Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Home Office topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Plaistow planning board asks ZBA to interpret recently adopted home‑office provision after implementation questions
Summary
After a citizens' warrant on home‑office rules passed while a related table-of-contents change failed, the planning board voted to ask the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) for an interpretation of Article 10; members expressed frustration that the town has been charging home‑office fees despite divergent views on implementation.
The Plaistow Planning Board voted to ask the Zoning Board of Adjustment to interpret the adoption and enforceability of the recently adopted Article 10 home‑office provisions, after board members identified inconsistent implementation by town staff.
Members said two related warrant articles were presented at town meeting — one that amended the table of contents and another that updated home‑office language — and that one passed while the other failed. Several board members said the town has nonetheless been charging fees for home‑office uses and that the appropriate interpretive body under state law is the ZBA.
One member said the board had the warrant articles reviewed by legal counsel before the vote and that nothing in the counsel review indicated the two articles should be treated as contingent on each other. The board discussed bringing specific cases to the ZBA and emphasized that the ZBA is the statutory interpretive body for ordinance questions.
Planning board members expressed varying views about process: some urged immediate referral to the ZBA, while others said they would give the town manager time to review legal guidance he reportedly received. Members discussed that any inquiry to the ZBA would need to be submitted by the planning board and that there is a June 11 deadline for submission if they wished to raise it promptly.
At the meeting a member made a motion "that the planning board make an inquiry to the ZBA in accordance with the provisions article 20, section 2 20-1 37.4 interpretation of the ordinance on the adoption and enforceability of article 10 of the ordinance." The motion was seconded and the board voted to submit the inquiry; members also noted that the board could withdraw the request later if circumstances were resolved.
Separately, the board reviewed suggested edits to its rules and procedures submitted by attorney Cleary; members said the comments were mostly straightforward and that five questions in the draft require answers before the board forwards the revised rules to a public hearing. Board members agreed to address the remaining questions and target the rules for the next workshop and then public hearing.
The board also read a legal notice: a completeness determination for PB25‑6, an application from David Abari to redevelop a retail plaza at 111 Plaistow Road to include a restaurant with a drive‑through; the application was found complete and the board may open the public hearing at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, June 18 at 145 Main Street, Second Floor.
