Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning Setback topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Greystone Terrace homeowner withdraws 2‑foot deck setback variance after board review of corner‑lot rules

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Jess Hepler asked for a 2‑foot variance to widen a rear deck on 1 Greystone Terrace. After questions about measurements, pylons and lot geometry, the board reviewed corner‑lot setback rules and the applicant withdrew the variance application.

Jess Hepler, of 1 Greystone Terrace, told the Hooksett Zoning Board of Adjustment on May 20 that he planned to replace a deteriorating 10‑by‑10 rear deck and expand the deck floor to 12 feet, which prompted a variance application for a two‑foot reduction of the required 25‑foot rear setback.

"We have a deteriorating deck that needs to be replaced," Hepler said, explaining the existing deck was a small landing and the proposed modest expansion would improve safety and utility. Hepler testified the deck’s existing railing is approximately 25 feet from the rear property line and that he proposed moving floor area from 10 to 12 feet with the foundation/pylons remaining about 27 feet from the line.

Board members and residents pressed for construction detail. A staff member noted the ordinance measures rear setback to the foundation and asked whether new footings would change the measurement; Hepler’s contractor drawings showed helical piles proposed roughly 11 feet from the house and about a foot to a foot‑and‑a‑half farther landward than the existing footing. The board discussed whether a corner‑lot classification changed which yard standards applied.

After deliberation the board indicated the existing lot geometry and ordinance language might render the requested variance unnecessary. At the meeting the applicant withdrew the variance application after board members identified applicable setback measurements for corner lots.

No variance was approved or denied; the board recorded the applicant’s withdrawal, and the matter did not proceed to a formal vote.