow a 5 foot left side yard, where 10 feet is required, 2, a variance from section 10.515.14.

A

To allow a 7.5 foot section setback excuse me for two mechanical units where 10 feet is required.

A

Three: a variance from section 10.321 to allow a non-conforming, building or structure to.

A

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

A

Said property is located on assessor map 206 as lot 30 and is located within the single.

A

Residence b srb district, who presents this project, please thank you. My name is brendan mcnamara. I'm.

N

A residential designer uh representing uh it actually goes by tony clark, but.

N

Jay clark welcome. um Thank you, um the haven road neighborhood it's uh this is in the middle of it.

N

It's a very charming, 1940s neighborhood. um This is a one three-quarter cape style house.

N

um It uh has had an addition to the main structure, probably down in the late 60s or.

N

Early 70s over the garage and the um just to note in terms of the front yard setback setback the.

N

Surrounding neighborhood houses are in alignment and they're all consistently non-conforming for.

N

The required front yard setback and this house has a non-conforming left side structure which.

N

Is an enclosed porch, which is well within the left side setback. It is proposed to preserve the main.

N

Cape core of the house, but demolish the more recent garage and later edition, including the.

N

Enclosed porch and to do a new addition to replace this to give greater space to the existing setback.

N

But to allow more volume at the second floor level, so essentially in simplistic terms. At.

N

The moment it has a an enclosed porch, that's three feet off the left, side setback um and what we're.

N

Proposing is to demolish that to go for a to the main structure, a seven feet. It reads in the.

N

Request for five feet, which actually relates to uh chimney and protrusion that's comes into it.

N

But the general structure moves to seven feet. Basically, the um that is a redistribution of.

N

The existing area of the enclosed porch- that's within that left side setback the.

N

So, in its main, the left side setback would be increased from three to seven feet.

N

And there's a slight reduction in the overall amount of structure. That's within.

N

Within the setback overall, there's other additions associated with it, but there's.

N

A slight increase in light coverage, but that still remains below the allowed 20.

N

I'll revisit the um the criteria later and just complete the description. If we go to the uh the.

N

Site plan you can see on the left side, there is the existing conditions um and you can see what.

N

I'm talking about there that small, the structure on the left that three foot setback is the.

N

Enclosed porch to an existing garage which is very narrow, it's less than 10 feet internally and then.

N

On the right hand, side you can see what's proposed one note, I don't know whether it was my error on.

N

The info I provided to peter, but the mechanical units aren't 7.5 they're, actually, four point: five.

N

We have to do a stipulation on that because the the distance- yes exactly so the distance there.

N

To the to the proposed new structure is seven feet. Overall, it could have been a typo for me.

N

But overall you can see the proposed uh new addition to the left's side, which extends to.

N

The rear, it's somewhat going over the footprint of what's there now, but essentially, as I said, it's.

N

The redistribution of the area of the existing enclosed porch to effectively widen the available.

N

Garage, it intrudes into the 10-foot setback, but it reduces the existing three-foot setback.

N

And then further, as the pages progress all right, the table is there just showing the.

N

Metrics that are justifying the the proposal as we go along in the plans you can see. There's just.

N

The existing footprint you can see the narrow garage, it's the top left hand corner there.

N

That's the existing first and second floor plans, and then we move to the next page, which is just.

N

Showing photographs of the existing exterior? What we're mainly concerned about is represented in.

N

That front left top left view. It's that garage area that we're proposing to change essentially.

N

Increasing its left to right width and then the further pages are the proposed floor plans.

N

Going through and that's the changes to the basement so going back to the criteria.

N

For um public interest and the existing left side in closed porches and non-conf.

N

Is non-conforming to the required setbacks? The proposal decreases. This setback non-conformity.

N

The existing appearance will be improved by the new, more stylistically, conforming addition.

N

This incorporation into the look of the main structure will enhance the.

N

Essential characteristic neighborhood, through the necessity of meeting code compliance, the building.

N

Will become more safe and more energy efficient, there does not appear to be any public interest.

N

Contrary to this proposal, uh the spirit of the ordinance, the proposal continues, some of the.

N

Original buildings, historic non-conforming use but reduces the level of non-conformity.

N

The redeveloped structure will be more in keeping with the intent of the zoning ordinance.

N

Through substantial justice, the proposal for the proposed.

N

Use does not cause any harm to the general public or other individuals and accommodates substantive.

N

And costly renovation and improvements to the property property value, the increased investment.

N

And preservation of this property will enhance and elevate the value of the property surrounding it.

N

And little in literal enforcement, the property is unique, given its period of development.

N

And its historical use in its current form, this use predates the implement.

N

Implement implementation of the current zoning ordinance the proposed use, while continuing some.

N

Non-Conformities more aligns with the intent of the ordinance the period nature of this.

N

Property and the existing structure make it a special case to accommodate moderate development.

N

In line and enhancing its existing use and just to note the the left side neighbor, who would be the.

N

Neighbor most impacted is completely in favor of the proposal. um They're the.

N

Family that lives at number 80. and if you have any questions, I'm more than happy to answer them.

A

Any questions from the board at this point no apparently not.

A

Okay, thank you. Thank you other speakers. Anyone wishing to speak in favor, please.

A

Come up anybody in favor, mr stith, we got anybody on the zoom side.

C

No, no okay and he went opposition in opposition.

A

Does anyone wish to speak against this apparently not.

A

Does anyone wish to speak too far or against too far against last call for speakers apparently not.

A

Okay, but what's your pleasure boy, mr mantle, uh I make a motion to grant as presented. Thank you.

A

Is there a second a second, mr lee? Thank you, mr mantle. Your motion. Please uh going through the.

B

Five criteria, granting the variance is not in contrary to the public interest, uh the spirit.

B

Of the ordinance is observed, substantial justice is done. The values of surrounding properties.

B

Are not diminished and literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship.

B

What they're asking for are variances from the side yard um and from the rear yard.

B

And, given that nearly every house in portsmouth is non-conforming.

B

um This granting the variance will make the house less non-conforming.

B

The side yard will go from three to five or the left yard will go from three to five and with the.

B

Yeah, that's it! Okay! Thank you, mr lee. I concur with mr mantle's comments and nothing to add.

E

Okay, good before you vote, the the um hvac ac vacc units were advertised at seven and a half feet.

C

The applicant has indicated they're actually closer at four and a half feet right. So if.

C

You were to allow that you'd have to make that a stipulation that you would allow it to be closer.

C

Than what was okay, you agree one more time peter, so they also are requesting a variance for two.

C

Ac units and we advertise them at seven and a half feet. um The applicant's.

C

Representative has indicated that they're actually going to be four and a half feet.

C

From the left side, okay and the current left side of the yard is still three right, but.

C

There's a specific section for mechanical units that they must be ten feet from the.

C

Side well, three feet less less than okay. We have I'm still fine with that. Okay, that mr lee.

A

Okay: okay, great any! Thank you anything for anything further. Okay, great all right! Well,.

A

With that correction, on the spacing of the mechanical units off the side, we'll.

A

Go ahead and vote and the motion is to approve with that change, to the stipulation.

