ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
THURSDAY, JULY 3, 2003
41 South Main Street
Members Present: Paul Parker, Bob Moholland, Randy Orvis and Charlie King
Staff Present: Paul Charron
Public Present: Deme' Erickson, Laurie Fudge Larry Johnson
· Chairman Parker called meeting to order at 7:15 p. m. Bob Moholland made a motion to approve the minutes of June5, 2003 as presented, Randy Orvis 2nd, motion carried 4 - 0.
· Discussion on obtaining more ZBA members to have a full board. Paul Parker will check with former members to see if there is any interest in serving maybe even as an "on call" basis only.
· Discussion on "Motion for Rehearing Pursuant to RSA 677:2" by Tom Demers. Discussion on this with the board.
Bob Moholland - setback is an issue as it is in the 50' setback zone. He should live up to it. Tom didn't demonstrate that he couldn't meet it. Not enough information. Discussion on back section . Item 30 in appeal - "will provide additional evidence." Paul and other members have reviewed the site. Discussion on issue of this being a new building, not adding on (same footprint).
Randy Orvis - didn't demonstrate why he couldn't conform. ZBA didn't list as reason? Discussion on expectation of abutters to be conforming as in the Zoning Ordinance. He didn't show it's not possible.
Paul Parker - grant motion to give him a chance. See if he can demonstrate that it's not possible.
Charlie King - extent of expansion discussion - references to other cases of extreme extent of such expansion and uniqueness to our ordinance.
Paul Parker - can state he should address the possibility just mentioned, can't make the 50' setback.
Charlie King - discussion on setbacks being able to be met for the new building.
Paul Parker - discussion on state law - what is allowed. Discussion on "no foundation." Discussion and Zoning Ordinance - some type of permanent adequate foundation - even if it is not re-useable, it exists.
Randy Orvis - discussion on foundation on poles, pylons, concrete blocks, if on same footprint, it is O.K.
Bob Moholland - slab or foundation - is there any difference? Randy said no. The imaginary line is there for 24 months - allows expansion to certain criteria on existing foundation. He has 50' setback - he's going to make it bigger. Use footprint & expand. Discussion on shops in back of mobile home. Drainage, leaching problems?
Randy Orvis - discussion on being able to demonstrate, then he can expand. ADA discussion on handicapped access, #30 - nothing presented. Why the difference - why can't move building back? There are certain width requirements to go in - review, shapes 12:1, etc. Give him a chance.
Bob Moholland made a motion to grant the "Motion for Rehearing Pursuant to RSA 677:2 for Tom Demers, Charlie King 2nd, motion carried 4 - 0. Post for August 7, 2003 ZBA Meeting. Discussion on issue of not being able to meet 50' setback. Address the issues. Discussion on case law (none available), board members to review site, caution against talking to Tom Demers, gather evidence, problems for discussion, Charlie King knows the machine shop.
· Application for Appeal from an Administrative Decision per Application for Special Exception - David A./Linda Delpozzo, Knotty Knoll Circle (Tax Map R44, Lots 29 & 30), regarding the determination by the Zoning Board of Adjustment on June 5, 2003 in relationship to Section 1.04 (C ) (3) of the Zoning Ordinance and appeals their decision. Randy Orvis has excused himself from the board for this hearing and will sit in the audience. Discussion on a quorum (3 more). Applicant is entitled to a full board. Public notice read. Applicant needs unanimous vote if he decides to continue. There not being a full board is not a
basis for appeal. Randy Orvis is representing Dave Delpozzo. Review if the board wishes to grant a
Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting July 3, 2003 (continued) Page 2
rehearing. Paul reviewed a letter from John Claussen and a letter requesting rehearing by Delpozzo development.
Bob Moholland - questions on drainage. Abutter letter from John Claussen raises more questions. Discussion on this being an unbuildable lot for many years. Drainage of slopes to wetlands an issue, proof this is a buildable lot - septic design? (page 1 of letter, 4th paragraph).
Paul Parker - ZBA can put conditions on motions.
Bob Moholland - discussion on building location and moving it. Design is based on a new lot line revision.
Charlie Kling - referenced the Zoning Ordinance and not making a lot unbuildable. Lot line adjustment is not in conflict. Lot becomes productive. Zoning wants you to make it buildable.
Bob Moholland - Section 1.04 prescribes you can't make lot unbuildable. Discussion on to move it all, slope, Class III wetland - decision by Conservation Comission, science study, water is a concern.
Paul Parker - issues are required to be addressed before anything happens. Make as requirement the Conservation Commission should review. Review for lot line adjustment requirement: Section 1.04 (C) (3): (a).
Bob - question of "buildable now," and presently able to be built on. Discussion on you can't make it unbuildable (we're not doing that). The lot line adjustment makes it more buildable. Is it relevant? Slope - too close; too close to wetlands; move the house - where's the septic? (State Subsurface Systems Dept. capable of making that determination.)
