Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Variance Property Lines topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hooksett ZBA continues shed-variance request at 28 Main Street after boundary, neighbor concerns
Summary
The board continued an application from Michael Saint Germain for a variance to expand a backyard shed at 28 Main Street to Oct. 14, citing unresolved boundary and abutter disputes and requests for clearer documentation.
The Hooksett Zoning Board of Adjustment voted to continue an application by Michael Saint Germain seeking a variance to expand and connect an existing backyard shed at 28 Main Street (Z25-13). The hearing was continued to the boards October 14 meeting so staff can gather additional information and the applicant can provide clearer documentation of setbacks, surveys, and the proposed work.
Why it matters: The applicant seeks relief from dimensional setbacks because the existing structure and the proposed addition would together exceed the 200-square-foot threshold that triggers standard yard setback requirements. Neighbors raised questions about property-line markers, prior drainage work, and whether the work already underway conforms with building and zoning rules.
What happened at the meeting Applicant Michael Saint Germain described the current 12-by-16 shed and said he planned a 16-by-16 addition, producing a combined 28-by-16 structure. Multiple neighbors testified with conflicting accounts about property lines and drainage. An abutter, Tarek Devian (2 Thompson Ave), said he was concerned the shed and new work encroach on the abutter boundary and asked the board to inspect the site. A former owner and longtime neighbor, Dolores Cooper Ford, said the back yard has been used and measured for decades and told the board the structure built to date appears larger than a shed.
The board heard that the existing shed damage is partly related to ground/water conditions and that the applicant had previously installed drainage piping; the applicant said he spent money to redirect water and to protect the existing structure. Board members said they needed a clearer showing of property corners, an updated survey or evidence of existing boundary monuments and more complete photographic documentation of the backyard and the structure proposed.
Next steps The ZBA voted to reopen the public hearing at the request of neighbors, then voted to continue the application to Oct. 14 so staff can inspect the back yard and the applicant can produce survey/boundary documentation and clearer photos. Planning staff agreed to visit the rear yard and report findings before the continued hearing.
Ending: The continuance is intended to give the applicant time to provide a clearer hardship narrative, submit boundary evidence, and allow staff to inspect the site so the board can make a full record before acting.
