Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Alton ZBA continues administrative appeal over two-year special-exception timing to Nov. 6 for legal review
Summary
The board continued an administrative appeal about whether court appeals suspend the two‑year window for exercising a special exception under RSA 674:33, scheduling further deliberations Nov. 6 to obtain outside legal guidance after extended legal argument from both sides.
The Alton Board of Adjustment voted to continue deliberations and obtain additional legal review on an administrative appeal (case Z25‑32) over the interpretation of state law that governs the lifespan of a special exception. The board set a continuation date of Nov. 6 to review legal memoranda and guidance before issuing a written determination.
The appeal, filed by Paul Manzioni, challenges a planning-board determination that a previously granted special exception remained effective because an appeal had been pending in court. Manzioni’s attorney, Steven Nicks, argued the plain language of RSA 674:33 and related rules means an appeal does not suspend the two‑year deadline to exercise a special exception; if an applicant needs more time they must obtain an extension from the zoning board or a court order. Nicks told the board that the statutory grammar and longstanding municipal guidance (New Hampshire Municipal Association and state zoning handbook guidance) support his reading.
Opposing counsel for the property interests (represented in the hearing by attorney Chris Boldt) argued the specific statutory provision enacted as part of RSA 674:33 (subparagraph 4) and the practical history of use should control and that the court‑appeal context here did not automatically extinguish the applicant’s ability to act. Boldt noted the town’s planning staff had treated the ruling as allowing planning-board action after the appeal ended and said the site had been used in reliance on prior approvals.
Board members heard detailed statutory and grammatical argument, plus public comment about local practice and precedent; several residents urged the board to "do what is right" and to consider long-time local practice. After extensive discussion the board decided it needed further legal review to weigh the competing statutory readings and to examine the planning-board record; the board continued the appeal to Nov. 6 to obtain that advice and to allow members time to review submitted legal materials.
Action taken: the ZBA continued the administrative appeal to its Nov. 6 meeting and directed staff to obtain additional counsel or legal analysis to provide the board a written memorandum comparing the competing statutory interpretations and the effect of any court orders in the record.
Background and clarifying points: the underlying permit process began with a ZBA special-exception decision issued April 7, 2022, that later was appealed to the Superior Court and to the New Hampshire Supreme Court. Counsel cited RSA 677:9 and the court rules concerning stays and restraining orders; Nicks emphasized that an appeal to the Supreme Court does not itself stay lower-court orders absent a stay request in the lower court. The board did not resolve the legal question Oct. 2 and instead sought additional legal review.