A

And uh mr mantle? Yes, yes, mr mcdonald, yes, mr lee, yes, ms margerson, yes, ms eldridge, yes, mr.

A

Rossi, yes- and I vote yes as well, so thank you. Oh done. You're all you're all set you're welcome.

A

Okay, that brings us to 217 myrtle avenue the request of christopher chaliner owner.

A

For property located at 217 myrtle avenue, whereas relief.

A

Is needed to construct a six by eight foot deck with the stairs which requires the following one.

A

A variance from section 10.521 to allow a 12-foot secondary front yard where 30 feet is required.

A

Two: a variance from section 10.321 to allow a non-conforming, building or structure to.

A

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

A

The ordinance said property is located on assessor map 220 as lot 92 and is located within the single.

A

Residence b srb district, who presents this project- please uh stephen challenger property owner.

A

Welcome yeah good evening yeah go over your project and make sure you touch on the five.

A

uh If you will, if you will please thank you yeah, so my uh my wife and I are just looking.

O

To build a relatively small deck off the back side of our house, um we currently don't have.

O

Any direct backyard access. We have uh two front doors um that go off our front porch. um We have a.

O

Secondary front yard, because we're in the corner of myrtle, ave and emery street. And that's where.

O

Obviously the we don't meet the 30-foot setback is on that secondary front yard. There, where we plan.

O

To position the deck is nested into the footprint of the house in a way there's a little bit of a.

O

Cut out on the back side of the house, where our first floor and second floor bathrooms are.

O

So yeah, you can see it here in this picture, so it's pretty well protected there. You can see.

O

Our neighbor to the right of the house, there has no visibility of the deck um from emory street.

O

You're pretty well protected with uh in terms of the sight line with trees.

O

Along the property line, the other unique thing about our house, our property is that we have.

O

A city culvert that sits along emory street that takes up, I believe, it's over 20 feet of land. There.

O

So visually, where the deck is, it would look like it appears to adhere to that 30 foot step back.

O

So I will go through the five criteria. Now the variance will not be contrary to public.

O

Interest, we propose a small deck that nests into our current house footprint. It is not any.

O

More non-conforming than the house- and it is not visible to any of the adjacent neighbors, also the.

O

Public view is comparable to the compliant to a compliant deck due to the city-owned land of.

O

Budding the property, the spirit of the ordinance will be observed. We are not proposing a major.

O

Addition in our use of land we've scaled down our deck, so that it is the smallest possible.

O

Footprint, while remaining functional for our needs visually from emory street, the deck addition will.

O

Adhere to the spirit of the ordinance due to the parcel of city-owned land. Substantial justice will.

O

Be done allowing us to have a deck will give us direct access to our backyard, which we eventually.

O

Intend to fence in giving us a full, unimpeded use of our outdoor living space, the values of.

O

The surrounding properties will not be diminished. The deck is not visible from any direct neighbors.

O

And would not negatively impact the value of any adjacent properties. The style of the deck will be.

O

Visually attractive and will enhance the value of our property, and thus our neighbor's properties.

O

Lastly, the literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary.

O

Hardship due to our property's corner lot location, as well as the city's.

O

Ownership of the majority of what used to be our former secondary front yard, I'm assuming I don't.

O

Know when exactly that culvert went in, but we did have 30 feet from every street at one point.

O

We now have a relatively narrow, 12-foot property line on that secondary front yard.

O

Which our entire house structure is then non-conforming to the 30-foot setback.

O

Our proposed deck design is understated in size such that it meets our needs without appearing.

O

Obtrusive negatively impacting property values or the quality of our life, the life of our neighbors.

O

Literal enforcement of the ordinance would be prohibitive to our ability to fully make use of.

O

Our property, and, in this unique case from a public perspective, this deck, does visually, adhere to the.

O

Spirit of the ordinance. Thank you. Thank you. Any questions from the board, nothing! Okay! Thank you.

A

Anyone president wish to speak in support of this. Anyone in support anybody on the zoom, mrs death. No.

A

Anyone in opposition, any speakers in oppositions and any call last call too far against any.

A

Speakers at all any speakers, no okay, we'll close the we'll close the public hearing.

A

uh Board do we have discussion on? Does someone wish to go right to a motion? Mr miami make a.

B

Motion to approve um the variance request is advertised. Thank you. Is there a second.

A

Presented present, yes, thank you, ms eldridge. Thank you, mr manley. You motioned please.

B

Going through the five criteria, the variance is not granting the agrarians is not contrary to the.

B

Public interest, the spirit of the ordinance is observed. Substantial justice is done, the values.

B

Of surrounding property are not diminished, and literal enforcement of the ordinance would result.

B

In an unnecessary hardship now they need the variance to from the secondary front yard, because.

B

It's on the corner, correct peter, correct, but on the other side of their property line is another.

B

20 feet of grassy area before they get to well, it's all in the right of way. So it's yeah yeah.

B

Okay, so um yeah it's a very small request and I will support granting the variance.

A

Thank you, mr lee. I'm sorry! No sorry, no problem, no problem, yeah, that's children! I'm sorry! I'm sorry.

C

I'm sorry I agree with that, went the wrong way. Nothing to add. Thank you. Thank you. That's great.

A

Oh goodness, okay, anything anything further discussion. No, let's, let's.

A

Go right straight to the vote. The motion is to approve, as presented mr mantle. Yes,.

A

Mr mcdonald, yes, mr lee, yes, ms margerson, miss eldridge, yes and mr ross. Yes, and I.

A

Vote yes as well. Thank you. Oh yep, you're welcome. All done. You're all set.

A

A

All right that brings us to 47 level street.

A

And please correct my pronunciation if I miss butcher your name request of emily elatti owner.

A

For property located at 47 level street, whereas relief is needed to construct a rear edition.

A

And attached garage with apartment, which requires the following one.

A

Variance is from section 10.521 to allow a a 5 foot right side yard was 10. Feet is required.

A

B, a 5 foot, rear yard, where 20 feet is required. C: a 6.5 foot left side yard.

A

Where 10 feet is required d, a lot area per dwelling unit of 2178 square feet.

A

Where 3 500 square feet per dwelling is required and e a six foot right side yard, where ten feet.

A

Is required, two, a variance from section 10.321 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 located on assessor map, 144 146 as lot 14, and it's located within the general.

A

Residency grc district who presents this project, please um I do I'm emily lottie owner of 47 level,.

J

Street well um good evening, mr chairman, members of the board, um that sounds like a lot of variances.

J

To get started just quickly, I'm a long time portsmouth resident over 22 years, I'm a single mom.

J

Of two kids who attend portsmouth high school- I am not an attorney or an architect, so bear with me.

J

um I currently reside at 653 greenland road of which I am in the process of selling.

J

To downsize to this new property on level street, which is more in town.

J

um Before I go into the presentation, I wanted to communicate that I have met with the abutting.

J

Neighbors to the left of the property are laura and brad stoll at 55 level street and to the right.

J

Is brian whitaker of 39 level street, of whom I have a shared deeded driveway.

