BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Bill Kaiser, Niel Hansen, Tony Lyon, Bob Murray and Jim Cubeddu were present.
Bob opened the meeting and read the particulars of the hearing.
Terry & Debbie Mitchell are applying for a use variance
for “residential care” for the elderly. 3.6.B.
Property is located at
Debbie Mitchell explained that they would like to have in home care for 3 to 6 elderly. It would be 24/7 supervision. Group living atmosphere. Debbie currently runs an in home care service for 43 individuals, where they go to their home and do whatever is needed. They do not do medical needs but could transport client for a Dr. visit.
Bob asked if they had an Attorney? Yes but he is not here. Terry Mitchell presented for the file State Fire Marshalls Certification for this property for residential boarding and care.
Jim asked if they were State Licensed? Yes, they are as home care providers, the site is not yet licensed until they get permission from this board to proceed. Tony questioned whether the board and/or applicant was trying to find a “category” in our zoning ordinance for this? There is no specific “category” therefore requesting this variance.
Jim asked if the individuals in the home would be supervised. Yes 24/7. They have to be mobile and able to evacuate themselves even though there is supervision. Jim asked if they became immobile what then? They would have to move to some other type of assisted living.
Bob asked about increased traffic? Doctors in and out or food service trucks? No they have their individual Doctors and would go grocery shopping like everyone else. Applicants would have a van that they transport in. Instead of individual cost for 24/7 in their own home they would live in this “group” home and share the cost.
Terry felt that there would be no change in the
neighborhood, there was a sidewalk put in on the side of the building and a
deck added to the back. The property is a 6 acre parcel. There would be no
changes internally, a home environment. The house is split level with the
second floor having about 6 steps. There would be no elevator, only 6 steps.
Clients have to be ambulatory. The house would be
There was concern about expanding to a full care facility, what would prevent that? Terry, they will be licensed for residential use only and have no interest in expanding. The license would also be for them and that house, they could not sell the license. If there was expansion they would have to come back before the board for expansion of use permits.
Fire Chief, Adam Thompson said he had been working with the
applicant and the State for almost 2 years and the State has basically approved
the house for residential care, sprinklers etc. They have gone beyond what is
needed. Everything has been done. There is a generator on site. Adam sees it as
a needed service in the community. He noted that there had been an elderly care
home at
Jim asked how often does the State inspect? Licensed has to be renewed yearly so they have to do an inspection yearly.
Niel asked who determines if and when they are incapable. The RN or their Doctor.
Tony still had issues concerning defining themselves. Terry reiterated that they are considered “Residential Care” 805 as per the State. Jim felt that there is a need for this kind of care. Cindy Monroe commented that the “baby boomers” are just around the corner, and fit in this category. Jim felt there should be a copy of their existing license in the file. Would they have to go to the Planning Board? Tony replied that they had been there and were advised to go to the ZBA. The Planning Board also debated what they fell under in our zoning ordinance.
The owners will not be living there. They are living there
now because of their homecare license. Jim explained that to be licensed you
have to have a “home base”. Their
Bob asked if any abutters had questions?
Phil Sheridan 146 Mountain Rd. presented a signed
petition opposed to this residential home. Bob asked why he was opposed. He
felt it would adversely affect the neighborhood. Market value would be
affected. There is
only 3 bedrooms in the home, what is preventing him from expanding? He would
have to reapply to the State.
Jim felt that the board should not accept the petition
because the statement was very misleading. Mr. Sheridan commented that a letter
had gone out prior to the petition. Jim asked if he had a copy. No, but he
would get one.
The Mitchell’s replied that they have no intentions of expanding. Jack Parsons, Code Officer felt it was no different than a foster home.
Marjorie Dow asked why isn’t this considered a commercial business? Debbie Mitchell responded that it is considered residential care/ group home not commercial. Jim felt there is a fine line between commercial and non commercial and the licensc clearly state residential.
Barbara Wood felt it was commercial, they are selling this to clients. Bob asked, is this different than a landlord renting his duplex and not living there?
Brent Ingham, 138 Mt. Rd. asked about signage. The existing sign is what is allowed per zoning ordinance.
Barbara Wood asked about dementia? Debbie Mitchell explained the client has to ambulatory and if is deemed not mentally capable would have to be moved.
Mo Marsh asked if this was temporary? Depending on the client.
Niel asked what are the size of the bedrooms? 12’x 24’ and 24’x17’, they more than exceed State regulations.
John Cook encouraged the board understand the “use” as per our ordinance. It is a “temporary use”.
Debbie said that this home had been used as a temporary safe refuge in the past when power was out. It is handicap assessable, is family orientated, with a max of 6 occupants.
No other questions?
Bob felt he was ready to vote tonight. Niel would like a copy of 805 and the letter that was sent out by Mr. Sheridan. He moves to continue. Jim would like to amend that to include a copy of the personal license and a copy of the floor plan. Bill 2nd. All were in favor of continuing. Tony still felt this board shouldn’t make this decision. Board has to allow them to apply for a variance because of our existing ordinance. This is an individual case.
To be continued on Tuesday December 11th at
Hearing Adjourned.
Other Business;
The Board has received an appeal petition from code officers
building permit for a cell tower located off
November 9th minutes; Case # 365. Jim moved to accept as written. Niel 2nd. All in favor.
Meeting adjourned
Jackie Rollins
Secretary