Claremont Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting – December 1, 2025

The Claremont Zoning Board of Adjustment met on December 1, 2025, to consider two applications from the Broad Street Supportive Housing Trust concerning 189 Broad Street. The board dismissed an administrative appeal (ZB 2025-13) for lack of jurisdiction and continued a variance request (ZB 2025-14) to the next meeting on January 5, 2026. The board also approved the 2026 meeting schedule.

Appeal ZB 2025-13 – Dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction

• The applicant appealed two emails from the Chief Building Official and Health Officer Paul Thibodeau, which applied the state fire code to limit occupancy at 189 Broad Street. The applicant sought to apply RSA 674:16, paragraph eight to permit two unrelated persons per bedroom (up to 14 residents) in a single-family dwelling.
• The board discussed whether it had jurisdiction under RSA 674:33, I(a)(1), which limits appeals to errors in enforcement of the zoning ordinance. The Chief Building Official’s emails referenced only the state fire code, not the zoning ordinance.
• The zoning administrator confirmed that no zoning determination was made in this case. A board member noted that the emails did not mention zoning. The applicant argued the official was using the fire code to interpret zoning, but the board disagreed.
• A motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction was made, seconded, and passed unanimously (4-0, with one abstention).

Variance ZB 2025-14 – Continued to January 5, 2026

• The applicant sought a reasonable accommodation variance from Section 221 of the zoning ordinance (definition of family) to allow up to 14 unrelated individuals (persons in recovery from substance abuse) to reside in the seven-bedroom home. The applicant argued that RSA 674:16 preempts the city’s definition of family and that a variance is necessary to provide housing for disabled individuals.
• The board discussed the complexity of the issue, including the interplay of state law, preemption, and reasonable accommodation under federal and state law. One board member moved to continue the hearing to the next meeting (January 5, 2026) to allow time for review. The motion was seconded and passed.
• The applicant did not support the continuance, but the board proceeded.

Key Outcomes

• Appeal ZB 2025-13: Dismissed unanimously (4-0) because the board lacked jurisdiction under RSA 674:33, I(a)(1). The Chief Building Official’s decision was based on the state fire code, not the zoning ordinance.
• Variance ZB 2025-14: Continued to the regular meeting on January 5, 2026, for further deliberation.
• 2026 Meeting Schedule: Approved by motion (seconded, all in favor) with the Labor Day meeting rescheduled due to the holiday.