Stratham Select Board challenges ZBA condos decision
STRATHAM — A developer's plan to build 59 condos on the Stratham-Exeter town line is facing new opposition from the town's Select Board.
The Select Board is requesting the Zoning Board revisit its decision to grant a variance to allow single-family housing in a commercial zone for the project at 13-15 Stoney Brook Lane.
The Zoning Board approved the variance request Jan. 9, allowing 59 standalone condos to be built on the 77-acre property. Developer Michael Green, of Green & Company, had said the condos would look similar to a single-family house but have all the perks of condominium ownership, such as private roads and full maintenance service.
In a letter to the Zoning Board, Select Board Chair Michael Houghton said the developer failed to meet “several” of the five criteria needed for a variance to be granted.
“The Select Board believes there are factors the ZBA did not consider in applying the statutory criteria for granting a variance, and that a rehearing is appropriate,” the letter stated.
Houghton noted the land at 13-15 Stoney Brook Lane, located off Route 108 past the Route 101 interchange going towards Exeter, is within the town's special commercial district.
“The intent of this district is to provide an opportunity for the development of hotel, conference center, and restaurant and entertainment complexes to be provided within Stratham,” the letter stated.
Houghton stated Green's proposal “comprises almost all of the developable land in the district” and would “render any further commercial development impossible.” He said the project “clearly violates” the town's zoning objectives and is against the public's interest.
Houghton stated such a change to zoning should be recommended by the Planning Board “after careful study” and voted on by residents at the Town Meeting.
Houghton said another option would be for Green to put forth a citizens' petition at the next Town Meeting to amend the ordinance himself. He said residents of the town, not just neighbors of the property, should have a say in such a major change.
The board also questioned whether the developer had an unnecessary hardship, which is one of the five criteria needed for a variance to be granted.
“The point of the ‘special conditions' requirement is to demonstrate that there is something unusual about the property that causes unfairness in applying the zoning ordinance to that property,” the letter stated. “It makes no sense to suggest that almost an entire zoning district can have special conditions. If most of the district has conditions that make the zoning restriction unreasonable, that is an argument for changing the ordinance – which again is the responsibility of the voters, not the ZBA.”
Proposed condos received pushback from Stratham, Exeter residents
Green had previously received pushback from Stratham and Exeter residents on the project.
The Zoning Board, however, approved the variance following a recommendation letter from the Rockingham Planning Commission, which stated “the overall addition of housing is generally considered a positive regional impact.”
Stratham resident Drew Goddard spoke out against the project at previous ZBA meetings and echoed the views of the Select Board.
“There's no unnecessary hardship to a residential developer that buys land a year ago and hopes to convince a board and a town to try to turn it from commercial to residential,” Goddard said at the Jan 9 meeting. “That's not a hardship, that's just a bad buy, should've known what you bought.”
Goddard also had said any zoning changes to the area should go before voters at the annual Town Meeting as it could impact taxpayers in the future.
Zoning Board to take up rehearing request April 2
The Zoning Board is scheduled to take up the Select Board's request for a rehearing on April 2.
Initially, the board was supposed to discuss the matter March 5, but Town Administrator David Moore requested the postponement on behalf of the Select Board as only four ZBA members were in attendance.
Town Planner Mark Connors said the Select Board wanted five board members present to decide on the rehearing to prevent a tie vote.