[Rusty]

This article is in todays addition of the Plymouth Record Enterprise:

BY DONNA RHODES
ASHLAND — A public hearing of the Ashland Zoning Board was held last Thursday evening to hear arguments from attorneys representing both veterinarian Don Lester and his neighbors, Francis McBournie and Scott Bell, who appealed the board’s prior decision to approve an addition to Dr. Lester’s Northern Lakes Veterinary Hospital, which was first built in 1993.
Lester maintains that he received approval from the board and all the necessary permits, then built the addition last spring when no timely appeals had been received from his abutters. He now has an unsigned occupancy permit for a building that he paid $140,000 to construct, but still cannot use.
McBournie and Bell, who reside in a home they built seven years ago, did, however, file an appeal two days after the deadline had expired, and eventually took their complaints about Lester’s business expansion to the state’s Supreme Court.
At the hearing last week, Zoning Board chairman Eli Badger said the New Hampshire State Supreme Court had sent the matter back to the board so they could revisit the matter based on the complaints from McBournie and Bell.
The first matter addressed was a variance for the addition and a new driveway.
Attorney Chris Bolt represented the two men who filed the appeal, and said that the key issue was the noise they are subjected to from the business.
“You did require him (Lester) to come up with a noise plan for the variance, but one was never submitted,” he said. “Their health, safety and welfare is a concern as a result of the barking dogs.”
He further argued that the new driveway was an added noise factor for his clients, as traffic and horse trailers en-ter Lester’s parking lot.
Residents were able to speak on the matter throughout the four hour meeting, and all voiced their support for Lester’s veterinary clinic and its expansion.
Diane Hill said she couldn’t understand why a variance for the animal hospital was even in question, since road frontage set backs would not even affect any abutters next door.
“So what’s the problem?” she asked.
Her question was met with a round of applause.
Another resident stated, “This was already granted once. Is that fair?”
As far as the variance, the board determined that Lester’s original structure was approved before the current set-back regulations from the roadway were written, but the facility still meets setback requirements on the side and back of the property. Since the addition is on the back of the building, is smaller than the original structure and located in a central part of the property where it does not encroach on the home next door, the board found no issue with granting Lester the variance. The driveway, they noted, was also ap¬proved by the state, and the board found that it posed no problem for neighboring properties.
The special exception for the business and the issue of barking dogs was another matter, though.
Nuisance barking is considered that which lasts for more than an hour at a time. Bolt’s clients maintained that barking from Lester’s property goes on for as much as six continuous hours, and they presented tapes that they claimed document the incessant nature of the noise. Most of the approximately 80 people who attended the hear-ing found that hard to believe, however. Some went so far as to suggest that the two men intentionally brought their own dogs outside knowing the presence of unfamiliar animals next door would set them off, then taped the resulting barking as “evidence.”
Jeanette Stewart lives across the road from the veterinary office, and said she has never heard continuous barking from the business.
“There are no trees, no bushes between us that would soften the sound. It really upsets me that this would happen to Dr. Lester. I’d be the first to complain if there was a problem,” she said.
Lester’s attorney, Daniel Muller, asked that the special exception to expand his client’s veterinary business be granted, as it is a permitted use in a rural residential area. He stated that Bolt’s clients were fully aware of the veterinary office next door to their property before they bought the land and built their home.
“The notion that they thought they were coming into an area with no noise was probably not a reasonable expectation,” Muller said.
Police Chief Tony Randall also stated that when he looked back over the years since the neighboring home was built, he could only find three barking dog complaints in that neighborhood, and two did not pertain to the veterinary office.
He further assured McBournie and Bell that he and his officers take all complaints seriously, and if there were ever any instances of dogs barking for six hours, the police certainly should have been notified.
Muller stated that Lester complied with past cease and desist orders for boarding dogs, and the only animals using his outdoor kennels now are a few ill or injured dogs who go outside for a short time during their recovery and are never left outside overnight or for extended periods of time.
In deference to his neighbors, he said Lester also made changes in the location of the new outdoor kennels and has taken extra measures to keep windows closed and erect a barrier wall to help keep sound from traveling next door.
McBournie and Bell felt that was ineffective, though, Bolt responded.
The board deliberated on the several questions a majority of the members needed to agree upon in order to grant the special exception for the use of the building.
While they were unanimous about most of the requirements, one final condition failed to get a preponderance of the vote.
Badger received a vote of 2-3 on the final question pertaining to the adequate and appropriate use of the facility, and therefore declared that that matter was not substantially proven through Muller and Lester’s presentation.
So while the building received the necessary variance for its driveway and road frontage, Lester will have to con-tinue to fight for the use of the added wing now.
“We’ll be filling an appeal on that right away,” he said as the hearing drew to a close.