Pittsfield Zoning Board of Adjustment
Town Hall, 85 Main Street
Pittsfield, NH 03263
Minutes of Public Meeting & Hearing
January 16, 2006
Chairman Lincoln called to the meeting to order at 7:05 pm.
Members in Attendance:
Roll Call was taken. Robert Lincoln (RL) Chair, Robert Elliott (RE) Vice Chair, Ed Vien (EV),
Susan Muenzinger (SM), Alternate Jesse Pacheco (JP), and Alternate Carole Dodge (CD), were
present.
Paul Metcalf (PM), was absent.
Charley Mewkill III, Planning and Zoning Administrator was present
Jeremy Lamson, Town Administrator was absent.
Anne Taylor, PB/ZBA secretary was present.
1. Public Hearing with respect to an application for a Use Variance
filed by Con-Lin-Ty, LLC of P.O. Box 10483 Bedford, NH 03110 for a
multi-family building (55 and older housing) for property owned by
Pittsfield Weaving Co., Inc. in the Light Industrial/Commercial Zone
located at 1 Fayette Street (Tax Map U-4 Lots 25 and 26).
2. Public Hearing with respect to an application for an Area Variance
filed by Con-Lin-Ty, LLC of P.O. Box 10483 Bedford, NH 03110 for a
variance regarding the parking requirements in Article 2 Table 3 for
property owned by Pittsfield Weaving Co., Inc. in the Light
Industrial/Commercial Zone on Bridge Street (Tax Map U-3 Lots 25
and 26) relative to the property owned at 1 Fayette Street (Tax Map
U-4 Lots 25 and 26).
Alternate Carole Dodge steps up for Paul Metcalf.
(RL) Ed Vien works for the owner of the property. How does the Board feel about him recusing
himself?
(CD) It is up to him if he can do this fairly.
(SM) Addressing (EV): Are you uncomfortable?
2
(EV) I feel comfortable, however, I will step down because of previous town
problems.
Alternate Jesse Pacheco steps up.
Philip Hastings, Attorney for the applicant: Pittsfield Weaving is under a purchase
and sales agreement with Con-Lin-Ty LLC.
Robert Sullivan, owner of Con-Lin-Ty: On the 1 Fayette St. side, which was the
front door of Pittsfield Weaving, the proposal requests to have forty fifty-five and
older apartment units. They would be all one bedroom or studios, approximately
650 sq. ft of living area per unit. The existing structure is 24,000 sq. ft. (passes
pictures to Board). It is a one story structure right now and our proposal is to
remove the roof line, and add a second floor, which from Fayette St. would only be
five or six feet taller. (Shows proposed units on plan). There will be no exterior
walkways on the second floor. There will be interior walkways. There will be a main
office at the entrance. The exterior of the structure would not change except it
would have windows. It would be a more residential setting. The property has
existing electric, sprinklers, and more than adequate water service. Across the
street we have forty-five parking spots presently. Not including the extension area,
which is on Fayette St. in between the telephone building on the left side. There
were two lots there at one time.
Gil Bleckmann, property owner: There are still two separate tax deeds U- 25 and U-
26.
R. Sullivan: Any questions?
(RL) Is there additional parking?
R. Sullivan: The driveway between the parking lot and the extension building, the
one that had the fire, there is a roadway on the side. We could use that as well.
(RL) How many cars could go there?
R. Sullivan: Five or six. We would have to remove the condenser and the a/c units.
(RL) Is the driveway an egress road for the Fire Department?
R. Sullivan: It is too tight on the corner. We would like to use the storefronts for
offices.
(JP) Where is the parking for those?
3
R. Sullivan: I will defer to my engineer later, but we have a total of 52 spots. I do
not think it would use more than one or two parking spots for office or retail. There
are four units on plan above that, but we will probably take those out.
Attorney Hastings: Just to address the legal requirements, the Use Variance in the
LI/Commercial zone, the property is unique in that the history of the property was
created for this type of use. This will use an under-utilized property. This will not be
a nuisance, hazard, or create unsafe conditions. It will not diminish value, is not
contrary to public interest, or against the spirit of the ordinance. The proposed use
is reasonable in the LI/ Commercial zone. Because of the character of the
neighborhood, you wouldn’t want Light Industrial in there. Ref. to the Master Plan.
