ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 2003
41 South Main Street
Members Present: Paul Parker, Gordon Grant, Margaret Russell, Charlie King, Randy Orvis
Staff Present: Paul Charron and Fran Osborne
Public Present: David Delpozzo, Brian Bogle, Jane Wingate, John & Gay Clauson, Larry Johnson, Deme’
Erickson, Lauri Fudge, Tom Demers, Bob Talon
· Chairman Parker brought the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Minutes of July 3, 2003 were reviewed. Randy Orvis made a motion, Charlie 2nd to approve the minutes as presented, no discussion, Margaret & Gordon abstained, motion carried. Minutes of June 5, 2003 were reviewed. Randy Orvis made motion to approve the minutes as presented, Margaret 2nd, no discussion, all in favor, motion carried.
· Chairman Parker suggested to the board that they attend the Office of State Planning training classes which will be held probably October 12, 2003. They will be offering Planning & Zoning Board basics classes.
· Margaret Russell made a motion to recess for 10 minutes at 7:20 p.m., Gordon Grant 2nd, meeting reconvened at 7:30 p. m.
Public Hearing 7:30 p. m.
· Appeal of Administrative Decision by the Zoning Board of Adjustment regarding Special Exception denial – by David/Linda Delpozzo (Tax Map R44, Lots 29 & 30), Yonder Ridge Development regarding their determination in relationship to Section 1.04 (C) (3) of the Zoning Ordinance. Randy Orvis is re-cused from the board for this hearing as he is representing David Delpozzo. Gordon Grant is seated for Bob Moholland who called in absent. Chairman explained to Mr. Delpozzo there is a 4-member board & did he want to proceed and he was affirmative to continue. He cannot use this as a basis for appeal. Randy Orvis
explained he started working on this project in January – February to do septic designs on these 2 lots. He discussed what was to be done. A lot line adjustment was discussed rather than Special Exception. We knew it would be lengthening the process. The 1st meeting there was no quorum, things happened that shouldn’t have. The Zoning Board denied the Special Exception. A new drainage analysis was presented. Copies were presented. In the drainage study Bob Moynihan said because the tennis court will be removed, lot #29 runoff will decrease and in fact will decrease on both lots. In the original subdivision plan a house was designed for both these lots. We hope this addresses the drainage. We also have valid septic designs for lots 29 & 30 with the lot line adjustment shown. A few trees need to be cut, and 300-400 s. f. of grading to be done on moderate slopes. Discussion on moving
house & drainage issue. This is better environmentally for this lot. We don’t feel there are any drainage issues.
Paul Parker – discussion on lot #29 & drainage runoff. Discussion on lot 29 being on top of the hill and on down side of lot 30. There will be no change on water runoff – it will continue to the wetland. There are 2 letters from the Conservation Commission (attached). The 1st letter showed no quorum was present. The letter on August 7, 2003 showed the Commission had no reason to dispute drainage calculation numbers. Chairman Parker opened the meeting to comments from the public.
Brian Bogle – before a vote is taken he would like each member polled for vote for the record on what they think on the foundations in place.
John Clauson – is lot 30 buildable without presentation. Randy Orvis - there’s less impact with the lot line adjustment.
Larry Johnson – statistics reveal less runoff if tennis courts are removed. I’d like clarification if the tennis court will be removed. Is lot 30 a buildable lot? He questioned cellar drains and if there would be any and asked about foundations without building permits. Cease & desist orders to stop work were issued.
Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting August 7 2003 (continued) Page 2
Randy Orvis – the tennis court will be removed & Mr. Delpozzo said it was part of his sales contract to remove the tennis court. These lots have had prior subdivision approval. I designed these septic systems with no waivers.
Paul Parker – drainage issues. Randy – the septic systems meet state requirements. Drainage will run toward the wetland. Discussion on prior plan runoff. Lot 29 will drain to lot 30 & 30 to the wetland. Discussion on groundwater & water table during spring runoff.
Brian Bogle – voiced concern on septic system.
Charlie King – asked setbacks. Randy – from the edge of the property they are about 100’ & well radius is 75’. This should not change his system. This soil is well drained soil.
CEO – questioned them discussing the foundation. The Zoning Board should stick to conditions of approval per the legal counsel’s suggestion. It is not part of the Zoning Board decision.
Brian Bogle – asked the board’s personal opinion on the foundation being put in.
David Delpozzo – is drainage a zoning issue? Randy said these lots meet state standards.
Charlie King & Gordon Grant had no questions.
Margaret Russell – asked about foundation drains. They are not on the design. CEO Paul Charron said foundation drains are required depending on soil type. They are required here.
Charlie King – Section 1.04 (3) a., b., read for the public and the record in the Zoning Ordinance. He recommended the builder put in foundation drains. Chairman closed public portion of the hearing. Discussion. By granting the lot line adjustment there is less adverse impact.
Charlie King made a motion to accept the Special Exception with reference to the lot line adjustment for lots #29 & 30, Knotty Knoll Circle, Gordon Grant 2nd. Chairman Parker discussed the narrowness of the ordinance to the 2 issues at hand. Vote was in favor of granting the Special Exception, motion carried.