J

Both parties have expressed verbally that they are in favor of this proposed renovation with.

J

The garage plus the studio apartment and, I think, are quite excited to see this eyesore renovated.

J

I've already spent substantial money to actually safely remove the asbestos siding.

J

I did purchase this property last fall, so that's the one thing I've done.

J

So far, I plan on being a long-term owner and living on this property and I do recognize.

J

That the granting of this variance goes with the land and remains regardless of ownership.

J

um So I'll go into um my narrative and then we'll go through the pictures and then I'll.

J

Go through the ordinance, the five parts of the ordinance. um So my plan is to fully renovate.

J

The level street house, it's currently pretty modest size of 1226 square feet.

J

While preserving the over overall architecture plus to add a detached garage with a small.

J

Apartment above my mother has lived with me in my current home for 12 years.

J

So I'm looking to basically duplicate what I have now but downsize everything.

J

So I'm looking to add that studio space for her separate living.

J

Especially because the house is very small, even with the addition of a second floor, bathroom.

J

That house will only be 1328 square feet, attaching the garage and the extra living space to the house.

J

Was explored with my architect, but proved to be non-viable for vehicular access.

J

um And as all properties in portsmouth, this slot is unique because it's very narrow and long.

J

But it does have that deeded driveway, so the new design shows that we've changed.

J

We've detached the garage in that extra living space and pushed it to the far back of the lot.

J

And by doing so, this allows for ample pulling in and backing out of of the two cars.

J

I would say, please know that I did work with the architect and we did try to attach it in various.

J

Ways number one: it just looked very weird and didn't sort of it. Just didn't. Look good.

J

um And again, just because that lot is so narrow, it would be really difficult to get.

J

Cars sort of um in and out and as I said, the property is already deeded with the.

J

Shared driveway and I have already applied for that and a permit has been granted so.

J

In summary, the intent of the garage is to remove parked cars from the narrow street level. Street is.

J

A very narrow street and if there's cars parked on both sides, it's actually difficult for even.

J

One car to get through so this would obviously remove cars from from the street because right.

J

Now this house only has street parking to add some living space. um I would want to put it above the.

J

Garage for my mom and then just to make use of the lot. It just makes sense to push that to the back.

J

um The main house footprint will remain, as is my goal, for this project is to keep the historic look.

J

And massing of the house intact, but to add that additional functionality at the back of the house.

J

To adapt to my family's needs, there's a very large non-conforming deck right now that will go away.

J

And then the second floor proposed on the main house is an addition for a full bathroom.

J

But the footprint of the house will remain the same. Just goes straight up in the back.

J

And we'll be able to see that in the pictures um regarding density, the the current the way, the.

J

House sits today uh with the deck you're at about 24 lot coverage um and then the proposed.

J

Lot coverage with the detached garage would be at a roughly 33.5.

J

With the maximum allowed of 35 percent now I do understand that is if it's attached.

J

So, by detaching it, I know that throws me into a different variance of.

J

3 500 square feet per dwelling, um so in so just overall details.

J

Because I am detaching it, I realize that now makes it two dwellings. um So my current lot is 43.56.

J

um And so by detaching now in theory, I'm at the 2178 square feet where the requirement is 3500.

J

um So if we want to go through the pictures, peter just to show the house.

J

So you can see um here that, where the you can see proposed where the the.

J

The deeded driveway is that's where that would go. um If you scroll down, you can see.

J

Just more pictures of the front of the house here you can see the back of the house where the.

J

um The old deck is and where the that first floor bump out is the idea for the second floor.

J

Bathroom, we would go straight up from there um and because this house is non-performing.

J

For the setbacks, I would need relief just to go straight up for that second floor. Bathroom.

J

And then there's some pictures of the backyard you can see that it's just sort of long and narrow.

J

And then for the site or the lot plan we've drawn in where the garage would go.

J

And then on the site plan you can see the proposed garage.

J

Just being pushed back so that we can get um so, I can get in and out of the garage more safely.

J

um I think that's all for the pictures. Okay, so I'll go through the five points of the.

J

Criteria for the ordinance 10.233 number one- the variance- will not be contrary to the public.

J

Interest, um it's in the public's interest in the community to keep this house in its original form.

J

To preserve the original aesthetic in massing, that was once a modest workforce house to support the.

J

Local frank jones, brew yard. This property current relies on street parking only and so the addition.

J

Of the garage and parking frees up street street space for public right of way, especially because.

J

It is a very narrow street. In addition, I have already improved the safety and health of the.

J

Community bike of the community by safely removing that asbestos siding number two. The spirit of the.

J

Ordinance will be observed by preserving this um dilapidated property as a single family dwelling.

J

With the addition of the studio apartment of the garage, the spirit as a residential dwelling will.

J

Remain but the neighborhood will be improved by this by this property being completely renovated.

J

This property appears to have no have had no maintenance in many many decades.

J

So, in the spirit of the ordinance there won't be intense use because that studio apartment is only.

J

572 square feet and will have minimal impact on the neighborhood because of its modest size.

J

I still have open space um between the garage and the the back of the house and currently have.

J

2178 square feet versus the required 3500, um so the request is considered minimal. Number three.

J

Substantial justice will be done. The improvements of the house in the addition of off street parking.

J

Will benefit the entire neighborhood at the same time, at the same time, benefit me and my family to.

J

Allow me to reign remain in portsmouth the values of surrounding property number four for the values.

J

Of surrounding properties will not be diminished. um On the contrary, by improving the property.

J

As I am planning to um and adding garage, it will increase property values and create.

J

Actually create some privacy and perhaps sound barrier from this densely populated neighborhood.

J

And there are large brick apartment buildings right beside us on madison street, so.

J

It could actually help with that number five. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the.

J

Ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship, um I'll speak on that from a personal and from.

J

A lot perspective, but personally, in order for me to continue to live in portsmouth, I need downsize.

J

From my existing home, which I am doing with this property, it gives me extra space needed for my mom.

J

From a lot perspective, I would attach the living space in the garage to the existing house.

J

But because the lot is so narrow, it just doesn't enable for the.

J

Pulling in and out of cars from this already deeded driveway, so literal enforcement of the.

J

Ordinance would not allow me to add the extra living space plus the parking in the garage.

J

Given that that is now requiring me to have 3 500 square feet, per dwelling.

J

When compared to other properties in this neighborhood and this zone, that proposed 2178.

J

Square feet per dwelling um seems consistent with other properties in the neighborhood.

J

Example, the madison street apartments and then the castry departments around the.

J

Corner so that is all I have for tonight and would have to take questions. Thank you. Thank.

A

You any questions from the board at this point. Anything at all apparent apparently not thank you.

A

Is there anyone president who would like just I just I'm, I'm sorry, mr.

D

Anderson, yes, so I just want to clarify you're. How are you actually going to get to the garage.

D

So um I know that's so here, so the driveway is to the right, and so the architect is saying. If I have.

J

At a minimum 20 feet, I would be able to pull in and back out. So if I'm coming up the right side.

J

Of the house I would go left and then into the front of the garage. Can you see that there's no.

J

Choice, does that make sense, it does it's, so we try to turn it sideways, but then you can't back out.