It is a positive proposal and will restore the tax base. It will take a dilapidated
property and turn it into an asset. We are asking for a variance on the 2 parking
spots per unit per your zoning ordinance. This is limited to elderly housing. Most
people fifty-five and older do not require the same parking needs. One space per
unit will be adequate and will not add to traffic. The denial of this variance would
not be consistent with the Master Plan. This application satisfies the requirements.
Reuben Hull, Civil Design Engineer: Has charts and graphs to support data.
Retirement Community Chart-The average parking spot per unit is .27. Low to Mid
Rise Community chart- The average parking spot per unit is 1.04. Data shows that
this would be closer to the .27 spots per unit. These numbers are supported by
engineering data. The variance is needed based on this info.
(RL) What about when they have visitors? Downtown is limited parking to begin
with.
R. Sullivan: We have a fourteen-unit facility in Deerfield. Eight residents have
three cars. It is a 40% ratio. You are required to have 1.5 spots per Deerfield’s
regulations. I have a 70 unit facility in Bedford as well that is age sixty-two and
older and that only uses 60% of spots.
(RL) So, what if one person is fifty-five and his wife is forty-eight?
R. Sullivan: They won’t qualify. Everyone living in this development would have to
be fifty-five. Visitors have one week to stay.
(SM) What will be the rent amount?
R. Sullivan: $650.00-$700.00 per month with heat included.
Attorney Hastings: We will accept as a condition that there will be no lease to
anyone under 55.
4
(SM) Not even a sub-lease?
R. Sullivan: No.
(SM) What if someone at your facility is granted guardianship of their
grandchildren?
R. Sullivan: It is not allowed; they would be subject to eviction.
(SM) There are a lot of apartments in Pittsfield. What makes you think that
Pittsfield is the right market for 55 and older units and what age range, in your
experience, will you end up with?
R. Sullivan: The average is around 75 years old, but here I think it will be closer to
70.
(SM) Have you done market studies?
R. Sullivan: I have gotten some feedback.
Discussion on Rolling Green.
R. Sullivan: We will offer laundry services, activities, and have a big meeting room
for the residents. It is also close proximity to Rite Aid, banks, markets, the post
office, churches, and local eateries in town.
(SM) Asks about the offices.
R. Sullivan: We have two different designs; we want to use the building storefront
on Depot St. We would not market anything without permission from the Town.
Reuben Hull: The storefront was not part of the analysis. The variance is strictly for
residential use only. Staff parking was included in the analysis.
(CM) The Fire Department will want open access all around.
R. Sullivan: We may seek an easement with the abutters.
Gil Bleckmann: There is a ROW that goes around.
Attorney Hastings: I would like the ZBA to recognize the reasonability of one space
for this type of use.
5
(CD) If the approximate age is 70, why are you going with 55 and over housing as
opposed to 62 and over?
R. Sullivan: Fifty-five and over would be the proper number to ask for. It is
standard.
(CD) It says fifty-five and over and/or handicapped. Are there restrictions on the
handicapped?
R. Sullivan: I never saw that I had to allow anyone under fifty-five.
(CD) How long are the apartment leases?
R. Sullivan: It would be one year and then after the year is up, it would be a monthto-
month, tenant at will basis.
(CD) You have the storefront planned as quasi-retail. You have plans to put
residential units on top of that. Will you be cutting those four units to two?
R. Sullivan: Those would be two huge units. We will work within the framework.
We just want the forty units.
(CD) What is your minimum size for the handicap slots?
R. Hull: Those spots would be deeper but narrower. It is different geometry. It will
be in the final design for the Planning Board. The spots will exceed ADA
requirements for handicapped spaces.
R. Sullivan: Explains and shows layout of handicapped slots and stripes on plan.
(CD) Asks the handicap-parking ratio.
R. Hull: For under 25 spaces, you need one handicap spot and then the ratio
decreases. I use the ADA requirements. Placement is part of the design.
(JP) What about storage?
R. Sullivan: There will be a small storage area on the first floor between units five
and six on the plan.
(JP) Where is the manager’s office?
R. Sullivan: Front door.
6
(JP) Why wouldn’t you put units on the first floor, rather than above the storefront?
R. Sullivan: I want to maintain the storefront.
(SM) Is that a security issue?
R. Sullivan: Always.
(CM) You need an elevator
R. Sullivan: I did not know that.
(CD) A keyed, secure, an emergency elevator.
