Members Present: Jane Roberts, Jack Ernst, Steve Filipi, Coni Porter, Gretchen Wittenborg, and alternates Cathy Davis (seated) and Sue Wood,
Others present: Mike Methe, Selectmen’s representative.
Meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM
Administrative: The Board discussed and commented on the proposed town-wide survey sponsored by the Planning Board as part of the planned revision of the Master Plan in 2008.
Minutes: Wittenborg moved, Davis seconded and the Board approved the minutes of the August 14, 2007 meeting as corrected. (Sue Wood took the minutes of the July 10, 2007 meeting.)
Case # 07-10 continued: Peter and Janet Lopilato appeal for a Use Variance under Article III, 127-9 and RSA 674:33, I. (b) and V. to convert a detached garage to an accessory apartment on property located at 432 NH Route 119 E, Map 12, Lot 36-01, Rural District.
Porter recused herself from the Lopilato case having not been present at the first hearing. Davis was seated for her.
Roberts read the case and asked if Mr. Lopilato had brought detailed plans as requested. Mr. Methe clarified he had been mistaken in thinking there was a state RSA that defined attached or detached structures.
Mr. Lopilato said he had the new plans with him. Mrs. Lopilato presented the plans, which showed how they plan to attach the garage to the house. An enclosed connector approximately 42 feet in length joins the existing house to the existing garage. The connector can be entered from the back of the existing house, or from three entrance points along its length, including a formal entrance to the proposed new apartment. The proposed apartment is 728 square feet (800 or less is required by ordinance) and is on one floor of the garage. The primary dwelling will be owner-occupied and the accessory apartment will, for the time being, be occupied by Mr. Lopilato’s daughter who will provide care giving services for the family.
Wittenborg mentioned that she felt an enclosed structure was a more significant attachment than an unenclosed one. She said she thought the real question was whether existing zoning inhibits the applicant from the reasonable use of their property. She believes the prohibition against more than one dwelling on a lot has a public purpose. She asked if the special exception options were adequate to enable the reasonable use of this property, adding that the Board must be consistent, even as they view each case as unique, and balance the needs/requirements of the applicant, town residents, and the town ordinance.
Davis noted this property has two septic systems and she wondered if that precluded its being considered as a single dwelling with an accessory apartment. Wittenborg believes that two systems takes the case out of consideration as a dwelling with an accessory apartment, making it a duplex. Methe mentioned the septic system size is based on the number of bedroom served. Filipi mentioned that when the Board did its site walk it was noted that the garage elevation is lower than the existing septic system and pumping up would be necessary to be effective, adding that the new apartment would therefore need its own system. Ernst said he didn’t see a second system as an issue.
Filipi thought the case should be considered for a special exception, as was first applied for, rather than a use variance. All agreed that with the new plans, a special exception could be considered for this dwelling with an accessory apartment. All agreed that the square footage of the connection between the two structures did not need to be counted as part of the square footage of the apartment since it was actually common area for the two dwelling units.
Methe felt this was an accessory use but asked the Board to insure that the connector is enclosed. Davis agreed that the applicant should stick to the plans as presented.
Filipi moved to vote on granting a Special Exception under section 127-41 E. for an accessory apartment on condition that the connector is enclosed and the plans as presented are followed. Ernst seconded. Filipi added that a special exception runs with the land and the applicant will not have to disable the dwelling unit when he no longer needs it.
The Board found that the application met all the requirements for the Mandatory Findings for granting a Special Exception and approved the application with conditions stated above.
Wittenborg moved, Ernst seconded and the Board voted to adjourn the meeting at 8:10 PM.
| 
