The Hudson Zoning Board of Adjustment’s April meeting included another last-minute appeal from a controversial sober house at 12-14 Gambia Street. Brendan and Julie Burke’s original variance request was formally denied by the ZBA last March. Prior to making a variance request, Hudson Zoning Administrator Chris Sullivan cited the Gambia Street facility for operating in a residential zone without approval.
“The application was to allow seven unrelated individuals to live together while recovering from substance abuse,” explained Sullivan. “The use would not be permitted in any zone.”
Beyond its conflict with local zoning regulations, the sober house was opposed by many neighbors following complaints of high residential turnover, excessive noise, and possible safety issues.
The Burke’s have asserted that the denial is “discriminatory” under the Americans with Disabilities Act. They further argued that public testimony against the sober home led to a “biased” rejection from the ZBA.
“Is there any new information that’s provided here?” asked Selectman Liaison Dillion Dumont. “Is there any information they’re providing here that’s different than before?”
After reviewing the appeal, Sullivan stated that the property owners did not seem to be making many new arguments.
“The thing that they are asking for is a reasonable accommodation,” said Board Chair Norman Martin. “From what I read, the reasonable accommodation is for people who own a home, and it’s like a temporary thing. If one of your family members is in a nursing home, you want to bring them home, and you don’t meet the conditions for a variance, then the Board may consider an accommodation to have that person at home, knowing that in the ultimate event that when the person passes on or goes somewhere else, that reasonable accommodation will go away. In this particular case, the reasonable accommodation would never go away.”
He argued that the Gambia sober house did not seem to meet the requirements of either a reasonable accommodation or a variance.
“I don’t see any new information. I don’t see that there was an error in judgment. We’ve been incredibly thoughtful and considerate to the owner of the property, including bringing in our own in-house legal resources to ensure we’re doing the right thing along the way,” said Board member Dean Sakati. “The comment about public input and how that can distort us is just a naïve perspective that just doesn’t hold any water with me.”
He called for a full rejection of the appeal request.
“For me, it’s pretty cut-and-dry and simple. There’s nothing in this motion for a rehearing that leads me to conclude the decision was unlawful or unreasonable. To the extent that the applicant is suggesting that the Board’s decision was discriminatory, the record was very clear that the denial was not based on discrimination,” said Board member Tristan Dion. “From that I vote not to grant.”
Without exception, other members of the Zoning Board agreed, unanimously voting against granting the rehearing request.
The next ZBA meeting is set for Thursday, May 22, at 7 p.m. in the Buxton Room of Town Hall.