(JP) Is there access to the roof for the residents?
R. Sullivan: No.
(JP) What about exterior lighting?
(CM) It has to be at ground level. As far as the units above the storefront, how does
the Board separate between those and the 39 units in the main building?
R. Sullivan: We over utilized the number. It would be a max of 40 units.
(SM) Theoretically, you could get more units with the ones over the storefront.
R. Sullivan: I could get rid of some of the lines on the plan to make it two units over
the storefront.
(SM) Then you would still be at 41 units.
R. Sullivan: We are over in our numbers. We are just showing where units could be.
The redesign of the main building will offer more common space for residents.
(RL) Open to public
Gil Bleckmann: We had 110 people working at Pittsfield Weaving. We parked as
many as 62 cars on the property. The only time there was ever a problem was
during shift changes. There is parking for 8 cars in back. You can fit 62 cars.
Donna Keeley: Is it legal to restrict 55 and older communities?
7
Attorney Hastings: The rule is you can restrict the property to that use as long as
all units are 55 and older and as long as you provide amenities. There are 10 or 12
factors that the government looks at in regards to meeting the needs of the elderly.
Donna Keeley: What if the property is sold?
R. Sullivan: That would be through the Town if it were a change of use.
Attorney Hastings: It would be in the deed. If the use changed from what we were
granted, they would be in violation.
Barbara Pelligri: Requests a recorded covenant.
Attorney Hastings: The ZBA can impose reasonable conditions. Covenants are
permanent, beyond the ZBA’s authority.
B. Pelligri: It would be a protection for the town.
Attorney Hastings: Mr. Sullivan may not agree to it and the ZBA cannot enforce it.
Larry Konopka: Will be there a strain on taxes if the residents cannot pay rent?
R. Sullivan: They could go to Town welfare. The history is that 30-40% will receive a
subsidy from the federal government.
J. Lenaerts: Suggests the Board should address the storefronts and not just address
half of the building. I hope you got comments from the Fire Department and the
Police department.
J. Lenaerts: The variance would be vague.
Dave Simpson: If you consider the variance without considering the storefront, that
would leave a big problem for the Planning Board. I am not confident I space per
unit would be effective. Overflow parking would need to be considered for the
storefront. Suggests a joint PB/ ZBA meeting.
Don Chase: I think it is a great idea. Putting covenants in is not a good idea. If this
fell through, that would be a punishment for anyone in the future.
S. Bleckmann: Reference to parking spots at Rolling Green.
Fred Hast: That was pre-zoning.
R. Sullivan: There are 40 units at Rolling Green and 40 parking spots.
8
Linda Small: Why is it fifty-five and older and/or handicapped?
(CD) Anyone over fifty-five if handicapped, would be allowed.
R. Sullivan: Federal law requires us to put in a certain amount of handicapped
units. I have never been restricted to allow under 55 handicapped.
Linda Small: I am concerned with parking. If you are 62 or older, you may not have
a car. People that are 55 and older, usually still drive. Do not make assumptions, it
should be researched.
Gil Bleckmann: There was a study done that there was 240 parking spaces within
walking distance from Drake’s field. All this concern over parking-no one has ever
respected our rights. We have lived there our whole life. Where was the Police
Department when the parking lot was jammed and no one had ever asked us if they
could use it? It is upsetting that I cannot sell the property because I cannot get the
people into it because the ball field is using our space. We are not asking for
anything out of the ordinary. Visitors park on the street like every visitor does. The
real issue here is what is the school district going to do with their parking problem.
It is not the landowner’s problem that the school district uses that field. I have lived
with it. When my father was ill, we could not get an ambulance to his house. That is
the real issue that the PB and ZBA ought to be talking about.
(RL) I understand your frustration. There are rules we have to look at, though.
Gil Bleckmann: The public has violated the space that is there; MY space.
Fred Hast: In the upper right hand corner of the plan, you have two boundary lines.
Do you own that strip of land that goes all the way up?
R. Sullivan: This would be the fence near Drake Field and there is a strip of land
that goes from the willow tree behind the house and almost a direct line down to the
other side of the weeping willow.
Fred Hast: Two months ago, we had a proposal before the Board on this property.
On that plan it showed a road from Fayette St. into that strip of land that had 15
parking spaces.
