Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Density topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board denies request to convert 18 Girard St. to three-family; remaining variances withdrawn
Summary
The Laconia Zoning Board of Adjustment voted to deny a special-exception request to convert 18 Girard Street into a three-unit dwelling, citing lot size, sidewalk and parking impacts; the applicant withdrew the remaining variance requests.
The Laconia Zoning Board of Adjustment on its April agenda denied a special-exception application to convert 18 Girard Street from a two-family to a three-family dwelling and the applicant withdrew the remaining variance requests.
Board members said the 0.14-acre lot is too small to accommodate an additional unit and cited safety and pedestrian concerns along the single sidewalk on Girard Street. The board voted to deny application ZB2025-040 (special exception) and the applicant then withdrew three related variance applications that had been on the agenda.
The applicant, Shelley Daniels Marcoux, presented plans for a single-stall garage with a small apartment above and an addition to create another rental unit. Her representative Rob Turpin said the garage would allow one vehicle inside and three parking spaces to remain in front of the house, and that the addition would be “in keeping with the rest of the volumes of the structures on Girard Street.”
Neighbors and abutters raised multiple concerns. Gail Drew, who said she lives at 24 Girard Street and is an abutter, summarized a written submission and told the board: “I also wanna express that I do not want anyone, tenants, cars, construction, workers, equipment, or material on my property.” The letter read into the record raised specific worries about parking dimensions, snow storage, roof runoff and building proximity to property lines.
A resident who identified himself as Francis questioned whether the proposed driveway and garage complied with the city rule cited in the hearing as “235-50,” noting the application shows a 15-foot driveway length where, he said, the ordinance calls for 19 feet in some garage/driveway definitions. Board staff responded that the zoning rule requires a minimum driveway length but does not define the exact measuring points, and said enforcement of sidewalk obstruction would be a separate public-works or police matter.
In discussing the special-exception criteria the board concluded the proposal would create traffic and pedestrian safety concerns, would not meet the intent of setback and density provisions for the RG zone and would therefore be contrary to the public interest. One board member said the lot is “so tiny” that it could not safely accommodate a third unit, and the motion to deny carried.
After the denial the applicant withdrew the other variance applications rather than proceed to separate votes on those items.
The board advised the applicant she may return with revised plans or seek the variances again at a later date. No formal appeal or further action by the board was recorded at the meeting end.
