CHICHESTER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES
JULY 13, 2005
Case #182-Geana Leduc Map 9 Lot 17A requesting an area variance to Article III, Section P. Wetlands, c. Other Setbacks to replace existing mobile home with a larger one.
Members Present: Edward Meehan, Chairman; Stephen MacCleery, Ex-offico; Ben Brown David Dobson, Mark McIntosh.
Applicant: Geana Leduc
Applicant is currently living in an old mobile home that she would like to replace. The mobile home is in disrepair and she was denied a building permit for a new mobile home because of the wetland buffer. There is also a pond on the property. The existing home is about 35’ from the pond and the new location will be further away from the pond. She would like to have a full basement with the new mobile home. The existing home is 14’ wide and the new one is 27’ wide. The home needs to be at least 30’ back from the road. There is a cemetery next to this lot. Geana would like to center the new home with the pond which is about 100’ from the road.
The board mentioned that it might not be feasible to have a full basement in this area without having a sump pump. Also that this whole area is encompassed in wetlands yet zoned residential.
Geana wants to replace this mobile home with a larger home because of family size and the fact that the existing home is in disrepair and falling down. All the lean-tos will be removed. One shed will remain and may need to be moved. Mobile home now sits on cement blocks. Pictures of the property were given as evidence to the board. (On file)
Steve felt that some consideration should be made since someone is trying to improve their home. If the board felt that a full foundation would be too much of an impact they could stipulate only a pad or frost wall could be poured. There is limited space on this property to put a new home.
Ben would like to see the new home placed as far away from the pond and as close to the boundaries as is reasonable, given the proposed location while maintaining setbacks.
BOARD DISCUSSION
The board felt this would not be a diminution in value of surrounding properties because the existing home, which is in such disrepair, is being replaced with a new one. This variance would not be contrary to the public interest because the new home will be farther from the wet area than the existing home. Also there were no abutters present that objected to this proposal. The special condition of this property is that the entire lot falls within the 100’ wetland buffer and there is no other place on the property to put the new home. The granting of this variance would do substantial justice because the applicant has no other options given that their entire lot is within the 100’ setback. The upgrading of their home is a benefit to the town. This would not be contrary to the
spirit of the ordinance because the proposed site is farther away than where the existing home now sits. Also, the new home will be more energy efficient and meet all life safety codes.
MOTION
Ben Brown motioned to grant the area variance requested by Geana Leduc, Map 9 Lot 17A, to Article III, Section P. Wetlands, c. Other Setbacks, to replace existing mobile home with a new manufactured home, providing the new manufactured home is placed as far away from the pond and as close to the boundaries as is reasonable, given the proposed location while maintaining the required setbacks. One shed will remain and may need to be moved. Motion was made for the following reasons:
1. There would not be a diminution in value of surrounding properties as a result of the granting of this variance because replacing existing mobile home with a new manufactured home will increase the applicant’s property value and surrounding properties.
2. The granting of this variance would not be contrary to the public interest because there is already an existing home on the lot and the new manufactured home will be farther from the wet area than the existing home.
3. a. Since the following special conditions of the property make an area variance necessary in order to allow the development as designed; the entire lot falls within the 100’ wetland buffer yet the building site is residential soil.
b. The same benefit cannot be achieved by some other reasonably feasible method that would not impose an undue financial burden because there is no other place on the property to put the new manufactured home.
4. By granting this variance substantial justice would be done because the applicant has no other options given that their entire lot is within the 100’ setback. This also allows the applicant to upgrade their home which is a benefit to the town.
5. The use contemplated by petitioner as a result of obtaining this variance would not be contrary to the spirit of the ordinance because the proposed site is farther away than where the existing home now sits. The new manufactured home will be more energy efficient and meet all life safety codes.
Motion was seconded by Mark McIntosh. Vote was 5-0 in favor of motion. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Holly MacCleery, Secretary
Chichester Board of Adjustment
| 