J

So this was the best position to have that, and the architect is telling me that.

J

Smaller cars would fit, but not like a huge truck, which I don't have, but.

D

Okay, thank you sure. Well, that yeah prompts me to have a question: what what is the distance between.

A

The back of the house, as as it as it would be rehabbed if that's changed and the front of.

A

The garage, what's what's that distance for this design here, yeah um approximately approximately.

J

um Let me find that page because it's 20 plus.

J

So right now, there's 25 feet to pull in and back out of the garage. There's additional 12 feet of.

J

A deck proposed deck, yeah, okay um and then there's a couple feet in between there. So, okay, so 25 25, 35.

J

37, maybe 39 40., okay, yeah, okay, okay, alrighty! Thank you. Any anybody else have any questions.

A

At this point, apparently not thank you. Is there any president who would like to speak in favor.

A

Anyone in favor anyone president who would like to speak in opposition any speakers in opposition, mr.

A

Sith will clear on the zoom side. Okay last call too far against any speakers at all. No, no, no.

A

Okay, all right there we go, we've heard the proposal board. What what's your pleasure.

G

Mr chair, if nobody has any any discussion, I'd like to have a motion to approve this application.

G

That's presented and advertised. Thank you, mr lee. Is there a second a second, mr rossi? Thank you, mr.

A

Lee your your motion, please like to say, first of all, I am pretty familiar with this property. The.

G

Property next door is for sale. I was showing that last week, so I was walking all over the backyard.

G

There's really not a lot of you're right. These elders, there's that proposed driveway is pretty.

G

Narrow it's going to be shared with the house next door, so you won't be back in.

G

Any 18 wheelers up there, but again just to uh to go through the variance criteria.

G

So this variance is not contrary to the public interest. The spirit of the ordinance is observed.

G

That proposed use doesn't conflict with the explicit or implicit purpose of the ordinance.

G

And doesn't alter the essential character of the neighborhood threaten public health safety.

G

Or welfare injury, public rights- substantial justice is done here because the benefit to the.

G

Applicant is not way outweighed being harmed, the general public or any other individuals.

G

Speaking as a real estate broker for a number of years, I can testify that.

G

This improvement edition of the garage will not uh diminish the value of any surrounding properties.

G

Quite the contrary, I think it will enhance them greatly. This house, as the applicant stated, is.

G

From what I could see on the outside, in pretty poor condition and.

G

You know that's a kind of a low bar, so I think you know anything that she does to improve. It would.

G

Would be an asset, so literal enforcement would result in unnecessary hardship. The uh literal.

G

Enforcement here would prevent her from having the variance for the setbacks to put the garage in.

G

And have the extra dwelling with the lot area for dwelling, so that would be the the.

G

Special conditions of the property and that doesn't serve.

G

That purpose in any fair and substantial way. So for those reasons I would move that we apply.

G

Approve this variance as presented and advertised all right. Thank you. A second, mr rossi,.

A

I would only add that, uh with regard to substantial justice that the uh the the.

E

Use of the property as proposed is uh very much uh providing a great benefit to a family.

E

Situation that has some complexity to it, uh with the need to care for a parent and also.

E

Other factors to be considered and I'm very happy that we're able to make this variance.

E

In order to accommodate the needs of someone really trying to make things, work in portsmouth.

A

All right, thank you anything from ms mark rogerson. um I just want to note that I I struggled.

D

With this a little bit until the presentation tonight by the applicant, you did a very good job.

D

um So I you know, this property doesn't really have special conditions and I mean has doesn't have.

D

Special conditions in that it's really very much like the properties. Next to it, however,.

D

It can't be reasonably used in strict conformance with the ordinance, so variance is therefore.

D

Necessary to enable a reasonable use of it. I you know this is in the grc district, which allows for.

D

More than one um dwelling lot um more yeah, one more than one dwelling.

D

And uh I think that um in order- and this is an allowed use in that in that.

D

Zone, and also a garage, obviously is a is a permitted accessory use in a residential area.

A

Thank you anything for anything further. Apparently, not okay, we'll call for the vote. The motion is to.

A

Pass as presented uh mr rossi, yes, ms eldridge, yes, miss rogerson, yes,.

A

Excuse me, mr lee. Yes, mr mcdonald, yes, mr mantle and I vote yes.

A

Thank you. I vote yes as well. You're up you're all set you're welcome.

A

Okay, to go past 10. yeah we yeah yeah. I was just thinking of that. uh We have mates reached the.

A

Magic witching hour of 10 pm. uh Does anyone wish to make a motion that we proceed to start a new.

A

uh Make a motion: we go beyond ten months to finish, start a new agenda to finish the agenda sec. Second,.

A

Okay voice vote, it will suffice. Does everyone agree that we soldier on yes? Yes, thank you.

A

Record will notice, it was unanimous. Okay.

A

Okay, next is item j on the agenda, which is the request of 404 islington street llc owner for property.

A

Located at 404 islington street, whereas relief is needed for the expansion of of use to an.

A

Inn with 10 rooms, which requires the following one: a special exception for an in use from num.

A

Use number 10.30 where the use is only allowed by special exception, said property is shown on.

A

Assessor map 145 as lot 33 and lies within the character district, 4-l-2, cd4, l2 and histo, and.

A

Historic districts who speaks in favor of this proposal, please good evening, mr chair members,.

H

Of the board, I'm attorney john boston- I represent the applicant with me tonight- is timothy johnson.

H

He's the owner of the martin hill inn located at 404 islington street. We're also accompanied.

H

By john shagging from ambit engineering and rob harbeson from market street architects.

H

First, I just want to thank you for agreeing to go past the 10 o'clock witching hour, we're here.

H

Tonight, seeking a special exception for the mart hill inn, which has existed in portsmouth for over.

H

30 years as a seven roomman with a caretaker's apartment, so really a total of eight units.

H

There's no longer a need for the caretaker given there's going to be a keyless check-in model.

H

Being utilized by the applicant and this keyless check-in model is something being utilized.

H

Not only in other names now in the city portion, but in many smaller inns in other cities as well.

H

What the applicant is proposing is to renovate the interior caretaker apartment, so the increase.

H

In the unit, current will be now then, to a total of 10 units. By way of background, we have gone before.

H

The hdc and received their approval to add an ada compliant wheelchair ramp. We've also received a.

H

Conditional use permit from the planning board to permit 11 parking spaces where 13 spaces.

H

Are required, we've also done a walk through with fire and inspection. The end result being.

H

An improvement to the accessibility improvement to code compliance and life safety.

H

Other than doing the interior renovations to the caretaker unit and the ada ramp, there's no other.

H

Changes that are being proposed to the property, no increase in the footprint whatsoever, property.

H

Lies in the cd4 l2 zone, the purpose of which is to promote the development of walkable mixed uses.

H

This in has existed for many years and is presently non-conforming grandfather.

H

Use but because the unit count is increasing by two rooms, we do need a special exception.

H

That being said, we do believe the proposal easily meets the criteria for a special.

H

Exception found in section 10.23, which I'll like to go over next. First, the proposed use as an in.

