DUNBARTON ZONING BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENT
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2003
TOWN OFFICES – 7:00 P.M.
The regular monthly meeting of the Dunbarton Zoning Board of Adjustment was held at the above time, date and place with Chairman John Trottier presiding. The following members were present:
John Trottier, Chairman
John Herlihy, Vice Chairman
Alison Vallieres, Secretary
Gertrude Dulude
David Nault
John Van, Alternate
Kenneth Swayze, Admin., Planning
and Zoning Department
The
Chairman verified with the Secretary that the Public Meeting Notices had been
posted in three public places throughout the Town and published in the Concord
Monitor for one day.
John Trottier amended the minutes as follows:
On
page 2, after the 10th paragraph which Steve Duggan made a
statement, John Trottier stated the following statement should be included
within the Board’s discussion.
“The
applicant is to prove to the Board what the correct interpretation of the Ordinance
is.”
MOTION:
A
motion was made, seconded and passed unanimously, that the Dunbarton Zoning
Board of Adjustment approve the minutes of the Monday, October 30, 2003 meeting as amended above.
7:00 p.m. – REHEARING REGARDING THE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO ARTICLE 5, SECTION G.1 OF THE WETLANDS CONSERVATION DISTRICT TO ALLOW GARY KING (B4-3-1) TO PUT A STRUCTURE CLOSER THAN 125 FEET FROM THE WETLANDS DISTRICT ON HIS PROPERTY LOCATED ON 1175 BLACK BROOK ROAD IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON, NH
David Howe, Attorney, Rath, Young and Pignatelli, and representing Five Rivers Conservation Trust, appeared before the Board. He presented a letter explaining why he felt the determination by the Dunbarton Zoning Board of Adjustment that Gary King did not need a Variance was incorrect according to him. (attached)
He stated that references within the existing ordinance refer to the “ordinance” as meaning the entire Ordinance passed in 1970. He stated “the Ordinance” has to mean the same thing throughout the Ordinance, etc.
Discussion:
John Trottier asked Attorney Howe if his interpretation was if the house was built before 1970, it would fall under this interpretation.
David Nault stated he did not agree that the Wetlands Ordinance Section should go back to 1970 if it was added in 1990.
John Herlihy stated that in 1989-90, there was a big push to conserve conservation land. According to the way I remember this, this would affect anything from 1990 on. You can’t go back and include other lands prior to the date of passage or I would not have voted for this. In 1990 there was never any mention of that in this ordinance. Also there are a lot of houses that never should have been built in this Town. Any house built after 1970 should all be torn down according to this interpretation.
Attorney Howe stated he can’t talk about what decisions have been made in the past.
Alison Vallieres stated that there are many houses presently with the Wetlands Districts throughout the Town, especially Gorham Pond. They have been granted Variances in the past. She stated she felt that you can’t pass an Ordinance that backs up twenty years prior and have these structures fall under it. It only makes sense that the effective date of the Wetlands Ordinance would be 1990 and not 1970 or else no one in Town would have voted yes on the proposal in 1990.
George Holt – Stated he lives on Alexander Road. I would agree that the ordinance is unclear in this point, although I am not really sure on the outcome of this case. My house is 20 feet from the road and it was built in 1700. It was clearly built prior to the Zoning Ordinance was passed in 1970 but I still have to get a Variance to put an addition on closer than the required setback, etc. How is that any different from the Wetlands Conservation District. If I expand the footprint of the house, I need to get a Variance. You need to go back to what was passed at Town Meeting. I feel you should still consider the Wetlands impact. If we grant Variances all the time, we are going to be undermining the Wetlands Conservation District Ordinance, etc. If we start hacking away a little bit here and there, we are going to start looking like Concord and Bow.
Voting Members on this issue will be as follows:
John Trottier
John Herlihy
Alison Vallieres
David Nault
Gertrude Dulude
MOTION:
John Herlihy made a motion that the Dunbarton Zoning
Board of Adjustment Grant the request for a Variance to Article 5, Section G. 1
of the Wetland Conservation District to allow Gary King (B4-3-1) to put a
structure closer than 125 feet from the Wetlands District on his property
located on 1175 Black Brook road in the Low Density District in Dunbarton, NH
with the condition that the addition be located no closer than 48.2 from the
southeast corner of the property as shown on the plan submitted. Alison Vallieres seconded the motion.
The motion was passed by a majority with the following
vote:
Herlihy
– Yes
Dulude
– Yes
Vallieres
– Yes
Nault
– Yes
Trottier
– Abstained
It was noted for the record that the Dunbarton Zoning
Board of Adjustment reviewed the Dunbarton Zoning Ordinance and they determined
that the Wetlands Conservation Ordinance was approved in 1990 and did not fall
back to 1970, the date of the original ordinance.
At this point in the meeting, John Trottier, Chairman, announced that both the U. S. Cellular and Robert/Dorothy Perry Public Hearings would not be heard this evening. U. S. Cellular was taken off the agenda because the Town has hired a consultant to advise the Zoning Board in cell towers. The Robert Perry item was withdrawn by the applicant. (attached)
David Nault will plan to attend the Planning Board Meeting when the Perry item is on the agenda, possibly December.
REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO ARTICLE 4, SECTION B. OF THE
DUNBARTON ZONING ORDINANCE FROM THERESA TOLMAN (I3-3-24) TO ALLOW HER TO
CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION TO HER HOME CLOSER THAN 50 FEET FROM THE BOUNDARY AT HER
PROPERTY ON 275 STARK HIGHWAY NORTH IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN DUNBARTON,
NH
At this point in the meeting, Gertrude Dulude stepped down from the Board because she is an abutter to the Tolman property.
