Zoning Board of Adjustment

ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING November 22, 2011 A public hearing of the Zoning Board of Adjustment was held on Wednesday, November 22, 2011 at 6:30 PM in the Auditorium at City Hall. Rob Shaw, Chair, conducted the meeting. Members present were: Rob Shaw, Chair Gerry Reppucci, Vice Chair Jack Currier Rick Johnson Carter Falk, AICP, 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. Constance P. Gosselin Rev. Trust (Owner) 356 Amherst Street (Sheet G Lot 50) requesting variance to exceed maximum wall sign area, 57 square feet allowed, 41 square feet existing – an additional 41 square feet proposed. GB Zone, Ward 2. Voting on this case: Rob Shaw Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier Rick Johnson Robyn Casey, KC Signs, Londonderry, NH. Ms. Casey stated that she is representing Chipotle Mexican Grill. She stated that the proposed sign is for the west elevation, it would be 40.21 square feet, and will help in their identification for eastbound traffic on Amherst Street into the entrance. She said the site is in a commercial area, and the character of the neighborhood, and other nearby businesses, will not be negatively affected by the proposed sign. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING November 22, 2011 Page 2 Mr. Currier asked what wall the approved sign would go on. Ms. Casey said it’s on the front wall, facing Amherst Street. Mr. Currier said he’s struggling with the need for this sign, as there is the free-standing sign right out front. He said that drivers will see it either way they’re travelling on Amherst Street. Ms. Casey said that she had a hard time finding the building, and if the sign were up there, it would be a lot easier. Mr. Johnson said that it appears that the rationale is that as you’re driving towards Nashua, when you drive in their driveway, you’ll be able to see where the building is located. Mr. Reppucci asked about the orientation of the ground sign. Mr. Falk said that the ground sign is perpendicular to Amherst Street, and it is just a re-face of a previously existing sign, and is not before the Boards consideration. Mr. Falk said they’re allowed 57 square feet of wall signage, and it could be divided up into a maximum of three wall signs. He stated that they already chose to put a 41 square foot sign on the front wall facing Amherst Street, and they want another 41 square foot sign on the long wall that is seen as you drive from Milford into Nashua. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: No one. Mr. Currier asked if the site can be entered from coming around the jug-handle. Mr. Falk said yes, you’d have to travel across Amherst Street, and go onto Airport Road, and there is an entrance to the property. He pointed out on the drawing the location of the ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING November 22, 2011 Page 3 jug-handle with respect to the traffic flow. Mr. Falk said that they have 38 feet of frontage, which translates into 57 square feet of allowable wall signage, and they already have a permit for 41 square feet, so, this sign is 25 square feet above their maximum size. He said that Chipotle is a longer word, and they have the logo next to their text, so that is why they have the extra length on the sign. Mr. Johnson asked about the LED designation on the sign. Mr. Falk said that internally lit signs are permitted in this zone. Mr. Currier said that he’s struggling to find the hardship in this case. He said that the jug-handle is there, so there will be some traffic that sees the front, but, they’ll also see the freestanding sign as well. Mr. Shaw said that the parking is on the side, and in the back, and the building is a split unit. He said the sign that is proposed may be beneficial to help people to the entrance, and it would be keeping with the character of the neighborhood. Mr. Johnson agreed with Mr. Shaw. Mr. Reppucci stated that they could live within the sign limitations if they wanted to. He said they’re allowed 57 square feet, and there’s no reason that they couldn’t put up two signs just under 30 square feet to meet the ordinance. He said he doesn’t see a hardship in this request. He said they’re going to have three signs. Mr. Johnson said he’s favoring it because it’s a split building. He said that Amherst Street struggles with the business turnover. He said what they are requesting is directional guidance coming from the west. Mr. Reppucci asked what the Planning Department’s view of the sign is. Mr. Falk said that the Board has to see that the request meets the points of law, and that it meets the character of signage in this area, be in context with the traffic patterns, and have adequate visibility