H

Is allowed by special exception number two: the proposed use will pose no hazard to the public or.

H

Adjacent properties of account of potential fire explosion or release of toxic materials, in fact,.

H

There won't be any accelerants or explosive material or toxic materials stored on site.

H

Next will be no detriment to property values in the vicinity or change in the essential.

H

Characteristics of any area, including residential neighborhoods or business and industrial districts.

H

Of accountable location or the scale of buildings or other structures, parking areas, access ways.

H

Odor smoke, gas dust or pollutants, noise, glare heat vibration or unsightly outdoor storage of.

H

Equipment, vehicles or other materials, and to this point the proposed use is consistent with the long.

H

Steering use of this property as an end for the past 30 years, the building already exists. There's.

H

No new construction, with the exception of the ada compliant ramp, so I think I can safely say that.

H

The above criteria in part, three will not be compromised.

H

Next there'll be no creation of traffic, no creation of the traffic safety or substantial.

H

Increase in the level of traffic congestion in the vicinity and to this point, the existing inn.

H

Is currently comprised of seven units with caretaker unit, and it's been without incident in.

H

This location for over 30 years, so by adding two more rooms, we don't believe the fourth criteria.

H

Will be compromised also, this project has been through tac and planning board before coming here.

H

So we're confident saying that the fourth criteria is not going to be compromised in any way.

H

In fifth, there'll be no excessive demands on municipal services, including, but not limited to.

H

Water sewer waste disposal, police fire protection in schools. In fact, we don't believe any of those.

H

Services will be impacted at all by this proposal. Lastly, the project will result in no significant.

H

Increase in water, storm water, runoff on adjacent properties or streets, and to this point again.

H

We're not making any exterior renovations we're increasing the pedaling footprint in any way.

H

So, for all these reasons, we do respectfully ask for your approval for a special exception tonight.

H

Happy to answer any questions yeah. Thank you any questions at the at this point. Any questions, mr.

A

Lee I have a question so, mr boson, so I understand the concept of how this works, but could you just.

G

Kind of walk us through the mechanics. If I'm staying there, I drive into the parking lot and get.

G

Out of my car, what do I do then? So you're going to check in on you're going to make your reservation.

H

Online and then you'll have to be a keyless kills entrance you'll have a code to access the room.

H

There is going to be a professional management company as well, so that you know there is a.

H

There is a number to call it's a local management company that will manage the property. Somebody.

H

Does have a problem: it's not going to be managed from afar. There will be a professional management.

H

Company, so if something goes wrong, I can call somebody locally correctly there and say 30.

H

Minutes or less okay yeah, it's a portion of the company; okay, okay, good! Thank you! Okay! Anything.

A

Else any other questions at this point. Yes, I guess not thank you. Thank you. Anyone else.

A

Present wishing to speak in the opposition, excuse me in support and support anyone in support. Okay,.

I

Elizabeth elizabeth browner property owner 159 mcdonough street I've been following this little.

I

uh Changeover uh for a while, I usually go to a lot of meetings, write a lot of letters as you well.

I

Know um they have done a lot of the little things that to me were important, such as making sure.

I

There's parking and the the difference. The reason why they need a special exception is because it.

I

Used to be a bed and breakfast, they called it an inn, but it was really a bed and breakfast and the.

I

People lived there and now it's going to be an inn and an inn doesn't require somebody to live there.

I

So that's why you're getting a special exception? My only concern is what happens in portsmouth in.

I

May and in june, and in may, if you go downtown, there's all these young ladies running around.

I

With decorative things in their hair because we're having a big engagement party and we're.

I

Going from bar to bar and having a good time, which is wonderful- and this is what what portsmouth does.

I

Then, in june we have all the wedding parties that come so you're not going out to dinner in june.

I

In portsmouth, because you're going to be keeping company so since it's only going to have 10 rooms.

I

I don't know if it's even possible, but my concern is, if you have 10 rooms that are rented out by.

I

Quote unquote and engagement party or a wedding party, there's no longer self-regulation that.

I

Happens and self-regulation happens when I pay two or three hundred dollars a night for a hotel room.

I

And the people next door, making too much noise, I'm going to call somebody.

I

So that's gone when everybody rents, it is from the same party. So that's my only concern about.

I

This other than that I am in support of it. I think it's it's been. It's been a good neighbor.

I

For many many years, I figure if it doesn't work with an online situation, that people will complain.

I

To the code officer and things will be cracked down on so I am in support of it. I just would like.

I

To see a stipulation put on if it's all rented to the exact same party there's some kind of.

I

Babysitting that happens, if I can use that word. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else to speak in favor.

A

Mr stiff anybody on the soon side, no anyone wishing to speak in opposition, anyone at all.

A

Anybody anybody, apparently not anyone wishing to speak too far,.

A

Or against last call for speakers, apparently not we're all clear. Okay.

A

Which, what's your pleasure on this one board, does anyone.

A

Have a discussion point or perhaps a motion, miss moderation. uh I would move to.

D

uh Prove the special exception as presented and advertised, in fact, in a second, I will.

D

Explain why thank you, mr rossi. Thank you. So um you know for purposes of I think most people know this.

D

um But uh if the applicant proves that it meets the criteria for special exception.

D

um The board is really compelled to um to grant it in this case. That is, uh the applicant has done.

D

That so just going through the same criteria that attorney bozen went through um and in is permitted.

D

Within this district by special exception, so it meets the first criteria. It will not pose any.

D

Hazard to the public or adjacent properties on account of potential fire explosion or release.

D

Of toxic materials, um there will be no detriment to property values in the vicinity or changing the.

D

Essential characteristics of an area um this inn has been opera was a b and b. It has been.

D

Operating for a long time, they're doing a change in use, but the um function of the of the building.

D

Will remain the same um and um there also will be no uh no uh parking air and I lost my way.

D

It's late anyway, there will be no detriment to property uh values in the vicinity or changing.

D

The essential character of the neighborhood on account a location or scale of the building.

D

Another structures, parking areas, access ways: odor smoke, gas, duster, other pollutant.

D

Noise, glare heat vibration or unsightly outdoor storage of equipment, vehicles.

D

Or other materials and fourth, there will be no creation of a traffic safety hazard.

D

um Or substantial increase in level of traffic congestion in the area.

D

It is going from a seven unit in to I believe, a 10 unit in seven unit into a caretaker 2.

D

10., the parking will be dealt with by the planning board in the form of a conditional use. Permit.

D

Fifth, there are no excessive. There will be no excessive demand on municipal services.

D

Including, but not limited to water, sewer, waste disposal, police and fire protection in schools.

D

And the project will not uh will result no significant increase of stormwater runoff.

D

And to adjacent property or streets, there's no change to the existing bill.

D

Footprint so therefore that criteria is met. um I do not believe that we could put any kind of.

D

Stipulation on the special exception, even if we were, I would not support it. I think that having a.

D

A party rent, the whole inn was capable was able to happen under the old use.

D

As well as the new use, so that is not a condition or stipulation I would put on.

A

Okay, thank you, mr rossi. Nothing to add thank you. Okay, anything any.

