Zoning Board of Adjustment

ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING January 8, 2013 A public hearing of the Zoning Board of Adjustment was held on Tuesday, January 8, 2013 at 6:30 PM in the Auditorium at City Hall. Gerry Reppucci, Vice Chair, conducted the meeting. Members present were: Gerry Reppucci, Vice Chair Jack Currier, Clerk Rick Johnson J.P. Boucher Carter Falk, AICP, Deputy Planning Manager/Zoning Mr. Reppucci explained the Board's procedures, including the points of law required for applicants to address relative to variances and special exceptions. Mr. Reppucci 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. Reppucci also explained procedures involving the timing light. 1. Scott, Joseph & Beverly Gustitus (Owners) 27 Watson Street (Sheet 58 Lot 41) requesting special exception to allow an accessory (in-law) dwelling unit. RA Zone, Ward 2. Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson Joe Gustitus, 27 Watson Street, Nashua, NH. Mr. Gustitus stated that they converted the existing garage and put in a kitchen, he said it’s his mother’s house. Mr. Boucher asked what areas are over the garage. Mr. Gustitus said just the kitchen is over the garage. He said the area is a combination of living room and kitchen. Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 2 Mr. Currier asked about the structure on the Pond Street side. Mr. Gustitus said there’s a shed and a screen porch, which was put on many years ago. Mr. Reppucci asked if the space over the garage has already been constructed and used. Mr. Gustitus said it’s already constructed, he said he got notification that he needed a building permit, and was told that he needed a special exception for the in-law apartment, and an electrical permit. Mr. Reppucci asked about the in-law special regulations, and briefly went over them with the applicant. Mr. Gustitus agreed with all the special regulations. Mr. Reppucci asked about the size and square footage of the unit. Mr. Gustitus said it meets the criteria, and had a revised plan, and said its 656 square feet for the in-law apartment, and it’s 26% of the gross living area, which meets the code. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: No one. MOTION by Mr. Boucher to grant the request on behalf of the owner. Mr. Boucher 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 the area variance. Mr. Boucher 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, and substantial justice is met. Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 3 SECONDED by Mr. Reppucci. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4-0. 2. Marcio H. & Denise C. Bartholi (Owners) 43 Gilman Street (Sheet 94 Lot 91) requesting special exception for a major home occupation for in-home hair salon. RB Zone, Ward 6. Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson Denise Bartholi, 43 Gilman Street, Nashua, NH. Mrs. Bartholi stated that before her, there was another hair salon there for over thirty-five years. She said the space is about 120 square feet. She said she had a salon at 159 Pine Street, and now wants to move back home. Mr. Currier asked where the parking is. Mrs. Bartholi said in her driveway, and in the front of the house, she said there is no problem with the parking. Mr. Currier asked if she lives there. Mrs. Bartholi said she does, and knows the property very well. She said a lot of the neighbors are her clients, and they walk there. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: Andrea Lindsey, lives directly across the street. Ms. Lindsey said she is in full support, and traffic or parking will not be a problem. Carol Pierpont, 20 Tilton Street, Nashua, NH. Mrs. Pierpont said she is a client, and has been going to her for ten years, and is in full support of the request. Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 4 Maria Caruso, 49 Hawthorne Village Road, Nashua, NH. Ms. Caruso said she’s been going there for more than 8 years, and is in full support. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: No one. MOTION by Mr. Johnson to approve the special exception request on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Johnson stated that the request is listed within the table of uses, Section 190-16, Table 16-3 and 190-47 (B). Mr. Johnson stated that the use will not create undue traffic congestion or unduly impair pedestrian safety, it will not overload public water, drainage or sewer or other municipal systems. He stated that all the special regulations are met per testimony, and it will not impair the integrity or be out of character with the neighborhood, or be detrimental to the health, morals or welfare of the residents, as testimony came forward that this has been an established business in the past, and it’s just basically a relocation and everything is already in place. He said that neighbors have testified that this in the character of the neighborhood, and is supportive. SECONDED by Mr. Boucher. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4-0. 