Zoning Board of Adjustment

ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING AND MEETING April 9, 2013 A public hearing of the Zoning Board of Adjustment was held on Tuesday, April 9, 2013 at 6:30 PM in the Auditorium at City Hall. Gerry Reppucci, Chair, conducted the meeting. Members present were: Gerry Reppucci, Chair Jack Currier, Vice Chair J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson 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. Monis One Family Trust (Owner) Gottesman & Hollis, P.A. (Applicant) 4 Searles Road (Sheet B Lot 20) requesting the following variances for a Conservation subdivision: 1) to allow a 15 foot side yard setback, where 20 feet is required; and, 2) to allow a 10 foot rear yard setback, where 40 feet is required. R18 Zone, Ward 9. Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier JP Boucher Rick Johnson Attorney Morgan Hollis, Gottesman & Hollis, P.A. 39 East Pearl Street, Nashua, NH Atty. Hollis said since they had a public hearing at the last meeting, he wanted to bring forward all the evidence and testimony from the previous meeting. Jim Petropulos, Hayner, Swanson, Inc., 3 Congress Street, Nashua, NH. Mr. Petropulos stated that the property has a lot of unique characteristics, and believe that a Conservation subdivision is the best way to go. He said they are proposing 33 lots, on 24 acres. He said that 49 units are allowed. He said in 2006, when the Land Use Code was re-written, the Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 2 Conservation subdivision language speaks to flexibility. He said designers of these subdivisions have flexibility to try to protect environmental features of the property, or natural features of the property, or other elements, and it encourages preservation of open space, and by doing so, it allows for smaller lot sizes, and relief for lot frontage and lot width. He said that when the Code was re-written, he believed it was an error, or an oversight, to not have it in the Code to give relief for setbacks. Mr. Petropulos handed out a packet of three drawings, he said the first one represents what the current setbacks would be in a Conservation subdivision, which is 20 feet in the front yard, 20 feet in the side yard, and 40 feet in the rear yard. He said it leaves a building box of about 40 feet by 50 feet, which is a small envelope to build on. He said a 60 foot by 50 foot box would be preferred. Mr. Petropulos said that their original request is the second drawing, 20 feet in the front, 15 feet on the side, and the relief of 10 feet in the rear, which would have provided a 60 foot by 70 foot box. He said they’ve considered the ZBA’s concerns, and agree that people want back yards. Mr. Petropulos said they’re revising their request to the third drawing, for a 25 foot rear yard setback. He said that gives them a 60 foot by 55 foot box to build within. He said that will give them adequate flexibility, and will give the residents an adequate back yard to enjoy, along with protecting the buffer area as well. Mr. Petropulos said that they believe they have a balanced plan, and will be back before the Board for the wetland crossings. Mr. Currier asked to clarify the width of strip of Conservation land, the green strip at the bottom of the plan, or southerly side. Mr. Petropulos said from the rear property line of the proposed lots, to the property line of Meadowbrook Phase 3, it is 40 feet. He said that Meadowbrook Phase 3 is a condominium project, where the closest unit to the subject project is 200 feet from the back of that unit to the property line, so with the 40 feet of green strip, it’s 240 feet. Mr. Currier asked if the no-cut in the conservation buffer is a requirement. Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 3 Mr. Petropulos said it is not, but they’d agree to have that as an intent to protect the area. He said it’s currently treed, and they want to keep them there to provide the separation. He said it would be in a vegetated state. He said some of the open areas are fields. Mr. Reppucci asked to confirm if any of the structures would be in the wetlands or setbacks. Mr. Petropulos said that lot 12, a very small portion of lot 13, just nick the tip of the wetland buffer. He said they needed to create a loop road for the property, and indicated the crossings of wetlands. He said they’ve tried to indicate small, narrow crossings. He said that lots 12 and 13 would have buffer in it, in its pre-developed condition. He said they’ve tried to keep the homes out of the buffer as much as possible. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: Fred Teeboom, 24 Cheyenne Drive, Nashua, NH. Mr. Teeboom asked about the buffer width and asked if it was 40 feet. He asked to confirm if the setbacks are to be 25 feet. He said with the distance to the nearest condos of over 200 feet away, he said he’d be in favor of the request. Michael McDermott, 1 Indian Fern Drive, Nashua, NH. Mr. Reppucci read Mr. McDermott’s letter into the record. The letter is in the file. Mr. Currier asked what the impact would be if they could build as many homes that could be built without variances. He said he’s concerned with the safety on the road, and increased development is a concern. Mr. Petropulos said that the impact is negligible. He said they aren’t asking for greater density, or any variances for density relief. He said they’re asking for design flexibility, not density. He said they have an excess of four acres of open space. He said that 49 homes are allowed per the Land Use Code. Atty. Hollis said that if this request is not granted, the lots could go right to the back of the property, without any common area. He said they don’t have a problem if the request is granted stipulating that there should remain 40 feet of open Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 4 space beyond the lots for the conservation easement. He said as to the lots on the south and west side, there shall remain 40 feet of open space. Mr. Johnson asked if the open space is to remain undisturbed. Atty. Hollis said that is the goal, but would prefer not to stipulate not touchable. He said it would be association owned and controlled. He said they really don’t want a walking path, it would be contrary to a stipulation that we cannot cut the trees. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS – REBUTTAL: Mr. Teeboom said undisturbed is to leave it in its natural state, no path or anything. He said a 25 foot setback is not much of a setback, and they want to encroach 15 feet into a 40 foot setback, which is significant, it’s not a minor encroachment. He said the stipulation ought to say undisturbed. Mr. Reppucci said that by going from a 10 foot to a 25 foot setback is a pretty significant change, it’s a demonstration that they’re being considerate of the issues previously raised by abutters and the Board. Mr. Currier said the 10 foot setback wouldn’t work. He said he has some concerns about a development that’s just getting out of the gate asking for relief of two setbacks. Mr. Johnson said the setback of 25 feet is much better. He said the intent is to keep the buffer clear. He said he’s in favor of the request. Mr. Boucher said he’s in favor of the request as it stands. He said he feels much more comfortable with the 25 foot setback. He said that every property is unique, and the goal of the development is to provide open space. He said he’s comfortable with all the scenario’s they’ve stated. Mr. Reppucci said he didn’t see why the Board couldn’t put in a stipulation that says the buffer should be completely undisturbed unless the Planning Board finds it necessary to incorporate a change to that buffer in their decision. He said that way, the Board isn’t forcing them to come back to us if there’s a violation of our stipulation. Mr. Johnson agreed with Mr. Reppucci’s statement. Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 5 MOTION by Mr. Reppucci to approve the application on behalf of the applicant, with the change to a 25 foot rear yard setback, as amended by the applicant. Mr. Reppucci 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. Mr. Reppucci said that the request is within the spirit and intent of the ordinance, the request will not impact property values, the request is not contrary to the public interest, this type of development is positive to the public interest, and substantial justice will be served. Mr. Reppucci said that the special condition will be that the south and west 40 foot Conservation setbacks will be left undisturbed, with the provision that the Planning Board deems it necessary to modify the plan, if the change comes from the Planning Board, they don’t need to come back to the ZBA. Mr. Currier asked if it would be safe to say if it shifts from undisturbed land to open space. Mr. Reppucci agreed. SECONDED by Mr. Boucher. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4-0. 2. Fred S. & Janice R. Teeboom (Owners) 24 Cheyenne Drive (Sheet E Lot 874) requesting variance to encroach up to 7.5 feet into the 30 foot required rear yard setback to replace an existing open deck with an attached 16’x16’ sunroom addition. R9 Zone, Ward 1. Voting on this case: Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson Gerry Reppucci – Recused, (Mr. Currier acting as Chair). Fred Teeboom, 24 Cheyenne Drive, Nashua, NH. Mr. Teeboom said he’s asking for a minor setback encroachment in the rear yard. He showed the Board a drawing of his property. He said that for some reason, there is an angle by the Nashua River, which sticks out into the rear yard, like the letter “v”. He said he doesn’t Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 6 know why the “v” is there, and pointed it out on the GIS map. He referred to a photo of the rear yard, and it serves no purpose, as there’s no such “v” in the river, it’s an arbitrary drawing, and the boundary is smooth, it’s not shaped like a “v”. Mr. Teeboom said when he submitted for a building permit, staff indicated that a variance would be required. He showed a picture of the proposed addition, and it will be harmonious with the house, and the roof line. He said it doesn’t intrude into any wetlands, and there is no health or public welfare threat, and the proposed use will observe the spirit and intent of the ordinance, and it blends into the character of the neighborhood. He said it will be stick-built. He said that substantial justice will be done, and the owners will be able to enjoy their home. He said that all the abutters are in favor. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: None. MOTION by Mr. Currier to approve the application on behalf of the owner, as advertised. Mr. Currier stated that the variance is needed to enable the applicant’s proposed use of the property, which is to add a 16’x16’ sunroom where a deck currently is. He stated that the Board has found hardship in the lot, in that there’s a surveyor’s “v”, where it cuts in, so there’s an area in the rear yard that really isn’t there in reality, but is on paper with the survey, and therefore, is a hardship on the land, and that the variance is appropriate. Mr. Currier said that the request is within the spirit and intent of the ordinance, also, the Board finds that it will not impact property values, it is not contrary to the public interest, and substantial justice is served. SECONDED by Mr. Johnson. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 3-0. 3. Hollis Crossing Condominium Association (Owner) Bartemus Trail (Sheet F Lot 4) requesting special exception to work within the 75-foot prime wetland buffer of the Nashua River to construct a 5’x5’ concrete pad as part of a seasonal dock system, replacing an existing dock system. PRD Zone, Ward 1. Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 7 Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson Gary Flaherty, 335 Broad Street, Hollis, NH. Mr. Flaherty said they are looking for relief for a 5’x5’ concrete pad, to be poured right before the bank to the Nashua River. He said they have a seasonal dock system, it’s about 200 square feet, and the rest of it falls under the State of New Hampshire jurisdiction. He said it’s about 200 feet from the Hollis/Nashua line. He said that no vegetation will be disturbed. He said the old dock is dilapidated, and it’s made out of railroad ties, and everything to be built will be built right on top of it. Mr. Reppucci asked about the nine special wetland conditions, and if they are all met. Mr. Flaherty said they are all, and will be adhered to. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: No one. MOTION by Mr. Currier to approve the application on behalf of the applicant, as advertised. Mr. Currier said that the use is listed in the Table of Uses, Section 190-112. He said that the use will not create undue traffic congestion, or unduly impair pedestrian safety, it will not over load public water, drainage or sewer or other municipal systems. Mr. Currier stated that all special regulations are met, per testimony, and 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, it will remain a passive dock, and has been there for quite a few years. Mr. Currier said the special conditions are that it is per the Conservation Commission approval from March 5, 2013, with 7 stipulations of approval, and the minutes are incorporated into the record as well. Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 8 SECONDED by Mr. Boucher. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4-0. 4. MacThompson Realty, Inc. (Owner) 140 Daniel Webster Highway (Sheet A Lot 242) requesting variance to maintain an existing ground sign that was granted by the Zoning Board of Adjustment on 2-14-06, with a special condition that the sign was to be used solely for a Suzuki dealership. HB Zone, Ward 7. Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson Attorney Gerald Prunier, Prunier & Prolman, P.A., 20 Trafalgar Square, Nashua, NH. Atty. Prunier said he’s reserving his rights to move forward without a full Board. Atty. Prunier said that they already received approval for the ground sign for a Suzuki dealership. He said that Suzuki is not selling any more automobiles in the United States. He said they’d like to replace the Suzuki sign with a Hyundai sign. He said the sign will be in the same location, it’s no higher than the Suzuki sign, in fact, its smaller in area than the Suzuki sign. Atty. Prunier said that they are here because the Zoning Board put on a stipulation from the original approval that if the Suzuki dealership stopped doing business, then the sign must be removed. He said that all of the same conditions exist. Mr. Reppucci said the proposed sign looks like a solid body sign, where the old one had poles. Atty. Prunier said that it’s just a decorative skirt around the poles, there won’t be any advertising on the bottom portion. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: No one. Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 9 MOTION by Mr. Currier to approve the application on behalf of the applicant, as advertised. Mr. Currier stated that the intent of the initial sign, and approval, was to avoid a proliferation of signs at the Suzuki dealership. He said that he believes that this request meets the same criteria for the Hyundai, therefore, the Board finds that this variance is needed to enable the applicant’s proposed use of the property, which is now a different dealer. He said the other five criteria are met; it’s within the spirit and intent of the ordinance, property values will not be negatively impacted, it is not contrary to the public interest, and substantial justice is served. SECONDED by Mr. Johnson. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4-0. 5. Scott Boyer (Owner) 75 Deerwood Drive (Sheet H Lot 134) requesting use variance to allow a 6-unit multi-family development. PI Zone, Ward 2. Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson Attorney Gerald Prunier, Prunier & Prolman, P.A. 20 Trafalgar Square, Nashua, NH. Atty. Prunier stated his objection to going forward with less than a full Board. Atty. Prunier said the property is unique, it’s a residence on a 27,500 square-foot lot. He said the area is strangely zoned. He said the zone is PI, and it’s also near an Airport Industrial zone. He said next door is a day-care school, and a bank is on one corner, and a gas station is on the other corner. He said that across the street is a very large apartment complex. He said the area is a mix of several types of uses. Atty. Prunier said that the 6 units that are proposed would make a reasonable use of the property, based upon the nearby conditions and character of the neighborhood. He said it’s in the public interest, it will not diminish the property values of surrounding parcels. He said that the parking will meet the ordinance as well. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 10 SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: No one. MOTION by Mr. Boucher to approve the application on behalf of the owner, as advertised. Mr. Boucher stated that the zoning restriction as applied interferes with a landowner’s reasonable use of the property, considering the unique setting of the property in its environment; no fair and substantial relationship exists between the general purposes of the zoning ordinance and the specific restriction on the property, and the variance would not injure the public or private rights of others. Mr. Boucher stated that the use 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. He said the motion should state that a majority of the Board found that the request met the spirit and intent of the ordinance MOTION CARRIED 3-1 (Mr. Currier). 6. Jamie & Robert Bosse (Owners) 330 Nowell Street (Sheet 103 Lot 306) requesting the following variances: 1) minimum lot frontage, 50 feet required – 30 feet proposed; and 2) minimum lot width, 60 feet required – 30 feet proposed – both requests to subdivide one lot into two lots. RB Zone, Ward 6. Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson Richard Maynard, Maynard and Paquette, 23 East Pearl Street, Nashua, NH. Mr. Maynard said in the RB zone, there is a requirement of 6,000 square feet of land for a single-family home. He said the subject lot is 18,503 square feet in size. He said the code requires 50 feet of frontage, and 60 feet of lot width. He said the plan in the package labeled “subdivision plan” meets all the requirements of the zoning ordinance, and would be approved by the Planning Board. He said that there are elements of that plan that are not ideal. He said that the lot would be only 6,599 square feet, and the side lot line would cut Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 11 across and intrude upon the front yard of the house in the front. Mr. Maynard said the second plan, labeled “ZBA Plan”, is a better layout, and requires some simple variances for lot frontage and lot width. He said the two lots would be more evenly balanced, one would be 8,000 square feet, and overall, represents a better plan. Mr. Maynard said that the proposed request meets the spirit and intent of the ordinance, which is to require proper separation of houses. He said the proposed subdivision will not intrude into the front yard of the existing houses, requiring 50 feet of lot frontage and 60 feet of lot width serves no beneficial purpose with regard to these unique circumstances. Mr. Maynard stated that property values will be enhanced with the proposed subdivision, he said that the public is benefitted in that the proposed subdivision allows for a more logical and reasonable layout of the lot lines, given the unique shape of the lot. Mr. Maynard said that substantial justice will be done, as the property owners will be able to subdivide the property in a reasonable manner. Mr. Maynard stated that for the hardship, the property has a very unique shape, with the left side lot line at an oblique angle, and substantial property square footage to the right rear side, and the existing house situated well back on the front lot line. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: Ron Macero, 12 Tilton Street, Nashua, NH. Mr. Macero said he owns a two-family abutting the rear of the subject lot. He said he is concerned that this request will bring down his property values. Mr. Reppucci said that the request is not asking for any setback variances, and the variances they are requesting have nothing to do with the rear of the property, and, they’re building a single family home, so the use of the land is permitted by right. Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 12 Mr. Boucher said that the proposed house meets the yard setbacks. Mr. Maynard said that they feel that their plan is a better layout, than what the ordinance allows. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS – REBUTTAL: Mr. Macero asked about the distance of the existing garage from his lot line, and asked if it is in violation. Mr. Reppucci said if the structure was built before the zoning setback was created, then it would be grandfathered in. Mr. Falk said that the setbacks of the structure, a detached accessory structure, meets the current setbacks. Mr. Reppucci said the only matter before the Board is the lot frontage and the lot width. Mr. Macero said he’d like a privacy fence built along the back line abutting his property. Mr. Maynard said if Mr. Macero desires privacy, he should put up his own fence. He said there is no requirement anywhere in the ordinance to require privacy fences between single-family residential homes. He said there is no reason for a privacy fence, and it’s not relevant to the request, and object to the requirement of any fence. Mr. Reppucci said he’d be very hesitant to include a stipulation requiring a fence. MOTION by Mr. Reppucci to approve the application on behalf of the applicant, as advertised, both requests considered collectively. Mr. Reppucci 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. Mr. Reppucci said that the request is within the spirit and intent of the ordinance, the request will not impact property values, the request is not contrary to the public interest, they can subdivide this property by right, and substantial justice will be served. Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 13 SECONDED by Mr. Boucher. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4-0. 7. Kimco Webster Square, LLC (Owner) Barlo Signs (Applicant) 256-258 Daniel Webster Highway (Sheet A Lot 19) requesting variance to exceed maximum wall sign area, 40 sq.ft allowed – 76.1 sq.ft proposed. HB/GI Zones, Ward 7. Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson Tim Sullivan, Barlo Signs, Hudson, NH. Mr. Sullivan said they are asking to install a second set of illuminated letters on the building for Five Guys, which is located to the back of the David’s Bridal building, the out-building. He said that their main entrance door is facing the Toys ‘R Us building. He said they presently have a set of letters facing that front side, that are 33 square feet. He said the request is for a set of letters on the rear side of the building, facing the Verizon store. He said they’re not allowed space on the freestanding sign out by the road, as there is no available space on that sign. Mr. Sullivan said they are seeking approval for 42 square feet of letters on the rear side of the building, to identify Five Guys. He said it is a commercial zoning district, and the sign will adequately help locate the business. Mr. Currier asked if space could be made available on the pylon sign if someone leaves. Mr. Sullivan said that a lot of the spaces in the plaza have leases that specify that they get space on the pylon, it would be extremely difficult to rewrite some of these leases. Mr. Currier asked what was in the space before Five Guys. Mr. Sullivan said that Five Guys is there now, they just began operations. Mr. Boucher said that there is a sign on the wall facing Trader Joe’s. Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 14 Mr. Falk said that the sign facing Guitar Center is not visible from any public right-of-way, therefore, staff doesn’t count it. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: Cort Mandez, Amherst NH. Mr. Mandez said he is the owner of Five Guys. He said that they are one of the smallest tenants in the plaza, and if any of the larger stores move out, Five Below, David’s Bridal and the Vitamin Shoppe, would have a better shot, since they are larger, to get some space on the pylon sign. He said they don’t anticipate obtaining any space on the pylon. He said they’ve only been open for five days, and already many customers have said they don’t know they are there. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: No one. MOTION by Mr. Currier to approve the application on behalf of the applicant, as advertised. Mr. Currier stated that the variance is needed to enable the applicant’s proposed use of the property, because it’s the rear portion of the building, and there’s hardship in that it will hardly be seen from the public right-of-way, but will provide needed signage when people are driving in and around Webster Square. Mr. Currier said that the request is within the spirit and intent of the ordinance, the request will not impact property values, a wall sign on the north end is not contrary to the public interest, and substantial justice will be served. SECONDED by Mr. Johnson. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4-0. 8. Southern New Hampshire Regional Medical Center (Owner) Barlo Signs (Applicant) 10-12 Prospect Avenue (Sheet 30 Lot 65) requesting variance to exceed maximum wall sign area, 6 sq.ft allowed – 60.42 sq.ft proposed. RC Zone, Ward 4. Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 15 Tim Sullivan, Barlo Signs, Hudson, NH. Mr. Sullivan said that they are seeking relief for a second sign on the property, of 60.42 square feet, to properly identify the Surgery Center. He said since the package went out, they amended the logo from the black lettering to the new branding that they are using at the Surgery Center. He said the area of the sign is the same. He said that this is a very large building, but they are in a residential zone, where 6 square feet is allowed. Mr. Sullivan said that the sign is in keeping with the size of the building, and the property. He said for illumination, they will be halo-lit letters, so at night they’re not very bright, but they will identify the building. He said the sign will be located in a band for signage, and is tastefully designed. Mr. Boucher asked about ground signage. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: Scott Cote, Southern NH Medical Center, Nashua, NH. Mr. Cote said that the ground sign already exists, it’s at the entrance off of Prospect Street, across from the parking lot. He said the sign used to say “Health and Education Center”, but the new sign will just identify the address, 10 Prospect Street. Mr. Currier asked to confirm which street the wall sign will be facing. Mr. Cote said Prospect Street. Mr. Cote said that the hospital campus doesn’t have many wall signs, there are more ground signs. He said the building is used by a group of three non-profit health care organizations in the community to form the Surgery Center, with St. Joseph’s Hospital, Dartmouth Hitchcock and Southern NH Medical Center opening up this ambulatory surgery center. He said there will be patients coming to this campus that don’t historically come to this campus that need the building identification. SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: No one. MOTION by Mr. Reppucci to approve the application on behalf of the applicant, as advertised. Mr. Reppucci 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 Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 16 method reasonably feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Mr. Reppucci said that the request is within the spirit and intent of the ordinance, he said although it’s an excessively large variance over what’s allowed, it’s the view of the Board that it is a commercial building in an RC Zone, and it’s appropriately sized for the building. Mr. Reppucci said the request will not impact property values, the request is not contrary to the public interest, and substantial justice will be served. SECONDED by Mr. Boucher. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4-0. 9. Southern New Hampshire Regional Medical Center (Owner) 16-20 Prospect Avenue (Sheet 30 Lots 19 & 40) requesting variance for minimum open space, 35% required – 27.4% proposed – to remove an existing structure for a parking lot expansion. RC Zone, Ward 4. Voting on this case: Gerry Reppucci Jack Currier J.P. Boucher Rick Johnson Attorney Gerald Prunier, Prunier & Prolman, P.A., 20 Trafalgar Square, Nashua, NH. Atty. Prunier said the lot has a residential building on it, and it’s slated to be removed for a parking lot expansion, adding 31 new spaces for the hospital. He said they meet all the setback regulations, except for the open space requirement. He said they are adding as much landscaping as possible, they’re just a little bit short of the open space. He identified the abutting properties. Mr. Falk said there is an apartment building there right now, and there is more lawn area. Atty. Prunier said he objects to going forward will less than a full Board, to protect his client’s rights. SPEAKING IN FAVOR: No one. Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 17 SPEAKING IN OPPOSITION OR WITH QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS: Fred Teeboom, 24 Cheyenne Drive, Nashua, NH. Mr. Teeboom asked why if a building is torn down, there is less open space. Mr. Reppucci said that the paving counts against the open space, as it’s impervious material, therefore, it’s less open space. He said it’s not the building, it’s the asphalt covering the majority of the lot. Mr. Falk said that open space is grass or lawn area, it’s space that nothing man-made is on. He said that anything built or constructed on a property counts against open space, whether it’s a building or asphalt. He said that 35% of the lot must consist of non man-made material. MOTION by Mr. Johnson to approve the application on behalf of the applicant, as advertised. Mr. Johnson 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. Mr. Johnson said that the request is within the spirit and intent of the ordinance, the request will not impact property values, the request is not contrary to the public interest, and substantial justice will be served. SECONDED by Mr. Boucher. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4-0. MISCELLANEOUS: REGIONAL IMPACT: Mr. Falk said that staff does not have an Agenda yet, but there is only one residential case. He said he didn’t believe it had any Regional Impact. REHEARING REQUESTS: None. MINUTES: Zoning Board of Adjustment April 9, 2013 Page 18 None. ADJOURNMENT: Mr. Reppucci called the meeting closed at 9:26 p.m. Submitted by: Mr. Johnson, Clerk. CF Taped Hearing