and readability, and the sizes of the signs ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING November 22, 2011 Page 4 should be in proper scale to the building. Mr. Reppucci asked about the status of the other wall sign that was approved. Mr. Falk said that staff notifies the applicant when a sign is approved, and from there, they pick up the permit, post it on site, and begin fabrication and installation of the sign. Mr. Reppucci said it’s looking like it’ll be a 2-2 vote. He mentioned the possibility of tabling the request. He said this could allow the applicant, not just the sign company, to tell the Board what the status is of the approved sign, whether it’s been made already, or, the implications of making two thirty square foot signs, rather than two forty-one square signs. He said he doesn’t see any hardship in the case. He said he’d rather see the case tabled, then denied under a 2-2 vote. Mr. Currier said he wouldn’t mind tabling the case. MOTION by Mr. Reppucci to table the request to the date certain meeting of December 13, 2011. Mr. Reppucci stated that the intention is to re-open the Public Hearing to allow the applicant to speak to the hardship, status of the present signs, and the hardship imposed by the limitation of square footage. SECONDED by Mr. Currier. Mr. Shaw asked if the re-opening of the Public Hearing is to exclusively limit it to that topic, or open it up to other concerns. Mr. Reppucci said that in this case, that the Board should just open it up. MOTION CARRIED 3-1 (Mr. Johnson). 2. Pheasant Lane Realty Trust, and Francis T. & Monica E. Sullivan Trust (Owners) 304 & 310 Daniel Webster Highway (Sheet A Lot 736 & 466) requesting the following variances: 1) to exceed maximum area for two directional signs, 9 square feet allowed, 15 square feet existing – 21 square feet proposed; and, 2) to exceed maximum ground sign area for two signs, 145 square feet allowed per 11-25-86 ZBA ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING November 22, 2011 Page 5 meeting, 198 square feet proposed per sign. GB & HB Zones, Ward 7. Voting on this case: Rob Shaw Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier Rick Johnson Attorney Gerald Prunier, Prunier and Prolman, P.A., 20 Trafalgar Square, Nashua, NH. Atty. Prunier said that the Pheasant Lane Mall is being redone, there are new tenants, restaurants being added, exterior work, and signage. Atty. Prunier said that the first two signs to talk about are the one next to Uno’s on Dan Chan Drive, and the one next to Zimmermans Ski Shop. He said that the new signs will not be any wider or higher, and they’re removing the electronic reader board portion of the signs. He said that due to the shape of the new signs, they’d have a little more square footage, as they’re utilizing more of the bottom of the sign. He said the proposed sign is a much more pleasing sign. Atty. Prunier said the other variance is for the directional signs, since the Mall has added a new anchor tenant, the new signs will help drivers make their way around the site easier. He said that the extra size will help to make them easier to see as well. Atty. Prunier went over all the relevant variance points of law with respect to the proposed signs. Mr. Currier stated that even though the sign has a little additional square footage, the physical size of the sign is the same, it is not taller or wider, it’s just a better usage of area, and the sign is very tastefully done. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: No One. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING November 22, 2011 Page 6 MOTION by Mr. Reppucci to grant the variances on behalf of the owner. Mr. Reppucci said that 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 stated that the request is within the spirit and intent of the ordinance, it will not adversely affect the property values of surrounding parcels, it is not contrary to the public interest, as the overall size of the text is being reduced, also, a new anchor tenant is being added, and substantial justice is being done. SECONDED by Mr. Johnson. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4-0. MISCELLANEOUS: REHEARING REQUESTS: None. REGIONAL IMPACT: The agenda is not published yet, as there was an extra week in the schedule. Mr. Falk said there are three cases scheduled, and did not see any cases for Regional Impact. MINUTES: None. OTHER BUSINESS: Mr. Currier asked about the status of Lara Rice, as her name is still on the voting sheets. Mr. Falk said he’d look into it. ADJOURNMENT: ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING November 22, 2011 Page 7 Mr. Shaw called the meeting closed at 7:39 p.m. Submitted by: Mr. Jack Currier, Clerk. CF Taped Hearing