3. Aaron T. Reagan (Owner) 9 Newbury Street (Sheet 20 Lot 90) requesting variance for minimum lot area, 4,682 sq.ft existing, 12,445.6 sq.ft required, to convert a single- family home into a two-family residence. RB Zone, Ward 7. Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson Kimberly Reagan, 9 Newbury Street, Nashua, NH. Mrs. Reagan said they’d like to convert the upstairs, when it’s constructed, into a one bedroom apartment, basically for her brother to live in. Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 5 Mr. Reppucci said the plans for the second floor addition didn’t need any ZBA approval, it was just a building permit, the only reason they are here is for the land area. He asked when they decided to make it into a two-family unit. Mrs. Reagan said they just had a baby, and they thought it would be nice to have a family member living up there. Mr. Currier concurred about the abutting properties, with a majority of them being two-family structures. He asked if they had a property comparison of all the nearby lots, with their lot sizes and unit counts. He asked if there is any data that supports what they want compared to the neighborhood. He said one of the points of law is the hardship in the property, and said he’s struggling to find the hardship to allow an encroachment of the land area required. Mrs. Reagan said she understands that it is a small lot, but everyone around them has a two-family, and that is the nature and character of the neighborhood. Mr. Reppucci said that he is favorable because they’re not expanding the footprint, they’re only building up, and they do not need any variances for setbacks. Mr. Johnson said there is compatibility, as many other homes in the neighborhood are both two stories and two units. He said their request is a reasonable one. Mr. Currier said he’s struggling to support the case. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: No one. MOTION by Mr. Boucher to grant the request on behalf of the owner. Mr. Boucher 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 Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 6 feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than the area variance. Mr. Boucher 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, and substantial justice is served. SECONDED by Mr. Johnson. MOTION CARRIED 3-1 (Mr. Currier). 4. Public Service Company of New Hampshire (Owner) 220 Lund Road (Sheet 106 Lot 19) requesting special exception to work within the 75-foot prime wetland buffer of Salmon Brook to relocate the Nowell Street Substation from an area adjacent to the Bishop Guertin sports fields to a different part of the lot adjacent to Nowell Street. RB & R9 Zones, Ward 6. Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson Nicholas Golon, TF Moran, Bedford, NH. Mr. Golon said the special exception requested is to allow for land disturbance in the 75-foot prime wetland setback and buffer. He described the property location, and said that the primary access is off of Nowell Street. Mr. Golon stated that the existing Nowell Street substation, which has been there since the 1950’s, and actively used, has reached the end of its useful life, and needs to be replaced. He said they’ve worked with PSNH’s engineers to find the most suitable alternative to the replacement of the infrastructure system. He said it’s not an option to replace it in the exact same location as it is today, to keep the power going. He said they’ve identified a few other locations on the lot, and came up with the proposed location as the best overall, especially for emergency access, and proper areas for vehicles to pull in and out. Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 7 Mr. Golon stated that the existing tank for the substation carries about 2,000 gallons of oil, as identified on the plans. He said this is located completely within the 75-foot wetland buffer, as is the transformer. Mr. Golon said that in lieu of a traditional substation, there is a pad-mount transformer. He said it’s about six feet in height, and it will sit on a 10’x10’ concrete pad, it will be about 8’x3’ in size. He said it won’t be the traditional substation surrounded by an 8’ tall fence with barbed wire at the top, this one will be an electrical enclosure that is rated appropriately for the use. Mr. Golon said that they’re proposing 10,658 square feet of impact to the 75-foot wetland buffer, of which 4,200 square feet of that was added at the Conservation Commission meeting on December 18, 2012. He said the other impact is for grading and the proposed poles to service the pad-mounted transformers. He said the grading is consistent with what is there today. He said there will be a retaining wall with screening for the adjacent abutter. Mr. Golon said that PSNH already owns this particular corridor, they are just relocating equipment to another portion of it. Mr. Reppucci asked if all the wetland special conditions are met to work within the wetland buffer. Mr. Golon said they are. Mr. Reppucci asked if all of the