Paul Parker - conditions of approval - stipulations in motion - address concerns. The Zoning Ordinance gives the right to do it. Make lots buildable, (2) requests - lots are not unbuildable.
Bob Moholland - we don't know the lots are unbuildable.
Charlie King - (B): no adverse impact. Add as an amendment. Deny it if it does have an adverse impact. Paul Parker - abutters all felt this way. Larry Johnson - lot #30 is buildable - must strip land to build, I would rather see the lot line adjustment and some trees. Turn the house to make it more pleasing, keep the trees. This would be better than an ugly & stripped lot.
Charlie King - allow appeal?
Paul Parker - what evidence and from who to determine if lot is buildable?
Bob Moholland - the state must determine septic design. Need current design on proposed lot. Instead of going around in circles we need to settle the issue of the lot being buildable or unbuildable, address the drainage issue, where is sewer going - is this a health or safety issue. Can the State SSB overrule the Conservation Commission.
Bob Moholland - no. The Conservation Commission can say "more significant," and gave an example of Packy Campbell going to the CC to get wetlands determination. Discussion on the CC being only able to make recommendation, check Class III wetlands. Grant with amended requirement that the CC makes a recommendation. Charlie King disagrees. This is not relevant. May be an issue. The zoning doesn't address this. Septic - ? better position. Discussion on the question of drainage. Discussion on question of Class III wetlands - CC never looked at it. What if something happens? The ZBA doesn't have authority to deem Class II or Class III wetlands.
Paul Parker - grant to rehear, but not tonight. The Conservation Commission to review & present findings. Be fair to all concerned.
Charlie King - can we mandate & postpone re-hearing until applicant gets recommendation from the Conservation Commission. This may go to court first.
Larry Johnson - abutter. The lot as is, is buildable according to Randy Orvis - haven't proved it is unbuildable. Test pits are not in that area. Wetlands - we don't know. Other abutters are concerned about drainage on the downhill side. Both septic systems are above-ground systems, criteria for location. If they are elevated systems - several truckloads of fill will be needed and pumps to get to the leach field. Look at all other septic systems to see possible impact (drainage to cellar to his house or to subdivision drainage). Other abutters concerned about changing rules (more conforming vs. less conforming), engineer analysis? Just septic system? Test pit only, cutting trees & defoliating lot, not just house area (this was just a threat).
Long range effect on abutters septics, wells downhill.
Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting July 3, 2003 (continued) Page 3
Laurie Fudge abutter - Section 1.04 - how is it possible to adjust one section & not the whole section. Discussion on 1.04 (C ) 2: less conforming vs. more conforming.
Randy Orvis - that's why we're here, to make one lot smaller and one lot buildable. Both lots are nonconforming by existing standards.
Charlie King - what was the minimum lot size(1 acre). Lots will now be 1 3/4 and 1 1/4 with lot line adjustment - Zoning Ordinance now requires 3 acres per lot. Lots were 50 - 75% larger originally but are now reversed. Discussion on adding drainage information to be submitted to Code Enforcement Officer. "Stormwater runoff Analysis" - pass around and review. Discussion on this not showing direction in drainage analysis to other properties, Class III wetlands, road?
Paul Parker - we need to rehear?
Charlie King - there are substantial reasons to allow rehearing.
Bob Moholland - rehear & recommend the Conservation Commission to look at it. Discussion on this being just like the PB sending it to the CC. This is CC's neck of the woods.
Paul Parker - evidence to reconsider.
Charlie King - motion to allow for rehearing on appeal from an administrative decision by David A./Linda Delpozzo, Knotty Knoll Circle (Tax Map R44, Lots 29 & 30), regarding determination by the Zoning Board of Adjustment on June 5, 2003 in relationship to Section 1.04 (C) (3) of the Zoning Ordinance & appeals their decision on the lot line adjustment, Bob Moholland 2nd, amend to include Conservation Commission to take a look & make recommendation on lot #30, precisely for what? Take a look at Class III wetlands & septic location, decision on septic drainage & water drainage to see if it impacts on surrounding properties, Conservation Commission to determine if there is any threat to public health or safety (Section 1.04 (C) (3) (b), Bob Moholland 2nd, motion carried.
Discussion by Bob Moholland on notifying abutters to be present and to determine time & date. Discussion on Brad Anderson calling Larry Johnson as representative for Yonder Ridge Development abutters. Larry's phone number is 859-8031 or work 755-7099.
Charlie King made a motion to continue this hearing to a date and time certain - August 7, 2003, Bob Moholland 2nd, motion carried.
· With no further business to discuss, Randy Orvis made motion to adjourn at 9:30 p.m., Bob Moholland 2nd, motion carried.
APPROVED
_______________________________________ ____________________________________
Paul Parker, Chairman Date
Zoning Board of Adjustment
Town of Farmington
| 