Chairman Parker – we were asked opinions by Mr. Bogle in reference to the foundations put in. Gordon Grant had no issues. Margaret – I think it’s a blatant disregard of our regulations. I don’t know how he gets away with it.
Charlie King – I urge members of the public to contact the CEO Paul Charron and discuss it with that office. I don’t feel this is part of our job.
CEO Paul Charron – Mr. Delpozzo was issued a cease & desist & an order from legal counsel Sharon Somers. The foundation is in, he has stopped work, but is in the process of obtaining a building permit on lot #29. You have to realize the court injunction process and how the law works – it is a process that takes time and procedure has to be followed.
Larry Johnson – discussion on the building process going to the Planning Board, then the Selectmen. This is different. Lot 29 was approved for a building permit. Lot 30 was held up until they voted on it.
Charlie King made a motion to recess at 8:20 p .m. for 10 minutes, Gordon 2nd, motion carried. Meeting reconvened at 8:30 p. m.
· Motion for Rehearing Pursuant to RSA 677:2 by Tom Demers, 516 Rte. 11 (Tax Map R31, Lot 25) regarding the Zoning Board of Adjustment denial for Special Exception to Section 1.04 (B) (1) of the Zoning Ordinance. Tom Demers gave an outline of why he shouldn’t have been denied Special Exception per the rehearing document he presented to the board. No abutters have appeared at hearings to object.
Chairman Parker – are there reasons why you can’t go back 50’. We needed more evidence why you can’t move the building back to the 50’.
Tom Demers – (reasons) - the drainage & issue of sloping water runoff. Bob Talon – discussion on the requirements of Special Exception. The ADA (American Disabilities Act) was another reason. The entire parking lot is 5% grade and ADA approves of this grade. By drawing everything to the front, drainage goes to catch basins. If we go to the back, we have steeper slopes, the leach field would be impacted by water runoff as well as concern of runoff to abutters. The building could be built around the existing structure but we have run into problems with the parking lot slope by moving the building back. We want the building to be acceptable to the community.
Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting August 7, 2003 (continued) Page 3
Tom Demers – discussion on 5% ADA requirement. We can move the building back to 34’ and still accomplish the ADA requirement as well as the water drainage issue. He read sections of the “Motion for Rehearing.” Discussion on existing building setbacks.
Paul Parker – would you agree to a 34’ setback? Tom Demers – yes. We also reduced the size of the building to 36’ x 60’. We can’t move back because of drainage. There will be green space in front as well as in back which will help water runoff. The additional catch basins will help drainage. Discussion on plan and sheet flow vs. putting in a retaining wall and the need for chain link fencing on top of the retaining wall which would not be feasible no safe. Tom Demers – I’ve tried to reduce problem areas, the machine shop is a local guy and is a low-impact business.
Charlie King asked if the building could be pushed back to 36’ – 37’. Bob Talon said no because of the leach field. Discussion on gallons of water per day usage. Bob explained he used calculations based on the Dunkin Donuts facility in Rochester (1,750 gallons per day).
Randy Orvis – concerns have been answered.
Charlie King – he has shown he is not able to conform (he could possibly be, but it wouldn’t be good).
Margaret – questions on reducing the building size more. Tom Demers – I want some office/retail space which I originally asked for and was approved for. The other business would something real low keyed.
Paul Parker – what % of the business is for the donut space in the building. Tom Demers – at least 80%, with 20% small office/retail space. Discussion on use and size of building. Hours of operation would be 5:00 a. m. to 10:00 p. m. for the donut shop, there would be 6 – 8 employees. There are 22 parking spaces. I’m not interested in strip mall.
CEO Paul Charron – discussion on parking spaces needed. Try to accommodate to have about 30 parking spaces. Discussion on how to figure the parking. He’ll find some way to grant parking. Tom – I want to keep the building as I proposed. Public hearing portion closed.
Charlie King – based on lawyers document, I’m in agreement it meets the letter of the law.
Randy Orvis – I think he has tried to meet the law and build something that fits – it’s difficult to do. I think what he’s asking for is reasonable.
Margaret – I’m glad he’s got it back to 34’. No discussion.
Randy Orvis made motion to accept the appeal for Special Exception based on:
(1) the expanded structure is no closer to the lot line than the existing structure
(2) the expansion is not in the 100-year flood plain
(3) the applicant has shown methods of sewage disposal & water supply
(4) the expansion does not adversely affect abutting properties, public health, safety or
general welfare
(5) the applicant has demonstrated that it would not be reasonable or prudent to closer
conform with the setback
Amendment by Charlie King to add as presented with a setback of 34 feet minimum, Gordon
Grant 2nd Randy Orvis’s motion and Charlie King’s amendment, no discussion, all in favor, motion carried.
· Chairman Parker – Bob Moholland may be leaving the Zoning Board because of move to Wakefield. If you know anyone who would like to serve on the ZBA, please have them contact us.
· Gordon made a motion to adjourn at 9:30 p. m., Margaret 2nd, motion carried. Margaret informed board members she would not be here in September as she will be in California.
APPROVED
__________________________________________ ___________________________________
Paul Parker, Chairman, Zoning Board of Adjustment Date
Town of Farmington
| 