requirements from the Conservation Commission will be complied with. Mr. Golon said they will be. Mr. Currier asked if the substation makes any noise or humming during the day. Mr. Golon said the transformers meet the manufacturer’s standards relative to noise, and it’s dissipated. He said it’s not discernible relative to background noise. He said he didn’t anticipate a backyard abutter hearing anything. He said the transformer will have bollards around it for additional safety. He said that a 6-foot tall fence is proposed for screening, as well as 7 trees on either side of the proposed retaining wall, Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 8 with the fence on top of it. He said the line of sight in other areas is fairly limited from other directions, but it is important for local law enforcement to be able to see the equipment. Mr. Currier asked if there will still be a walkway through the property as there is today. Mr. Golon said that there is no fence being proposed around the property, it would still be available, however, it would be trespassing on PSNH’s property. Mr. Johnson asked if there will be any lighting at the site. Mr. Golon said there will be no lighting. Mr. Currier asked what voltages are coming into the substation, as people often mention that it could cause cancer. Mr. Golon said that coming into the pad-mount transformers, its 34.5 Kv. He said the existing line has 4 Kv. He said that this project is providing more capacity, the more capacity, the more reliable the service. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: Dan Burns, 16 Dora Street, Nashua, NH. He identified his house location on a map. He asked if they are coming in from the Nowell Street end, versus the current Lund Road end. He asked if there will be any high-tension towers, or larger towers. Mr. Golon said the Planning Board process will address the specifics of the tower. He said they’ve already contacted the nearby owners relative to the work that will be done. Mr. Reppucci agreed, he said that the ZBA’s scope is limited to just what will be occurring within the wetland buffer, the Board cannot discuss the tower, or the attributes of the equipment or lines, or the technical information, it’s not in the Board’s purview. Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 9 Mr. Golon said that they would be glad to meet with the abutters to go over more details about the proposal. Sally Grigas, 86 Almont Street, Nashua, NH. Ms. Grigas said she is concerned about the trees that will be cut down near the marsh, there is a lot of wildlife there, it’s very beautiful. She said she wants to make sure that PSNH is sensitive to this. Mr. Reppucci asked if she went to the Conservation Commission meeting. Ms. Grigas said she did not, she didn’t get any notice or anything. She said the existing location is the best, and every effort should be made to keep it in the same location. She said she’d like to keep the area as is, in an uninterrupted format, and wants the quality and appearance of the area to stay. She said that when the trees come down, the noise level will increase, and it reduces the habitat for the animals. Ron Bois, 320 Pine Street, Nashua, NH. Mr. Bois said he has the same concerns as the previous speaker. He said that there is asbestos back here, and is concerned about that. Mr. Reppucci said it’s his understanding that this work will not be very intrusive, and asbestos is only a problem when you dig it up, and he didn’t believe that there will be much digging in this project. Darlene Albert, 66 Nagle Street, Nashua, NH. Ms. Albert said it sounds like they’re already getting approval. She said they’re talking about cutting a lot of trees down, to clear-cut it. Diane Gendron, 4 Brewster Street, Nashua, NH. Ms. Gendron said that the character of their residential area would be highly impacted by this project, the location of the transformer presently is not an eyesore. She said there’s a great deal of natural habitat and wildlife that will be impacted. Jamie Bosse, 33 Nowell Street, Nashua, NH. Ms. Bosse said she was concerned with the trees being removed. SPEAKING IN FAVOR – REBUTTAL: Mr. Golon said that this is a proposed distribution service, they are the same type of poles that are in front of your house, Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 10 they are 45-50 foot tall max poles. He said they’re consistent. He said there will be a 34.5 Kv line that is being added to increase capacity, so there will be the 4 Kv line and just above that will be the 34.5 Kv line. He said this isn’t one of those tall towers with 115 Kv that you see along the highway. He said the trees to be removed are on PSNH’s land to make room for the improvements. He said there are clear distances that have to be maintained around the equipment. He said the lines and equipment cannot go underground, as it’s not as reliable, and doesn’t last as long, and the cables lifespan is greatly reduced. He said if there is a maintenance issue, if lines and equipment are above ground, it is visible, where if it’s underground, it’s not, and the maintenance is significantly more intense. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS – REBUTTAL: Ms. Grigas stated that it would have been great if PSNH sent a registered letter to the abutters prior to the Conservation Commission meeting, it would have resolved many questions before the ZBA meeting. MOTION by Mr. Reppucci to approve the special exception request on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Reppucci stated that the request is listed within the table of uses, Section 190-112. Mr. Reppucci stated that the use will not create undue traffic congestion or unduly impair pedestrian safety, it will not overload public water, drainage or sewer or other municipal systems. He stated that all the special regulations are fulfilled, the wetlands special conditions are fulfilled by testimony of the applicant, they meet the nine criteria. Mr. Reppucci said that there are special regulations requested by the Conservation Commission, it was reviewed and approved by Conservation Commission on December 18, 2012, with five stipulations, and per testimony of the applicant, they all will be fulfilled. Mr. Reppucci stated that the use will not impair the integrity or be out of character with the neighborhood, or be detrimental to the health, morals or welfare of the residents, there were some concerns about health that were brought up, but they are not the purview of the Board, and the Board is not in a position to evaluate them. Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 11 Mr. Reppucci asked that for a special condition, the minutes of the Conservation Commission meeting of December 18, 2012 be included into the record. SECONDED by Mr. Johnson. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4-0. 5. Carl Roy (Owner) April Ware (Applicant) 8 Dixville Street (Sheet 53 Lot 82) requesting special exception for a major home occupation for an in-home day care for 12 children. R9 Zone, Ward 1. Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson April Ware, 8 Dixville Street, Nashua, NH. Ms. Ware said she just finished a two-year degree program and is going through the licensing process for the in-home child care. She said she wants 12 children, but that includes two of her own children. She said that right now she watches six children, so it would only be an additional six children. She said she’s spoken with all the abutters, and everyone seemed very agreeable, except for one homeowner that was undecided about it, due to the noise. She said there will be very limited outside play, and it won’t be until 11:30, and 3:00. She said all the children will be in the back yard playing. Ms. Ware said she won’t be doing any structural changes, and has met with the Fire Marshal, and they have to make one of the windows larger. She said the fence is there around the yard, it’s old and worn. She said there is one section that is chain- link, and she said it may be a little shorter than six feet, but is willing to change it out. Ms. Ware said she’s been in the field for 15 years, and eventually wants to expand into a commercial space. Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 12 Mr. Boucher asked about the six special conditions, and identified them. Ms. Ware said she is compliant, or will be, with all of them. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: Christine Bartlett, 9 Dixville Street, Nashua, NH. Ms. Bartlett said that her primary concern is for pedestrian safety, and the practicality of having eight additional cars twice a day on a dead-end street that does not end in a cul-de-sac. She said that their street is one of the last ones to be plowed or sanded. Mr. Reppucci asked if there is a concern about the noise. He asked how it has been with the existing children at the home. Ms. Bartlett said the noise from the children has not been an impact. SPEAKING IN FAVOR – REBUTTAL: Ms. Ware said that all her neighbors can speak with her to any concerns, she wants to be a good neighbor and not interfere with anyone. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS – REBUTTAL: None. MOTION by Mr. Johnson to approve the special exception request on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Johnson stated that the request is listed within the table of uses, Section 190-36 (B). Mr. Johnson stated that the use will not create undue traffic congestion or unduly impair pedestrian safety, those questions were brought up and discussed. Mr. Johnson said it will not overload public water, drainage or sewer or other municipal systems. He stated that all the Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 13 special regulations are met per testimony, and it will not impair the integrity or be out of character with the neighborhood, or be detrimental to the health, morals or welfare of the residents. Mr. Johnson said that the child care facility will be subordinate to the single family, the maximum capacity is 12 children, the lot conforms to the minimum lot size dimensions, there is on-site parking for the principal residential use, outdoor activity will be in the back yard and will be fenced in, and will be enclosed by a wood stockade fence not less than six feet in height, and shall be kept in good condition, and no sign other than one not to exceed one square foot. Mr. Johnson said a special condition of approval is that all of the fence needs to be in compliance with the minimum height requirement no later than June 1, 2013. SECONDED by Mr. Boucher. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4-0. 6. William E. & Gayle J. Deibert (Owners) 116 Vine Street (Sheet 98 Lot 34) requesting variance for minimum lot area, 4,948 sq.ft existing, 13,939.2 sq.ft required, to convert a three-family residential building into a four-family residential building. RC Zone, Ward 4. Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson Bill Deibert, 2 Cherokee Avenue, Nashua, NH. Mr. Deibert said that they purchased the building in May, 2012 as a 4-family structure. He said they do not live there. He said that the Planning Department has it as a 3-family structure, but it’s taxed as a 4-family. He said that sometime in the early 1980’s, the records in Assessing showed that it went from a two-family to a four-family. He said the owner at the time changed it into a rooming house, it had twelve people living there who didn’t know one another. Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 14 Mr. Currier asked about the parking, and the garage. Mr. Deibert said they are allowing one car per unit. He said that the garage is fully functionable, and one tenant is currently using it. Mr. Currier asked how the building is arranged with respect to bedrooms. Mr. Deibert said it is cut right down the middle, they have two bedrooms per unit, approximately 650 square feet per unit. Mr. Reppucci asked if he has gone to the Building Department to ask what it will entail for plans to go to a four-family structure. He said it’s possible that all four of the units will need to be brought up to current housing or building codes. Mr. Deibert said he’s not sure what would be required of him. Mr. Reppucci stated that he should do some homework on what it will entail, as fireproofing is a big expense, too. Mr. Boucher asked about the one parking space right at the intersection corner. Mr. Deibert said he doesn’t want anyone to park there. He said the tenant likes it. He doesn’t want the tenant driving over the sidewalk to park there. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: No one. Mr. Currier said he isn’t supportive of that front parking space, as it blocks traffic and is not safe. He said he’d support the case, but not for that parking space. Mr. Reppucci agreed, he said it’s dangerous. Mr. Boucher said he’s supportive of the application, the applicant has done a nice job with the property. Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 15 Mr. Reppucci said by granting this application, the Board could be doing harm to the applicant. He said that if the Board grants the variance, and becomes a four family today, the building must come into compliance, and it will require a site plan. He asked if the Board would consider tabling this item so that the applicant can consider, if he chooses, an attorney to see what their best options are, before a decision is made, thereby forcing them into the four-family structure. Mr. Boucher agreed, it may or may not be an issue with the applicant, though, but liked the idea of looking out for the applicant. Mr. Currier disagreed. He said it’s a good thing if the building is brought up to today’s code standards. He said the applicant is here for this application, and didn’t see any reason to table the request, it’s beyond the Board’s jurisdiction. Mr. Johnson said if they discover that it’s too expensive to bring it up to current code standards, then they may not bring that fourth family in. He said he didn’t think there was a need to table it. He asked about the minimum parking space requirements. Mr. Falk said its 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit for multi-family, so it’ll need six spaces. Mr. Johnson thought he heard that they were going to only allow one car per unit. Mr. Falk said that the Code requires 1.5 per unit. If the landowner wants to limit it to one car per unit, they have the right to do so, the City doesn’t get involved in these private matters, as it would be a continuous enforcement issue. Mr. Reppucci said that there is an issue with the way the Assessing Department looks at these units as compared to how the Planning & Building Department looks at the unit count. He said it can cost people a lot of money to come into compliance into today’s standards. He said he didn’t see the harm in offering them an opportunity to look into this a little further. Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 16 Mr. Boucher said he didn’t see the harm in asking the applicant the question. Mr. Falk said that Mr. Deibert owns the property, it’s their decision to come here in the first place, and it’s their responsibility to do their due diligence, and should know what’s ahead of them, and it’s their application. He said that it wouldn’t be a problem in asking them how they want to proceed. MOTION by Mr. Reppucci to suspend the rules to re-open the Public Hearing to ask the applicant a question. SECONDED by Mr. Boucher. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4-0. Mr. Deibert said that the unit sits vacant, and it’s more valuable to them as a four-family. He said the only other option would be to create a 5-bedroom apartment upstairs. He said they’d like to go forward as a four-family dwelling, as per the application. MOTION by Mr. Currier to grant the request on behalf of the owner. Mr. Currier stated that the request is within the spirit and intent of the ordinance, it’s a very large structure, currently divided up into four units, and it will not adversely affect the property values of surrounding parcels, in fact, it should increase the values of surrounding parcels, because it will be a less intensive use than what it’s been in the past, therefore, it’s not contrary to the public interest to have this exist legally as a four unit, and substantial justice will be served. Mr. Currier stated that there is a special condition with the approval that there will be no parking on the corner of Vine and Nevada Street, and the parking will be limited to the parking lot and garage. SECONDED by Mr. Johnson. Mr. Boucher said that a berm was poured onto the street, and asked if it should be removed. Mr. Reppucci said there must be something to prevent someone from parking in that spot. Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 17 Mr. Johnson said that any and all aids that would facilitate parking in that corner space. AMENDED MOTION by Mr. Currier that any driveway aid must be removed at the corner of Vine Street and Nevada Street. SECONDED by Mr. Johnson. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4-0. Mr. Currier had to leave the meeting at 9:40 p.m., Mr. Reppucci, Mr. Johnson and Mr. Boucher remain to vote. 7. Weliton & Marilda Dacosta (Owners) 271 Broad Street (Sheet E Lot 228) requesting variance to exceed maximum driveway width, 21 feet existing, 24 feet allowed, an additional 26 foot wide driveway proposed (on Bow Street). R9 Zone, Ward 1. Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson Joshua Dacosta, 271 Broad Street, Nashua, NH. Mr. Dacosta said the request is to allow a second driveway, on the side of the house off of Bow Street. He said they spoke to four different paving companies, and got four different estimates, and weren’t aware that a variance was required for the second driveway. He said that none of the paving companies mentioned anything about a variance, or the maximum width. He said they chose Affordable Asphalt out of Hudson. Mr. Reppucci asked if there was a driveway in this location in the past. Mr. Dacosta said it was gravel, and it’s been that way for 6 years, 8 months. He said there is no curb or sidewalk, it’s all at grade, and the driveway is paved right up to the street, the work was done in November. Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 18 Mr. Reppucci asked what the distance is from the intersection to the beginning of the driveway, if it’s over 50 feet. Mr. Dacosta said that there’s a scaled drawing in the package. Mr. Falk confirmed that it exceeds the 50 foot maximum distance, and meets the Ordinance. Mr. Reppucci stated that it meets the Code, and is a safe distance from the intersection. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: No one. MOTION by Mr. Boucher to grant the request on behalf of the owner. Mr. Boucher 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 the area variance. Mr. Boucher 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, and substantial justice is served. SECONDED by Mr. Johnson. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 3-0. Mr. Reppucci said that they should contact the DPW Street Department to finalize the connection to the street. MISCELLANEOUS: REGIONAL IMPACT: The Board determined that there are no cases of Regional Impact. Zoning Board of Adjustment January 8, 2013 Page 19 REHEARING REQUESTS: None. MINUTES: 12/11/12: Mr. Reppucci said on Page 2, near the bottom of the page, he asked Attorney Richard’s opinion that if he still felt he didn’t need a variance, and if he still feels that he could convert the property by right into a two-family. Mr. Falk said that Staff will make the changes. MOTION by Mr. Reppucci to approve the minutes with the noted corrections, waive the reading, and place them in the file. SECONDED by Mr. Boucher. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 3-0. ELECTIONS: The Board decided to wait until all the members are present, as only full-time members can vote on officers. ADJOURNMENT: Mr. Reppucci called the meeting closed at 9:57 p.m. Submitted by: Mr. Currier, Clerk (finished by Mr. Johnson). CF Taped Hearing