A

Further comment anything anything any further. Okay, the proposal is to approve it as presented.

A

Okay, we'll start, mr will vote the other way. Mr mantle? Yes, mr mcdonald, yes, mr lee, yes.

A

Ms margerson, yes, miss eldridge, yes, mr rossi, yes, and I vote yes as as well.

A

You're welcome. Thank you. Okay, all right, just just a comment about the proposed.

A

Stipulation we're not that's not something that we can do. Okay,.

A

uh All right now moving right along to item k, which is the request of safely family revocable,.

A

Trust agreement owner for property located at 1121 south street, whereas relief is needed to demolish.

A

The existing garage and construct a new garage and deck, which requires the following one: a variance.

A

From section 10.521 to allow a 3.5 foot left side yard, where 10 feet is required, two, a variance from.

A

Section 10.2 to allow a non-conforming structure or building to be extended, reconstructed or.

A

Enlarged without conforming to the requirements of the ordinance said, property is located on.

A

Assessor map 150 as lot 20 and is located within the general residence, a gra district.

A

Who presents this prey this case? Please hi, I'm natalie safley, I'm a homeowner for this property.

A

Welcome okay, thank you all for uh staying staying late tonight. I really appreciate it. um My husband.

D

And two children and I live at one one: two one south street after living in the portsmouth area,.

D

For 10 years and in this property for five years, we are finally ready to improve upon the integrity.

D

Of this property, as part of this renovation process, we are asking to be able to demolish.

D

The existing attached single car garage that will remain in the same footprint of the existing.

D

Garage right now we are building a structure not on a foundation, so that will also help improve.

D

The integrity of the home we have checked verbally with all of the abutters, especially the westward.

D

Neighbor madeleine with the designs, and they have all verbally approved the designs as presented.

D

So I will go through all of the um the five points of interest at this time, um so granting.

D

This variance um would it be contrary to public interest, um as I mentioned, that all of the.

D

Areas around us, the property line, is consistent with the surrounding homes in the neighborhood.

D

And rebuilding the structure in the same footprint and living space has.

D

No impact negative impact on the health, safety and welfare of the general public.

D

Is the proposed use in the spirit of the ordinance again, as has been mentioned, several.

D

Times this evening, portsmouth is a very unique, has a unique neighborhoods with unique footprints. So.

D

It is consistent with the surrounding areas. um Is it going to do substantial justice? uh It allows.

D

Us to make these modern improvements, um making building energy codes, making it more efficient.

D

While gaining a modest living space for our family of four, it will not diminish.

D

Any surrounding property values it will actually add to the property value and and then finally,.

D

If we are not able, then this variance I'm as tired as you all, um then um it would not be.

D

The small expansion to the home provided would above the garage, would not be possible so that.

D

Is my proposal for this evening? If you have any questions I'll be happy to answer them.

A

Any questions from the board anything at all: no, no, okay, apparently not thank you.

A

Anyone else present who would like to speak in favor anybody on zoom, mr stith, no okay, anybody.

A

In opposition 2-4 against any speakers at all too far against last call: okay, okay,.

A

Close the public hearing and go to the discussion and the voting stage.

A

What's your uh does someone have a motion, ms ms eldridge, thank you. um I would move approval of.

C

This all right, thank you. Is there a second to that motion? Second, mr mantle, thank you.

C

Granting the variance would not be contrary to the public interest and.

C

Observe the spirit of the ordinance granting the variants would do substantial justice.

C

There's been a garage 3.5 feet from the property lines for many years. They will.

C

Continue to be one, it has not been a problem for the neighborhood. There is no other place to put.

C

This garage, it seems like a reasonable request. As far as the deck goes, it has been pointed out.

C

Much of it is not above 18 inches and so really would not need our approval at all, and so I guess.

C

It's marginally in on this motion, so we approve that as well. Would you consider that stipulation.

C

Yes, I will yes um and for all of those reasons, I think that we should grant the variance for this.

C

Simple request: all right. Thank you, mr mantle. I concur okay, good and that.

A

And the stiff, you agree with this: yes, they do and, and the stipulation is okay with you.

A

Okay, great okay, super anything further, apparently not okay, good! Let's call, let's call a vote. The.

A

Motion is to approve with the stipulation, that's suggested, we'll start down this.

A

We'll start down with mr rossi this time. Yes, mr miss eldridge. Yes, ms margerson, yes,.

A

Excuse me, mr lee, yes, mr mcdonald, yes and mr mantle. Yes, all right.

A

Thank you very much. You're welcome, sorry to hit you had to wait so long, but how did the chair vote.

A

And chair votes, yes as well, which it didn't didn't matter anyway. Yes, thank you all right, as.

A

Chairman charlie used to say our favorite uh petition of the evening, no, namely the last one.

A

Some of you may remember, chairman charlie, I do good yeah I'll bet you I'll bet. You do.

A

All right, this is item l, the request of 531 islington street.

A

Portsmouth llc owner for property located at 531, is lincoln street, whereas relief is.

A

Needed to replace the existing menu board, which requires the following one: a variance from section.

A

10.835.31 to allow a menu board to be 26 feet from the rear, lot line and 40 feet from the side lot.

A

Line where 50 feet is required for each two, at variance from section 10.1261.30, to allow direct.

A

Lighting in the historic district, where external illumination is the only type of illumination.

A

Allowed zed property is located on assessor map 157 as lot 5 and is located within the.

A

Character, district 4, l2, cd4, l2 district, so who speaks who presents this please? uh Mr chairman?.

K

um Members of the board, my name is: sharon; summers, I'm an attorney with donahue, tucker and shandela.

K

I'm here tonight representing uh the interests of dunkin donuts at 531 islington street, and we are.

K

Here, in conjunction with a project to renovate the exterior of the building and to upgrade various.

K

Components of the property, including the menu board and the speaker tower for the drive-through.

K

With me, tonight um are dorothy selima, normand and also joe salima.

K

Who are the owners of the property and they can answer any questions which you may have.

K

uh As the chair, uh it has indicated the relief that we're seeking is, first of all setbacks.

K

From the rear and the side for the speaker tower canopy and also the menu board, as well as the type.

K

Of lighting in the menu board, because of the fact that we are now in the historic district and the.

K

Only type of lighting that's allowed technically is exterior lighting, so I will touch upon.

K

Some of the points that I raised in terms of dealing with the five criteria and after which.

K

I would uh ask that the um uh present to me that the variance request be approved as presented.

K

Before we do that, though, I just do want to bring your attention to, because I think it'll be.

K

Provide some kind of context for you, the um item. That's on your screen right now, which is.

K

Exhibit two: if you look down in the lower right hand corner, I don't know if that can be blown up.

K

Or whether you you've been able to see that, but if, if you, um if you look, you can see in kind of a.

K

A square box there behind the building- that's where the thank you that's where the.

K

Proposed menu board is going to face out towards the rear of the property.

K

And then the speaker tower is going to be there as well. So that's that's. The proposed.

K

Location right now, the speaker and the menu board are up flush against the building.

K

So I wanted to let you know that and then um exhibit three, which is, I think, the next one.

