CITY OF BERLIN, NH
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MEETING MINUTES
November 28, 2007
Members Present: Vice Chair Ron Cote, Harold Bigelow, Reverend Dana Hoyt, Henry Boucher, Greg Estrella, and Norine Van Leuven
Members Excused: Chairman Richard Tremaine
Others Present: Timothy Hallgren; George Stanley, Lucille Robinson, Hennette Theriault, Emilien Poulin; Joe Martin, Zoning Officer and Alison Findsen, Secretary
Minutes: Mr. Bigelow made a motion to accept the minutes of the previous meeting, with Mr. Boucher seconding the motion and everyone voting in favor.
New Members: New members, Norine Van Leuven and Greg Estrella were introduced to the Board.
Mr. Boucher made a motion to move Harold Bigelow from the position of an alternate member to the position of a regular voting member, with Rev. Hoyt seconding the motion and everyone voting in favor.
Vice Chair Cote ask the Board if anyone and any reasons why they should not vote on the cases to be heard at this meeting, no one did.
Vice Chair Cote appointed Mr. Estrella to a voting member, to replace Richard Tremaine, for the evening’s hearings.
Vice Chair Cote explained the proceedings of the hearing to those present.
Applicant: 08-07 Timothy Hallgren, 349 High Street, Tax map 120, Lot 252, in a Residential Two Family Zone
Request: Special Exception to allow the erection of a garage six feet from the side and rear setbacks.
Discussion: Mr. Hallgren stated that he was requested the six foot setbacks, instead of the 10 foot setbacks on his 50 X 100 foot lot. He stated he presently parked on the driveway (which is two-car wide). He would make it on a foundation, and level it to the height of the driveway. There will be nine feet between the garage and the garage on the adjacent property.
Support: No one spoke in favor of the granting of the special exception.
Opposition: No one spoke against the granting of the special exception.
Final Word: Mr. Hallgren had nothing to add.
Chair Tremaine closed the hearing summarized the deposition, which was not disputed.
Board
Discussion: The Board did not see any reason to not grant the special exception. Mr. Bigelow stated that he did not object to the granting of this application, however, he stated the Board should keep in mind that when granting a special exception they should not “chip away” at the integrity of the zoning ordinance. Mr. Estrella asked if it was granted it would set a precedence for future requests, and it was explained that it would not, as each application is viewed separately and individually.
Decision: To grant the Special Exception.
Motion: Mr. Boucher made a motion to grant the special exception, allowing the erection of a garage six feet from the side and rear lot lines.
***************************
Applicant: 09-07 George Stanley, 469 Hillsboro Street, Tax Map 130, Lot 224, in a Residential Two Family Zone
Request: A Special Exception to allow the erection of an eight foot high fence around the perimeter of his property.
Discussion: Mr. Stanley stated that he wanted to erect an eight foot high fence. He stated that he had spoken to Mr. Martin, the zoning officer and was told that he could add an extra two feet of height (to the regulated six foot) without much problem. Mr. Martin stated that he told Mr. Stanley that he could probably add the two feet in the corner fence to protect his trees, which is what Mr. Stanley was requesting at the time, not a full new fence. Mr. Stanley continued, stating his home was lower than his neighbors and everyone could look into his yard. He stated that he liked to work in his garden everyday and did not like being stared at. He said he minded his own business and wished his neighbors would do the
same. He told the Board the taller fence would stop pollution from coming into his yard, the dust and dirt and blown snow. He added that it would give privacy and not interrupt the neighbor’s view, nor would it be an eyesore. He also stated he wanted protection for his “exotic” trees he purchased from Maine.
There was a question from the Board as to why the application stated 50 X 50 feet (lot) when the tax map stated 50 X 100 feet. Mr. Stanley stated that was an error on his part, but Mr. Martin knew about it. Mr. Martin stated that Mr. Stanley originally came to him stating he wanted to erect a partial fence to protect the trees, and he (Mr. Martin) told Mr. Stanley that he could probably add two feet to the section.
Mr. Stanley stated that he had a fence near the sidewalk, but his neighbors had knocked it down. He stated he would use what ever materials were allowed, for building his fence.
It was noted that Mr. Stanley would also have to follow the rules and guidelines for fences. He added that he needed the fence to keep the garbage from being blown into his yard.
Mr. Stanley was asked if the two foot extension would match the fence he already had. He asked where it was written that it had to match.
Support: No one spoke in support of granting the Special Exception.
Opposition: Ms. Hennette Theriault, of 457 Hillsboro Street, spoke in opposition of granting the Special Exception. She stated his property was already a mess and if it was granted it would be even worse. She was concerned that the fence would look terrible and devaluate her own property.
Mr. Emilien Poulin, of 156 Stratford Street, also spoke against granting the special exception, stating it would block the light from his basement window. It would also make it difficult to blow the snow in the back of his yard.
Ms. Lucille Robinson, of 478 Hillsboro Street stated she was not speaking against the special exception, but had a question as to whether he was adding to the top of the piece of fence he already had or building another. She did not feel that it would be safe.
A letter was read written by Marie Canning, of 488 Hillsboro Street, who was unable to attend the hearing. In the letter, she stated she opposed the granting of the special exception, stating that Mr. Stanley has turned his property into an eyesore and that it has decreased the value of her property. She was concerned that he would make his property another “junkyard”, as he had to the Kelley’s Supermarket property, adding he has a two car garage that he can’t park his car into. She was also concerned about the cost to fight him to clean it up. Mr. Stanley objected to the letter, stating that the writer should have appeared in person, however, the
letter was accepted, as written correspondences are used in hearings when the abutter cannot attend.
Final Word: Mr. Stanley stated the fence would not obstruct any view, adding that he also needed it to keep the bear out, as they jumped over the other fence and chased him around his yard. Mr. Stanley stated he didn’t want people staring at him when he was working around the yard in his bathing suite and that he was also always missing tools, and this would stop that. He stated he would build the fence according to all the rules and regulations.
Chair Tremaine closed the hearing summarized the deposition, which was disputed by Mr. Stanley and corrected, as needed.
Board
Discussion: Reverend Hoyt reiterated that they deliberating only on the height of the fence, not the construction. Mr. Martin noted that the front section of the sidewalk, by the sidewalk, would need to go through the city engineer. Mr. Bigelow stated he believed this would be categorized as a “spite fence” The Board reviewed the Article II, Section 205.1 of the Berlin Zoning Ordinance, regarding the granting guidelines for special exceptions. One of the conditions would be that property values would not be adversely affected and another was the granting would not become a nuisance to the neighborhood and would not obstruct a view, light or air.
Decision: To deny the granting of the special exception.
Motion: Mr. Bigelow made a motion to deny the request for a special exception to erect an eight foot high fence, in order to keep the integrity of the Berlin Zoning Ordinance, pertaining to Article II Section 205.1.a-g. The motion was seconded by Mr. Boucher and a role call vote was taken with everyone in agreement not to grant the special exception.
| 
