 |
Zoning Board of Adjustment
Town of Holderness
PO Box 203
Holderness, NH 03245
Minutes
January 12, 2010
Members Present: Ivan Bass, Wendell Broom, Erik Simensen, and Susan Webster
Members not Present: Gyda DiCosola, Tim Lyons, and Bob Rothschild
Staff Present: David Lorch – Town Planner
Others Present: Heidi & Paul Luscher, Catherine Broderick – Wescott, Dyer, Fitzgerald & Nichols, Elaine & Henry Dionne, Jeff Cripps, Mark Marden
1. CALL TO ORDER: Ms. Webster called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. The Roll was called. Mr. Simensen was raised to voting status.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Bass moved, seconded by Mr. Simensen, to approve the minutes of 9/15/09 as presented. Motion passed.
3. OLD BUSINESS: none
4. NEW BUSINESS:
Case #314-01-12: Paul & Heidi Luscher
Request for Appeal of an Administrative Decision requiring a variance prior to Site Plan approval for property located at 7 Esco Lane in the General Residential Zone, Map 252, Lot 6.
Ms. Webster explained that a four member board was present and the applicant could continue their appeal until a five member board was present. After consultation, the applicants agreed to proceed with a four member board.
The public hearing was opened at 7:08 P.M. Ms. Broderick and Mr. & Mrs. Luscher provided the following information:
- The original application noted that the applicant felt they met the definition of a home occupation business. They are withdrawing that argument, stating that they feel they are in compliance with current regulations, in part based on the history of prior permits and approvals and because the property meets the mixed used allowed by special exception in the General Residential Zone.
- The Luschers will submit a Site Plan application to the Planning Board which, upon approval, will be recorded as a benchmark of the business along with the recently approved Boundary Line Adjustment.
- The business owned and operated by the Luschers, Ameri-Swiss, is a wholesale import / export business of machine parts. They also repair, refurbish, and clean fuel-injection ESCO machines. Mr. Luscher also provides consulting and training services on the machines, both on and off site. Samples of materials used and pictures of the machines were provided to the Board.
- There are four machines for producing parts as well as training machines on site.
- Cutting oil and mineral spirits used to clean and refurbish the machines is collected and recycled. There are no hazardous materials used on site, and the machines do not produce dust. The noise is minimized by the building construction.
- There are two full time employees and one part time employee. Training someone to repair and use the machines takes a minimum of two years, limiting the size of the business and use of a local labor force. UPS trucks come twice daily, while larger trucks bringing or picking up the machines come approximately once per month.
- The Luschers live on the 3.82 acre lot with their two children and have no plans for expansion at this time. Any further expansion would be regulated by site plan review by the Planning Board. Potential future construction of a storage barn, if needed, would more than likely be on a 5 acre lot owned by the Luschers situated across the road in Center Harbor.
- The Luschers have returned some paved area to green space and improved the overall aesthetics of the property, making the business very low impact for the area.
- The Luschers requested that the business be allowed to continue as it is, stating that denying any part of the business would be crippling to their livelihood.
The Board members had numerous questions for the applicants, most involving the type of operation at the business. Although the zoning ordinance does not define “manufacturing” a prior approval for a special exception for the property clearly states the use was for a warehouse with no manufacturing. The definition for light industry, allowed only in the commercial zone, includes manufacturing. The allowed uses by special exception in the general residential zone do not include manufacturing. Mr. Luscher stated that one machine is used for manufacturing parts for one customer and comprises approximately 2% of the business. Mr. Lorch cautioned against creating definitions for terms not already included in the ordinance.
Public Comment: Mrs. Dionne requested clarification of the impact of granting approvals for the business on her property. Mr. Bass explained that approvals, such as variances or special exceptions go with an individual property, not the surrounding neighborhood. There was no further public comment. The hearing was closed at 8:06 P.M.
Deliberation & Vote: Mr. Bass moved, seconded by Mr. Simonsen, to deny the Appeal of an Administrative Decision. During discussion, Mr. Bass stated he felt that a variance should have been issued at the start of the business and is now required. He felt there had been nothing in the testimony that would qualify the business for a special exception. There was general discussion regarding limiting the scope of the business via a use variance, and all agreed that conditions could be imposed specific to this property. Vote: Motion passed unanimously.
Case #315-01-12: Paul & Heidi Luscher
Request for Special Exception from Articles IX & X for property located at 7 Esco Lane in the General Residential Zone, Map 252 Lot 6. The applicant proposes to expand an engineering and machine sales and refurbishing service for small precision parts.
There was general discussion regarding the most appropriate method for proceeding with this application. It was agreed the applicant could withdraw the application, the hearing could be opened and continued awaiting submission of a Variance Application, or not accept the application. Ms. Webster felt the application was not applicable since the Board had just voted to require a Use Variance of the applicant. Ms. Webster moved, seconded by Mr. Bass, to not accept the application for Special Exception since it is not applicable in this zone. Motion passed unanimously.
The Luschers and Ms. Broderick were apprised that the deadline for the February meeting was January 13, 2010, the next day.
5. OTHER BUSINESS: none
6. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned on a motion by Ms. Webster, seconded by Mr. Broom, at 8:24 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Wendy J. Huff
Secretary
Minutes Approved: February 9, 2010
Corrections: none
| |