K

Yeah that just gives you a nice contrast between what's in existence right now and.

K

What it will look like with the new speaker, canopy and the the menu board.

K

So with that in mind, as I've indicated in the materials, this is a dunkin donuts, which.

K

Has been in operation since approximately 1989 and periodically, in conjunction with.

K

The franchise requirements the owners have conducted these these renovations.

K

It's been a while, since we've done a renovation and since the last renovation occurred uh this.

K

Property has now been included in the historic district and there have been.

K

Regulations adopted by the city relative to uh drive-through services um so prior to.

K

um Those uh regulations going in neither the speaker nor the menu board needed relief.

K

um The as conjunction with this project, we have gone to the hdc we've conducted a work session.

K

To talk about the various exterior renovations that are going to be proposed, we've received some.

K

Favorable comments: we also had some suggestions which we're working on. We are hoping to go back.

K

To the hdc on august 3rd for a public hearing and, hopefully approval, we understand, of course,.

K

That the hdc also has to approve this signage and, however, they didn't have any any comments.

K

About the signage, so we're cautiously optimistic that that will be um okay. So with that I'd like.

K

To turn now to the um to the criteria, um first of all, I'll go through the criteria for the setback.

K

For both the the speaker tower and the the menu board, um so the basic objective, I believe for the.

K

Zoning ordinance relative to the the setbacks has to do with establishing a set of guidelines for.

K

Accessory drive-throughs, the objective, arguably, is to provide some degree of buffering from.

K

Abutting properties to avoid any detrimental impacts associated with the surface facilities.

K

In this case, um and and also to um that, objective must be examined in in conjunction.

K

With determining whether the variance is going to alter the essential character of the locality.

K

Here the essential character is that this is a property located in the cd4.

K

L2 district, it's surrounded on three sides by either issington street or commercial or.

K

Mixed commercial and residential and then in the rear, where the menu board and the speaker tower.

K

Are going to be located um this abuts vacant land, which is a parking lot, and also a um a a railroad.

K

Instead of railroad checks, I know there were a number of um photos that I took early one morning.

K

Out the uh the dunkin donuts, which shows you, I think what the what this will look like with the.

K

The menu board and the speaker facing that that view so there's really no one there to see it.

K

The um of the existing menu board and the speaker with a newer version, which is shown.

K

On exhibit three is not going to alter the essential character. The locality uh given the.

K

Fact that the menu board and the speaker have been on site for many many years and we do not.

K

Think that it's going to threaten the public health, safety or welfare. In fact, the proposed.

K

Location of the speaker tower and the menu board, we believe, will enhance the safety of the traffic.

K

Flowing on the site, because it's just going to be a little bit farther away from the building.

K

The spirit and intent of the ordinance, of course, um under new hampshire law, is merged with public.

K

Interest so that's already been addressed uh with regard to the surrounding properties of.

K

The of not being diminished the existing equipment has been on site for a long time.

K

The new equipment is going to be, I think, much more aesthetically pleasing as well, as is the.

K

Entire renovation project, so we do not believe that there's going to be any uh property value.

K

Values that will be diminished and we are unaware of any information that would suggest otherwise.

K

With regard to the substantial justice component of the application.

K

The benefit to the applicant in granting this variance is that this is a long overdue.

K

Exterior renovation project and granting the various is going to allow us to proceed.

K

In addition to that, the the circumstance of this particular applicant is that we are subject to.

K

Contractual obligations which provide require us to perform uh periodic renovations um and.

K

The uh also some of those guidelines are quite strict, including the the uh the type of the menu.

K

Board so granting the variance is going to allow us to uh continue with this renovation.

K

And to do it in a way, that's going to be an in conformance with our franchise obligations.

K

There is no detriment, we don't believe to either any member of the public or to the any individual.

K

And in fact, we believe that the renovations will be a benefit to the public. With regard to this.

K

The hardship element, which is the last one on the setback, the property, is distinguished from other.

K

Properties in the area in that it is operated as a dunkin donuts with a drive-through window.

K

Since approximately 1989., and these have been in the existing menu board and the speaker are.

K

Non-Conforming as to the setback requirements, the size of the lot and the location of the existing.

K

Building really do not allow us to place the um either the menu board or the speaker.

K

Tower really place else in it or in a way that's going to conform with the setback requirements.

K

So as a result of that, in addition to the fact that we need the menu board and the speaker in.

K

Order to to conduct the drive through, um we really do need to put them where we're proposing to do it.

K

Denying the variance um for the location of the proposed replacement value, menu, board and speaker.

K

Will not advance the general public purpose of the ordinance, um the if you can see from the photos.

K

There or the exhibits that are that are shown the proposed equipment, both the tower and the.

K

Menu board are going to overlook a parking lot and the railroad track. They are not.

K

Going to be facing the street and they are not going to be facing the other properties.

K

And so forth, and because of that, we believe that there's no fair and substantial relationship.

K

Between the purpose and the application here, last of all the proposed use in terms of the setback.

K

Is reasonable because the impact from this equipment is going to be felt if at all,.

K

Towards the rear of the property and there's really nothing there.

K

The proposed location is going to be.

K

A similar amount of non-conformity as to what exists currently.

K

And again, it's going to be facing the rear of the building, and so the impact will be negligible.

K

Moving on to the variance criteria for the.

K

Illuminated signage: we believe that the basic zoning objective for this particular ordinance.

K

Is to limit the type of lighting for any signs which are in the historic district.

K

This sign is going to have direct illumination, as I explained in the written materials. It's.

K

Basically, going to be sort of like two tv sets: that's an led lighting. um The need for this.

K

Variants for the lighting is driven strictly by the fact that we are now in the historic district.

K

um The effect of the lighting of the new menu board is only going to be experienced by the.

K

Property to the rear of the building, which is again a parking lot, the essential character.

K

Of the locality is not going to be altered by a menu board with a new form of illumination.

K

Since the menu board has been on site for decades, and the new board is going to continue.

K

To face the rear property and not impact others, spirit of the ordinance is observed.

K

The uh values of the surrounding properties are not diminished.

K

Again, the existing menu board with internal illumination has been on site since the late 1980s.

K

The led lighting, which is going to be included in this one, is going to face the rear. So it's.

K

Not really going to affect other properties, and we are unaware of any information or evidence.

K

That suggests that the lighting is going to be an issue with regard to the substantial.

K

Correct justice criteria: I think that the the comments that I made about the setback variants.

K

Apply with equal force to the uh to the lighting, and so we would ask that that be found.

K

With regard to the unnecessary hardship again, this property is distinguished from.

K

Other properties because it's operated as a dunkin donuts with a drive-through since 1989.

K

The nature of the menu board requires that it have has lighting and lighting of the highest.

K

Quality highest quality- and I note that some case law of new hampshire does support.

K

The fact that there is something of the special conditions associated with this.

K

And in addition to that, the there's no fair and substantial relationship between the general.

K

Public purpose of the ordinance, the ordinance given the fact that it is in the historic district.

K

Presumably relies heavily on what's going to be visible from other properties, including the.

