Zoning Board of Adjustment

ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING July 13, 2010 A public hearing of the Zoning Board of Adjustment was held on Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 6:30 PM in the Auditorium at City Hall. Rob Shaw, Clerk, conducted the meeting, in Jack Currier’s absence. Members present were: Rob Shaw, Clerk, (Acting Chair) Gerry Reppucci Ryan Williams Carter Falk, Deputy Planning Manager/Zoning Mr. Shaw explained the Board's procedures, including the points of law required for applicants to address relative to variances and special exceptions. Mr. Shaw explained how testimony will be given by applicants, those speaking in favor or in opposition to each request, as stated in the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) By-laws. Mr. Shaw also explained procedures involving the timing light. 1. Kaustubh Kulkami & Sonali Joshi (Owners) 31 New Searles Road (Sheet B Lot 900) requesting variance to encroach 24 feet into the 30 foot required rear yard setback to construct a 22’x33’ open deck. R9 Zone, Ward 9. Voting on this Case: Gerry Reppucci Ryan Williams Gerry Reppucci Kaustubh Kulkami, 31 New Searles Road, Nashua, NH. Mr. Kulkami said the variance is to allow for construction of an open deck that will be more than four feet in height, and it will encroach into the rear yard setback. He said the reason that he needs the variance is that there is ledge in back of the house, and that rear area is an eyesore and is useless, the deck will help for better utilization of the rear yard. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING July 13, 2010 Page 2 Mr. Kulkami went over all the variance points of law, and stated that it will not impact the neighbors whatsoever. He said that it will not be attached to the ledger board; it will be a free- standing structure. He said the highest point will be about 8½ feet. Mr. Shaw said the house is butting into a steep ledge/slope in the rear, and it goes up. Further discussion ensued about how the deck would be constructed in the yard, and its height relationship with the house. Mr. Kulkami said that you cannot get directly from the house to the deck, there is no door, you have to go to the yard, and then go up the steps. Mr. Shaw asked what the comparison is between the carpeted floors inside the house to the surface of the deck outside. Mr. Kulkami said the deck surface would be about two feet higher. Mr. Shaw asked about the height of the deck, and whether that is part of the variance. Mr. Falk said that if a deck is less than four feet in height, it can be built up to five feet from a property line, and if it exceeds that, it must meet the setbacks of the principal structure. He said that since there is ledge sloping up towards the back of the property, he couldn’t build the deck less than four feet in height, he’s adding the extra height to get some useable walking area on the deck. Mr. Williams asked for additional clarification about the hardship, and asked if due to the existing ledge, that is the reason why a variance is being requested. Mr. Kulkami agreed. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No One. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING July 13, 2010 Page 3 No One. MOTION by Mr. Reppucci to grant the variance request on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Repucci stated that the variance is needed to enable the applicant’s proposed use of the property, given the special conditions of the property; and the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some other method reasonably feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, per testimony there is ledge in the back yard, and they can’t build the deck on the ground level less than four feet high, without the ledge interfering. Mr. Reppucci stated that the request is within the spirit and intent of the ordinance, it will not adversely affect property values of surrounding parcels, it is not contrary to the public interest, and substantial justice would be done. SECONDED by Mr. Shaw. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 3-0. 2. Akvile Dargiene & Remigijus Dargis (Owners) 344 Main Street (Sheet 9 Lot 28) requesting the following variances: 1) to exceed maximum ground sign area, 10 square feet allowed – 28 square feet requested, and 2) to exceed maximum ground sign height, 6 feet allowed – 8 feet requested. RB Zone, Ward 7. Voting on this Case: Rob Shaw Ryan Williams Gerry Reppucci Remi Dargis, 7 Cardiff Road, Nashua, NH. Mr. Dargis said he is requesting a variance for a business sign, and showed the Board some pictures of the proposed sign. He said the photo was done on the computer and is accurate, and proportioned. He said it will be perpendicular to Main Street. He said it will be 8 feet high, 28 square feet, and have exterior lighting. Mr. Dargis said they need the sign for visibility. He said there are bushes and trees that block the view, and showed the Board a picture taken from the sidewalk, just to the north, ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING July 13, 2010 Page 4 where a shrub blocks the view. He said the sign will allow for better business exposure. He pointed out some existing ground signs on Main Street that have received variances. Mr. Reppucci asked about the rehearing request that was applied for relative to the driveway. Mr. Falk said that the applicant has withdrawn that request, and will accept the Boards original ruling. Further discussion ensued. Mr. Shaw asked why they are requesting a ground sign that is three times what the Ordinance allows. Mr. Dargis said that a lot of people don’t even know they exist, and a lot of customers don’t even know that we’re on Main Street. He said if they install a sign that would meet the Ordinance, it would be barely visible, and said they want to be consistent with other businesses for the size of the sign. Mr. Shaw said the signs for the other uses, such as the hair salon, the veterinary office, Salvation Army, those are destination businesses and services, and those businesses attract more customers to the site, so there is some justification to those signs. Mr. Dargis said they do expect some walk-in traffic, and said they want to make sure they can see where the business is. He said it’s impossible to put all the information on a ten square foot sign. Mr. Shaw asked about the setback for the sign. Mr. Dargis said they would meet the ten foot setback. Mr. Williams asked about the design of the sign, and if a sign company has been chosen. Mr. Dargis said they do not have a company, but the submitted drawing is what is being sought. Mr. Williams said it’s typical that the submittal has a copy of the final version of the sign, so the Board can ensure that it meets the character of the neighborhood. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING July 13, 2010 Page 5 Mr. Dargis said they’d like to have the granite posts, with brackets and the sign inside. Mr. Reppucci stated that he didn’t think the sign would be visible coming from the north, as the bush in the photo blocks the view. Mr. Dargis said the photo is taken right from the sidewalk, there will be a different angle for a driver in the street. Mr. Reppucci said he thought the sign might be too low, the bottom of the sign is only four feet high. He said he’d support the request, but thought it may serve better if it were a little taller. Further discussion ensued. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No One. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: No One. MOTION by Mr. Reppucci to grant the variances on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Reppucci stated the variances are needed to enable the applicant’s proposed use of the property, given the special conditions of the property; and the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some other method reasonably feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Mr. Reppucci said it is within the spirit and intent of the ordinance, the Board believed that there were similar signs in the area and the sign is consistent, it will not adversely affect the property values of surrounding parcels, it is not contrary to the public interest, in fact, and substantial justice would be done. SECONDED by Mr. Williams. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 3-0. MISCELLANEOUS: ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING July 13, 2010 Page 6 REGIONAL IMPACT: The Board did not see any cases of Regional Impact. REHEARING REQUESTS: None. MINUTES: June 22, 2010: MOTION by Mr. Reppucci to approve the Minutes as presented, waive the reading, and place the minutes in the file. SECONDED by Mr. Shaw. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 3-0. ADJOURNMENT: Mr. Shaw called the meeting closed at 7:41 p.m. Robert Shaw, Clerk CF Taped Hearing