Applicant Asks for Variance for RV

By Chris Frost
EAGLE TIMES NEWS EDITOR
CLAREMONT, N.H. – The City Planning Board is being asked if RVs can be used for commercial businesses and transient housing in the city.

During its Aug. 7 meeting, the board voted to continue discussing the usage request for 142 E. Green Mountain Road. A site visit was held on Tuesday with a meeting planned for Monday.

On a 4-1 vote, the board determined that a recreational vehicle for a commercial purpose in short-term rentals be dismissed because they don’t feel it fits the zoning definition.

The applicants, Stephen and Nicole Verbeek, of Revere, Mass., and their representative Jeffrey Christianson, said the board asked for code compliance for the RV and wanted to speak with the Claremont City Council about issues regarding the application.

Christianson said Norm Skantze, a former fire chief and fire safety and building safety consultant, had inspected the camper, found it complied with the National Fire Protection Association’s 1192 standard and recommended the addition of a second egress and guards for the loft.

“Although New Hampshire has not adopted NFPA 1192 and Claremont hasn’t built it into its zoning ordinance independently, the review of the camper is regardless of what’s legally required.

“The Verbeeks are willing to make these modifications to satisfy the board’s concerns for safety,” Christianson said.

“One of the sticking points we’re having is the hardship of the piece of property. What makes this property unique to the other surrounding properties,” Chair Todd Russel asked.

The zone allows transient residential properties like hotels and bed and breakfasts, but the property doesn’t meet all the requirements.

“This property has special conditions on it that make this use reasonable,” he said.

“This property can’t otherwise be used for it because the conventional requirements prevent it from falling within the qualifications for the special exception,” he said. “Things like the 400 feet of frontage that we don’t have because the property is oddly shaped. … It has plenty of space, but it’s narrow where the road hits — doesn’t make this use less reasonable; in fact, in the case of the cabin, the second half of this application, it’s more reasonable because the point is to be set off into the woods.”

Alternate Board Member David Putnam said he sees how many zoning variances there are and wants the board to deal with each singularly.

Russel said when you look at a piece of property, there are often one or two zoning variances to fix.

“There are seven variances to try and get this to work on this piece of property to get this situation to work,” he said. “I don’t see the uniqueness and the hardship.”