Selectmen Meet About Litigation After Condo Approval Stands

The Hampton Board of Selectmen didn't discuss Monday the Hampton Zoning Board's decision not to reverse its approval for a tall Hampton Beach condominium project, although the board did hold a late nonpublic session to discuss litigation.

The nonpublic session, which started just around 10:30 p.m. after Dick Nichols requested one be held using the statute reserved for litigation involving the town, came just four days after the zoning board didn't grant selectmen's requests for a variance rehearing.

Selectmen have the ability to seek a reversal of the zoning board's decision — which selectmen have opposed due to concerns about the height of the proposed five-story, mixed-use structure at 339 and 345 Ocean Blvd. — by filing a lawsuit in Rockingham Superior Court.

No such paperwork had been filed in court as of Monday, according to court staff.

Hampton Zoning Board members reiterated their justifications for the proposed development while deciding not to change their votes Thursday. Tom McGuirk has told Hampton-North Hampton Patch that approving the structure, which would be constructed after razing existing buildings at the site of the Shirley Inn and Aegean Motel, wouldn't go against the neighborhood's character.

McGuirk has also said the heights of the various pieces of the building aren't "markedly different" from other Hampton Beach buildings and other overwhelmingly-approved recent projects like the Sea Spray Condominiums.

"Obviously we listened to their application, and we did find that these types of projects need variances because the zoning at the beach doesn’t make any sense," said McGuirk earlier this month. "Zoning is so restrictive and not applicable to these zones that you almost have to have a 100 variance to do anything. These variances are common, and the reason is proper zoning hasn’t been written for town of Hampton.

"The physical structure of this could be built if the use was different, but because the project is two-family condos and not single room hotels, that's why it needs a variance. The motion for rehearing says the master plan calls for small-scale and single family homes. That's all well and good, but this is a commercial zone and not a residential zone."