Gil Bleckmann: That drawing was from way back from my Dad’s driveway. The
reason that strip was even there was to increase the utilization of the property if
there was ever a need. It would have allowed direct access to Drake’s Field. That is
why that strip is even there.
9
Fred Hast: In your proposal two months ago that showed a road going from Fayette
into that strip.
Gil Bleckmann: I did not have a proposal. The guy that drew that on there did it
without the owner knowing it. You cannot make the turn around the back of my
garage with a vehicle.
Fred Hast: This was between your house and Kurt’s house, not by your garage. You
had it on the other plan. I stated to someone on the Board where is that driveway
and he stated it was already there.
Gil Bleckmann: There is a horse track out there, too.
Fred Hast: Where is that road?
Gil Bleckmann: There never was a road.
Brief discussion on previous proposal.
Mrs. Scott Hardy: I like the proposal. Can you put the one car per unit in the lease?
R. Sullivan: Yes, we can restrict that.
Scott Brown: How many properties have you done?
R. Sullivan: 300 units from Boston to Deerfield.
Gil Bleckmann: The location is good for those who do not drive because of the
proximity of Town amenities.
B. Pelligri: If the PB limits you to 35 units, will that leave you inoperable?
(RL) What we grant ties the PB’s hands to a certain extent.
J. Lenaerts: If you give the variance on the parking, they will be coming back for a
special exception for the storefront. You need x amount of spaces per square foot.
Attorney Hastings: If we get approval, the applicant’s next step is to finalize plans
and look at the available parking requirements. We may not need to come back if it
is office space.
Dave Simpson: Reiterates that the ZBA needs more info.
(RE) At site plan, can you set the number of spots to get approval?
10
Dave Simpson: If you gave the variance to the discretion of the PB.
L. Konopka: It would depend on the wording.
(CM) The whole property would be considered in site plan.
(RL) Closed to public. Five minute break at 9:15pm. Meeting back open at 9:30pm.
The ZBA looks over a deed and covenant from a recent proposal in Epsom.
(SM) There are a lot of differences between these two proposals. The one in Epsom
is new construction.
(CD) I would like to see more department head info and have a joint PB/ZBA
meeting.
(RL) I also want to check with the Town Attorney and maybe ask the LB Group for
input at the cost of the developer. We could have a site visit.
(SM) I do not think the parking issue is as big as everyone is making it out to be. I
am not sure it would be useful to have the LB Group review this, either. I think one
space per unit is reasonable. The one to one ratio will get balanced out.
(RL) I was thinking about visitor parking.
(RE) We will never know. Sometimes there is more demand, sometimes there is
less. I agree with (SM).
(SM) Regarding department head input, I e-mailed Chief Wharem and have not
heard back.
(RL) Under BOCA, the department heads have to address issues at the first
meeting, otherwise they have no say.
(SM) I am still interested in what they have to say.
(CM) You don’t need an engineer; you need the department head’s input.
(JP) Agrees.
(CD) Motion to table further discussion on the parking variance until we receive
department head input.
11
(JP) Seconds motion
(RL) Further discussion? All in favor?
Motion carries 3 in favor –2 against (RE) and (SM)
(SM) Asks (CM) to correspond with the Fire Chief and Police Chief.
(CM) I will.
(CD) Motion to continue the area variance until a date certain of January 26, 2006.
(RL) Seconds motion
5-0 Motion carries
(SM) Motion to continue the use variance until a date certain of January 26, 2006.
(CD) Seconds motion
5-0 Motion carries
Review of December 8, 2005 meeting minutes.
(RE) The record reflects that I did not attend two meetings in a row without calling,
which is true. Under Section 5, Rules of Procedure require a 24-hour notice. I did
not know there were meetings. Reads rules re: the Town Administrator or the
Building Inspector sending a notice.
(RL) I apologize.
(RE) Not necessary. I just want the record to reflect that it was not negligence on
my part.
(EV) Motion to accept minutes of December 8, 2005 with (CD)’s addition of “in a
row” on page one.
(CD) Seconds motion
(RL) All in favor?
Motion carries 5-0
Adjournment
12
(RE) Motion to adjourn
(RL) Seconds motion
Motion carries 5 – 0
Adjourned at 10:20PM.
Respectfully Submitted by Anne Taylor, Board Secretary
Chair____________________________ Date__________________________