ANTRIM ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
August 17, 2004 meeting
Members Present:
Carol Court Ron Haggett Frank Scales Don Winchester Paul Young
Member Absent:
John Kendall Len Pagano Tim Quachenbush
Public attendees:
Paulette LaMacchia Robert LaMacchia Matthew Fleming
Alice Fleming Geraldine Rabideau Renee Rabideau
Matthew Robblee Bess Robblee Andrew Robblee
Joe Koziell Stephen Noble Donald Knapton
Cynthia Crockett Daniel Valley Christopher Rawnsley
Chairman Winchester opened the meeting at 7:04 PM by introducing the members of the board and explained the procedure to be followed in the conduct of a public hearing. He then appointed Mr. Scales to sit for Mr. Kendell. The first order of business was the public hearing on the request by Robert & Paulette La Macchia for a variance from Article VIII Section C.3 of the zoning ordinance to replace an existing structure within the front yard and side yard set back requirements for property located on 43 Wheelers Cove Road, Antrim, New Hampshire, Tax Map 7A, Lot 55, located in the Lakefront Residential District. The applicant proposes to demolish a portion of the existing structure and replace it with a new structure. Ms. LaMacchia explained that the current structure on the property consisted of three sheds that had
been nailed together over the years. It was their intention to remove two of the sheds and replace them with a new structure that would be affixed to the remaining portion of the existing building. She provided drawings of the proposed addition including a floor plan. The board then reviewed a plot plan and Ms. LaMacchia explained that the new building would be situated so that the distance from the north property line would be eight feet and the distance from the front (southwest) property line on Birch Lane would be 26 feet. Ms. LaMacchia explained that the survey showed that they did not have frontage on Wheeler Cove Road. Ms. Rabideau explained that Wheeler Cove Road and Birch Lane were actually on the land owned by the Rabideaus and that the roads were right of ways for the residents. Following some discussion from the board members to clarify the encroachment on the setbacks, Mr. Winchester asked for abutters or interested parties who wished to speak either in favor or
against the application. No one spoke. Mr. Young moved for a roll call vote on the five conditions to be met to grant a variance with a conditional requirement that the building not be located closer than 8 feet to the north property line and not closer than 26 feet to the front property line facing Birch Lane. Mr. Haggett seconded the motion.
The proposed use would not diminish surrounding property values: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye, Mr. Haggett – aye.
Granting the variance would be of benefit to the public interest: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye, Mr. Haggett – aye.
Denial of the variance would result in unnecessary hardship to the owner because of special circumstances of the property that distinguish it from other properties similarly zoned: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye, Mr. Haggett – aye.
Granting the variance would do a substantial justice: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye, Mr. Haggett – aye.
The use is not contrary to the spirit of the ordinance: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye, Mr. Haggett – aye.
Ms. LaMacchia was advised that the variance had been conditionally granted. She was told that she would be required to obtain a building permit prior to construction.
The next order of business was the public hearing on the request by Andrew and Bess Robblee for a variance from Article VII Section D.d of the zoning ordinance to expanding an existing structure within the fifty (50) foot front yard set back requirements for property located on 115 Pierce Lake Road, Antrim, New Hampshire, Tax Map 7A, Lot 100, located in the Rural District. The applicant proposes to add a family room to the existing house. Mr. Robblee presented a drawing showing that the existing house was situated 19 feet off of Pierce Lake Road. He proposes to add a 12 feet by 16 feet addition to the side of the house that would be no closer to the road than 22 feet. Following some discussion to clarify the location of the house on the property and the proximity to other property lines, Mr. Winchester asked for
anyone who wished to speak either in favor or against the application. Mr. Rawnsley and Ms. Crockett spoke in favor of the request. No one spoke in opposition. Mr. Haggett moved for a roll call vote on the five conditions to be met to grant a variance with a conditional requirement that the building not be located closer than 22 feet to Pierce Lake Road. Ms. Court seconded the motion.
The proposed use would not diminish surrounding property values: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye, Mr. Haggett – aye.
Granting the variance would be of benefit to the public interest: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye, Mr. Haggett – aye.
Denial of the variance would result in unnecessary hardship to the owner because of special circumstances of the property that distinguish it from other properties similarly zoned: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye, Mr. Haggett – aye.
Granting the variance would do a substantial justice: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye, Mr. Haggett – aye.
The use is not contrary to the spirit of the ordinance: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye, Mr. Haggett – aye.
Mr. Robblee was advised that the variance had been conditionally granted. He was told that he would be required to obtain a building permit prior to construction.
Mr. Winchester then opened the public hearing on the request by Mathew Fleming, Trustee, for a variance from Article VII, Section D.e of the zoning ordinance to permit a garage/shop/storage building within the (20) foot side yard set back requirements for property located off of Elm Avenue, Antrim, New Hampshire, Tax Map 4, Lot 36-1, located in the Rural District. Mr. Haggett recused himself, as he was an abutter to the applicant. Mr. Fleming stated that he proposed to locate the building 9 feet from the north property line. He explained that the location was dictated by the existing driveway, an existing stone wall and the desirability of maintaining a 16 feet approach to the building for vehicles. Members reviewed the location of the building on the property and queried whether or not it could be located elsewhere.
Mr. Fleming stated that any other location might require destroying a portion of the old stone wall. There being no further questions from the board, Mr. Winchester asked if anyone wished to speak either in favor or against the application. No one spoke. Mr. Young moved for a roll call vote on the five conditions to be met to grant a variance with a conditional requirement that the building not be located closer than 9 feet to the North property line. Mr. Scales seconded the motion.
The proposed use would not diminish surrounding property values: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye.
Granting the variance would be of benefit to the public interest: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye.
Denial of the variance would result in unnecessary hardship to the owner because of special circumstances of the property that distinguish it from other properties similarly zoned: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye.
Granting the variance would do a substantial justice: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye.
The use is not contrary to the spirit of the ordinance: Roll call vote: Ms. Court – aye, Mr. Winchester – aye, Mr. Young – aye, Mr. Scales – aye.
Mr. Fleming was advised that the variance had been conditionally granted. He was told that he would be required to obtain a building permit prior to construction.
Mr. Young moved to approve the minutes of the May 18, 2004 meeting. Mr. Haggett seconded the motion that was passed.
The secretary then reviewed Article XI of the Antrim Zoning Ordnance entitle “Wetland District”. He pointed out that paragraph G requires that anyone disturbing an area within 25 feet of a wetland is required to obtain a special exception from the zoning board. He explained that this procedure had not been followed in the past; however, would have to be adhered to based on the advice of town counsel. Mr. Knapton asked to speak to the matter. He felt that the requirement was unnecessary when a State dredge and fill permit had been obtain. He provided a list of 64 applications of dredge and fill permits issued in the past which had not complied with the ordinance. It was his opinion that enforcement of the regulation would place a heavy burden on the zoning board. Mr. Winchester thanked Mr. Knapton for his
comments and pointed out that the zoning board was obligated to abide by the zoning ordinance and that until such time as the ordinance was changed or modified, the board would have to follow the designated procedure.
The secretary distributed updates to the zoning ordinance manuals and advised the members of the Fall Planning & Zoning Conference scheduled for October 30, 2004 and the Hancock 2004 Open Space & Nature Series.
Mr. Young moved that the meeting be adjourned. Mr. Haggett seconded the motion, which was passed. Mr. Winchester adjourned the meeting at 9:15 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Paul L. Vasques, Secretary
Antrim Zoning Board of Adjustment
| 
