HANSON PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF PUBLIC HEARING
Held
SEPTEMBER 21, 2005 @ 8:00 P.M.
On
PROPOSED ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENTS
For
OCTOBER 3, 2005 SPECIAL TOWN MEETING
Members Present: Philip Lindquist, Chairman
Gerard LeBlanc, Vice Chairman
Gordon Coyle, Member
Joan DiLillo, Member
David Nagle, Clerk
Others Present: Noreen O’Toole, Town Planner
Barbara Ferguson, Administrative Assistant
James Egan, Zoning Bylaw Committee member
I. Call to Order: 8:00 p.m. - Town Hall
A. Chairman Philip Lindquist advised all present that the meeting was being tape recorded and filed.
B. Vice Chairman Gerard LeBlanc advised that the public hearing notice had appeared in the Hanson Express on September 1 & 8, 2005. He read the first paragraph of the notice. It was determined that, due to its length, the rest of the notice would not be publicly read. A copy of the hearing notice is attached to these minutes.
I. Presentation of Zoning Articles
Town Planner Noreen O’Toole told the Board that five zoning articles relating to summer houses, home occupations, and accessory apartments had been submitted for inclusion on the warrant for the October 3, 2005 special town meeting by the Zoning Bylaw Committee. The articles appear on the warrant as Articles 26 through 30. She noted that Selectman James Egan, who is that Board’s representative to the Zoning Bylaw Committee, and David Nagle, who is the Planning Board representative to the Zoning Bylaw Committee were also present to answer any questions the Planning Board members might have.
Article 26, she said, deletes the words “summer houses” from Section V1.B1.g which is a housekeeping provision. It was recommended by Assistant Building Inspector David Bonney because it is not relevant today.
Article 27, she said, replaces the existing Section VI.B.2.f. with a new section that incorporates the wording on home occupations in the definitions section of the bylaw into Section VI.B.2.f. to assist the Board of Appeals with its decisions.
Article 28, she explained, limits the total number of persons who can be employed in a home occupation to three.
Article 29, she said, creates a new bylaw provision to govern in-law apartments. She said that in-law units are currently being built in town that are as large as the existing house. This bylaw would set minimum and maximum limits to make the size of the new building compatible with others in the area. It restricts the in-law unit to one bedroom, she said, with a provision for the Board of Appeals to allow two bedrooms under extenuating circumstances.
Article 30, she noted, merely establishes a definition for an accessory apartment.
III. Questions from Abutters
There were no abutters present.
IV. Questions from Public
James Egan said that the Zoning Bylaw Committee was evenly divided on the number of bedrooms that should be allowed in an inlaw department. It was finally decided to allow the Board of Appeals to make the decision to allow two. He said that his personal opinion is that limiting an in-law apartment to one bedroom is too restrictive. He said the language “extenuating circumstances” is also confusing and could cause hard feelings or result in a lawsuit. Richard Edgehille, who was operating the camera for cable, said that he thought two bedrooms should be allowed. .
V. Questions/Comments from Planning Board Members
Chairman Philip Lindquist said that it would be up to the Board of Appeals to determine extenuating circumstances. Such decisions, he said, are one of the reasons we have an Appeals Board. Ms. O’Toole said the decision would be made on a case-by-case basis. David Nagle said that extenuating circumstances should not be difficult to prove. Mr. Lindquist said the intent of the bylaw is to keep residential areas residential. Board member Gordon Coyle said that the bylaw, if approved, will have to be reviewed by the Attorney General’s Office.
VI. Findings
Motion to recommend all five articles: David Nagle
Second: Gordon Coyle
Vote: 5-0
VII. Adjournment
Motion to close the hearing: Joan DiLillo
Second: David Nagle
Vote: 5-0
| 