John Van acted as Alternate to replace Gertrude Dulude.
Jacques Belanger, Surveyor, and Theresa Tolman appeared before the Board. J. Belanger presented a plan showing the location of the existing home and the proposed addition 20’ x 12.5’. In addition, there were two pictures on the plan showing the property.
Mrs. Tolman stated that she wanted to expand her existing bedroom which was presently only 8’ x 9’. She will not be adding an additional bedroom only making the present one larger.
The proposed addition is 29.9’ from the Dugrenier property.
Abutters were read as follows and noted all were notified by certified mail:
D. C. Dugrenier Revocable Trust – Not Present
James/Lillon Walker – Not Present
Gertrude Dulude – Present. Looked at the plan. Stated she had been concerned because her well was north of her property. She noted the addition is to the rear of the property and would not be near her well. She is a good neighbor and I have no objections.
Robert/Ellen Allwood – Not Present
Town of Dunbarton – Not Present
J. E. Belanger Surveying – Present, representing the applicant
Questions necessary for the granting of a Variance were answered as follows:
a. No diminution in values of surrounding properties would be suffered.
Answer: Currently, the existing structure is smaller than the surrounding properties. The addition will make the home more comparable in size, and will be screened from the road side by the existing home.
b. Granting the Variance would be of benefit to the public interst:
Answer: The addition to this home would increase its value and in turn more taxable to the Town of Dunbarton.
c. Denial of the Variance would result in unnecessary hardship to the owner seeking it:
Answer: The addition to the home is to enlarge the living space and make it a more comfortable dwelling.
d. Granting the Variance would do substantial justice:
Answer: By granting the Variance, Mrs. Tolman can enlarge her living space and live more comfortably.
e. The use would not be contrary to the spirit of the Ordinance:
Answer: The ordinance is established to promote a rural development of the Town. There will not be an increase in bedrooms to the property and the overall coverage will still fall under the maximum lot coverage of 15% (4%).
Discussion:
John Herlihy stated he had no problem with this. Pretty cut and dry. It is not out of the ordinary to enlarge a 8’ x 9’ bedroom. Would make a stipulation that the house be no more than two bedrooms.
Other members of the Board indicated they did not have a problem with the granting of this Variance.
Voting Members were as follows:
John Trottier
John Herlihy
Alison Vallieres
David Nault
John Van, Alternate for Gertrude Dulude
MOTION:
John Herlihy made a motion that the Dunbarton Zoning
Board of Adjustment grant the request for a Variance to Article 4, Section B.
of the Dunbarton Zoning Ordinance from Theresa Tolman (I3-3-24) to allow her to
construct an addition to her home closer than 50 feet from the boundary at her
property on 275 Stark Highway North in the Low Density District in Dunbarton,
NH with the condition that it be no closer than 32.9 from the northwest
boundary and 29.9 from the northeast boundary and that the addition be limited
to 20’ x 12.5’ and that there be no more than two bedrooms in the home. Alison Vallieres seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING FOR A REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL
EXCEPTION FOR A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (PRD), ARTICLE 6 OF THE
DUNBARTON ZONING ORDINANCE FROM LOUIS AND ANNA CHAN (H5-1-1) TO ALLOW THEM TO
SUBDIVIDE A LOT INTO A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CREATING 9 NEW HOUSE LOTS, ONE
EXISTING HOUSE LOT AND ONE OPEN SPACE LOT FOR A TOTAL OF ELEVEN (11) LOTS AT
THEIR PROPERTY LOCATED ON GILE HILL ROAD IN THE LOW DENSITY DISTRICT IN
DUNBARTON, NH
At this point in the meeting, John Van stepped down from the Board because of a conflict of interest.
Jacques Belanger, Surveyor, and Anna Chan, applicant, appeared before the Board.
John Trottier stated that he had received calls from residents who live on Gile Hill Road concerned about what would be done to the road. They were concerned about having 11 lots at the top of the hill and how this would affect the road.
John Trottier stated he had spoken with the Selectmen regarding what improvements they would require. It is not clear at this time how wide the Selectmen are proposing that Gile Hill Road be for improvements. John Trottier had told the Selectmen that the Board of Adjustment would have difficulty in making a decision on the Chan Proposed PRD until such time as what improvements the Selectmen will require of the applicants. condition of the road would be after any improvements by the applicant.
Kenneth Swayze stated that the road is a Class V road until Brennan’s. In addition, the road is a Scenic Road which means that no trees can be cut unless the landowner does it. It also requires a Public Hearing for any road improvements, etc.
In addition, Public Service needs to move poles for electricity, etc.
After discussion, it was jointly agreed between Kenneth Swayze, Admin, Planning and Zoning, that there would be a public hearing between all necessary Boards i.e. Board of Selectmen, Planning Board, Zoning Board and Conservation Commission. Public Service Company will also be notified because of poles.
The Public Hearing for the
Gile Hill Road improvements will be tentatively scheduled for Thursday,
December 11, 2003 at the Selectmen’s Meeting.
This will be prior to the Dunbarton Zoning Board Meeting which was moved
to Monday, December 15, 2003 because it will be held after the Public Hearing
for Gile Hill Road.
The Board instructed Jacques Belanger, Surveyor, that the Selectmen will want an Engineered Proposed Plan of the road prior to the Public Hearing.
The public hearing for the Chan’s Proposed PRD will be continued until the Monday, December 15, 2003 meeting of the Dunbarton Zoning Board.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
‘
Alison R. Vallieres
Secretary