K

Streetscape in this case, because the lighting is going to be facing the rear of the property.

K

We do not believe that there's any fair and substantial relationship between the purpose.

K

And the application here and then finally, the proposed use is a reasonable one. The.

K

Lighting that we're talking about is mandated in conjunction with the franchise corporation's.

K

Periodic uh renovation requirements and we believe that the new menu board is going to be.

K

More attractive, as evidenced in in the the exhibit that I I showed to you and will not generate any.

K

uh And either an amount or type of light, that's going to be have greater visibility to other.

K

Properties than what is currently there, and as a result of that, we believe that the proposed.

K

Use is reasonable, so for those reasons I would request that the two variances be granted as.

K

Presented and I'm happy to answer any questions which the board may have okay. Thank you. Any.

A

Questions from the board, it doesn't miss miss martinson. So um I just want to confirm um that.

D

The there will be no internal illumination of any other sign on duncan on the duncan building.

D

Just this canopy and this board that's not entirely true, the um the the other signs.

K

Will have, um I think the term is re-facing and that's been reviewed by the um by the hdc or.

K

That is being reviewed by the htc, the only uh sign which requires this board's review.

K

Is this menu board and that's because it is a new sign, the other signs are just going to be refaced.

K

And therefore they are not considered they're essentially considered to be grandfathered. If.

K

You will so, therefore, they do not need to have review by this board. It's only this menu board.

D

Okay- um and this is, and so this menu board has led lighting, correct and the current board.

D

Do you know what kind of um I think it's called? I think it's in internal okay, when you say led.

E

Lighting, what you mean is it's an led screen correct? Yes, that's correct.

D

It's interesting that duncan is historic. Now we're so I don't know what that says.

K

About all of us who have been going to duncan for all these years, hey, thank you.

A

Any other questions at this point from the board: no apparently not.

A

Anybody present wishing to speak in favor anybody on the zoom call. No, no anyone wishing to speak.

A

In opposition, I suspect not no, okay, any speakers too, for or against last call. Okay, we're, okay, okay,.

I

I get up at five o'clock, so you know this is way past. My bedtime, elizabeth bradder property owner.

I

159 mcdonald street, I do not drink coffee, but when my kids were little, I used to walk to dunkin.

I

Donuts via the railroad tracks, don't tell them to get donuts there. I can tell you that I walked by.

I

There normally I didn't park in my bartlett street property today, because I did not want to work.

I

Walk in the 93 degrees and 60 humidity to here, so I chose not to do that, but normally when I.

I

Go by there after a meeting, I walk back from the meetings to my bartlett street property. I go by.

I

Dunkin donuts and it's completely dark. They are closed, they're open in the morning, but they're.

I

Not open in the afternoon- and I can't attest for how late they are open, but they do clo. They are.

I

Closed when I go by at night so and it's dark- it's not like they're leaving all the lights.

I

On it's dark there. um The reason I'm speaking too for against is, although I realize that the new.

I

Sound equipment will probably be an improvement over. What's there now.

I

Because, what's there now is the old 1989 system, which is very squawky and squeaky, and I can't hear.

I

You, and can you repeat yourself so hopefully the new one will not have that issue, but the.

I

But as someone who is real attuned to sound, if you put a lid over it, that reflects the sound and.

I

It kind of bounces around between your car and the stuff, so I realize that behind there is reecey and.

I

Risi makes a lot of noise. There is a parking lot back there and eventually, reecey will have some.

I

Units back there, but I think the the footage from this building to there will not be impacted by the.

I

Sound but the building next door may be minimally and, like I said it could be an improvement.

I

So my suggestion would be for them to put some trees in there and all the trees would do.

I

Well, besides, make it look a little better, but they would also help to absorb some of that sound.

I

So if trees were put along there, the kind that are there year round, you can call them whatever you.

I

Want but those would help there is another problem with this area and I don't think they have to go.

I

To tax on bringing it up here, sorry- and that is when you walk along there, if you're walking from.

I

Bartlett coming down islington street so that dunkin donuts is on your left.

I

When you arrive at their fence, the cars coming out of the drive-through cannot see you so just.

I

So they know that that's a complete blind spot for the pedestrian, as well as the.

I

Things so you guys can't deal with that, I'm just bringing it up because.

I

Maybe they heard me and might do something about that, but I would like to see some.

I

Kind of foliage added there as a stipulation, if you're allowed to put it on there. If you want to.

I

Thank you very much. Thank you. Last call speakers, uh mr sith, all clear. Okay, all right we're.

A

Closed the public hearing is closed time for some discussion and perhaps emotion. I would like to.

E

Say that I plan on supporting this request for variants. But I do want to make a comment because.

E

We just recently considered a request for internal illumination of a sinus change in the historic.

E

District and turned it down, but I think this is a request. That's differentiated from that because.

E

This particular signage, if you really want to call it signage, is really not so much a sign in.

E

The way that I think of the sign, this is really just a menu board that is digital and therefore.

E

I think, and it's hidden from public theme for the most part, so in my mind uh those things make this.

E

Significantly different from the last uh request that we considered for this type of variance, okay,.

A

So my emotions, I happen to agree with you, your comment. This is sort of hidden in the.

A

Yeah, that was actually a motion author. uh So so yes, my motion is always now emotional.

E

A

E

Can I see the criteria put everything away? I just want to make sure I hit them all. Thank you.

E

So this would not be approving. This variance would not be contrary to the public interest. It does not.

E

uh In any way impact what the public sees as they go down, the pedestrian and traffic street.

E

Granting the variance would observe the spirit of the ordinance, because I believe the ordinance is.

E

Really designed for signage, that is meant more as a visible advertisement for the facility, its.

E

Substantial justice would be done because there is no public harm that outweighs the benefits.

E

Of the business owners granting the variants will not diminish the values of surrounding.

E

Properties, they're, mostly commercial use or empty parking lots in the areas. I can see this and I.

E

Don't see any way, it impacts the value of those properties and because this property is bordered.

E

By those commercial spaces and empty parking lots that is kind of a special condition that shields.

E

This shields these boards, these menu boards from public view and therefore I don't think, there's.

E

Any uh relationship between the ordinance and uh that the fair and good use of the property.

A

Thank you who got the second. Was it you, mr lee? I did miss the mantle. That's right. I concur with you.

B

All right, mr rossi, I think uh granting the variances would improve the property and make it.

B

Less non-conforming, okay, thank you anything anything further from anybody. You know and.

D

Just missed, we are creating the variances for both the setback, the speaker tower and.

D

The menu board setback and the illumination of the sign? Yes, yes, that's yes! Yes, yes, yes and yes,.

A

Okay, anything further before we vote. Okay, let's, let's start down here with mr mantle this time.

B

Yes, mr mcdonald, yes, mr lee, mr lee, mr miss margesson, yes, miss eldridge and mr ross.

A

Yes and I grow yes, also: okay, all right done. Yep you're welcome, thanks for staying.

A

Yeah okay motion two would like to make the motion, mr man, mr mcdonald, mr mcdonald, okay.

A

And a second, those in favor of adjournment right now, hi.

A