Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Senior Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hand in Hand asks Weare planning board to treat senior center as permitted residential use at 733 South Stark Highway
Summary
Representatives from Hand in Hand Senior Center told the Weare Planning Board they want to buy 733 South Stark Highway and argued that a senior center—providing meals, activities and a thrift shop—is consistent with permitted nursing-home or municipal uses in the residential zone; the board said conceptual opinions are nonbinding and asked the group to return when a larger board is present.
Helene Kirk, a director of Hand in Hand Senior Center, asked the Weare Planning Board on May 12 to determine that a senior center is a permitted use at 733 South Stark Highway.
"Hand in Hand Senior Center and thrift shop provides meals, social activities, and educational programs to area seniors at its current location at 33A North Stark Highway and has been doing so for the past six years," Kirk told the board. She said the center is supported financially by its thrift shop, operates a small food pantry and provides meeting space for local groups.
Kirk and other directors told the board they hoped to buy Lisa Wilbur’s property at 733 South Stark Highway, a building that previously hosted retail uses. The applicants argued that, because nursing homes and municipality-owned facilities are listed in the zoning ordinance as allowed uses in residential districts, a senior center that offers similar nonresidential services should likewise be permitted. Kirk provided a simple comparison of Hand in Hand’s services to typical nursing-home offerings and said the center’s operations would be "much less invasive to the community" than a nursing home.
Board members examined the relevant zoning language (cited in the meeting as Article 17.2) and noted that conceptual meetings are advisory and nonbinding: the board can revisit or change an advisory opinion when additional members or a full vote are present. One member said the center appears to be consistent with allowed uses but warned that a different outcome could occur when the full board considers the item.
When the applicants asked whether they could proceed to purchase the property now, Kirk said she wanted to know whether the center could move forward; the board replied it would consult absent members and legal counsel and would provide an update. No final determination or formal vote was taken at the meeting.
What happens next: Hand in Hand representatives were told to expect follow-up from planning staff and to plan to return to the board when more members are present for a binding determination.
